[Papa John]

The SB Nation ND homer site One Foot Down offers a preview of 2014 Stanford football:

http://www.onefootdown.com/2014/5/19/563...d-cardinal

All in all, the reviewer seems to know a bit about Stanford football--or is really good at copy-and-paste.

What caught my eye was his comment about Stanford's offensive line:

"The situation at offensive line is downright scary. Unanimous All-American left guard David Yankey (40 career starts), center Khalil Wilkes (26 career starts), right guard Kevin Danser (28 career starts), and right tackle Cameron Fleming (39 career starts) all depart The Farm this off-season."

He does go on to say that there is hope with the high quality of the 2012 OL recruiting class. Cause for concern? Sure. Downright scary? Please.

I also found it interesting that the author chose to feature Reed Hastings as Stanford's Famous Alum.

[Papa John]

The SB Nation ND homer site One Foot Down offers a preview of 2014 Stanford football:

http://www.onefootdown.com/2014/5/19/563...d-cardinal

All in all, the reviewer seems to know a bit about Stanford football--or is really good at copy-and-paste.

What caught my eye was his comment about Stanford's offensive line:

"The situation at offensive line is downright scary. Unanimous All-American left guard David Yankey (40 career starts), center Khalil Wilkes (26 career starts), right guard Kevin Danser (28 career starts), and right tackle Cameron Fleming (39 career starts) all depart The Farm this off-season."

He does go on to say that there is hope with the high quality of the 2012 OL recruiting class. Cause for concern? Sure. Downright scary? Please.

I also found it interesting that the author chose to feature Reed Hastings as Stanford's Famous Alum.

[washingtonismoney]

"Downright scary" is accurate...if you saw the spring game. If that's the offensive line that steps on the field in the beginning of the season, then there will be problems.

[washingtonismoney]

"Downright scary" is accurate...if you saw the spring game. If that's the offensive line that steps on the field in the beginning of the season, then there will be problems.

[fullmetal]

Right, scary for Stanford fans.  Sigh.

[fullmetal]

Right, scary for Stanford fans.  Sigh.

[OutsiderFan]

It's not like ND is bringing back all its experienced OL starters from last year.

Doesn't Stanford have better "raw material" to work with to develop an OL than ever before?  If by the last Summer scrimmage the OL is struggling, then concern is warranted.  Until then, there is nothing to see here on this topic.  Stanford fans should just move along and not worry about it.  Notre Dame fans should get their hopes up, so when Stanford extends its streak of outplaying the Irish at Notre Dame Stadium in October, their fans can say, "I thought when they said Stanford's OL was scary, that meant scary for them, not us!"

[OutsiderFan]

It's not like ND is bringing back all its experienced OL starters from last year.

Doesn't Stanford have better "raw material" to work with to develop an OL than ever before?  If by the last Summer scrimmage the OL is struggling, then concern is warranted.  Until then, there is nothing to see here on this topic.  Stanford fans should just move along and not worry about it.  Notre Dame fans should get their hopes up, so when Stanford extends its streak of outplaying the Irish at Notre Dame Stadium in October, their fans can say, "I thought when they said Stanford's OL was scary, that meant scary for them, not us!"

[stupac2]

It's not like ND is bringing back all its experienced OL starters from last year.

Doesn't Stanford have better "raw material" to work with to develop an OL than ever before?  If by the last Summer scrimmage the OL is struggling, then concern is warranted.  Until then, there is nothing to see here on this topic.  Stanford fans should just move along and not worry about it.  the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends fans should get their hopes up, so when Stanford extends its streak of outplaying the Irish at the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends Stadium in October, their fans can say, "I thought when they said Stanford's OL was scary, that meant scary for them, not us!"

I think the point is that it's the largest area of concern right now. Most Stanford observers expect the OL to get better, the whole idea of OLs needing time to "gel" is extremely widespread for a reason, the question is just what level it'll get to. We can't have a league-average OL and still expect to be dominant.

[stupac2]

It's not like ND is bringing back all its experienced OL starters from last year.

Doesn't Stanford have better "raw material" to work with to develop an OL than ever before?  If by the last Summer scrimmage the OL is struggling, then concern is warranted.  Until then, there is nothing to see here on this topic.  Stanford fans should just move along and not worry about it.  the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends fans should get their hopes up, so when Stanford extends its streak of outplaying the Irish at the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends Stadium in October, their fans can say, "I thought when they said Stanford's OL was scary, that meant scary for them, not us!"

I think the point is that it's the largest area of concern right now. Most Stanford observers expect the OL to get better, the whole idea of OLs needing time to "gel" is extremely widespread for a reason, the question is just what level it'll get to. We can't have a league-average OL and still expect to be dominant.

[Papa John]

I don't think you should judge the efficacy of the OL based entirely on the spring game. Peat is a star and Murphy and Garnett have plenty of game experience. Graham Shuler made the Rimington Watch List.

I fully expect the OL to reload in 2014 and be just as good as it was in 2013. My main concern is injuries. We've been pretty fortunate the past few years, and I just hope the string of good luck combined with good training will continue.

[Papa John]

I don't think you should judge the efficacy of the OL based entirely on the spring game. Peat is a star and Murphy and Garnett have plenty of game experience. Graham Shuler made the Rimington Watch List.

I fully expect the OL to reload in 2014 and be just as good as it was in 2013. My main concern is injuries. We've been pretty fortunate the past few years, and I just hope the string of good luck combined with good training will continue.

[fullmetal]

I'll take a performance equal to the the OL of 2011.  It was a little disappointing to see recent OLs unable to achieve the lofty performance of DeCastro, Martin, et al.  Spoiled fan problems, I know.

[fullmetal]

I'll take a performance equal to the the OL of 2011.  It was a little disappointing to see recent OLs unable to achieve the lofty performance of DeCastro, Martin, et al.  Spoiled fan problems, I know.

[CTcard]

I don't think you should judge the efficacy of the OL based entirely on the spring game. Peat is a star and Murphy and Garnett have plenty of game experience. Graham Shuler made the Rimington Watch List.

I fully expect the OL to reload in 2014 and be just as good as it was in 2013. My main concern is injuries. We've been pretty fortunate the past few years, and I just hope the string of good luck combined with good training will continue.

I have been agreeing with wim on this issue for some time now. The O-line is the scariest combination of importance and uncertain prospects of any position group on the team for next year - and I don't think it's close.

While I certainly agree that the spring game is not a fool-proof measure of where the O-line was, much less where it will be on opening day - one might ask what other measure one can use to determine it is in good shape.

The main cause for optimism seems to be high rankings as recruits out of high school. Better than not I suppose, but I'd sure rather have actual production.
I am somewhat more encouraged by some fairly positive comments on individuals coming from the coaching staff during the spring, but those were neither overwhelming nor consistent.

Going down the apparent starters:
Peat is a star and has played like one.
Murphy has clearly shown some talent, and seems to be getting up to size. Has never started - but played a reasonable number of snaps at tackle.
Garnett seems to have struggled at times. He has two career starts as injury replacement (both vs WSU). Obviously a ton of potential.
Shuler has appeared in a few games, not many snaps. He's on the Rimington list almost entirely because Stanford now has a rep for producing good linemen and maybe partially because he was a top rated center out of high school. But he certainly didn't make the list because of any accomplishments at Stanford - he's barely played and almost never at center.
Caspers was reportedly struggling to win the starting position going into the spring game - but I think he played the entire time with the first string. I believe he's seen more snaps than Shuler - but not all that many.

More importantly than a player by player run down, this group has simply not played games together. No position group needs more cohesion than the O-line. If you watch some tape of a bad line (we saw way too much of this at Stanford in the first half of the 2000s), as often as not the problems aren't individuals being beat so much as somebody simply not being blocked, often accompanied by a double team of someone else. There was quite a bit of this sort of thing going on at the spring game - along with Caspers and Shuler looking like they were having trouble handling our D-guys one-up.

I think the positive take is that as an almost entirely new group it is expected that they will struggle at first. The difficulty is figuring out on what time scale improvement is coming.

[CTcard]

I don't think you should judge the efficacy of the OL based entirely on the spring game. Peat is a star and Murphy and Garnett have plenty of game experience. Graham Shuler made the Rimington Watch List.

I fully expect the OL to reload in 2014 and be just as good as it was in 2013. My main concern is injuries. We've been pretty fortunate the past few years, and I just hope the string of good luck combined with good training will continue.

I have been agreeing with wim on this issue for some time now. The O-line is the scariest combination of importance and uncertain prospects of any position group on the team for next year - and I don't think it's close.

While I certainly agree that the spring game is not a fool-proof measure of where the O-line was, much less where it will be on opening day - one might ask what other measure one can use to determine it is in good shape.

The main cause for optimism seems to be high rankings as recruits out of high school. Better than not I suppose, but I'd sure rather have actual production.
I am somewhat more encouraged by some fairly positive comments on individuals coming from the coaching staff during the spring, but those were neither overwhelming nor consistent.

Going down the apparent starters:
Peat is a star and has played like one.
Murphy has clearly shown some talent, and seems to be getting up to size. Has never started - but played a reasonable number of snaps at tackle.
Garnett seems to have struggled at times. He has two career starts as injury replacement (both vs WSU). Obviously a ton of potential.
Shuler has appeared in a few games, not many snaps. He's on the Rimington list almost entirely because Stanford now has a rep for producing good linemen and maybe partially because he was a top rated center out of high school. But he certainly didn't make the list because of any accomplishments at Stanford - he's barely played and almost never at center.
Caspers was reportedly struggling to win the starting position going into the spring game - but I think he played the entire time with the first string. I believe he's seen more snaps than Shuler - but not all that many.

More importantly than a player by player run down, this group has simply not played games together. No position group needs more cohesion than the O-line. If you watch some tape of a bad line (we saw way too much of this at Stanford in the first half of the 2000s), as often as not the problems aren't individuals being beat so much as somebody simply not being blocked, often accompanied by a double team of someone else. There was quite a bit of this sort of thing going on at the spring game - along with Caspers and Shuler looking like they were having trouble handling our D-guys one-up.

I think the positive take is that as an almost entirely new group it is expected that they will struggle at first. The difficulty is figuring out on what time scale improvement is coming.

[Rally]

This whole "watch list" thing is ridiculous.  Didn't we have a never-played-before tight end last year on the Mackey Award watch list?

[Rally]

This whole "watch list" thing is ridiculous.  Didn't we have a never-played-before tight end last year on the Mackey Award watch list?

[Papa John]

While it is sometimes difficult to decipher, or not be decieved by, coachspeak, I think that a recent USA Today interview of David Shaw is informative:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca...r/8406907/

"Q: So will the greatest offensive-line recruiting class you've ever seen turn into the greatest offensive line you've ever seen? That's a big step to take, but is that the potential – best line in America?

A: Knowing these guys, that's their mindset. We're going to be honest with them, because we're not there yet. We're not going to start the season as the best line in America. There's no chance. We don't have enough experience; we haven't done enough as a unit. So the charge is there because we believe the ability is there, we believe they fit in our scheme extremely well. We don't have just five talented guys. I believe right off the bat we've got at least seven guys, hopefully eight, that will be ready to play and rotate in as backup tackles, etc., as we've done in the past. So it's a talented group. If they can put the work in, and I know they have the mindset for this offseason, what they need to accomplish… they have that opportunity, but they'll have to earn it."

I don't think David Shaw makes those comments if he doesn't expect the 2014 version of the OL to be solid, if not spectacular.

[Papa John]

While it is sometimes difficult to decipher, or not be decieved by, coachspeak, I think that a recent USA Today interview of David Shaw is informative:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca...r/8406907/

"Q: So will the greatest offensive-line recruiting class you've ever seen turn into the greatest offensive line you've ever seen? That's a big step to take, but is that the potential – best line in America?

A: Knowing these guys, that's their mindset. We're going to be honest with them, because we're not there yet. We're not going to start the season as the best line in America. There's no chance. We don't have enough experience; we haven't done enough as a unit. So the charge is there because we believe the ability is there, we believe they fit in our scheme extremely well. We don't have just five talented guys. I believe right off the bat we've got at least seven guys, hopefully eight, that will be ready to play and rotate in as backup tackles, etc., as we've done in the past. So it's a talented group. If they can put the work in, and I know they have the mindset for this offseason, what they need to accomplish… they have that opportunity, but they'll have to earn it."

I don't think David Shaw makes those comments if he doesn't expect the 2014 version of the OL to be solid, if not spectacular.

[Mick]

I also found it interesting that the author chose to feature Reed Hastings as Stanford's Famous Alum.

Perhaps he has a large outstanding balance on his Netflix account....

[Mick]

I also found it interesting that the author chose to feature Reed Hastings as Stanford's Famous Alum.

Perhaps he has a large outstanding balance on his Netflix account....

[Papa John]

[quote author=Papa John link=topic=10020.msg89872#msg89872 date=1400690355]
I also found it interesting that the author chose to feature Reed Hastings as Stanford's Famous Alum.

Perhaps he has a large outstanding balance on his Netflix account....
[/quote]

Actually, Mick, I find it interesting because of this Hastings quote, in reference to his applications to comp sci grad program, from the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/jobs/17boss.html?_r=0

"I didn’t get into my first choice, which was M.I.T. I got accepted to Stanford."

Now that's downright scary.

[Papa John]

[quote author=Papa John link=topic=10020.msg89872#msg89872 date=1400690355]
I also found it interesting that the author chose to feature Reed Hastings as Stanford's Famous Alum.

Perhaps he has a large outstanding balance on his Netflix account....
[/quote]

Actually, Mick, I find it interesting because of this Hastings quote, in reference to his applications to comp sci grad program, from the NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/jobs/17boss.html?_r=0

"I didn’t get into my first choice, which was M.I.T. I got accepted to Stanford."

Now that's downright scary.

[Mick]

I had a conversation with Reed once.  Maybe it was just me, but he struck me as a remarkably down to earth guy, particularly for a technologist.

[Mick]

I had a conversation with Reed once.  Maybe it was just me, but he struck me as a remarkably down to earth guy, particularly for a technologist.