ESPN College Football

If you haven't had a chance to familiarize yourself with new ESPN.com College Football Insider Travis Haney, what better way to get to know him than by reading a piece about Stanford. Well, Stanford and a few others.

Haney picked four teams as his spring sleepers . Virginia Tech tops the list, along with Georgia, Kansas State and Stanford.

Here's a couple of hits from his Insider story:

Two reasons to have faith in the Cardinal: They can run and they can stop the run, and that's a pretty good place to start in the effort of winning football games. Senior back Stepfan Taylor has stealthily put up consecutive 1,000-yard rushing seasons, going for 1,330 yards in 2011. Had Stanford's kicker made the chip shot late against Oklahoma State, it would have been Taylor, and not [Andrew] Luck, who would have been Fiesta Bowl MVP after a 35-carry, 177-yard, two-score outburst. Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson, who combined for 731 yards and 10 touchdowns last season, provide quality depth. Youngster Ricky Seale impressed coach David Shaw in the spring. Oh, and Barry Sanders' kid (the nation's ninth-ranked RB recruit in the 2012 class) will be on campus beginning this summer.

Defensively, the Cardinal return the front for a unit that was first last season in the Pac-12 in yards per rush allowed (3.0 per-carry average) and stopping teams on third down (31.1 percent). It was second in the league points allowed, giving up 21.9 a game. With Shayne Skov returning from injury to rejoin all-conference performer Chase Thomas, Stanford is particularly loaded at linebacker.

Nothing in here should come as a surprise to anyone. Even with Luck running the show, the Cardinal were all about running the football first on offense and stopping the run on defense. They were very good at both last year and should be extremely good at the latter in 2012.

As Haney also points out in the story, there are some holes to fill on the offensive line and that's going to be an issue. I think we're all excited to see some of these true freshmen offensive linemen get into camp to see who can start contributing right away.

Over on the Pac-12 blog, Ted Miller and I have been breaking down the most important player (quarterbacks excluded) from each team in the conference.

Stanford is up today. I tinkered with this idea in a top-10 list back in February and had fullback Ryan Hewitt at No. 2. Well, I've changed my opinion. If I could go back, I would flip Stepfan Taylor and Hewitt. And here's why.

The Cardinal are extremely deep at running back. Taylor is a fantastic back -- and the best of the group without a doubt. But I have the feeling that if he went down with an injury, the Cardinal could absorb the loss with the rotation of Tyler Gaffney, Anthony Wilkerson, Ricky Seale, Barry Sanders, etc.

If Hewitt went down, there are other fullbacks behind him, but none as versatile or dynamic.

Here's what I had on Hewitt in the Pac-12 blog today:

He does so much for Stanford that few people realize his impact. Sure, it would have been easier to pick Taylor or Chase Thomas on defense or budding wide receiver Ty Montgomery. But when Hewitt is on the field, Stanford can run any number of formations with the same personnel group because Hewitt is so versatile. Here's how much Stanford loves to use fullbacks -- they have four of them on scholarship. I haven't checked, but there can't be that many teams that carry four scholarship fullbacks. And Hewitt is at the top of that depth chart. He won't run for 1,000 yards. But Taylor probably will again -- and Hewitt will be a big reason why. You take him out of the offense and the Cardinal lose one of their most under-appreciated, yet most important weapons.

I think whoever wins the quarterback spot is going to rely heavily on short-yardage passes, at least until they fully grasp the offense. That means a lot of tight ends underneath, a lot of running back swings and a lot of Hewitt coming out of the backfield. He catches everything (I don't recall any drops) and by my count he had a 94 percent catch-to-target ratio. That's the kind of consistency and reliability the new quarterback is going to need.

Happy Friday the 13th.

We're back-loaded by a couple of weeks on questions since we had to make sure all of the videos Ted Miller shot during his trip got posted, so apologies for not getting to some of these sooner.

To the questions:

Malcolm in San Jose, Calif., writes: Who were the biggest pro day winners and losers?

Kevin Gemmell: I wouldn't say there were any losers. Any time ESPN comes out and televises the pro day, everyone is a winner. Any time you can get representatives from every NFL team in one spot to showcase your team, it's a good thing. In terms of winners, I would say Coby Fleener was probably the biggest winner. He got to do everything he couldn't at the combine and he did it well. His 40 time was great. He showed outstanding athleticism in the assorted tests and drills and Andrew Luck put him in a position to show off his hops. I also thought Johnson Bademosi had a pretty good pro day. He looked the part physically and might have worked himself into the draft. And, of course, Luck was a winner. He got to show off his arm strength, mobility and pure athleticism. There is only so much you can show in shorts and a T-shirt, but some of the throws he was making -- particularly the ones when he was on the move -- were impressive.

Anderson in San Francisco writes: Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you one of the people questioning Luck's arm strength? How's the crow taste after watching his 70-yard bomb?

Kevin Gemmell: Consider yourself corrected. But thanks.

Mike in Cupertino, Calif., writes: How many scholarships does Stanford have available for next year's signing? It seems like we've had a few years of 19-22 signees. With only 85 scholarships available and most players staying on campus for five years, how much play does David Shaw and the staff have? I've heard estimates of a class of about 15 being the max we can sign.

Kevin Gemmell: I talked to someone in the athletic department about this, and he essentially said it's a "fluid" number, meaning it's not a number they want to release publicly. But you can do some of the math on your own. There aren't many seniors on the 2012 roster. There will be attrition between now and next February. Guys leaving early, medical retirees or transfers and such equals more scholarships. But rough guess right now it's about half of the class they just signed.

Ally in Stanford, Calif., writes: Any word on whether Shayne Skov has recovered from his injury? How about from his DUI? Has the university issued a statement?

Kevin Gemmell: Skov is still rehabbing, and I would imagine that rehab will take him right up to fall camp. Those kind of knee injuries take a minimum of six months, but more likely nine or 10 months to really heal properly. And then there is the mental aspect. I'm pretty sure it won't be too much of an issue with Skov because he has a linebacker's mentality: Hit first, ask questions later. But he's going to need to get comfortable with full contact again and the first time he hits the ground awkwardly, it's going to be a shock to his system. I've seen some guys completely freak out and they never are quite the same players. But I don't think that will be the case with him. Regarding the DUI, Shaw said he wanted to wait until after spring to make an announcement so it wouldn't distract from the work on the field. Based on some conversations I've had, I wouldn't expect anything more than a two-game suspension, but one game seems likely.

Mark in Alameda, Calif., writes: Predictions for the spring game? Will the offense or defense rule?

Kevin Gemmell: Well, hearing Shaw talk about the defense, it seems like the offensive line is having all kinds of problems blocking the linebackers. I think there might be some coach speak there, because reports are that the running backs look pretty darn good also. I'm sure there will be highlights from both sides of the ball. But during spring games and fall scrimmages, the defense is usually further along than the offense. And when you factor in a quarterback competition vs. a very deep and experienced front seven, I'd expect the defense to come out on top.

Victor in Denver writes: Can you rank the running backs next year?

Kevin Gemmell: I think the only thing we can count on in terms of rankings is that Stepfan Taylor is the No. 1 back -- and with good reason. Behind him is a slew of opportunistic players. Ricky Sealeis making a name for himself during spring ball. I'm partial to Seale since I covered him for three years in high school. With the exception of Reggie Bush, whom I also covered during his prep days, I always said Seale had the best vision of any high school back I've ever seen. He would find the smallest holes, disappear and then re-appear 30 yards down the field. But he lacks the game experience of Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson. And then we have to consider Barry Sanders and what role he could play next season. And Ryan Hewitt will probably see more short-yardage carries with departure of Jeremy Stewart. Hewitt was extremely reliable last year on anything less than three yards and we know how much Shaw and Pep Hamilton love to use the fullback. So I can't give you a solid answer on rankings. I just know they are really deep and really talented.

Catching up on the week in Stanford recruiting. This is shaping up to be the-one-that-got-away edition.

It looks like Stanford probably isn't going to get Trent Hosick (Kansas City, Mo.), who has his heart set on playing quarterback in college. He told ESPN.com's Damon Sayles that Stanford was one of the latest schools trying to convert him to another position — but his heart is set on being a signal-caller.

It’s still a sense of, ‘Wow, what an honor. They brought in Barry Sanders Jr. at running back for the 2012 class, and they were interested in me at running back for the 2013 class. Stanford’s a great school, and I’d get the chance to play with [Staley teammate] Nathanael [Lohn] again.

They recognize my athleticism, and that’s honorable, but at the same time, my goal is to help my team win a national championship. I feel the best way for me to do that is to play quarterback. I have the opportunity to play quarterback at many places, so that’s what I’m going to do.

Meanwhile, more details are emerging about cornerback Chris Hawkins and his decision to go with USC over Stanford.

He was originally going to give the Cardinal verbal commitment last month, though a last-minute conversation with some members of the USC coaching staff changed his mind. Here are some outtakes from a nice piece by Erik McKinney .

While Hawkins was initially drawn to Stanford by its academic prowess and 3-1 record against USC on the football field over the past four years, he said things began to shift the closer he studied it.

“The academics Stanford has are great, but USC sort of has the same academic stature,” he said. “I don’t plan on moving out of California after my career is done, so a USC degree is just as valuable as one from Stanford.

“... I was thinking about Stanford all the time. But I couldn’t decide what school to go to. I would be doing homework and I would just have to stop everything I was doing. There was a lot going on in my head.”

In other Stanford recruiting news:

• Offensive lineman Tyrone Crowder (Rockingham, N.C.) picked up his 15th offer. This one from Miami. But he told ESPN.com's Jamie Newberg he's holding out for No. 16 : "Stanford said that they are waiting on my test score. That would be a great one for me."
• Defensive end Jordan Sherit (Tampa, Fla.) continues to be sought after by multiple schools, writes Bob Przybylo . Oklahoma has now entered the mix, though Sherit reiterated his interest in the Cardinal: "I'm not going to make a commitment until I've seen all of the schools I'm interested in. That will mean a lot of traveling so it's going to be some time. I'm not as much interested in the wins and losses as I am the relationship I have with the coaches and how I feel on the campus."
• Linebacker Ben Boulware picked Clemson over Stanford, UCLA and others .
• Linebacker Alex Anzalone (Wyomissing, Pa.) is planning to visit Stanford this week, according to ESPN's Jared Shanker .
• Linebacker Shane Jones (Cincinnati) believes Stanford could be knocking soon. He told Shanker : "When you think of Stanford, you think of the school, but now you have a football team that's turning it around and competing in the BCS."

Bob in Omaha writes: [David] Shaw said that the QB competition is open -- but sometimes that's just how coaches talk. You've got to think Brett Nottingham has the lead. How surprised would you be if Nottingham didn't win the job?

Kevin Gemmell: I can't say I'd be too blown away if one of the other guys wins the job. It's not like it's Nottingham and four scrubs who are there to fill out a jersey. These were all legitimate, highly respected high school quarterbacks. Remember, Nottingham was the No. 4 quarterback coming out of spring ball last year and once Josh Nunes got hurt, he beat out Robbie Picazo for the backup job. Shaw speaks highly of Kevin Hogan. I saw Evan Crower play in high school. Kid's good. So no, it wouldn't be totally surprising if someone else wins out. With that said, yes, you have to believe that Nottingham has at least a tiny edge -- not just because he was the backup quarterback last year -- but because he held on to the backup role all season. No doubt, he was pressed by other guys during the course of the year. How much? I honestly can't say because practices were closed, and we don't know how much Nunes' foot injury lingered during the year. But just because you win a job in August doesn't mean you're guaranteed to still have it in November. The fact that Nottingham did is a piece of the puzzle that I think often gets overlooked.

---

Eric in Bangkok writes: Are we likely to see more three-tight-end stuff in Stanford's future? Or was that a temporary response to a specific context?

Kevin Gemmell: As long as Shaw is the head coach and Pep Hamilton is the offensive coordinator -- I can assure you the three-tight-end package doesn't leave with Coby Fleener. Now, will they run it as frequently as they did last season? Probably not. You adjust the scheme to fit the talents of your team. And when you have a Fleener-type player, you find ways to let him stretch the field. Zach Ertz and Levine Toilolo are great tight ends. But Fleener did some things better than them -- just as they do some things better than Fleener. We saw Ryan Hewitt step up and play more tight end when Ertz went down. Wouldn't be surprised if there are a few packages in place next season with him as the third tight end and Geoff Meinken at fullback. Without Fleener, however, I think you have to start getting the wide receivers more involved in the passing game. Stanford was able to rely on the tight ends because of what that trio could do on the field at the same time. With the dynamics shifting, I think it has to be a priority for the wide receivers to take a more prominent role in the passing attack.

---

Tom in Menlo Park, Calif., writes: Hey Kevin, I've seen it mentioned numerous times with respect to Jonathan Martin & David DeCastro's draft prospects that OGs like DeCastro do not typically go in the first round (making it all the more impressive that DeCastro is projected to) whereas it is common for OTs. Can you discuss a bit about the reasons for the greater demand for tackles in terms of NFL team needs and the different skill sets for the two positions?

Kevin Gemmell: As in most things, demand is dictated by supply -- and good offensive tackles are in rarer supply than guards -- especially in the NFL. Once you get to the pro game, the best defensive linemen are typically the faster, more athletic guys on the outside. So you have to have your best athletes on the outside to hold them off. This requires a different type of player -- including physical frame. Guards like DeCastro have to be more explosive for pulling. DeCastro is a born run-blocker. Martin is better in pass protection. That's his physical makeup. Consider their combine measurables. Both checked in at 6-foot-5 -- DeCastro at 316 pounds and Martin at 312. But Martin has almost an inch and a half on DeCastro in reach. He's a longer player, and that's the physical makeup needed for tackles. Guys like Martin and USC's Matt Kalil are immovable objects -- and that's what's needed in the NFL. Plus, it's always easier to give help in a blocking scheme to the inside than it is the outside. You have fullbacks and running backs that can offer assistance on blitzes and centers can double-team on the inside. I'm not saying that guards are inferior players to tackles. Because they aren't. They just have a different frame and skill set required for the position. You hear cornerbacks use the expression "being out on an island." A lot of times it's the same for tackles -- who are out on the island one-on-one against the best pass-rushers. You're more likely to see college tackles move over to guard than vice versa. There are always exceptions, but that's the conventional thinking.

---

John in Phoenix writes: I attended the same high school as Anthony Wilkerson, so I'd really like to see him do well. I thought he showed signs of brilliance last year in his limited playing time. He looks explosive and powerful and wondered why he didn't get more carries. What do you think his role will be next year with the return of [Tyler] Gaffney and [Stepfan] Taylor, and now with the addition of [Barry] Sanders?

Kevin Gemmell: I think the biggest issue with Wilkerson last season was that he just never really got enough carries in a game to get into a rhythm. He'd have a lot of 1-yard, 2-yard runs in one game and then bust out a 38-yard run the next game. He started as the first guy off the bench to spell Taylor, but Gaffney moved up the food chain -- and a lot of that had to do with the wildcat package. Again, we're not at practices so we can't really judge what's going on behind the scenes. But the coaching staff saw a reason to give more carries to Gaffney. As for next year, it's just a matter of making the most of his opportunities. Shaw has shown he likes to play freshmen running backs, so if Sanders does play, it's going to cut into Wilkersons' carries even more. Taylor, who accounted for almost 50 percent of the carries last year, is going to be the workhorse again. Wilkerson needs to find his niche. For Gaffney, it started as the wildcat guy and grew into a more prominent role. Jeremy Stewart was the short-yardage guy. As long as Wilkerson is tagged as that change-of-pace guy, he's probably not going to see those 10-15 carries each week that would allow him to get into the flow of a game.

---

Sam in New York writes: Are any of Stanford's incoming recruits enrolled early? Been looking around all over the web but haven't found anything. Interested to know if anyone from this talented class will be playing spring ball.

Kevin Gemmell: Shaw actually isn't a big fan of the early-admission process. Back in December, he talked about a study he and Jim Harbaugh did and they found that high school players entering early really had no significant advantage -- and were in fact more likely to get injured. He'd rather they take the extra six months -- enjoy the high school experience, play a winter or spring sport, and then get on the Stanford training regimen in the summer.

---

Peter in Nor Cal writes: Hey Kevin, would you take a crack at predicting the state of affairs for Stanford Football 3, 5, and 10 years down the line? What will our record be, who will be coaching, what (if any) bowl will we be in, etc. Thanks for all the reporting on Stanford.

Kevin Gemmell: Boy, where's Carnac the Magnificent when you need him (everyone under the age of 30, start Googling). OK, let's see. Well, three years down the line I'd expect the Cardinal will be looking for another outstanding offensive line class because the bulk of this year's group will be heading to the draft. I'd be shocked if Pep Hamilton and Derek Mason haven't gotten head coaching gigs somewhere in three to five years. I'd imagine Shaw is still the head coach in five years. The lure to return to the NFL might tempt him five years from now -- especially if he's offered an offensive coordinator or head-coaching job. But unless he has back-to-back 0-12 seasons and a heap of NCAA violations, I don't see him ever getting fired. He's an alumnus, he loves the school and the program and if he's still head coach in 2022, I wouldn't be all that surprised. As for records -- well, with this recruiting momentum, I don't see any sub-.500 seasons on the horizon for the next five years. But after that, who knows? One off recruiting class can set a program back half a decade. I think this is a good staff with good recruiters. I see no reason why they don't keep the momentum they've established rolling along. As for future bowl games -- if they can crack a BCS game within five years of the post-Andrew Luck era, I'd say Shaw has done a heck of a job. This year's offensive-line class is going to pay off in recruiting quarterbacks for the next couple of years, so you can expect some of the top QBs -- who also meet the Cardinal academic standards -- will give Stanford a good, long look.

Scott in Redwood City, Calif., writes: Stanford's high admissions standards for the footballers is under-appreciated, I don't think you'll dispute. Especially remarkable to me is the fact that Stanford imposes the exact same labor-intensive admissions process (essays, recommendations, etc.) on football players as any other applicant. Comparing any school in D-I to Stanford in regards to academics is laughable, in my opinion. This used to be merely an interesting side-note (and a handy explanation/excuse). But now, with all this program is accomplishing, I find it remarkable that this topic doesn't get more "run." What gives?

Kevin Gemmell: No doubt, the admissions process is brutal. Just ask some of the commits who didn't end up gaining admission and were left scrambling to find a spot days before signing day. I asked head coach David Shaw about that specifically in our post-recruiting day Q&A and he gave, I thought, was a pretty candid answer. But I'm not sure how much more "run" you can give it. Stanford is a great academic institution. It's tough to get into. Now the Cardinal play good football to boot. What more is there to say?

---

Jorge in San Francisco writes: With the hoopla and depth surrounding next season's crew of Tunnel Workers O-lineman, could Stanford be a better running team than last year? We lose top talent in Moose [Jonathan Martin] and [David] DeCastro, but perhaps we may be able to run 7 or even 8 (!) lineman formations? The RBs are probably improved too. Going out on a limb, we may even match up better with Oregon next year with an increased focus on the running game. On the other hand, the O-line will be young and we lose Andrew Luck's pre-snap run-audibles and passing threat.

KG: First, great question. Second, I think you answered it with the last sentence. No matter how much Shaw tried to stress how important Luck was to the running game, I don't think it was ever really appreciated outside of the Pac-12. Now, that's not to say that Shaw and offensive coordinator Pep Hamilton can't call plays -- because they can and they're very good at it. When you look at the line, you love having Sam Schwartzstein back at center. No one understands the offense better than him -- except for Luck. And now he's gone. Cameron Fleming and David Yankey should be even better next year. I'd imagine we'll see more of Kevin Danser on the line and I'm really curious to see which of the new linemen can contribute right away. Guards traditionally see playing time sooner than tackles, but there is nothing traditional about this group coming in. I think we'll continue to see Stepfan Taylor and Tyler Gaffney get better. You lose the goal-line back in Jeremy Stewart, though fullback Ryan Hewitt was equally effective in short-yardage situations last year. And then there's the question of Barry Sanders and whether he sees time. As for the Oregon question, hang on, because you're about to fall off that limb. No matter how you slice it, losing Andrew Luck never helps you match up better against anyone.

---

Amber in Saratoga, Calif., writes: I was shocked at your statement: "Skov has neither the history nor the offense to warrant that severe of a punishment." How could you consider a DUI not that serious of an offense?

KG: Amber, first, I was in no way was downplaying the severity of a DUI. The point was that Shayne Skov didn't have a history of misconduct and that as far as we know this was his first slip-up. And I still don't think he should be kicked off the team, as opposed to Washington State linebacker C.J. Mizell, which is where the comparison came from. I certainly don't condone his actions and clearly neither does Shaw. Punishment is warranted. But blackballing him from the team would be too severe. Others disagree and think he should be booted. I don't buy that. And neither do I buy the "it could have been worse" argument. Of course it could have been worse. But it wasn't. So let this be a lesson to Skov, his teammates and valuable teaching moment for Shaw. I expect Skov to be a model citizen for the rest of his days at Stanford and Shaw to handle the situation justly and without prejudice.

---

Tony in Fresno, Calif., writes: Does David Shaw hire someone to be another co-defensive coordinator, or does Derek Mason take the job all to himself?

KG: Personally, I like the idea of one coordinator handling the pass defense and another handling the front end -- which was Jason Tarver's job. It probably happens more than we think on other teams, it's just that one guy usually gets the title. Whether the new coach gets the title or not, it was clear that Stanford's weekly defensive scheme was built on a collaborative effort and that won't change. More important I think is finding a coach well-versed in the 3-4. Tarver's knowledge was beyond vast. That's why he's now an NFL coordinator.

Barry Sanders (Oklahoma City/Heritage) talks with SoonerNation's Bob Przybylo about committing to Stanford.

Stanford head coach David Shaw has a lot to smile about after hauling in a top-15 recruiting class on Wednesday. With six ESPNU 150 players -- including three of the top offensive linemen in the country and athletic playmakers on both sides of the ball -- Shaw said his team fills much-needed holes and adds depth at other spots.

Here's part one of a Q&A with the second-year head coach.

What are your first impressions of this group?

David Shaw: This group has what we're looking for. We wanted to address the offensive line and make sure we had some more playmakers at the wide receiver position. We were going to take a running back if he was a difference-maker. That's what Barry (Sanders) is. Defensively, to be able to come in with the defensive line we've put together in this class, I think is a credit to our coaches and our coaching style and our scheme that these guys are excited to come play for us. Then to get a couple of the top defensive backs at the safety and corner position in the nation is really exciting.

So the offensive line was a target position this year? It didn't just work out that way. You guys were going after linemen all the way?

DS: No question. We hadn't gotten enough in the last couple of years. As well as we've played, we haven't been deep. Thankfully for our strength and conditioning program, our guys have stayed pretty healthy so we haven't had to play down to our younger guys. We needed depth, especially with two guys leaving early for the draft. We needed guys to come in and compete right away and I think we've brought some guys in that can do that.

Coach (Mike) Sanford tweeted after Andrus Peat announced: "Our staff reaction was priceless!" What does priceless mean and what was the reaction?

DS: It's something you don't feel in the NFL. You draft a guy and you know he's there and you draft him and you get excited. But to sit there waiting and not knowing for sure. Having a good feeling, but not knowing for sure that he was coming to us. Then the announcement was made and we saw the hat. Guys were jumping up and down and pumping fists and high fiving. It was pretty loud. I think it was heard pretty much around the building. Not too much longer, we had the same reaction when Kyle Murphy did his announcement. We jumped up and down and high fived and guys were yelling. It's been a special, special day for us because these guys are our type of guys. They aren't prima donnas that want to come in on a silver platter. The guys we've been recruiting, they want to come in and work and earn what we give them.

How exciting will it be to see these offensive linemen grow together?

DS: It's going to be exciting. Anytime you start with a player that does the things you can't teach -- size and athletic ability and flexibility and nastiness -- that's when it's really fun as a coach because now you are teaching the finer points of the game. The techniques and the calls. You're not trying to make up for something ability wise the player doesn't have. This group is really exciting. I think they are humble and they are hungry. The guys on our team are going to welcome them in as true competitors and teammates. It will be a fun group to work with.

You talked about having "that feeling," how confident were you leading up to the Barry Sanders announcement?

DS: Very. I think when Barry came to campus for the first time, I think it opened his eyes. I think he saw a place -- like so many guys on our team and committed to us -- the first time on campus it hit them that this is a place they are looking for. It hit them that there is a place out there that is first in academics but doesn't slight in the football category. That's what Barry saw. Barry Sanders is a famous individual. And to be able to sit down and have lunch with Andrew Luck, who is also a famous individual, for people to recognize him, but not bother him -- you're sitting in a place where there are a lot of people that are famous in their own rights in what they do and are really good at what they do. There is an environment that is very comforting to a guy like that who does have some fame and some notoriety to be around people that are just like him.

Noor Davis committed early and was so outspoken in support of the program to other recruits -- how much does it help when you have a guy who is going to sell the program for you and hasn't even signed his letter yet?

DS: I think every program in the nation always has one or two of those guys who commit early and is determined to help build the class. Noor has a lot nicknames around here for us. My favorite one is "The Senator." We're talking about a big kid who is imposing physically and extremely intelligent and very well-spoken, very thoughtful in every word that he says, but also very convincing. When you have a guy like that that can be talking to other recruits, he's an example of what we're looking for. Much like Andrew Luck before him and guys we have now that can talk to other recruits and give them an example of what a Stanford man is.

Last week we saw in an analysis by ESPN The Magazine and RecruitingNation that Stanford was the best school in the nation at getting the most production from out-of-state recruiting.

Well, there's a flipside to that coin.

As good as Stanford has been looking outside of the Golden State, it hasn't been too productive at landing California's finest. A similar analysis shows Stanford is the third-worst program at getting ESPNU 150 athletes from its own state.

From 2007 to 2011, Stanford landed just 2-of-73 ESPNU 150 athletes from California -- Anthony Wilkerson out of Tustin in 2010 and Josh Nunes from Upland in 2009.

Here's what LaRue Cook says about Stanford:

We gave Stanford props for its ability to go out of state to sign top prospects, but there's no ignoring the program's inability to create an elite pipeline in its state. (Meanwhile, UCLA has signed 12 in-state ESPNU 150 recruits over the last five years.) Sure, Cardinal fans can blame their program's struggles on academic constraints, but out of 73 players, surely more than two could qualify. In 2012, David Shaw doesn't have a single ESPNU 150 commit from California -- USC currently has four and UCLA has two -- but No. 4 OT Kyle Murphy (San Clemente) still has Stanford on his short list.

To which I say, so what? The analysis deals only with ESPNU 150 athletes. And I think we all know that whatever scouting service you trust, it isn't always bullet proof. Two-star players have gone on to greatness and five-stars have fizzled.

I say, consider some of the Stanford players who came out of California during that stretch who weren't ESPNU 150 prospects: Jonathan Martin (North Hollywood), Tyler Gaffney (San Diego), Levine Toilolo (San Diego), Zach Ertz (Danville), Delano Howell (Newhall). All remarkably productive and one who is expected to be drafted in the first round.

This type of analysis makes for great message board fodder, but read more into the results than projections -- and I think the Stanford coaching staff would agree. If you're looking strictly at the ranking numbers, then yes, Stanford hasn't been particularly successful as, say, USC, which has scored 33 ESPNU 150 recruits from California during that time span. By the way, what's Stanford's record against USC the last three years?

Stanford is a unique program that has to be examined with a different standard of criteria. The product on the field is what matters. The results are still out on Wilkerson since Stepfan Taylor has been carrying the load. And with Barry Sanders coming in, we might never know if Wilkerson could be a carry-the-load kind of running back.

It's an open quarterback competition next year, so we'll see who emerges and where Nunes lands.

This year's current crop of commits features just one player from California -- wide receiver Kodi Whitfield. So what? It also has four ESPNU 150 commits with the possibility of more.

The morale of the story: It shouldn't matter if they come from Los Angeles or Plymouth, Minn. (shout out to A.J. Tarpley), if they can play, they can play.

Like most regular readers of this blog, I live in California and was raised on Bay Area football and spent the early portions of my career covering Southern California high schools. There are only so many 6-4, 225-pound wide receivers that run 4.4 40s and only so many four- and-five stars that can be handed out. California is fertile ground, and fair game, for every school in the country.

My take: Stanford is doing just fine in California, and Texas, and Georgia and Arizona, and everywhere else they can find the athletes that fit the academic requirements, character and culture needed to be a football player at Stanford.

Here's a look at what happened in the world of Stanford recruiting over the last week and a couple of days (usually this report runs on Mondays, but hey, there was sort of an important game that day).

• Speaking of that Fiesta game -- we all know the sub-plot was that it was the Barry Sanders bowl. Damon Sayles is reporting that he'll make his decision on Saturday. I'd think Stanford's offense on Monday night looked like the kind of offense a running back would love. Just sayin' ...
• Sayles is also reporting that four-star offensive tackle Kyle Murphy is still waiting to make his decision from among USC, Stanford, Oregon, Florida and Cal. He's set up an official visit to Stanford the week of Jan. 13.

"I liked the environments," Murphy said of Oregon and Florida, "and I got a good feel for the schools and the programs. I want to go to a place that has a good system I can fit into. I want to have a good feel for the place and a good feel for the players and coaches."

• Bam Bradley of Trotwood-Madison (Ohio) was scheduled to make his announcement at the Semper Fidelis All-American Bowl, but has decided to delay, reports ESPN.com's Jared Shanker. He's considering Ohio State, Pittsburgh and Stanford.
• In case you missed it earlier in the week with all of the Fiesta hubbub, guard Brandon Fanaika (Pleasant Grove, Utah) committed to the Cardinal, Sayles notes.
• With Fanaika's commitment, the Cardinal could be on the verge of landing a historic offensive line class, writes ESPN.com's Greg Biggins.

Writes Biggins:

The commitment Thursday night from Brandon Fanaika (Pleasant Grove, Utah) gives the Cardinal four offensive line commitments. For most schools, that would just about wrap it up but Stanford is still heavily involved with three of the nation’s best line prospects and if it lands even two of the three, it would be one of the best OL classes in recent memory.

Some news and notes about players already committed to Stanford.

• A video breakdown of athlete Alex Carter (Briar Woods, Va.) and how he'll fare in the U.S. Army All-American Bowl.
• Here's a really nice breakdown of one of the Cardinal's newest recruits, offensive lineman Nick Davidson (Eden Prairie, Minn.).
• With 25 pancake blocks on the year, offensive lineman Graham Shuler (Brentwood, Tenn.) was named to The Tennessean's 2011 Dream Team after making the 2011 All-Midstate Football squad.
• Defensive tackle Ikenna Nwafor (Irving, Texas) had 1.5 sacks and impressed in the Offense-Defense Bowl at Cowboys Stadium.
• Linebacker Blake Martinez (Canyon del Oro, Ariz.) was reportedly in the house Monday night to watch his new team.