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.

2011 record: 11-2
2011 conference record: 8-1 (2nd, North)
Returning starters: Offense: 6; defense: 7; kicker/punter 1

Top returners
RB Stepfan Taylor, OLB Chase Thomas, LB Shayne Skov, FB Ryan Hewitt, C Sam Schwartzstein, OG David Yankey, OT Cameron Fleming, DE Ben Gardner, TE Zach Ertz, TE Levine Toilolo.

Key losses
QB Andrew Luck, OL David DeCastro, OL Jonathan Martin, S Delano Howell, DE Matt Masifilo, WR Chris Owusu, TE Coby Fleener, S Michael Thomas.

2011 statistical leaders* (returners)
Rushing: Stepfan Taylor* (1,330 yards)
Passing: Andrew Luck (3,517 yards)
Receiving: Griff Whalen (749 yards)
Tackles: Jarek Lancaster* (70)
Sacks: Chase Thomas* (8.5)
Interceptions: Michael Thomas (3)

Spring answers
1. And then there were two: The pack of five has been funneled down to two quarterbacks competing to replace Andrew Luck, the No. 1 overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. There are plenty of questions left (see below) but at least we know that it's not a three-, four- or five-man race heading into spring. Brett Nottingham and Josh Nunes clearly separated themselves from the rest of the pack. That's a start.

2. Running back depth: In case Stepfan Taylor gets the flu, and Tyler Gaffney trips over his batting gloves, and Anthony Wilkerson stubs his toe, we know the Cardinal still have a viable running back option in Ricky Seale, who impressed Shaw this spring with his vision, quickness and elusiveness. Oh yeah, there's a Barry something or other coming in the fall whose supposed to be a pretty good running back. RB depth is not a concern.

3. Scary front seven: The Cardinal have so much talent and depth at defensive line and linebacker that defensive coordinator Derek Mason has to be scratching his head on how to get everybody in. Linebacker James Vaugthers is a star on the rise -- but that means taking reps away from A.J. Tarpley and Jarek Lancaster. Chase Thomas and Trent Murphy are two of the best at what they do. Stanford's run defense was really good last year. It could be great this year.

Fall questions
1. Who's the guy? Nunes or Nottingham? Nottingham or Nunes? That's the question everyone will be asking on the Farm for the next few months. This might be the most intriguing quarterback competition in the country. But the Cardinal don't need a 50-attempt guy. They need someone who can put them in the best play against the right defense and hand off to Stepfan Taylor. Then repeat. Repeat. Repeat. And then pop a play-action to Ty Montgomery, Zach Ertz or Levine Toilolo.

2. The Fleener factor: Much of Stanford's offensive success came from the three-tight-end formations, which included Coby Fleener, Ertz and Toilolo. In fact, about 35 percent of the offensive playbook is triple-tight sets. How much does that change with Fleener's departure to the NFL? Ertz and Toilolo are both outstanding tight ends in their own right. But the three of them together was something special.

3. Drop-off? Aren't you tired of reading about the drop-off Stanford is going to suffer with the graduation of Luck? Well, so are the players. Several have said off the record that it's a great motivational tool because they believe the defense and running game are stronger than they've ever been. Whatever the public thinks, it hasn't penetrated the locker room. Not yet, anyway.

Stanford head coach David Shaw pulled the curtain back ever so slightly on his quarterback competition, revealing not what he's looking for, but what he's not looking for in Andrew Luck's successor.

"They know the quickest way for those guys to lose the competition is to try to be Andrew," Shaw said. "That will lose someone the competition."

This has been a different spring for Shaw, who took over following Jim Harbaugh's exodus to the NFL and had the best quarterback in nation already in place. Shaw had helped develop Luck as Harbaugh's offensive coordinator, and knew there wasn't much tweaking required. This year's crop presents a fun, albeit different, challenge for the former NFL quarterbacks coach.

"There were a couple of times where I had to grab them and get my hands on them," Shaw said. "Some of those young guys are like clay and you get a chance to mold them. It was fun. It was enjoyable.

"The only thing that would be more enjoyable [will be] when someone takes the job and we plant them in there and give them a chance to play. It was completely different. It was different working with a battle for the back-up quarterback job to the best quarterback in the nation as opposed to battling for the starting job."

Still, no matter whether it's Brett Nottingham or Josh Nunes who emerges as Stanford's starting quarterback, there are going to be expectations to maintain the success Stanford has enjoyed the past few years.

"I'm not going to lie, there is still an Andrew Luck hangover going on down here in Palo Alto," Shaw said. "But we have some athletic, smart, accurate quarterbacks that understand what we do. ... Their job is to be efficient. Their job is to hand the ball to Stepfan Taylor and Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson. To find Levine Toilolo and Zach Ertz and give Ty Montgomery a chance to play.

"As we always talk about, the quarterback's job here is to deal the cards. Get it to the playmakers. Make sure the offense runs efficiently. And the guy that does that the best will be the guy that starts."

In other Stanford news:

Linebacker Shayne Skov is on schedule with his rehabilitation from a season-ending knee injury suffered in Week 3 last season against Arizona. Shaw said he expects Skov to be ready by the start of fall camp, but they will keep a close eye on him. Some are already predicting Skov as a first-round pick in next year's NFL draft.

"We'll be very smart with him, getting into the more physical practices, just to make sure," Shaw said. "Shayne doesn't have to prove to me that he can play the game of football; Shayne has to prove to me that he's healthy. We're not going to put him in those potentially damaging situations until we know he's 100 percent ready to go. So early in training camp we'll take care of him. We'll watch him the first couple of days of pads. If there are no setbacks, we'll release him for complete, full-go activity. I expect him to play up to the level of his ability."

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.

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.

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.

First year or fifth year, it makes no difference. If you can play, you can play.

That's the philosophy of Stanford head coach David Shaw, who is starting his second offseason running the show at his alma mater.

And with several big-name players giving committing to Stanford, it's worth exploring which ones might play right away next season by examining who got in this year.

Of course, due to NCAA regulations, Shaw is not allowed to comment on any individual players until after the pomp and circumstance of signing day. But Shaw did say that he'll evaluate every player who comes in to the system and if they can compete immediately, they will.

"It's player-by-player, and there is no set rule," Shaw said. "If a guy is physically, mentally and emotionally ready to help us than that opportunity is there for them."

We saw several true freshman take the field for Stanford this season -- specifically wide receiver Ty Montgomery, linebacker James Vaughters, safety Jordan Richards and cornerback Wayne Lyons, before he hurt his foot and missed the majority of the season.

Some coaches live and die by a strict redshirt policy. That's not the case with Shaw, who has shown he'll use true freshmen to bolster depth.

Montgomery emerged -- slowly at first -- and then following the series of concussions to Chris Owusu, he leapt into the starting role and became a major contributor on offense down the stretch.

Lyons was working his way into the cornerback rotation early in the season before injuring his foot.

Vaughters saw a healthy amount of playing time -- specifically as a third-down pass-rusher. But even when Shayne Skov went down with a knee injury, Shaw said he wouldn't accelerate Vaughter's growth and give him responsibilities that he wasn't ready for.

In the case of Richards, he saw his playing time increase when Delano Howell missed time with a hand injury.

Player-by-player basis.

Naturally, the bulk of Stanford's freshmen redshirt -- that's the nature of college football. Most players aren't physically or mentally mature enough to contribute right away.

"Some guys aren't excited about it because they think they're ready, and they're not," Shaw said. "Other guys are really ready and we don't have a position for them and it's not worth missing that extra year for one or two plays."

That could be the case next season with, say, Noor Davis, considered by many to be the top outside linebacker in the nation. With Chase Thomas returning for another season and Trent Murphy coming off a fantastic year, it's not ikely Davis is going to overtake either of them. But he could be used like Vaughters, on pass-rush situations and to add depth in the case of injury. Or he could redshirt and get three or four good years after gaining strength for another season.

Stanford's other highly-touted recruit, running back Barry Sanders, could be in the mix right away, or could sit for a season behind the rotation of Stepfan Taylor, Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson.

We won't know for sure until we've seen them in camp -- and until the coaches are allowed to comment on them.

"There are a lot of things that come in to play," Shaw said. "It's definitely a player-by-player situation, and we're not going to rush anyone who isn't ready. But if they are, we'll find a way to play them."

Happy Monday. Let's take some questions (or respond to declarative statements).

Adam in Dallas, Texas, writes: DAVID SHAW WAS THE WRONG HIRE!

Kevin Gemmell: Whoa there, cowboy. First, ease up on the all caps. Second, I TOTALLY DISAGREE! Shaw was the perfect hire. First, he's a Stanford grad with deep ties to the program through his father and prior coaches. Second, he was the offensive coordinator for all of Andrew Luck's career. Did you really want to bring in a new head coach with potentially a new offensive system for Luck's final year? Third, so far, he appears to be able to recruit extremely well. Just for kicks, let's look at some of the coaches who were on the move last year or interviewed for the job. Chris Petersen was never really interested. Greg Roman or Vic Fangio? Maybe. But would either of them have done a better job this season? I can't see either one of them doing anything much differently. Brady Hoke was a non-name that turned into a big name last year, and as a former San Diego State beat writer, I heard whisperings about his name at Stanford, but know for a fact he wouldn't have taken the job. The point is, you say he's the wrong guy, but who would have been the right guy? This year was all about getting the most out of Luck and getting back to a BCS bowl game. Shaw did that. Five years from now if the Cardinal are coming off back-to-back 2-10 seasons, you can serve me up some crow with Tabasco and I'll dive right in without a bib. But don't throw out an all-caps message after an 11-2 season that also notched Shaw the Pac-12 Coach of the Year without suggesting another name.

---

Brian in Palo Alto writes: Kevin, what do you see as the biggest off-season needs for the Cardinal?

Kevin Gemmell: I would say that just as important as hammering out the quarterback issue, Stanford needs to really improve on tackling in the secondary. I haven't been shy about touting the futures of Devon Carrington and Jordan Richards. But they are really going to have to step it up next season because there is no Delano Howell coming back from injury and no Michael Thomas to rally the troops and hold the secondary together. Wayne Lyons should be back from injury, which will help soften the blow of losing Johnson Bademosi and Corey Gatewood. With Chase Thomas announcing over the weekend that he's coming back, the front seven should be outstanding again. But behind the front seven, the Cardinal are going to need to do a better job putting hats on receivers.

---

Taylor in Portland, Ore. writes: What can we expect out of Barry Sanders in his first year?

Kevin Gemmell: First off, wait until it's official. From what I understand, he has to clear admissions first and then officially go through the signing day pomp and circumstance. Once that happens, I wouldn't expect a 1,500-yard season just yet. Stepfan Taylor will continue to be the primary back, though I wouldn't be shocked to see Sanders get a decent amount of carries. Taylor, Tyler Gaffney, Anthony Wilkerson and Jeremy Stewart all saw playing time as true freshmen. He has a lot to learn about this system -- specifically reading gaps and pass protection, something that is going to be paramount next season with a new starting quarterback and new left tackle. If he shows in practice he can handle it, we should see him get some carries next season.

GLENDALE, Ariz. -- Here's five things we learned about the Stanford Cardinal in the wake of Monday's 41-38 overtime loss to the Oklahoma State Cowboys in the Fiesta Bowl.

1. More on the Fiesta Bowl

   For full coverage of the Stanford-Oklahoma State matchup in the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl, check out the Fiesta Bowl home.
   More:
   • Fiesta Bowl blog coverage
   • Stanford blog | Big 12 blog
   

   A rare glimpse: During the season, Stanford has a closed locker room policy. But the BCS mandates them to open the locker room for postgame interviews. There was a side of the players we don't get to see -- specifically Andrew Luck. After his media responsibilities, he went locker to locker hugging each of his teammates and thanking them for the season. It was wonderful moment between college teammates that those outside of the inner circle rarely get to witness. I share it, because we usually only see "game-day" Luck or "news conference" Luck. And while it was ultimately a bittersweet moment, it was a special one that was neat to see.
2. Taylor can carry the load: With three of five starting offensive lineman returning next season and three of the four-headed rushing attack also back (though Jeremy Stewart's role was often understated but incredibly important) the Cardinal should continue to put up good numbers on the ground in the coming seasons. Stepfan Taylor showed he can be an almost-every-down back if he has to be -- carrying 35 times for a career-high 177 yards and two touchdowns. It was an off night for Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson, just five carries for three net yards between them, but with Stewart's 65 and Taylor's big night, all four weren't needed.
3. Lancaster, stud: Linebacker Jarek Lancaster played, minute-for-minute, probably the best football game of his career. He was flying all over the field and was tied for the team lead with seven tackles. Critical, however, were three open-field tackles -- something that had plagued the Cardinal (and still did Monday night) throughout the season. Lancaster took the one-on-one challenge and was sensational. With him, A.J. Tarpley and Shayne Skov returning next season, the Cardinal have a very good problem at inside linebacker.
4. Every decision has a consequence: David Shaw is paid an insane amount of money (it's not public record, but I guarantee it's more than a college football blogger) to make some extremely difficult decisions. If Jordan Williamson had nailed the 35-yarder at the end of regulation, no one would question his decision to kick the game-winner. Ah, but regular readers of this blog know I abhor "what-ifs." The fact is Shaw made the decision he thought was best. It turned out to be the wrong one, and he's going to endure the fallout that comes from that. I see both sides. But my gut says OSU was on its heels and with the best run-blocking lineman in the country in David DeCastro, I would have pulled that big haas aside in one of the timeouts and said "make a hole that I can tow a 737 through." You know DeCastro would of. Plenty of spots along the way where the Cardinal could have prevented it from coming down to the final play. But what-ifs are worthless, and Shaw & Co. will learn from this experience.
5. Time heals all wounds. Well, most of them: A good friend of mine in sports radio once said that sports are the most important, unimportant thing in the world. That always stuck with me. This game will go down in Stanford lore as one of the best , and worst, in school history. But I think the players and coaches will tell you, and I'm sure most will agree, that it's the journey, not the destination, that makes it all worthwhile.

(Cue the Jan Brady voice) Andrew Luck, Andrew Luck, Andrew Luck!

It's all that anyone outside of the Bay Area talks about when the topic of Stanford football passes the lips.

Yeah, he's good. Really good. But he's certainly not the be-all, end-all when it comes to the Stanford offense. Lost in the Luck hyperbole is an incredibly efficient and potent rushing attack that more often than not takes a backseat to No. 12.

The Cardinal's run game will have to be at its best on Jan. 2 when Stanford takes on Oklahoma State in the Fiesta Bowl. There are yards to be had against a Cowboys rush defense that ranks 83rd nationally and yields 180 yards per game.

The greatest victim of this overshadowing is running back Stepfan Taylor, whom head coach David Shaw has called one of the most underrated running backs in the nation on more than one occasion.

"I think he plays 7 yards behind one of the best players in Stanford school history," Shaw told reporters after practice last week. "I think that's why he's underrated."

Taylor is the perfect mixture of speed, power and balance. He plays more compact than his 5-foot-11, 210-pound frame and often drags opponents for extra yards. For the second straight year, Taylor has rushed for more than 1,000 yards, netting 1,153 this season to go with eight touchdowns and 5.6 yards per carry. And he's done it rotating with three other backs plus a fullback who usually gets a few carries each game.

"We have a short-yardage, goal-line back that gets a lot of touchdowns [Jeremy Stewart], but Stepfan still has been effective in the red zone and catching passes," Shaw said. "He just does everything well. Does everything right. I'm sure at some point he'll get his just due.

"But at the same time, he doesn't care. He has fun. He loves playing. He recognizes that we have Tyler Gaffney and these other guys that can play, too. I think he just loves playing with his teammates."

Taylor, along with Gaffney, Stewart, Anthony Wilkerson and -- at least a couple of times each week -- fullback Ryan Hewitt make up a rushing attack that produces almost 208 yards per game and ranks 22nd nationally.

"We all pretty much do different things," said Taylor, the most well-rounded of the backs and the strongest pass-blocker. "They like to use us, and we all deserve to be on the field. They find ways to get all of us involved. Stewie has the power; Wilk has the speed off the edge. The coaches find ways to put us in the best spots."

Like all of the aforementioned backs, Gaffney was "the guy" coming out of Cathedral Catholic High School in San Diego. So going to a running-back-by-committee wasn't easy to swallow. It's still not.

"It takes some adjustment, and I wouldn't say I like it," said Gaffney, who averages a team-high 6.4 yards per carry among players with at least 11 total carries. "You can't like it as a running back. You want the ball. You want to help the team as much as possible. There is a rhythm to the game where you feel how fast the flow is of the defense, whether they are real aggressive or playing back. You don't get to feel that rhythm because I'll be in for two or three plays and then out for 10. Or I'll be in for 10 and then out for three. You never really know how much you are going to play or when you're going to play. You are just waiting on the sideline for your number to be called."

And that breeds competition. Taylor knows Gaffney is lobbying for carries. Gaffney knows Wilkerson is lobbying for carries. Short-yardage specialist Stewart knows Hewitt could get the call on third-and-short.

"If you're not playing well, there is going to be a guy stepping up who will," Gaffney said. "You have to bring your A-game every carry and every play. I wouldn't say we're breathing down each other's necks, but for lack of a better term, that's what it is. You have a feeling that if you have a couple of bad runs, you might not be going back in, and they might let the other guy ride it out."

So, you have a brilliant quarterback who checks his running backs into the best play against the best defense, and you have four backs clawing at one another for carries. All that's missing is the best run-blocking offensive lineman in the country with a nasty attitude to boot. Oh yeah, Stanford has that, too.

"Football is a physical sport, and the point is to move the other guy," said guard David DeCastro, widely regarded as the most NFL-ready interior lineman in the country. "There is no magic pill you take that makes us run the ball well. It's practice and repetition and hard work. You're trying to push the other guy backwards. That's football."

The running back quartet has combined for 26 touchdowns and more than 2,000 yards on the ground this season. And, yes, even Luck has to get a lot of the credit for the success of the running game.

Shaw has spoken extensively about what Luck does pre-snap and how he coordinates the running game. So when lining up, do the running backs see the same things as Luck?

"I don't think anybody sees what he sees," Gaffney said. "When he puts us in a play, 99 times out of 100 we're in agreement that it is going to be our most successful rep."

With one game left to play we're taking a look back at some of the memorable moments/series of moments from Stanford's 2011 season. Some were individual plays, others were a series of plays or games as a whole that were significant to the season.

No. 3: RUNNING BACKS GONE WILD

Setting the scene: The first 18 minutes of Stanford's home game against Washington started off like a pinball game between running backs. Washington's Chris Polk broke off touchdown runs of 46 and 61 yards. Stepfan Taylor answered with a 70-yard touchdown scamper. Then one team hit the accelerator while the other one ran out of gas.

Why it's memorable: Given the history of Stanford football, any time a record is set, it's significant. The Cardinal rushed for a school-record 446 yards. And do you know how many negative rushing yards they had? Zero.

Taylor ran for 138 yards and a score. Tyler Gaffney had 117 yards and a touchdown -- marking the 10th time in school history two players had run for at least 100 yards in the same game. Anthony Wilkerson had 93 yards and two touchdowns -- including the 38-yard touchdown run that pushed Stanford beyond the previous mark of 439 yards, set in 1981 against Oregon State. Jeremy Stewart opened the scoring with a short-yardage score. The offensive line feasted on Washington's defensive front and the backs ran crazy.

Head coach David Shaw tells the story that when Andrew Luck came off the field with a little more than nine minutes left in the game, he told his coach that he had just played the best game of his career. He was 16-of-21 for 169 yards and two touchdowns. Not exactly monster numbers. But Luck put his offense in the right formations 100 percent of the time to avoid negative plays and the running backs reaped the rewards to the tune of a 65-21 victory against the Huskies.

Stanford running back Tyler Gaffney said he isn't rushing to make any decisions regarding his future as a two-sport athlete.

"I love playing two sports," he said. "I want to play two sports as long as I can."

But eventually, he's going to have to chose between football and baseball.

The junior outfielder from San Diego will be eligible for the first-year player draft in June. He'll likely get plenty of exposure since the Cardinal are No. 3 in the preseason rankings.

He's coming off a sophomore year in which he hit .327 with 35 RBIs, three home runs and led the team in slugging percentage (.472) and on-base percentage (.422). He also scored 42 times, hit 10 doubles, five triples and drew a team-high 29 walks.

On the gridiron, Gaffney rushed for 445 yards on 70 carries (6.4 yards per carry) and seven touchdowns as part of Stanford's four-headed rushing attack. The Cardinal have a Wildcat package tailored specifically for him and he's also caught 11 balls for 63 yards and a score.

If he has a big year and his draft stock jumps into the high rounds, he said there is a chance he could pass on returning to school for his senior season.

"It would have to be top tier," Gaffney said. "I would have to be a fool where I have to turn it down."

Depending on which draft services you look at, Gaffney is currently slotted anywhere between the eighth and 15th round. If that were the case, you'll probably see Gaffney in shoulder pads next season.

"It would take a good amount for me not to come back next year," he said. "... There are no more Bo Jacksons in the world. The two professional sports thing isn't really going to happen. In the next year or two I'm going to have to make a decision. Wherever my best opportunity is, that's what I'm going to chose."

With one game left to play we're taking a look back at some of the memorable moments/series of moments from Stanford's 2011 season. Some were individual plays, others were a series of plays or games as a whole that were significant to the season.

No. 8: STIFF ARMED

Setting the scene: It was mop up time in Durham, N.C., with the Stanford Cardinal well in control, leading Duke 37-7. Backup quarterback Brett Nottingham was running the offense, and a plucky young fullback named Geoff Meinken took a second-and-five handoff 40 yards.

Why it's memorable: The stiff arm was just fantastic. Meinken actually elevates the defender while staying on his feet. And as defenders eventually start to swarm around him, he covers up the ball with both hands. Textbook.

He would follow it up with a 14-yard run on the next play before Tyler Gaffney finished the scoring drive a 1-yard run.

It was the longest run from scrimmage at the time, and really the first of many iconic moments for Stanford fullbacks this season. Probably the coolest part of the play -- which the replay barely captures -- was how excited the rest of the players were. It's all anyone wanted to talk about in the postgame news conference. While Meinken leaves plenty of room for improvement in the break-away speed department, he's got the stiff-arm thing nailed.