A really good, in-depth look at Terry’s struggles, mostly concentrated on his time after Stanford, but has references and info on his life on campus today.

Read that here.

2024 3-star wide receiver Emanuel Ross has committed. Listed as an ATH but I've put in a request to have him listed as a WR. He visited over the weekend for an OV.


Login to view embedded media

Login to view embedded media

Phew. Take a breath, hold it, and let it out slowly. This is wild.

I bet the assistant coaches are wondering what all the fuss was about regarding how difficult this was supposed to be. FCS to FBS? Easy. Recruiting to one of the worst teams in FBS? Ain't no problem. Academic hurdles? Please, the kids are lining up to clear them. Lack of NIL perks? We've got perks for life, my dude. Have you seen the average starting salary for Stanford grads?

All right, let's get serious. I have thoughts, and I'll try my best to organize them.

First, let's try to gain some perspective. We shouldn't get overly attached to individuals in this class. We will suffer losses from a combination of "Door No. 1" and possibly being "over-recruited." We can be confident we'll lose a recruit or two to admissions — maybe more. I wonder whether Taylor and his staff are the types to push out a kid because a better recruit wants to commit. That's to be determined. There were only a couple of examples in Shaw's entire tenure of us taking back an offer, and it was because the kid proved he was a terrible prospect.

I don't have data to back this up, but intuitively it makes sense that recruits who commit partly because of a deadline are more apt to look around and de-commit. That's a good bet to happen, too, especially once the season results give some fodder to negative recruiting about the new staff. Stanford should be well positioned to suffer less buyer's remorse than other programs. Parents usually love the decision, and it's hard to justify walking away from the opportunity.

It's a BIG if, but IF Stanford closes with the remaining four-star recruits we reportedly lead for, AND we hold onto a reasonable number of current verbal commits; then we have a real shot at our first top 20 class since 2017. We were still considered a great program back then!

I also want to give a shoutout about a specific geographic area in a class represented coast-to-coast: I love the success in New Jersey. We struggled far more than we should have under Shaw to build a pipeline from Garden State to The Farm. There are talented recruits every year at the top schools in New Jersey who we should be able to recruit successfully.

There's some good discussion on the forum about roster management.

msqueri said:

I count 22 (below). I am guessing you and I count Mayberry differently based on whether counts his 2020 enrolled but not playing football year. In any case, It does not strike me as beneficial to the team to lose all 22 of these players but you're right in the sense these are spots to play with. The thing that would most disturb me is if Rogers, McLaughlin, Pogorelc, Mayberry, and Bank all depart. That would leave us with Leyrer and is-he-an-OL-or-a-DL-or-totally-useless Uke as the only fourth year OL on a roster with zero fifth or sixth year OL. The 2024 roster would not be as healthy or promising as it could be in that scenario.

If you build in keeping three of the five upperclass OL, Phillips on DL, and say two other guys (notionally say Lytle as a transfer and Filkins as a guy who waited his turn behind Smith), that's 16 + 6 = 22. I still think the size of class it appears 2024 will be will require major roster upheaval.

Ideally, less useful guys like Raines, Buckey, Barrow, Ellis, Taylor, 1-2 among Patu/Daniels/Lamson, and the 2-3 weakest first or second year players transfer out to make room. But will Stanford push them out? Under Shaw we didn't have culture or cutthroat tactics in place to ensure that guys like Rogers and McLaughlin stay while guys like Raines and Buckey leave. It's not a small thing to tell somebody there's no spot for them months from being complete with their degree progress (heck, or years in the case of younger guys considering we sell on 40 year decisions).

Anyway, here's the list of scholarships to play with before we start cutting guys prior to degree completion:

58. EJ Smith
59. John Humphreys
60. Levi Rogers
61. Connor McLaughlin
62. James Pogorelc
63. Lukas Ungar
64. Tobin Phillips
65. Ben Yurosek
66. Bryce Farrell
67. Casey Filkins
68. Omari Porter
69. Alaka'i Gilman
70. Lance Keneley
71. Silas Starr
72. Trevor Mayberry
73. Joshua Karty
74. Bailey Parsons
75. Zahran Manley
76. Alec Bank
77. Tristan Sinclair
78. Spencer Lytle
79. Spencer Jorgensen

Click to expand...

With only a couple of exceptions, the players in this list are trying out for spots to max out their eligibility at Stanford. That goes without saying, but I want to emphasize the point. In my opinion, Yurosek, Karty, and Phillips are the only ones exempt from the tryouts.

I'd prioritize taking the linemen from among the guys who are questionable because their résumés don't knock me out. Whenever possible, I'll take an average lineman who's a grownup over a receiver, running back, or cornerback who is also a grownup but hasn't made a compelling case to be invited to stay. I think we're recruiting receivers and running backs like we don't have any because the coaches aren't currently excited about bringing back Smith, Filkins, Starr, Farrell, and Humphreys. Unfortunately, Ungar seems a given to be gone because of his complete lack of availability.

I wouldn't be floored if someone from the future told me that only the OL, DL, and Lytle are on the roster next season.

Too harsh? Maybe 🤷‍♂️ . Probably 🤔. It's possible that some of the guys I have on the cut block instead rise and show their quality is better than any of us think because they're having fun. What a concept: a real scheme and enthusiasm as fuel for success. I'd love it if Humphreys and Farrell, in particular, experience a revival. I think it'd be cool if Filkins was productive and a leader the staff wants to keep around. We're a better team if Smith gives his doubters the ol' 🖕and excels in a WR/RB role for an entire season. All we can do is wait and see; that probably goes for the coaches, too.

Bottom line: There are many pathways to create room on the roster.

What will the camps be like?
One of the most apparent and most embarrassing signs of Stanford's decline was that the recruit camps in June and July have been useless as a program-improvement tool for years. It became only a paycheck for coaches and a great way for small high-academic colleges to find kids they wanted to offer.

Taylor has approved many offers to recruits who Shaw would have wanted to camp first. It makes sense. We couldn't wait around, and the coaches made decisions based on spring practices at high schools. That's cool with me. I'm curious about what we do with the June and July camp days. There will likely be an emphasis on getting 2025-2027s and 2024 walk-on candidates to show up.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'd be stoked to interview the Stanford football head coach about recruiting.

Celebrate!
We don't know how everything will play out in recruiting, development, games, culture building, etc., but we're excited to find out! That's a welcome change.

9/1 (Fri) @ HAW - 8p PT (CBSSN)

9/9 @ USC - 7:30p PT (FOX)

9/16 vs. SAC ST - 5p PT (P12)

10/13 (Fri) @ Colorado - 7p (ESPN)

Read that here.

Behind a paywall perhaps but available to NYT subscribers.

https://theathletic.com/4575069/202...49ers/?source=targeted_email&campaign=7038535

team by team:

Read that here. Courtesy of Adam Gorney.

Started a new thread because this team under Esquer deserves spotlighting. I have played in and watched more baseball games than I can count, and to the best of my recollection, I don't think that I have ever seen as much sustained drama as Esquer's teams have shown in the past three years going back to that loss to Vandy the year before last. Last year's regionals and super were incredible and now they duplicate it again. Back to back years of winning 5 elimination games and doing it with sitting-on the-edge-of-your-seat games - enough to call them the Cardiac Cards.

I mean, these are college kids and somehow they muster up the abiity to not only fight against the odds, but show the mental and emotional toughness to get through all kinds of difficult game situations, failures, mistakes, bad breaks, and even weird happenings. These kids are not only talented but mature (despite Eager's assumption . They have played with the true heart of a champion. I'm impressed with their baseball abilities but I'm far more impressed with mental toughness and heart. There have been better teams and teams that are just as tough or tougher, but I don't recall teams that respond to adversity so well. It's special and though difficult, fun to watch. Clearly, Esquer must have a major hand in our the players respond. The couple of times that I have had the chance be around him and talk with him, I was extremely impressed by his knowledge of the game, understanding of his players, and his basic person and character. Winning is terrific and I hate losing, but the joy of the game is really the most important and these teams under Esquer truly exemplify it.

So on to the next adventure in the CWS. We must have bribed the committee to seed us for a matchup with #1 Wake so we can get to the losers bracket quickly. We have an unreal difficult bracket with Wake and LSU, and Tennessee is no slouch. Actually, the committee really f'ed up. No way should they have arranged the brackets so that Wake and LSU could end up in the same CWS bracket. Those are the best two teams and should have a chance to meet in the finals. Florida is good, but not as good as those two. I'm not expecting us pulling rabbits out of hats like we have done in regionals and supers the past two years, so my expectatations are low - maybe lucky to win one game before being eliminated. But that doesn't affect my respect and admiration for this team, players and Esquer. I'll be happy just to see them play loose, have fun, be competitive, and if they exceed expectations, better still. Glad to see that we are getting at least one P12 team in the CWS.

Co-players of tonight's game: Pancer and Dixon. If Pancer doesn't shut down Texas then they might well have gotten momentum and put up big numbers on the scoreboard and let Morehouse quiet our bats. With only one day's rest, Dixon pitched a terrific 9th (with Texas being amped after we had gaffes and stranded runners in prior innings), allowing us the chance for the walk off win.

Login to view embedded media

Rivals made the video private as I was watching it (too early, oops!), but good guys

EDIT: The video is now public. Woo!

Am a Warriors fan, but don't dislike the Kings (in fact, kinda like them).

But the suspension of Draymond Green is just complete horse manure.

And the indisputable answer to two questions convinces me of that.

1. What precipitated the entire episode that led officials to review the situation? Without question, it was Sabonis putting his arm lock on Draymond's ankle.

2. What is the universal reaction (by anyone, anywhere) when trying to free your foot from a hold? It is push down, pull up. The degree of push is dependent on the degree of the hold - and Sabonis had him locked up but good. It's just ridiculous to expect any other kind of reaction from Green (or anyone) in that position. That is how you free up your leg. And the violence of the effort to free is mandated by the urgency of what's going on - i.e., a fast break in an NBA basketball game. WTF else do you expect?

Frankly, I thought the Flagrant 2 was a bit over the top, given (a) that Sabonis instigated the whole thing, and (b) Draymond's leg drive down and pull up is a completely normal reaction (I'd almost say knee-jerk, because I think we'd all do the same thing). But okay, if you think the "stomp" was worse than Sabonis's leg lock, then give him a 2.

But the suspension? That is a freaking disgrace. Silver is such a pusillanimous NBA Commissioner, as I believed he bowed to some isolated commentary from folks who don't have the first clue about human nature/instinctive reactions, let alone in the setting of active competition at the highest level.

BTW, right now the Kings look like the superior team - and Fox and Munk are unguardable. (I laughed whenever I heard/read the "Klay is back" comments - yeah, maybe his stroke was rounding into his old form, but his defensive prowess? That was lost forever due to the injuries, and it's not coming back). Why would they even want a series W to be marred/questioned by a bull$hit suspension?

Last point: I used to like Sabonis and thought he was a tough baller. Now, I just view him as another Euro-flopper . . . who was so effing weak in laying down like a little baby. Did anyone, anywhere expect him to really sit out even a second after the incident? What a freaking joke . . .

P.S. To extent the rationalization for suspending Green was his interactions with the fans, that also is total horse manure. He just riled up the home crowd. BFD.

Read that here.

must win

Stanford football is finally operating like a modern recruiting operation, and it will be uncomfortable for many fans to adjust to. I know I'm suffering from some whiplash. What we're seeing happen since the first visit weekend is unlike anything that occurred during Shaw's tenure and didn't even happen to this extent in such a concentrated period under Harbaugh. I was outspoken with my exasperation with Shaw's approach and general disinterest in recruiting, so I would like to share my thoughts on recent developments.

Pressuring Kids to Commit
I am confident we are doing this. Eight recruits have gone public with commitments since June 5. The question is whether we're being jerks about applying pressure or walking Taylor's talk about leading with love in every way possible. I can only imagine a scenario in which Brandon Nicholson commits two weeks before his official visit if he is worried about having a spot in the class. How do I feel about this? Honestly, I don't know. I lean toward it's not a big deal because almost every other program does this to some degree.

It's fair to ask Taylor to talk about this without discussing individual cases. He seems to be a coach who can be asked to speak about his philosophy for applying pressure in the recruiting process and how it fits with his public statements about culture. I'm not saying they're mutually exclusive. If you have a tough but fair evaluation and recruiting system, you can do a lot to ensure parents/guardians/recruits/coaches aren't pissed with you.

We can't afford to wait around and be the nice guys from Stanford. We can't play everything out to signing day in December. There's too much to do. The sooner we get to a place where we're confident about the 2024 class, the better we can shift even more resources to 2025. That's one of the reasons why getting public commitments from the recruit leaders is essential — guys who can rally the class without direct staff support.

Churn, churn, churn?
Are Stanford's new coaches pro-churners in recruiting and roster management? Do we have a staff of go-getters who say a recruiting win is a win, and let's get it on Twitter as soon as possible?

I assume Bobby April has a significant say in offers to defensive recruits, the organization of the board, and who to take now versus possibly slow play. Wisconsin had remarkable success from 2018-2022 with holding onto commitments. They reportedly had two total de-commits in 2018, three in 2019 (Marcus Graham to us), and zero in 2020-2022. Six de-commitments occurred in November and December 2023 as the program underwent a coaching change. That's the recruiting approach April is used to, and there were good results.

For what it's worth, and I suspect it's very little, the Sacramento State 247 page shows only one total de-commit since 2019, when Taylor took over. There's one listed in 2017, so someone has entered such information about Sac State recruiting at various times.

This is an incomplete picture, but there's at least a little evidence that we don't have a staff full of guys with a history or preference for taking flimsy commitments. My fingers are crossed that we're witnessing a temporary compromise with their preferred steady approach because we need to go all gas, no brakes.

Fortunately, there's reporting that we're in a good position for Elijah Brown, Dylan Stephenson, Emmett Mosley, and a couple of other four-star recruits on one site or another. If we land those guys, then we can feel better about why commitments are pouring in. Those guys have profiles that can't be pushed to commit.

Celebrate!
Stanford has a football staff that cares about recruiting and puts in the work to succeed at a job requiring insane hours. I wouldn't be a college football coach. But if you volunteer to be one, you better be on board with doing this. Shaw found recruiting distasteful and advocated for kids to choose the school rather than be recruited to it — while he cashed in millions of dollars.

Looks like my source indeed just forgot to mention him in the list. 2024 3-star safety Jaylen'Dai Sumlin just committed. Visited this past weekend on an official.

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media

Read that here.

Check that out here. In the future, I would like to invite some folks on, but for now I figured I'd give this a whirl with just myself.

Caught up with the 3-star corner out of Memphis, Tennessee. He'll be back at Stanford for his official on June 23rd.

Read that here.

Obviously all hands on deck, but who gets the start? Does Bruno pitch the 8th & 9th?

I’m assuming this is the commit we were waiting on. 2025 3-star OG Charlie Hoitink has committed to Stanford.

@SamuelMcF deserves credit for saying he was likely to commit based on his Twitter sleuthing. First commit in the 2025 class.

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media

19.84

Time to update my list of best recruit track results. This year's update has some poignancy as it completes the Shaw era, which is where I started tracking. Incoming scholarship players bolded:

100m
Brandt-Sims: 10.36aw
K. Kelly: 10.66
Love: 10.68a (sophomore)
N. Peat: 10.73 (junior)
McCaffrey: 10.75aw (sophomore)
Ayomanor: 10.76
Rector: 10.80 (junior)
Fehoko: 10.81a
Adebo: 10.83 (junior)
Barton: 10.84a
Farrell: 10.87 (freshman)
Butler: 10.92a (sophomore)
Speights: 10.93
Wedington: 10.94 (junior)
Bowman: 10.95 (junior)
F. Owusu: 10.96a
Kalambayi: 11.00
Jo. Thompson: 11.04
Arcega-Whiteside: 11.13a (junior)
Scarlett: 11.13a (junior)
Logan: 11.14 (junior)
Holder: 11.19 (junior)
Woods: 11.24c (freshman)
Ojarikre: 11.29 (junior)
Carter: 11.32 (junior)
Bonner: 11.33 (junior)
Head: 11.35
E.J. Smith: 11.38 (junior)
Meeks: 11.39a
Bachmeier: 11.40 (junior)
Slocum: 11.43 (sophomore)
A. Jones: 11.43 (junior)
J. Harris: 11.45
Filkins: 11.52 (freshman)
Hudson: 11.53 (sophomore)
Cisse: 11.58 (junior)
Turner-Muhammad: 11.63 (junior)
J. Bailey: 11.68a (sophomore)
Hoffpauir: 11.69 (sophomore)
Whitfield: 11.71
Manley: 11.75
Martinez: 11.84
Mangum-Farrar: 11.84c (sophomore)
McGill: 11.84 (junior)
Irvin: 11.90 (freshman)
T. Williams: 11.93 (freshman)
Starr: 11.96 (sophomore)
Ellis: 12.02 (freshman)
Palma: 12.04c
Cotton: 12.05aw
Tafiti: 12.24c

200m
Brandt-Sims: 21.24a (sophomore)
Butler: 21.35aw (junior)
Adebo: 21.46 (junior)
Bowman: 21.47 (junior)
K. Kelly: 21.58
Love: 21.64a (sophomore)
Rector: 21.65 (junior)
Ayomanor: 21.66
Bonner: 21.97
Farrell: 22.04 (freshman)
Logan: 22.07 (junior)
McCaffrey: 22.17a (junior)
Barton: 22.26a
Wedington: 22.59 (junior)
F. Owusu: 22.67a
Jordan: 22.88 (junior)
Manley: 23.00
Slocum: 23.16
Head: 23.21 (junior)
Woods: 23.22 (freshman)
J. Reid: 23.27 (junior)
J. Harris: 23.27
Toomer: 23.30 (sophomore)
Meeks: 23.33aw
Karty: 23.44c (sophomore)
J. Bailey: 23.46a (junior)
Ojarikre: 23.49 (sophomore)
Holder: 23.5a
Filkins: 23.54 (freshman)
Ellis: 23.62 (junior)
A. Jones: 23.75 (sophomore)
Turner-Muhammad: 23.81 (junior)
McGill: 23.99 (freshman)
T. Williams: 24.15 (freshman)
Hudson: 24.21 (freshman)
Martinez: 24.34
Hoffpauir: 24.44 (sophomore)
A. Harris: 24.95 (junior)
Starr: 25.10 (freshman)
Tafiti: 25.33
Cotton: 25.34c
Wyrick: 25.91 (junior)

400m
Toomer: 48.00 (junior)
Brandt-Sims: 48.5a (freshman)
Bonner: 48.76
Adebo: 49.74 (junior)
Love: 50.84c (sophomore)
Crane: 51.26 (junior)
Logan: 51.42 (junior)
Rector: 51.66 (junior)
Antoine: 52.07a (sophomore)
Stewart: 52.23
Holder: 52.44c
Manley: 52.66

110m hurdles
Mangum-Farrar: 14.19
J. Reid: 14.61a (junior)
Jo. Thompson: 15.12
Whitfield: 15.42
Wyrick: 17.8 (sophomore)

Long jump
K Kelly: 24' 2.5
Logan: 23' 3.25 (junior)
Toomer: 22' 8 (junior)
Jo. Thompson: 22’ 6
Holder: 22' 6 (junior)
Morris: 22' 5.5 (junior)
Bonner: 22' 4.5 (junior)
Rector: 22' 3 (junior)
Franklin: 22' 1.5 (sophomore)
Cisse: 22' 1 (junior)
Ayomanor: 21’ 9.5
Fehoko: 21' 8.25
Higgins: 21' 8
N. Peat: 21' 7 (junior)
Carter: 21' 7 (junior)
Bailey: 21' 4 (sophomore)
A. Jones: 20' 10.5 (sophomore)
Maddox: 20' 9
Ellis: 20' 11 (junior)
Slocum: 20' 8 (freshman)
Meeks: 20' 5
McGill: 20' 4 (junior)
Reuben: 20’ 3 (junior)
Mangum-Farrar: 20' 1 (junior)
Hudson: 19’ 9 (sophomore)
Wedington: 19' 7.25 (junior)
Weselman: 19' 3.5 (sophomore)
Whitfield: 19' 1.5
Porter: 18' 8.5 (sophomore)
Palma: 18' 6
Karty: 17' 7.5 (junior)

High jump
Segina: 6' 0 (junior)
Manley: 6'0
Holder: 5' 11 (junior)
Owusu: 5' 10 (junior)
Bachmeier: 5' 9 (junior)
McGill: 5' 8 (freshman)
Filkins: 5' 8 (freshman)

Triple jump
Toomer: 47' 0.5 (junior)
Bonner: 46' 1.5 (junior)
Logan: 44' 9.5
Higgins: 44' 5.75
Jo. Thompson: 44’ 5 (junior)
Reuben: 44’ 1.25 (junior)
Holder: 44' 0.5
Cotton: 43' 4.5
McGill: 41' 10.5 (junior)
Ellis: 41' 4.5 (sophomore)
Whitfield: 40' 11
Weselman: 38' 10.5 (sophomore)
Hudson: 38’ 4 (junior)

Shot put
Nugent: 57'2
Uke: 56' 4
T. Phillips: 56' 0 (junior)
Sarell: 55' 7.5 (sophomore)
Kalambayi: 55' 0
Bragg: 53' 10.75 (junior)
Hooper: 53' 6.5 (junior)
Powell: 53' 5.75
Palma: 53' 1
Phillips: 52' 4.5
Nwafor: 51' 9
Keneley: 51' 1.5 (sophomore)
K. Murphy: 50' 10
Yamauchi: 50' 10
Armitage: 50' 1.5 (sophomore)
Lukrich: 50' 2
Miller: 49' 7.5 (junior)
Booker: 48' 6.5
Shuler: 48' 5 (junior)
Yarbrough: 46' 11.5
Dalman: 46' 7.5
Maddox: 46' 5.75
Hinton: 46' 5.75 (sophomore)
Buckey: 46' 2 (junior)
Cotton: 46' 2
C. Symonds: 45' 11.5 (junior)
Higgins: 45' 5.75 (junior)
A. Peat: 45' 5
Fanaika: 45' 4
Hall: 45' 3.25 (junior)
Stratford: 44' 10.75 (junior)
Aybar: 44' 8.25 (second freshman year....essentially sophomore)
A. Fox: 44' 8.25
Cooper: 44’ 7 (junior)
Leyrer: 43' 8.5
Rouse: 43' 7
Little: 43' 3 (sophomore)
Martinez: 42' 6.75
Meeks: 40' 11.5
Burkett: 40' 11.5
Marceau-Olayinka: 40' 4 (junior)
Herron: 39' 11.5 (sophomore)
Heyer: 39’10 (freshman)
Sh. Taylor: 39' 9 (sophomore)
A. Franklin: 39' 5.5 (junior)
Scarlett: 38' 5.25

Discus
Bragg: 190' 4 (junior)
Buckey: 190' 0
Uke: 179' 7
Phillips: 168' 0
Nugent: 162' 9
Dalman: 158' 1
Sarell: 155' 6 (junior)
Palma: 153' 8
Powell: 152' 6
Little: 152' 0 (sophomore)
Hinton: 150' 2 (sophomore)
Hooper: 147' 0 (sophomore)
F. Anderson: 146’ 10
Fanaika: 142' 6.5
T. Phillips: 139' 4 (sophomore)
Shuler: 137' 5 (junior)
A. Fox: 137’ 3.5
Miller: 133' 5 (junior)
Lohn: 133' 5 (junior)
Armitage: 130' 11 (sophomore)
Yarbrough: 130' 3
Cooper: 125’ 8 (junior)
Rouse: 125' 6.5
Leyrer: 120' 1

Observations:

* I only include marks that meet a certain minimum threshold so as to exclude outlier low marks that might result from somebody not having run very much track or from somebody competing in an event on a lark. I excluded a shot put Pale had as a freshman, a 400 Jackson Harris had as a junior as it was far from competitive and his marks in other events suggests it's not because he's just a crappy athlete, and a discus Marceau-Olayinka had as a junior for the same reason, though in his case I don't have reason to believe it's necessarily an outlier (but competing in discus without being versed in the form can lead to short hurls).

* There is no obvious headline story this year. That alone is probably the headline. Just as this class was unimpressive in recruiting rankings, it's unimpressive in terms of the athleticism it's injecting in the program.

* The possible exception from a track perspective is Aaron Morris. His long jump is very good (Cisse's above-average too). Moreover, as I noted at the time of commitment Morris had reported a 10.82 100 and a 22.3 200. I did not include those above because I only include verified marks, but it may be the case that Morris is athletic. Certainly the long jump supports that.

* We also have some evidence of Ojarikre having decent speed by Stanford standards, although it took him six races as a junior to get that mark and his 200 is less impressive, so he's clearly no speed demon.

* The wide receivers (although Ahmari Borden didn't run track and I'm very curious what kind of athlete he is) are very mediocre athletes. This is a big difference from last year with Ayomanor's off-the-charts athleticism, Reuben's solid marks, and Jason Thompson's clearly scholarship level and then some athleticism. I think we can have legitimate hopes the incoming receivers bring different skills, but in terms of sheer athleticism they seem to be at a disadvantage to the class ahead of them.

* That being said, Bachmeier did stand out in another event. I don't track pole vault, but for what it's worth Bachmeier's 15' 9 as a junior was tied for sixth in California that year.

* I included Yamauchi even though he's not a matriculator because it's his last high school track and field season and I may forget to include him in two years if I don't do it now.

* Assuming Chase Farrell matriculates we already know next year's update is going to have more notable entries than this year.

As always, I welcome any corrections/additions if there's anything my research missed or my analysis flubbed.