Troy Clardy released a TreeCast interview with Troy Taylor on Wednesday. Reactions:
* I am grateful for this interview. I know as well as anybody how nationally irrelevant Stanford football is at the moment (hopefully to be changed by a competent coaching staff with a plan) and how low-key our head coach's approach to public relations is, but even still it's been jarring to me how little football buzz or content there has been the last few months. I wasn't expecting there to be no press conference with the second Signing Day and no public opportunity whatsoever, as far as I know, to get a real post-mortem on 2023 and outlook on 2024. We've had the one recruiting-focused Signing Day and then basically radio silence. An optimistic read is that the staff is quietly going about their business, getting back in the lab, and working hard to turn the program around as actions will speak louder than words. At the same time it seems plainly true that there is very little by the way of PR or buzz building. In that climate, getting a quality interview with Taylor is much appreciated.
* I have been wanting to hear a little bit of a level-setting post mortem on what Taylor thought of 2023 and am glad Clardy gave us that. Taylor didn't give a lot but at least it's something. His answer was that we knew going into the year how challenging it would be with our roster but that he was proud of the guys for how they prepared and competed. Obviously Taylor knows it was a really crappy team. He's not blind or delusional.
* Coupling the immediate reference to how challenging the roster situation was with the quick pivot to how we need to recruit well, this answer reinforces what we already could pick up pretty easily, that Taylor thinks very little of the quality of our roster. So much of this rebuild is about turning over the roster and getting his own players in there. By my count we have 47 scholarship players who never played for Shaw. That's a big chunk of the way to roster turnover but there's another year or two to go. Beyond the sheer numbers of guys coming up in the Taylor culture vs. the Shaw culture, there's the equally pivotal issue of how good the guys actually are. Taylor called the 2024 class great and used the same word for the start of the 2025 class. As I've outlined elsewhere, I view the recruiting so far more as stabilizing and stanching the bleeding of where Shaw left the program than actually injecting talent we should be excited about. But it's really important to acknowledge that a whole new staff changes all the variables when it comes to player evaluation, positional coaching, strength and conditioning, and culture, so we are facing the complete unknown when it comes to what Taylor and Co. will get out of a given recruiting class. It could end up being much, much more than Shaw was getting out of more highly-regarded classes. Here's hoping.
* There were three references in that 30-ish second post mortem answer referring to depth. This is code for "our roster sucks." No need to belabor this. It's the same issue of Taylor grinding to get to the point where the roster has turned over and he's no longer dealing with his inheritance. I guess if we were to belabor this the question would be whether we can expect better "depth" in 2024 than in 2023. Maybe if the strength and conditioning has made the strides we're told about. I don't think the on-paper quality of the roster is much better in 2024 than it was in 2023 aside from an improvement in our retention of fifth and sixth year players, which will produce a somewhat more efficient use of the 85 scholarships than last year. The real story is the retention of Rogers, McLaughlin, and Phillips. I think the extent to which the roster is better than last year is basically those three players. We can expect better play in the trenches, especially on offense (can't forget the blow of losing Moi on defense). So I would say the roster is better this year overall but not dramatically so.
* To my knowledge Taylor has never been asked about how bad the 2023 defense was and whether that concerns him or if any changes have been made to get more out of the talent going forward. It's a major blind spot in our awareness of a critical issue facing the team and at almost any other major program these questions would be asked, but our coach isn't subjected to very many settings in which he has to talk about the program period. We have to settle for essentially official propaganda outlets (not a knock on Clardy, as I said grateful to at least get some chance to hear from the coach).
* That said, one can pick up mood pretty easily nonetheless from what Taylor was asked in this interview. The very first answer focuses on how it's good to be settled in and how we feel much further ahead this year than last year. The unspoken flip side of that is an unease last year in being thrust in mid-recruiting and having to do all the transitional things of building familiarity between players and coaches, installing systems, inculcating a new approach to strength and conditioning, and all the rest. That's probably as explicit as we're going to get that last year was a throwaway/practice round and that we're turning the page with high hopes that being more "settled" will make a difference.
* Taylor highlighted having the same coaching staff all back as being great. This is a classic issue in football of wanting to have continuity so you can build something year-to-year and avoid disruptions that come with changes to chemistry and instructional approaches. At the same time, you want to make sure you have the right guys. At this stage of the rebuild I am inclined to agree with Taylor that continuity is good, especially in building culture. We need more data points than just one year to know if we have the right guys on staff. We're probably talking three years, but it definitely seems like more than one, especially considering the difficult roster situation the coaches inherited. We should be hopeful that stringing together some continuity will help produce stability and better culture. But I am watching whether coaches deliver. We don't really have anything to judge yet for our jaw-droppingly inexperienced offensive staff since last year wasn't Taylor's real offense/a roster that had a prayer. On defense, April's first year was a disaster but we can hope there is major learning after his first season as a coordinator. Let's just keep evaluating (and I hope/trust Taylor is). At this stage it's appropriate to think continuity is a good thing as they're trying to build.
* Taylor also brought up the "phenomenal" new weight room early on, connecting it to a broader point that players now better understand how we train and condition. S&C is an area hard for outsiders to evaluate and ultimately the proof will be in the pudding but it seems like one of the main areas for optimism that things will start to turn around. We need to change players' bodies and hopefully the strength staff and overall culture are doing a good job of that.
* I am grateful for this interview. I know as well as anybody how nationally irrelevant Stanford football is at the moment (hopefully to be changed by a competent coaching staff with a plan) and how low-key our head coach's approach to public relations is, but even still it's been jarring to me how little football buzz or content there has been the last few months. I wasn't expecting there to be no press conference with the second Signing Day and no public opportunity whatsoever, as far as I know, to get a real post-mortem on 2023 and outlook on 2024. We've had the one recruiting-focused Signing Day and then basically radio silence. An optimistic read is that the staff is quietly going about their business, getting back in the lab, and working hard to turn the program around as actions will speak louder than words. At the same time it seems plainly true that there is very little by the way of PR or buzz building. In that climate, getting a quality interview with Taylor is much appreciated.
* I have been wanting to hear a little bit of a level-setting post mortem on what Taylor thought of 2023 and am glad Clardy gave us that. Taylor didn't give a lot but at least it's something. His answer was that we knew going into the year how challenging it would be with our roster but that he was proud of the guys for how they prepared and competed. Obviously Taylor knows it was a really crappy team. He's not blind or delusional.
* Coupling the immediate reference to how challenging the roster situation was with the quick pivot to how we need to recruit well, this answer reinforces what we already could pick up pretty easily, that Taylor thinks very little of the quality of our roster. So much of this rebuild is about turning over the roster and getting his own players in there. By my count we have 47 scholarship players who never played for Shaw. That's a big chunk of the way to roster turnover but there's another year or two to go. Beyond the sheer numbers of guys coming up in the Taylor culture vs. the Shaw culture, there's the equally pivotal issue of how good the guys actually are. Taylor called the 2024 class great and used the same word for the start of the 2025 class. As I've outlined elsewhere, I view the recruiting so far more as stabilizing and stanching the bleeding of where Shaw left the program than actually injecting talent we should be excited about. But it's really important to acknowledge that a whole new staff changes all the variables when it comes to player evaluation, positional coaching, strength and conditioning, and culture, so we are facing the complete unknown when it comes to what Taylor and Co. will get out of a given recruiting class. It could end up being much, much more than Shaw was getting out of more highly-regarded classes. Here's hoping.
* There were three references in that 30-ish second post mortem answer referring to depth. This is code for "our roster sucks." No need to belabor this. It's the same issue of Taylor grinding to get to the point where the roster has turned over and he's no longer dealing with his inheritance. I guess if we were to belabor this the question would be whether we can expect better "depth" in 2024 than in 2023. Maybe if the strength and conditioning has made the strides we're told about. I don't think the on-paper quality of the roster is much better in 2024 than it was in 2023 aside from an improvement in our retention of fifth and sixth year players, which will produce a somewhat more efficient use of the 85 scholarships than last year. The real story is the retention of Rogers, McLaughlin, and Phillips. I think the extent to which the roster is better than last year is basically those three players. We can expect better play in the trenches, especially on offense (can't forget the blow of losing Moi on defense). So I would say the roster is better this year overall but not dramatically so.
* To my knowledge Taylor has never been asked about how bad the 2023 defense was and whether that concerns him or if any changes have been made to get more out of the talent going forward. It's a major blind spot in our awareness of a critical issue facing the team and at almost any other major program these questions would be asked, but our coach isn't subjected to very many settings in which he has to talk about the program period. We have to settle for essentially official propaganda outlets (not a knock on Clardy, as I said grateful to at least get some chance to hear from the coach).
* That said, one can pick up mood pretty easily nonetheless from what Taylor was asked in this interview. The very first answer focuses on how it's good to be settled in and how we feel much further ahead this year than last year. The unspoken flip side of that is an unease last year in being thrust in mid-recruiting and having to do all the transitional things of building familiarity between players and coaches, installing systems, inculcating a new approach to strength and conditioning, and all the rest. That's probably as explicit as we're going to get that last year was a throwaway/practice round and that we're turning the page with high hopes that being more "settled" will make a difference.
* Taylor highlighted having the same coaching staff all back as being great. This is a classic issue in football of wanting to have continuity so you can build something year-to-year and avoid disruptions that come with changes to chemistry and instructional approaches. At the same time, you want to make sure you have the right guys. At this stage of the rebuild I am inclined to agree with Taylor that continuity is good, especially in building culture. We need more data points than just one year to know if we have the right guys on staff. We're probably talking three years, but it definitely seems like more than one, especially considering the difficult roster situation the coaches inherited. We should be hopeful that stringing together some continuity will help produce stability and better culture. But I am watching whether coaches deliver. We don't really have anything to judge yet for our jaw-droppingly inexperienced offensive staff since last year wasn't Taylor's real offense/a roster that had a prayer. On defense, April's first year was a disaster but we can hope there is major learning after his first season as a coordinator. Let's just keep evaluating (and I hope/trust Taylor is). At this stage it's appropriate to think continuity is a good thing as they're trying to build.
* Taylor also brought up the "phenomenal" new weight room early on, connecting it to a broader point that players now better understand how we train and condition. S&C is an area hard for outsiders to evaluate and ultimately the proof will be in the pudding but it seems like one of the main areas for optimism that things will start to turn around. We need to change players' bodies and hopefully the strength staff and overall culture are doing a good job of that.
