The CardBoard
Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford versus U$( in attrition (/thread-7598.html)

Pages: 1 2

Stanford versus U$( in attrition - TrumpCard - 08-26-2014

As far as I know, there hasn't been a single player in Stanford's 2011, 2012, or 2013 recruiting classes to leave the program for non-medical reasons.  Since the start of the 2011 season, the only guys to leave the program for non-medical reasons (Nottingham, Dudchock, and Nelson) went to other Top 20 academic schools with lesser football programs late in their careers for a chance at more playing time.  The high level of retention means that Stanford will have 0 true freshmen starting, only 1 true freshman in the two deep (Tucker), and only 1 second year player starting (Cotton or Hooper).

By way of contrast, U$('s recruiting class of 2011 already lost Carlisle, Heyward, Hobbi, Pomee, Wilson, and Wittek and U$('s recruiting class of 2010 lost Ambles, Baxter, Prater, Scroggins and Thomas.  Those lists don't even include 8 early NFL draft entrants.  With that volume of attrition, combined with the NCAA sanctions, it's no surprise that U$( will have at least 4 true freshmen starting and 6 more true freshmen in its two-deep when it plays Stanford. 

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - PrinceLightfoot - 08-27-2014

Good summary! We definitely have an advantage over most schools in the attrition battle.

I know Dudchock and Nelson graduated before heading out to Vanderbilt and BYU, but not sure if Nottingham did before heading off to Columbia. I think he had at least one more year left. Does anyone know and will Nottingham's transfer impact the team's graduation rate?

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - kuz - 08-27-2014

(08-27-2014, 06:23 AM)PrinceLightfoot link Wrote:Good summary! We definitely have an advantage over most schools in the attrition battle.

I know Dudchock and Nelson graduated before heading out to Vanderbilt and BYU, but not sure if Nottingham did before heading off to Columbia. I think he had at least one more year left. Does anyone know and will Nottingham's transfer impact the team's graduation rate?
Nottingham left at the end of his RS Sophomore year, so it's highly unlikely that he'd graduated. This year will be his RS Senior year at Columbia - he was injured in the season opener last year.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - CTcard - 08-27-2014

(08-26-2014, 08:32 PM)TrumpCard link Wrote:As far as I know, there hasn't been a single player in Stanford's 2011, 2012, or 2013 recruiting classes to leave the program for non-medical reasons.  Since the start of the 2011 season, the only guys to leave the program for non-medical reasons (Nottingham, Dudchock, and Nelson) went to other Top 20 academic schools with lesser football programs late in their careers for a chance at more playing time.  The high level of retention means that Stanford will have 0 true freshmen starting, only 1 true freshman in the two deep (Tucker), and only 1 second year player starting (Cotton or Hooper).

By way of contrast, U$('s recruiting class of 2011 already lost Carlisle, Heyward, Hobbi, Pomee, Wilson, and Wittek and U$('s recruiting class of 2010 lost Ambles, Baxter, Prater, Scroggins and Thomas.  Those lists don't even include 8 early NFL draft entrants.  With that volume of attrition, combined with the NCAA sanctions, it's no surprise that U$( will have at least 4 true freshmen starting and 6 more true freshmen in its two-deep when it plays Stanford.

A few add ons.

Certainly Stanford has fewer drop outs than most programs. If you want to check "all", my guess is you should run down the rosters of football programs at better schools - Notre Dame, Northwestern, Duke, etc.

On depth, USC is a special case right now. They are just now emerging from sanctions that have limited their depth which leads to the true frosh playing. They are also a special case in that they almost always recruit better than almost anybody else leading to having more true frosh ready to play. [And for that matter they are less likely to have kids stick around 5 years anyway - and not just for the NFL as you note.]

I personally don't consider anyone getting a degree as leaving early - i.e. Nelson and Dudchock. From a purely football standpoint it's more complicated: it's not clear to me that Nelson and Dudchock would have been invited back for a fifth year, but from a purely Stanford football perspective the team lost more from having potential fifth-years Yankey, Fleming, and Reynolds leave for a shot at the NFL. We've had a smattering of that kind of early exits over the past few years. Next year Peat might be an interesting case. If all goes well it seems he would be projected as a high draft pick next year, towards the end of his true junior year. We haven't had a player leave for the NFL before four years (and I hope a degree) in a long time. Luck was the most famous case where the NFL was clearly an option after junior year. We'll see what Peat wants to do.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - CTcard - 08-27-2014

(08-27-2014, 06:23 AM)PrinceLightfoot link Wrote:Does anyone know and will Nottingham's transfer impact the team's graduation rate?

It depends which graduation rate you mean.

The NCAA calculates something called the Graduation Success Rate (GSR) that does not count anyone who leaves the program in good academic standing in the denominator. Thus I don't know of anything that indicates Nottingham would hurt there.

There is also the actual Graduation Rate, which is a number defined by the US Department of Education. You can find these numbers published by the NCAA on their graduation reports, but they are not stressed in the articles about graduating players. Outward transfers in fact are included as non-graduates in this number. Thus Nottingham would presumably impact this number for Stanford.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - TrumpCard - 08-27-2014

I have no basis for knowing which players graduated and which didn't, but it wouldn't shock me if Stanford ends up with a 100% GSR a few years down the line.  I strongly suspect Peat will declare for the 2015 draft, but, if he leaves, he'll have three years of NFL off-seasons to complete one academic year at Stanford.  Same would be true for Carter if he were to leave after this year.  Count me as an optimist on the GSR front.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Durty Nelly - 08-27-2014

I suspect Nottingham went to an FCS school, so he could play immediately.  Likely, he still wanted a good education and looked for a football team that was in need of a quarterback.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - yvonne - 08-27-2014

Yes, but why one with a bad offensive line and a history of losing? (It had the Div I losing record before Northwestern did.)

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Stymie - 08-27-2014

After Nottingham had been dumped for Nunes, I'm not surprised that he opted for a kinder gentler football program at a school with first class academics.  I wish him well.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - CTcard - 08-27-2014

(08-27-2014, 09:57 AM)TrumpCard link Wrote:I have no basis for knowing which players graduated and which didn't, but it wouldn't shock me if Stanford ends up with a 100% GSR a few years down the line.  I strongly suspect Peat will declare for the 2015 draft, but, if he leaves, he'll have three years of NFL off-seasons to complete one academic year at Stanford.  Same would be true for Carter if he were to leave after this year.  Count me as an optimist on the GSR front.

If Peat and/or Carter leave without a degree but in good academic standing at the time, then they won't factor into the GSR calculation and thus wouldn't affect whether Stanford achieves a 100% GSR.

By the way, in the most recent NCAA report which covers students entering in 2006 and needing to graduate by 2012, Stanford had a 1 year Fed Grad Rate of 94%, a four-year rolling average of 89%, and a GSR (which is a four-year rolling average) of 93%.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - TrumpCard - 08-27-2014

CT Card:  Thanks for the post.  Stanford played some terrible football in the mid-2000s, but the graduation numbers were pretty darn good.  I don't think the numbers will improve as the reports cover the Harbaugh recruits, but I do think there's a possibility that the numbers will improve as the reports cover the Shaw recruits.

Josh Shaw comes clean, sort of - Rally - 08-27-2014

Apparently he has admitted to USC officials that he made up the rescue story.  According to Bruce Feldman on the USC radio show.  No word on the true story yet.  By the way, the supposed kids was supposedly his nephew, not his cousin.  Please keep the fabricated stories accurate here :)

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2175793-josh-shaw-injury-updates-on-usc-stars-ankles-after-rescuing-7-year-old-nephew?utm_campaign=tsipad&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=teamstream

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - terry - 08-27-2014

(08-27-2014, 08:15 AM)CTcard link Wrote:I personally don't consider anyone getting a degree as leaving early - i.e. Nelson and Dudchock. From a purely football standpoint it's more complicated: it's not clear to me that Nelson and Dudchock would have been invited back for a fifth year, but from a purely Stanford football perspective the team lost more from having potential fifth-years Yankey, Fleming, and Reynolds leave for a shot at the NFL. We've had a smattering of that kind of early exits over the past few years. Next year Peat might be an interesting case. If all goes well it seems he would be projected as a high draft pick next year, towards the end of his true junior year. We haven't had a player leave for the NFL before four years (and I hope a degree) in a long time. Luck was the most famous case where the NFL was clearly an option after junior year. We'll see what Peat wants to do.

I believe Nelson and Dudchock weren't offered a 5th year. And I agree that they aren't really "early departures."

I agree that Peat will be an interesting case. I think the last football players to go into the NFL draft after three years were Kwame Harris and Teyo Johnson. Before them, Bob Whitfield. There also have been some football-baseball players who left after three years to go into the baseball draft -- Chad Hutchinson, Joe Borchard, Darin Naatjes, Tyler Gaffney. Zach Hoffpauir might do that this year. (BTW, most or all of the guys who left after three years came back and got their degrees.)

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Rally - 08-27-2014

(08-27-2014, 04:21 PM)terry link Wrote:[quote author=CTcard link=topic=10442.msg95381#msg95381 date=1409152548]
I personally don't consider anyone getting a degree as leaving early - i.e. Nelson and Dudchock. From a purely football standpoint it's more complicated: it's not clear to me that Nelson and Dudchock would have been invited back for a fifth year, but from a purely Stanford football perspective the team lost more from having potential fifth-years Yankey, Fleming, and Reynolds leave for a shot at the NFL. We've had a smattering of that kind of early exits over the past few years. Next year Peat might be an interesting case. If all goes well it seems he would be projected as a high draft pick next year, towards the end of his true junior year. We haven't had a player leave for the NFL before four years (and I hope a degree) in a long time. Luck was the most famous case where the NFL was clearly an option after junior year. We'll see what Peat wants to do.

I believe Nelson and Dudchock weren't offered a 5th year. And I agree that they aren't really "early departures."

I agree that Peat will be an interesting case. I think the last football players to go into the NFL draft after three years were Kwame Harris and Teyo Johnson. Before them, Bob Whitfield. There also have been some football-baseball players who left after three years to go into the baseball draft -- Chad Hutchinson, Joe Borchard, Darin Naatjes, Tyler Gaffney. Zach Hoffpauir might do that this year. (BTW, most or all of the guys who left after three years came back and got their degrees.)
[/quote]

We knew Teyo's brother who said he left early because he refused to play any longer for that coach.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - JohnR34231 - 08-28-2014

(08-28-2014, 05:28 AM)garvin link Wrote:
Quote:We knew Teyo's brother who said he left early because he refused to play any longer for that coach.

Are we talking about Riall Johnson? I'm pretty sure he was at Stanford for four years.

I'm guessing what Ferrari meant was that Riall said Teyo left because he didn't want to play for the coach any more.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Rally - 08-28-2014

(08-28-2014, 06:10 AM)JPRI link Wrote:[quote author=garvin link=topic=10442.msg95537#msg95537 date=1409228932]
Quote:We knew Teyo's brother who said he left early because he refused to play any longer for that coach.

Are we talking about Riall Johnson? I'm pretty sure he was at Stanford for four years.

I'm guessing what Ferrari meant was that Riall said Teyo left because he didn't want to play for the coach any more.
[/quote]

Yes, that's what I meant.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Mick - 08-28-2014

Teyo's career:  http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JohnTe00.htm

I wonder how he would have done with one more year at Stanford?

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Rally - 08-28-2014

(08-28-2014, 05:54 PM)Mick link Wrote:Teyo's career:  http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JohnTe00.htm

I wonder how he would have done with one more year at Stanford?

How might he have done under Harbaugh or Shaw?  Or playing with Luck?  Timing, ah.

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - yvonne - 08-29-2014

and like clockwork, Sark says J. Shaw could return.

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/college-football/story/_/id/11425396/steve-sarkisian-says-usc-trojans-cb-josh-shaw-potentially-return-team

Re: Stanford versus U$( in attrition - Renaissance Man - 08-29-2014

(08-29-2014, 08:54 AM)Yvonne link Wrote:and like clockwork, Sark says J. Shaw could return.

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/college-football/story/_/id/11425396/steve-sarkisian-says-Unabashed Scamming Charlatans-Literature's Most Famous Losers-cb-josh-shaw-potentially-return-team

I never thought "indefinitely" was anything other than a synonym for "until his ankles heal."