Rosen on Stanford - 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: Rosen on Stanford (/thread-12387.html)
+- 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: Rosen on Stanford (/thread-12387.html)
Pages:
1
2
Re: Rosen on Stanford - Mick - 08-08-2016
(08-08-2016, 03:51 PM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:When I was interviewing for jobs my last year at Stanford, an interviewer stopped the interview after 10 minutes, told me I wasnt going to get a job offer from him, and spent the rest of the interview politely explaining to me why he wasnt going to offer me a job (it related to advice on how to interview, present myself, view the work world, etc). It was the most valuable interview I ever had.
Tomorrow morning, I'm interviewing a candidate who (a) scolded me for not getting back to him sooner, (b) claimed a relationship with our chairman that he doesn't have and © gave dire warnings about the massive downside if I didn't hire him. Why am I interviewing him? Because after 10 minutes, I will politely explain to him he isn't getting a job offer and give him some much-needed advice.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 08-08-2016
(08-08-2016, 06:51 PM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=TreesAndBirds link=topic=15417.msg167370#msg167370 date=1470696677]
When I was interviewing for jobs my last year at Stanford, an interviewer stopped the interview after 10 minutes, told me I wasnt going to get a job offer from him, and spent the rest of the interview politely explaining to me why he wasnt going to offer me a job (it related to advice on how to interview, present myself, view the work world, etc). It was the most valuable interview I ever had.
Tomorrow morning, I'm interviewing a candidate who (a) scolded me for not getting back to him sooner, (b) claimed a relationship with our chairman that he doesn't have and © gave dire warnings about the massive downside if I didn't hire him. Why am I interviewing him? Because after 10 minutes, I will politely explain to him he isn't getting a job offer and give him some much-needed advice.
[/quote]
I'm hardly an expert on interviewing, but based on those details I'm not sure how receptive your applicant will be to your advice.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - Mick - 08-08-2016
(08-08-2016, 04:12 PM)ThePOC link Wrote:I find it strange that a college athletic coach would be "put off" by questions from a recruit regarding the depth chart. Seems like that would be standard discussion. When I was being recruited, I know I sure wanted to know where the coaches saw me fitting into the rotation.
Yeah, I read that too. I call BS on Rosen's explanation.
I read an interview with Rosen as a senior in high school. He sounded like a kid I very much would not want to have in my football program. Not just an outsized ego or arrogance, I inferred an inability to listen, an inability to get along with others and an implied propensity to question coaches, not in a good way, if that makes sense.
Look at his tweets, the portable hot tub he installed in his dorm for which he had to write an apology paper to UCLA "which he struggled to take seriously," posing the lawn ornaments in a sexually suggestive way, over-the-top-politician tweets which he had to delete (got to love Shaw's public comment limitations on his players, BTW -- "I don't care if you talk politics, but you better know what you're talking about" says he to his players), and the fact that coach Mora goes off on him regularly and has lost his cool on occasion. That all indicates a much-too-high-maintenance player. Of course he's an SAE (Same Asxxxles Everywhere) frat member. He says "I have a superiority complex I really need to get rid of." No kidding. Admits he's not mature enough for a girlfriend (shocker). The kind of guy who wears a "FxxK Trump" bandana on his hat while he plays Trump National Golf Course. He mocked UCLA's deal with Under Armour, biting the hand that teaches him on his way to a ridiculous NFL contract. At the Elite 11 camp, apparently Rosen disagreed with Trent Dilfer and took liberties with the playbook -- every college coach must want that in a QB, har de har. In at least three points during the article he says, "I like to mess with people," or "I like to mess with the system." Great, a nihilist QB. A far as I'm concerned, he sounds like a garden-variety, SoCal d-bag.
One other item about the Sports Illustrated article...SI will often try to stretch a not-too-accurate point. The description of St. John Bosco as a "Catholic, blue collar high school" that wasn't in the same league as sports powerhouses Oaks Christian, Santa Margarita or Mater Dei...eh, I don't know about that. It was voted "Best Private School" by the Long Beach Press-Telegram, they have crazy athletics as much as any of those other schools. My sports-craziest, whack-job friend was the father of a very good volleyball player who ended up playing for an MPSF playoff school. He was dissatisfied with his sophomore son's high school, and wanted a school who could push him to the limit with the best facilities. The only limitation was that it had to be in the state of California. His choice after a six month search? St. John Bosco.
Rosen likes to mess with people and systems, because to date, they haven't messed with him back, not much anyways. At some point, he's going to confront the consequences of that attitude and it won't be pretty.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - JohnR34231 - 08-09-2016
Bottom line I think is that Rosen is a very talented QB with a personality that can be a bit off-putting at times. Shaw chose not to tolerate it. Mora did and so far, despite a few bumps in the road, it has been OK. We'll see if it continues to work out.
Interesting that Josh freely admits he can be a jerk. I guess recognizing you have a problem is the first step to correcting it.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - donkey687 - 08-09-2016
Could you imagine if we had a three way QB battle right now between Rosen, Chryst and Burns? Rosen likely would have won the job and perhaps our team would be better, but it also could have been toxic with players rallying around different QBs (ie. a number of players thinking rosen was a jerk and pushing for Chryst or Burns) and one or more threatening to transfer. Costello may have signed elsewhere as he may not have wanted to follow Rosen. It certainly would be a different and riskier dynamic. I don't blame Shaw for taking the lower risk approach and not offering Rosen, but we will have a better perspective after this season when we have a better sense on how good Burns or Chryst end up being compared to Rosen.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - JohnR34231 - 08-09-2016
(08-09-2016, 04:25 AM)donkey687 link Wrote:Could you imagine if we had a three way QB battle right now between Rosen, Chryst and Burns? Rosen likely would have won the job and perhaps our team would be better, but it also could have been toxic with players rallying around different QBs (ie. a number of players thinking rosen was a jerk and pushing for Chryst or Burns) and one or more threatening to transfer. Costello may have signed elsewhere as he may not have wanted to follow Rosen. It certainly would be a different and riskier dynamic. I don't blame Shaw for taking the lower risk approach and not offering Rosen, but we will have a better perspective after this season when we have a better sense on how good Burns or Chryst end up being compared to Rosen.
It would have been even worse if Rosen hadn't won the job. Josh would be likely mouthing off about how the best QB was on the bench and causing all sorts of discord and havoc. Everyone seems to assume if he came here he would be #1, but I'm not so sure. We'll see how the QB's compare when Stanford plays UCLA this year.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - socalstanfan1 - 08-09-2016
I think the most obvious explanation for Shaw's refusal to extend an offer is also probably the right one. I take Shaw at his word when he raves about Stanford having the best locker room in College football. And I also take seriously his commitment to the ideal of the Stanford Man who will burnish, rather than tarnish, the reputation of the school. Taking the long view of things, this is more than just Shaw being a stick in the mud. This is an understanding that part of the program's appeal is that it IS different than most big-time CFB programs. Why risk that image for an admittedly super talented quarterback who you might have for two tumultuous years? Losing the winning formula in the locker room might cost you as many games as you win because of Rosen on the field, and have worse long-term consequences.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - Treebound - 08-09-2016
+1 SocalStanfan
Team chemistry is critical at all levels and the ability for a team to pull together and be greater than the sum of its parts is what wins close games. You need to be able to trust that your teammates have your back and that the guys next to you are going to execute at the highest levels. Given what I've heard, Shaw made the best decision for the team and the program. The humble Stanford STUDENT Athlete that you see in Luck, CMac, Maya Dirado and others is what I want. Let your play do the talking! Rosen has more lessons to learn and I'm hopeful we will keep teaching him a few things over the next 1-2 years.
Re: Rosen on Stanford - CornFed - 08-09-2016
(08-09-2016, 07:41 AM)socalstanfan1 link Wrote:I think the most obvious explanation for Shaw's refusal to extend an offer is also probably the right one. I take Shaw at his word when he raves about Stanford having the best locker room in College football. And I also take seriously his commitment to the ideal of the Stanford Man who will burnish, rather than tarnish, the reputation of the school. Taking the long view of things, this is more than just Shaw being a stick in the mud. This is an understanding that part of the program's appeal is that it IS different than most big-time CFB programs. Why risk that image for an admittedly super talented quarterback who you might have for two tumultuous years? Losing the winning formula in the locker room might cost you as many games as you win because of Rosen on the field, and have worse long-term consequences.
Reading your comment I was suddenly and harshly struck by how difficult David Shaw's responsibilities are. To the extent that such considerations of future dynamics need to be considered (indeed, to the extent they are even capable of being objectively evaluated) it is only one such facet of an overwhelmingly (to me) complex set of tasks. It seems to me that the only way in which one could effectively handle the myriad challenges presented over the course of each year, a person would have to have an intensely intuitive reaction to each decision node. Otherwise, it seems likely that one would be stymied by analysis paralysis on a regular basis. Shaw has demonstrated such an intuitive sense about the Stanford football program and its integral role within the Stanford brand overall better than any football coach previously at Stanford. I know it may be an incendiary reference, but I think Joe Paterno represented the closest thing to this at Penn State. Maybe Ara Parsegian at Notre Dame.
I am deeply grateful for the fact that Stanford football found David Shaw. I hope that he, too, has made this a 40-year decision. I don't think we could have gotten to this point without Jim Harbaugh. But I am very glad that he moved on and Shaw has taken over. I hope it lasts forever.
It wasn't all that long ago - Redrum - 08-09-2016
When the position and direction of Stanford football didn't seem so certain within the university itself. Some key changes in the upper levels of the university hierarchy were critical. Winning certainly didn't hurt. Ask yourself if Rosen's mouth and antics would have helped the cause with the administration and BOT back then. We got lucky (and Lucky) that good football awakened a lot of Stanford positive feeling that couldn't have been easily achieved by yet another dedicated science building. TV football announcers regularly intone about Stanford's elite academic standing. It has become coin of the realm and has rival Notre Dame borrowing the very same PR branding/recruiting pitch. Turns out Rockne worship and Touchdown Jesus weren't getting the job done.
I don't know for sure that Burns or Chryst will get the job done for us. But the standards set with Luck and Hogan worked out OK. QB talent doesn't dwell exclusively
in Josh Rosen. Teams win or lose football games. Pay attention to building/maintaining the best team possible, and Josh Rosen will be just a talented kid living down south somewhere.Â