The CardBoard
taking a shot at the whales - 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: taking a shot at the whales (/thread-9090.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

taking a shot at the whales - TrumpCard - 04-06-2015

When was the last time Stanford landed 6 players in the top 60 overall?  It has never happened, as far as I can tell, but it could happen in the upcoming recruiting class. 

Stanford already has a verbal from Costello.  Stanford also is in the top 2 for K. Smith, the top 5 for Menet, the top 6 for Bredeson, and the top 4 for Robertson.  I suspect Stanford is also in the top 5 for Crawford, but I haven't seen a current list.  Land them all, and that would make 6 in the top 60 composite rankings on 247sports.  It would also be the most ridiculous haul of offensive players at least since Walsh II.

Do I think Stanford will actually land all 6?  No way.  But I also didn't think Stanford would land Peat, Murphy, and Garnett in the same class.


Re: taking a shot at the whales - Hulk01 - 04-06-2015

The big difference is that Peat, Murphy, and Garnett all were West Coast--or close enough in Peat's case.  Menet and Bredeson and from Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, two states that haven't been kind to us, Coy Wire and Ben Gardner--who had no other attractive offers--excepted.

But yes, we lead for Texan Smith, may lead for Californian Crawford, and have been called "my dream school" by Robertson, a fabulous fit for our run, run, throw deep offense from Georgia, where we recruit so well I once wore a Stanford football shirt that read “The University of Georgia/Palo Alto”.

We landed four top 60 guys in the 2001 class of Kyle Matter (30), Mike Craven  (14), Mark Anderson (11), and J.R Lemon (37). 

Kwame Harris, Teyo Johnson, and Amon Gordon were top 60 guys in the 200 class, and Brandon Royster wasn’t far behind. 

Stanford other super class was Walsh’s II, Year one: Two top five QBs (Tim Carey and Scott Frost), a top three running back (Mike Mitchell) and top five WR (Brian Manning), plus state players of the year Greg Comella (Connecticut), Adam Salina (Massachusetts), and Leroy Pruitt (Missouri). 

Re: taking a shot at the whales - TrumpCard - 04-06-2015

What's notable about the three classes you mentioned is that the superstar recruits too often didn't end up contributing as much as we might have liked.  Carey, Frost, Matter, Anderson, Craven and Royster never contributed much for various reasons. 

The book isn't closed on the 2012 class, but it seems like they have a better batting average. Peat and Carter were stars until they left. Murhpy and Garnett are going to start two years each. Shittu will be a major contributor if he stays healthy this year. Davis and Sanders, who both redshirted, have the most to prove, but have time to do it.

Some of the results are random chance, but I think the current coaching staff has a whole lot to do with the better outcomes.

Re: taking a shot at the whales - OutsiderFan - 04-07-2015

Though Stanford may have struggled to pull elite recruits out of the midwest in the past, it does seem the ascension of the program will at some point start swaying some to Stanford. 

Now I'm starting to wonder if the bleak water situation in California is going to have an impact on recruiting out of state players, or maybe even in-state ones who like the idea of not living with water emergency restrictions.  Moreover, it seems unlikely Stanford is will be able to keep its perfectly manicured lawns and gardens (that seem to be at least part of its appeal) in the face of massive water restrictions.  A 25% cut in water use is substantial and would seem to have a palpable impact on everyone's lifestyle, in addition to pure aesthetics.

Re: taking a shot at the whales - BobK - 04-07-2015

the restrictions are on fresh water not recyled water. 

Re: taking a shot at the whales - Hurlburt88 - 04-07-2015

Kind of a topic change, but I am really wondering why I am not hearing more talk about getting much more aggressive with water recycling and desalination in California. 

Re: taking a shot at the whales - Mick - 04-07-2015

How much would it cost to cart northwest water to California?

Re: taking a shot at the whales - BobK - 04-07-2015

Whales ocean all goes together.  Here's info on the big SoCal plant

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Southern-Californian-Desalination-Plant-to-Be-Largest-on-West-Coast-298828791.html

Re: taking a shot at the whales - CrazedZooChimp - 04-08-2015

I want Gary!  Has Stanford ever had a #1 overall player?

(04-07-2015, 04:29 PM)Mick link Wrote:How much would it cost to cart northwest water to California?

The Northwest isn't doing so hot despite the rain they get.  The snowpack in the Cascades is incredibly low right now, almost as bad as the Sierras.  They've been getting water, but it's been as unusually warm like down here.

Hmm, according to this article there are droughts up in parts of Oregon and Washington too:  http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentid=2015/03/0062.xml

Re: taking a shot at the whales - Extra Point - 04-08-2015

(04-07-2015, 04:29 PM)Mick link Wrote:How much would it cost to cart northwest water to California?

About 20 years ago the California State Legislature contacted the Montana State Legislature about the possibility of a pipeline that would supply fresh water to California. The Montana response was, "That's fine, as long as you return the water in the same condition that you receive it."

Re: taking a shot at the whales - Mick - 04-08-2015

(04-08-2015, 10:18 AM)Extra Point link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=12002.msg116310#msg116310 date=1428449357]
How much would it cost to cart northwest water to California?

About 20 years ago the California State Legislature contacted the Montana State Legislature about the possibility of a pipeline that would supply fresh water to California. The Montana response was, "That's fine, as long as you return the water in the same condition that you receive it."
[/quote]

So in other words...no water is available at any price?

Re: taking a shot at the whales - SeattleTree - 04-08-2015

(04-08-2015, 10:00 AM)CrazedZooChimp link Wrote:I want Gary!  Has Stanford ever had a #1 overall player?

[quote author=Mick link=topic=12002.msg116310#msg116310 date=1428449357]
How much would it cost to cart northwest water to California?

The Northwest isn't doing so hot despite the rain they get.  The snowpack in the Cascades is incredibly low right now, almost as bad as the Sierras.  They've been getting water, but it's been as unusually warm like down here.

Hmm, according to this article there are droughts up in parts of Oregon and Washington too:  http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentid=2015/03/0062.xml
[/quote]

Snowpack in the Olympics (4%) is even lower than in the Cascades (8-45%).  We received a decent amount of rain this winter, but little snow in the mountains. 

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-washington-state-drought-20150314-story.html

Re: taking a shot at the whales - BostonCard - 04-08-2015

(04-08-2015, 10:00 AM)CrazedZooChimp link Wrote:I want Gary!  Has Stanford ever had a #1 overall player?

John Elway?

BC

Good question on desalination. Answer in liked article - Redrum - 04-08-2015

"When "the largest desalination plant in the Western Hemisphere"  opens, it should generate 50 million gallons of potable water each day. That’s enough water for 300,000 residents, or 7 percent of the county of San Diego."

If California is going to invest in desalination at anywhere near the magnitude needed to serve its population,  the new environmental concerns will be:
a) the environmental effects of concentrated brine returned to the ocean from all those plants
b) the number of plants needed, the siting of which will raise aesthetic (oh! the humanity!) and loss-of-access complaints along formerly recreational beaches.



Re: taking a shot at the whales - rudruff - 04-08-2015

Not to mention that desalination isn't going to fix the agricultural use inland. You can't pump all that water to the middle of the state.

Re: taking a shot at the whales - washingtonismoney - 04-08-2015

Water is underpriced and needs to be set up on more of a market basis. There's your starting point.

Re: taking a shot at the whales - OutsiderFan - 04-08-2015

Well, the dirty little secret is the Earth has way too many people, and it isn't possible to sustain what we think of as our "rightful standard of living" with so many people consuming so many resources.  Humanity is throwing the Earth out of its natural equilibrium, an equilibrium that allowed humanity to thrive.  The Earth delivers what we "program" it to provide (or not provide) by our behavior due to the volumes of us. 

It seems the evidence suggests climate is directly impacted by carbon in the atmosphere, and the recent jet stream orientation is that has cut California off from water, is influenced by the (rising) temps.  But I'm not convinced that even if we have fusion reactors, and reduce carbon in the atmosphere to 1900 levels, that all the demand on resources like water and the biosphere won't still leave us screwed.  I mean one could argue that unlimited power without carbon emissions could actually lead to even more population growth and put even more strain on natural resources.

We are killing bees, butterflies, most fish in the ocean, and any number of life forms, regardless of water usage levels.


Re: taking a shot at the whales - OutsiderFan - 04-08-2015

(04-08-2015, 12:28 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Water is underpriced and needs to be set up on more of a market basis. There's your starting point.

Raising the price of water, or otherwise making it anything but accessible to everyone relatively equally, will lead to never ending war and civil unrest.  California may be a coming example.

Re: taking a shot at the whales - yvonne - 04-08-2015

(04-08-2015, 11:32 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=CrazedZooChimp link=topic=12002.msg116336#msg116336 date=1428512419]
I want Gary!  Has Stanford ever had a #1 overall player?

John Elway?

BC
[/quote]

Stanford has had four No. 1 overall players.
http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php/topic,12003.0.html



Re: taking a shot at the whales - MustardtheBallCarrier - 04-08-2015

(04-08-2015, 12:33 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Raising the price of water, or otherwise making it anything but accessible to everyone relatively equally, will lead to never ending war and civil unrest.  California may be a coming example.

You paint a rosy picture.  With the end of humanity on the horizon, at some point surely the 40-year decision as a recruiting advantage is rendered less significant, if not obsolete, right?  Also, is there any reason to think that recruiting rankings will have any more or less predictive value once California becomes a dystopian wasteland?