[Bruce Wang]

Leaving aside whether the decision is good for Hooper (which we can't really know), this seems bad for Stanford football.  Most importantly, Stanford is losing a very talented player early in his career, and this is not an isolated occurrence.  Two last year, one this year (so far), and likely at least one (McCaffrey) next year.  One of Stanford's traditional advantages is that its players want to stay 4 years to get the degree, but that advantage is decreasing.  Also, the program has developed a good relationship with the admissions office, but I think a good part of that is due to the team's high graduation rate, which seems likely to decline in the coming years.  The last time we saw a rash of early departures (Teyo, Kwame, Jacobsen and Borchardt), Stanford football and basketball simultaneously started a long decline.  I hope that Stanford is able to avoid a repeat of that unfortunate history.

This is the natural result of successfully recruiting the most elite athletes.  It's an indication that we now have a powerhouse program.  We should be happy that we get these guys for 3 years unlike in college basketball, which one and done has made into a joke (players that aren't even there long enough to get academically disqualified).  I bet most of our guys will come back and finish their degrees.

Should we go back and get less elite athletes so we can have them for 4-5 years?  That's not a recipe for success.  I'd rather have CMac for 3 years than a mediocre player for 4-5 years.

[Bruce Wang]

Leaving aside whether the decision is good for Hooper (which we can't really know), this seems bad for Stanford football.  Most importantly, Stanford is losing a very talented player early in his career, and this is not an isolated occurrence.  Two last year, one this year (so far), and likely at least one (McCaffrey) next year.  One of Stanford's traditional advantages is that its players want to stay 4 years to get the degree, but that advantage is decreasing.  Also, the program has developed a good relationship with the admissions office, but I think a good part of that is due to the team's high graduation rate, which seems likely to decline in the coming years.  The last time we saw a rash of early departures (Teyo, Kwame, Jacobsen and Borchardt), Stanford football and basketball simultaneously started a long decline.  I hope that Stanford is able to avoid a repeat of that unfortunate history.

This is the natural result of successfully recruiting the most elite athletes.  It's an indication that we now have a powerhouse program.  We should be happy that we get these guys for 3 years unlike in college basketball, which one and done has made into a joke (players that aren't even there long enough to get academically disqualified).  I bet most of our guys will come back and finish their degrees.

Should we go back and get less elite athletes so we can have them for 4-5 years?  That's not a recipe for success.  I'd rather have CMac for 3 years than a mediocre player for 4-5 years.