[Rally]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

I was rejected by my classmates for Secretary of Athletics but was accepted by The University of Stanford.

[Rally]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

I was rejected by my classmates for Secretary of Athletics but was accepted by The University of Stanford.

[MustardtheBallCarrier]

[quote author=MustardtheBallCarrier link=topic=14424.msg153839#msg153839 date=1453407247]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

I was rejected by my classmates for Secretary of Athletics but was accepted by The University of Stanford.
[/quote]

But was University of Harvard your backup?

[MustardtheBallCarrier]

[quote author=MustardtheBallCarrier link=topic=14424.msg153839#msg153839 date=1453407247]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

I was rejected by my classmates for Secretary of Athletics but was accepted by The University of Stanford.
[/quote]

But was University of Harvard your backup?

[Rally]

[quote author=ferrari link=topic=14424.msg153860#msg153860 date=1453419195]
[quote author=MustardtheBallCarrier link=topic=14424.msg153839#msg153839 date=1453407247]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

I was rejected by my classmates for Secretary of Athletics but was accepted by The University of Stanford.
[/quote]

But was University of Harvard your backup?
[/quote]

No, too dumb to have a back-up.  Only applied one place.  Was that a risk?

[Rally]

[quote author=ferrari link=topic=14424.msg153860#msg153860 date=1453419195]
[quote author=MustardtheBallCarrier link=topic=14424.msg153839#msg153839 date=1453407247]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

I was rejected by my classmates for Secretary of Athletics but was accepted by The University of Stanford.
[/quote]

But was University of Harvard your backup?
[/quote]

No, too dumb to have a back-up.  Only applied one place.  Was that a risk?

[dabigv13]

....that's the lamest humblebrag ever.

Stanford med school didn't even give me an interview. Which was fine....biking across campus in a suit would've been really annoying. And walking would've taken like an hour.

[dabigv13]

....that's the lamest humblebrag ever.

Stanford med school didn't even give me an interview. Which was fine....biking across campus in a suit would've been really annoying. And walking would've taken like an hour.

[doublespiral]

I was rejected by the GSB and accepted by Haas.

I decided to do something else with my life.

[doublespiral]

I was rejected by the GSB and accepted by Haas.

I decided to do something else with my life.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

Omg, sorry and totally not meant that way.  I got rejected from three quarters of the schools I applied to, and just happened to get accepted from a prestigious one.  But top schools that rejected me included Stanford, Ucsf, Hopkins, Cornell, Columbia, Yale, mayo and a bunch i'v forgotten.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

Omg, sorry and totally not meant that way.  I got rejected from three quarters of the schools I applied to, and just happened to get accepted from a prestigious one.  But top schools that rejected me included Stanford, Ucsf, Hopkins, Cornell, Columbia, Yale, mayo and a bunch i'v forgotten.

BC

[Rally]

[quote author=MustardtheBallCarrier link=topic=14424.msg153839#msg153839 date=1453407247]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

Omg, sorry and totally not meant that way.  I got rejected from three quarters of the schools I applied to, and just happened to get accepted from a prestigious one.  But top schools that rejected me included Stanford, Ucsf, Hopkins, Cornell, Columbia, Yale, mayo and a bunch i'v forgotten.

BC
[/quote]

BC, I have a solution for that, albeit a bit late.  Do what I did:  apply to one undergraduate school, one graduate school.  All or nothing.  Maximum rejections:  2.  'Course, you have to be dumb and naive, not necessarily in that order.

[Rally]

[quote author=MustardtheBallCarrier link=topic=14424.msg153839#msg153839 date=1453407247]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=14424.msg153813#msg153813 date=1453397079]
I got rejected by Stanford Medical School (and got admitted to the Stanford of the East).  It was a bummer, but my backup school turned out ok for me.

BC

This is the lamest humblebrag ever.  So bad.
[/quote]

Omg, sorry and totally not meant that way.  I got rejected from three quarters of the schools I applied to, and just happened to get accepted from a prestigious one.  But top schools that rejected me included Stanford, Ucsf, Hopkins, Cornell, Columbia, Yale, mayo and a bunch i'v forgotten.

BC
[/quote]

BC, I have a solution for that, albeit a bit late.  Do what I did:  apply to one undergraduate school, one graduate school.  All or nothing.  Maximum rejections:  2.  'Course, you have to be dumb and naive, not necessarily in that order.

[terry]

the troubling thing is the almost knee-jerk reaction here and at other fan boards to post (and/or assume) that the kid was rejected by admissions.  Even if true - which I'll concede is likely the truth in many/most instances - why why the need to state it?

Back in the pre-internet days, most people were blissfully ignorant of recruiting. I would pick up the newspaper one day in the winter and see a list of players who had signed with Stanford. Almost always, I had never heard of any of them. All I knew about them was their height, weight, high school, and hometown.

Those days are gone. Every move of every recruit is tracked. Fans stalk the Twitter accounts of recruits, reporters constantly publish updates, and players use social media to publicize offers, visits, lists of favorites, decisions to narrow lists, and decisions to commit or decommit. The recruit's decisions and motivations and leanings have become newsworthy, and most of the recruits embrace that.

When recruits decommit, most of them publicize it by putting it on Twitter or Facebook or telling a recruiting reporter. Most of these guys are putting the information about their recruitment out there for the world to see. They could choose to say nothing to anybody, but they usually don't.

When a Stanford recruit decommits, we typically see several responses from different segments of our fan base and other schools' fan bases. One reaction I've often seen is "the coaches messed up by letting this guy get away." Another reaction I've seen is "the coaches pulled the offer" or "the coaches are hiding behind admissions to get rid of this guy." And then there's the group that says "Admissions standards are going up."

I think all of those reactions raise issues worthy of discussion or rebuttal. In that context, I think it's understandable that people want to talk about the reason for the decommitment, and to talk about whether it was a real admissions denial. Sure, it would be preferable if everyone would just accept the decommitment decision and move on with no discussion whatsoever. But that's not really the way these things go. People inevitably are going to talk about this stuff. Almost all of the recruits embrace public scrutiny of their decisions throughout the process, and that public scrutiny continues when a player decommits. For better or worse, I don't think that genie is going back in the bottle.

[terry]

the troubling thing is the almost knee-jerk reaction here and at other fan boards to post (and/or assume) that the kid was rejected by admissions.  Even if true - which I'll concede is likely the truth in many/most instances - why why the need to state it?

Back in the pre-internet days, most people were blissfully ignorant of recruiting. I would pick up the newspaper one day in the winter and see a list of players who had signed with Stanford. Almost always, I had never heard of any of them. All I knew about them was their height, weight, high school, and hometown.

Those days are gone. Every move of every recruit is tracked. Fans stalk the Twitter accounts of recruits, reporters constantly publish updates, and players use social media to publicize offers, visits, lists of favorites, decisions to narrow lists, and decisions to commit or decommit. The recruit's decisions and motivations and leanings have become newsworthy, and most of the recruits embrace that.

When recruits decommit, most of them publicize it by putting it on Twitter or Facebook or telling a recruiting reporter. Most of these guys are putting the information about their recruitment out there for the world to see. They could choose to say nothing to anybody, but they usually don't.

When a Stanford recruit decommits, we typically see several responses from different segments of our fan base and other schools' fan bases. One reaction I've often seen is "the coaches messed up by letting this guy get away." Another reaction I've seen is "the coaches pulled the offer" or "the coaches are hiding behind admissions to get rid of this guy." And then there's the group that says "Admissions standards are going up."

I think all of those reactions raise issues worthy of discussion or rebuttal. In that context, I think it's understandable that people want to talk about the reason for the decommitment, and to talk about whether it was a real admissions denial. Sure, it would be preferable if everyone would just accept the decommitment decision and move on with no discussion whatsoever. But that's not really the way these things go. People inevitably are going to talk about this stuff. Almost all of the recruits embrace public scrutiny of their decisions throughout the process, and that public scrutiny continues when a player decommits. For better or worse, I don't think that genie is going back in the bottle.

[OutsiderFan]

De-commits are rare.  Every school has some, but never more than 1-2 per cycle, and usually never this late in the process. When you consider Stanford admissions is a much larger hurdle than any other program's recruits have to clear, it makes sense to say they didn't get admitted when they de-commit in December-January.

Nate Herbig seems to be the only possible commit who could de-commit because of reasons other than admission denial. If he signs elsewhere, this would give Stanford one true de-commit in terms of what de-commits are for every other school.

[OutsiderFan]

De-commits are rare.  Every school has some, but never more than 1-2 per cycle, and usually never this late in the process. When you consider Stanford admissions is a much larger hurdle than any other program's recruits have to clear, it makes sense to say they didn't get admitted when they de-commit in December-January.

Nate Herbig seems to be the only possible commit who could de-commit because of reasons other than admission denial. If he signs elsewhere, this would give Stanford one true de-commit in terms of what de-commits are for every other school.

[Redrum]

Is dinged at my first Stanford try.  Did a year of JC,  transferred in 1968.  I think I've read more transfer mentions in this thread alone than actual transfers I knew while I was there.  In stark contrast to their fiercely-defended process of acclimating and integrating freshmen, Stanford was terrible, simply terrible, at integrating transfers into campus life, starting with housing.

[Redrum]

Is dinged at my first Stanford try.  Did a year of JC,  transferred in 1968.  I think I've read more transfer mentions in this thread alone than actual transfers I knew while I was there.  In stark contrast to their fiercely-defended process of acclimating and integrating freshmen, Stanford was terrible, simply terrible, at integrating transfers into campus life, starting with housing.

[76lsjumb]

For better or worse, I don't think that genie is going back in the bottle.

I've heard rumors that the genie has, indeed, decommitted and IS trying to decide whether to go back in the bottle, although Jim Harbaugh was spotted climbing a tree outside the genie's house, so who knows...

[76lsjumb]

For better or worse, I don't think that genie is going back in the bottle.

I've heard rumors that the genie has, indeed, decommitted and IS trying to decide whether to go back in the bottle, although Jim Harbaugh was spotted climbing a tree outside the genie's house, so who knows...

[82lsju]

I think I've read more transfer mentions in this thread alone than actual transfers I knew while I was there.  In stark contrast to their fiercely-defended process of acclimating and integrating freshmen, Stanford was terrible, simply terrible, at integrating transfers into campus life, starting with housing.

I knew three other transfers pretty well, all of them transferred as juniors.  I'm still in touch with two of them (the two who ended up as roommates, one my junior and one my senior year).  And yes the whole transfer orientation thing was pretty lame then.  I also did not find out I was admitted as a transfer until August (and that was once I had called them several times since the admissions office had not updated my mailing address, the letter never arrived). 

[82lsju]

I think I've read more transfer mentions in this thread alone than actual transfers I knew while I was there.  In stark contrast to their fiercely-defended process of acclimating and integrating freshmen, Stanford was terrible, simply terrible, at integrating transfers into campus life, starting with housing.

I knew three other transfers pretty well, all of them transferred as juniors.  I'm still in touch with two of them (the two who ended up as roommates, one my junior and one my senior year).  And yes the whole transfer orientation thing was pretty lame then.  I also did not find out I was admitted as a transfer until August (and that was once I had called them several times since the admissions office had not updated my mailing address, the letter never arrived). 

[yvonne]

One of the first things that struck me about sports message boards when I first encountered them in 1997 was all the information on recruiting. I had hardly known anything about it before that. Even when I was a student, and working at the Daily, there was very little chatter about this stuff. The only recruit whose name I ever heard in advance of LOI day was the much-sought-after Turk Schonert, who would eventually be Stanford's third consecutive NCAA passing leader and then have a long career as an NFL backup.

...

What should be possible is for us to stop using "the Admissions Office dinged him" as our default explanation for why somebody decommits. If if that's statistically the most likely explanation, that doesn't mean it will hold in every case. Some times, some members of the board really have a basis for saying, "Recruit X was an admissions casualty." But that explanation is offered so frequently, so widely and so quickly that I really think it's often an assumption rather than an informed statement.

Recruiting was a differentiator when schools started their own websites. Schools are not permitted to talk about recruits before National Signing Day. I noticed Chad from the Wild West Board, a board that discussed ALL Pac-10 schools. He subscribed to at least one of the recruiting services and seemed to know a lot. I recruited him to the BootBoard. When I started this board, we didn't have a recruiting expert, so I sought a new differentiator: the openness to discuss all sports, including the much derided "Sears" sports.

I agree with the latter point. It's the point I was trying to make hyperbolically in the original post. Stanford's not for everyone.

[yvonne]

One of the first things that struck me about sports message boards when I first encountered them in 1997 was all the information on recruiting. I had hardly known anything about it before that. Even when I was a student, and working at the Daily, there was very little chatter about this stuff. The only recruit whose name I ever heard in advance of LOI day was the much-sought-after Turk Schonert, who would eventually be Stanford's third consecutive NCAA passing leader and then have a long career as an NFL backup.

...

What should be possible is for us to stop using "the Admissions Office dinged him" as our default explanation for why somebody decommits. If if that's statistically the most likely explanation, that doesn't mean it will hold in every case. Some times, some members of the board really have a basis for saying, "Recruit X was an admissions casualty." But that explanation is offered so frequently, so widely and so quickly that I really think it's often an assumption rather than an informed statement.

Recruiting was a differentiator when schools started their own websites. Schools are not permitted to talk about recruits before National Signing Day. I noticed Chad from the Wild West Board, a board that discussed ALL Pac-10 schools. He subscribed to at least one of the recruiting services and seemed to know a lot. I recruited him to the BootBoard. When I started this board, we didn't have a recruiting expert, so I sought a new differentiator: the openness to discuss all sports, including the much derided "Sears" sports.

I agree with the latter point. It's the point I was trying to make hyperbolically in the original post. Stanford's not for everyone.

[Oasis]

I transferred to Stanford and still remember seeing the big envelope in the mailbox when I went home from my glamorous summer job in Modesto (grounds crew at Gallo winery) for lunch to watch Watergate -- which still rates right behind Brideshead Revisited (1981) as the best television entertainment ever.

If I ever had a happier moment, it must've been three weeks ago at the Rose Bowl. 

[Oasis]

I transferred to Stanford and still remember seeing the big envelope in the mailbox when I went home from my glamorous summer job in Modesto (grounds crew at Gallo winery) for lunch to watch Watergate -- which still rates right behind Brideshead Revisited (1981) as the best television entertainment ever.

If I ever had a happier moment, it must've been three weeks ago at the Rose Bowl. 

[terry]

De-commits are rare.  Every school has some, but never more than 1-2 per cycle, and usually never this late in the process.

I don't think decommits are rare any longer. Decommits are increasing, and they often happen late in the cycle. A couple of articles about this are linked below. One of these articles gives the example that Georgia had 7 guys who flipped out of their class and 5 guys who flipped into their class last year.

I don't think decommitments are necessarily bad. I think that as time goes by, recruits have a chance to gather more information, talk to more people, take more visits, take time to reflect, judge the "fit" issues, go through the admissions process (at Stanford), and end up in a better position to make a good decision. If that means changing their original decision, then so be it.

I think the NCAA does a good thing by not allowing recruits to make binding decisions until February of their senior year. That gives them time to make a better decision. Coaches don't like having to hold their class together until February. But it's in the recruits' best interest to have enough time to change their mind.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor...ing-crazy/

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/college-foot...nce-gibson

[terry]

De-commits are rare.  Every school has some, but never more than 1-2 per cycle, and usually never this late in the process.

I don't think decommits are rare any longer. Decommits are increasing, and they often happen late in the cycle. A couple of articles about this are linked below. One of these articles gives the example that Georgia had 7 guys who flipped out of their class and 5 guys who flipped into their class last year.

I don't think decommitments are necessarily bad. I think that as time goes by, recruits have a chance to gather more information, talk to more people, take more visits, take time to reflect, judge the "fit" issues, go through the admissions process (at Stanford), and end up in a better position to make a good decision. If that means changing their original decision, then so be it.

I think the NCAA does a good thing by not allowing recruits to make binding decisions until February of their senior year. That gives them time to make a better decision. Coaches don't like having to hold their class together until February. But it's in the recruits' best interest to have enough time to change their mind.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor...ing-crazy/

http://usatodayhss.com/2015/college-foot...nce-gibson

[FrankO]

  they happen for all kinds of reasons... and what you point out is so very true...

more recently, the decommits away from Stanford have for the most part (with few exceptions) been because they simply did not get past admissions... and that goes with our territory

going further,  most other sports have a Nov LOI date... Football, the exception...

if NCAA moves the Football LOI calendar up to Nov (which has been seriously discussed of late), the Admissions office will have to start staffing up for earlier decisions for athletes in the Admissions cycle... basing their decisions on earlier data... which in turn means our staff would have to begin their process much earlier in scouring the country for good football players who are also good students... with fewer solid data points... and thus,  more uncertainty in the outcomes

[FrankO]

  they happen for all kinds of reasons... and what you point out is so very true...

more recently, the decommits away from Stanford have for the most part (with few exceptions) been because they simply did not get past admissions... and that goes with our territory

going further,  most other sports have a Nov LOI date... Football, the exception...

if NCAA moves the Football LOI calendar up to Nov (which has been seriously discussed of late), the Admissions office will have to start staffing up for earlier decisions for athletes in the Admissions cycle... basing their decisions on earlier data... which in turn means our staff would have to begin their process much earlier in scouring the country for good football players who are also good students... with fewer solid data points... and thus,  more uncertainty in the outcomes

[norcard]

hm..more arrogance claiming admissions is at fault.  Get over yourself already.  There have been recruits that spurned stanford for oregon state after getting admitted, les we forget about jameis winston as well.

Just as many people who could have possibly gotten into stanford as a recruit did not apply. *you see what I did there, FrankO? I made up data on the fly too*

[norcard]

hm..more arrogance claiming admissions is at fault.  Get over yourself already.  There have been recruits that spurned stanford for oregon state after getting admitted, les we forget about jameis winston as well.

Just as many people who could have possibly gotten into stanford as a recruit did not apply. *you see what I did there, FrankO? I made up data on the fly too*

[CowboyIndian]

hm..more arrogance claiming admissions is at fault.

Easy, big fella. If you've been following this stuff for a while, it becomes obvious that there's an admissions component to the overwhelming majority of these decommits...despite your few anecdotal references.

[CowboyIndian]

hm..more arrogance claiming admissions is at fault.

Easy, big fella. If you've been following this stuff for a while, it becomes obvious that there's an admissions component to the overwhelming majority of these decommits...despite your few anecdotal references.

[yvonne]

Easy guys. The cardinal CardBoard rule: attack ideas, not people.

[yvonne]

Easy guys. The cardinal CardBoard rule: attack ideas, not people.

[Hulk01]

It's ain't bragging if you can do it.  Stanford has been the Dream School of choice, of both parents and students, for at least the last seven years in a row.  I attended two other universities and have lecturered at over 15 and advised three.  I've never seen a school remotely like Stanford, and for good reason: there isn't one.  That's not arrogance; what we more often see is faux humility, the suggestion that you can get a great education anywhere and there are dozens, even hundreds, of great schools to choose from.  And I am certain beyond all doubt, and from over 40 years of experience, that that is nonsense.  The average university is just that: average.  A C.

[Hulk01]

It's ain't bragging if you can do it.  Stanford has been the Dream School of choice, of both parents and students, for at least the last seven years in a row.  I attended two other universities and have lecturered at over 15 and advised three.  I've never seen a school remotely like Stanford, and for good reason: there isn't one.  That's not arrogance; what we more often see is faux humility, the suggestion that you can get a great education anywhere and there are dozens, even hundreds, of great schools to choose from.  And I am certain beyond all doubt, and from over 40 years of experience, that that is nonsense.  The average university is just that: average.  A C.