[washingtonismoney]

Everyone's favorite spurned Stanford recruit talks about ... why he's everyone's favorite spurned Stanford recruit:

Four years earlier, on his visit to Bosco, Rosen had asked the coaches and academic officials if coming out of their school he'd be able to get into Stanford. Growing up the son of Penn and Princeton graduates, Rosen saw Stanford as a football Ivy. He attended a camp in Palo Alto the summer before his junior year but returned without a scholarship offer, heartbroken. Rosen recalls that he didn't click with the mild-mannered Cardinal coach David Shaw, who appeared put off by questions about the depth chart. Shaw says the Cardinal coaches simply decided to not take a quarterback in that class because of roster numbers.

Rosen returned to Bosco devastated but now calls the snub "probably the best thing that ever happened to me," he says. "I'm not Stanford, and I would have hated it. It was good for me because it killed my ego a little bit."

http://www.campusrush.com/ucla-quarterba...97373.html

Rosen seems like an interesting kid -- maybe not the easiest to get along with, but, unless everyone's hiding something, nowhere near the monster some have made him out to be.

[washingtonismoney]

Everyone's favorite spurned Stanford recruit talks about ... why he's everyone's favorite spurned Stanford recruit:

Four years earlier, on his visit to Bosco, Rosen had asked the coaches and academic officials if coming out of their school he'd be able to get into Stanford. Growing up the son of Penn and Princeton graduates, Rosen saw Stanford as a football Ivy. He attended a camp in Palo Alto the summer before his junior year but returned without a scholarship offer, heartbroken. Rosen recalls that he didn't click with the mild-mannered Cardinal coach David Shaw, who appeared put off by questions about the depth chart. Shaw says the Cardinal coaches simply decided to not take a quarterback in that class because of roster numbers.

Rosen returned to Bosco devastated but now calls the snub "probably the best thing that ever happened to me," he says. "I'm not Stanford, and I would have hated it. It was good for me because it killed my ego a little bit."

http://www.campusrush.com/ucla-quarterba...97373.html

Rosen seems like an interesting kid -- maybe not the easiest to get along with, but, unless everyone's hiding something, nowhere near the monster some have made him out to be.

[BostonCard]

First, I don't think anyone has said he's a monster.

Secondly, it sounds like he did a bit of soul searching after not getting the offer from us, and he has probably grown up since then.  That will probably help him long term.

Third, so much of these things are about "fit", and, at least at first blush, it looks like he may not have been a great fit at Stanford.  That doesn't mean he's a monster (see #1).

BC

[BostonCard]

First, I don't think anyone has said he's a monster.

Secondly, it sounds like he did a bit of soul searching after not getting the offer from us, and he has probably grown up since then.  That will probably help him long term.

Third, so much of these things are about "fit", and, at least at first blush, it looks like he may not have been a great fit at Stanford.  That doesn't mean he's a monster (see #1).

BC

[washingtonismoney]

First, I don't think anyone has said he's a monster.

I'm exaggerating, but the article itself features his coach asking him whether he wants to be Johnny Manziel or Peyton Manning. Now, putting some issues aside,* it's fair to say that Manziel's impact on the world has been tragic. Rosen appears to be a guy who likes popping off from time to time. Maybe a bit jerkish, but hardly someone (by all appearances) you'd be seriously worried about a friend dating.

* (Manning's reputation as a nice guy is primarily media-created.)

[washingtonismoney]

First, I don't think anyone has said he's a monster.

I'm exaggerating, but the article itself features his coach asking him whether he wants to be Johnny Manziel or Peyton Manning. Now, putting some issues aside,* it's fair to say that Manziel's impact on the world has been tragic. Rosen appears to be a guy who likes popping off from time to time. Maybe a bit jerkish, but hardly someone (by all appearances) you'd be seriously worried about a friend dating.

* (Manning's reputation as a nice guy is primarily media-created.)

[BostonCard]

No, I don't think that the modal path for Rosen involves a Johny Manziel-esque fall from grace, replete with arrests, allegations of assault, etc.  But while I guess I would be a bit surprised if something along those lines happened (mostly because it appears that Rosen has matured over the last year), I can't say I would be totally shocked either.

BC

[BostonCard]

No, I don't think that the modal path for Rosen involves a Johny Manziel-esque fall from grace, replete with arrests, allegations of assault, etc.  But while I guess I would be a bit surprised if something along those lines happened (mostly because it appears that Rosen has matured over the last year), I can't say I would be totally shocked either.

BC

[JohnR34231]

He's not a monster, but he just might be a kid with an oversize ego, which is quite possibly the reason that he didn't get the Stanford offer (only Shaw knows for sure).

At any rate, there were other kids in Rosen's class that did get Stanford offers (such as Ricky Town) so the reason Josh didn't get one is not because Stanford had decided not to take a QB in that class.

[JohnR34231]

He's not a monster, but he just might be a kid with an oversize ego, which is quite possibly the reason that he didn't get the Stanford offer (only Shaw knows for sure).

At any rate, there were other kids in Rosen's class that did get Stanford offers (such as Ricky Town) so the reason Josh didn't get one is not because Stanford had decided not to take a QB in that class.

[fullmetal]

Rosen lives and plays in LA, which has temptations that have felled wiser men.  Beware distraction.

[fullmetal]

Rosen lives and plays in LA, which has temptations that have felled wiser men.  Beware distraction.

[TreesAndBirds]

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.

If David Shaw did something similar for Rosen, then he did Rosen a favor, and it looks like Rosen benefitted to some degree.

At a higher level, obviously many student athletes benefit from playing at Stanford, but I think we are affecting a lot of kids who dont go to Stanford, by encouraging them to take high school academics seriously, to talk to other college coaches about the 40 year decision, to let them know the importance of character, etc.

[TreesAndBirds]

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.

If David Shaw did something similar for Rosen, then he did Rosen a favor, and it looks like Rosen benefitted to some degree.

At a higher level, obviously many student athletes benefit from playing at Stanford, but I think we are affecting a lot of kids who dont go to Stanford, by encouraging them to take high school academics seriously, to talk to other college coaches about the 40 year decision, to let them know the importance of character, etc.

[DC 86]

No, I don't think that the modal path for Rosen involves a Johny Manziel-esque fall from grace, replete with arrests, allegations of assault, etc.  But while I guess I would be a bit surprised if something along those lines happened (mostly because it appears that Rosen has matured over the last year), I can't say I would be totally shocked either.

BC

It wouldn't be shocking about any young high profile athlete or celebrity I suppose, but I would be much more surprised if Josh Rosen turned into Johnny Manziel as compared to others in his cohort. Manziel had the reputation of an immature party animal dating back to high school with some early warning signs (fake ID, bar fights). Rosen by all accounts likes to question authority and has a strong ego, but he is also a voracious studier of the playbook, outstanding student and something of an intellectual in his off field pursuits. I'm sure Shaw and the coaching staff was concerned about him being a disruptive presence but there isn't anything to indicate that has ever been considered a high risk player in terms of off field issues.

[DC 86]

No, I don't think that the modal path for Rosen involves a Johny Manziel-esque fall from grace, replete with arrests, allegations of assault, etc.  But while I guess I would be a bit surprised if something along those lines happened (mostly because it appears that Rosen has matured over the last year), I can't say I would be totally shocked either.

BC

It wouldn't be shocking about any young high profile athlete or celebrity I suppose, but I would be much more surprised if Josh Rosen turned into Johnny Manziel as compared to others in his cohort. Manziel had the reputation of an immature party animal dating back to high school with some early warning signs (fake ID, bar fights). Rosen by all accounts likes to question authority and has a strong ego, but he is also a voracious studier of the playbook, outstanding student and something of an intellectual in his off field pursuits. I'm sure Shaw and the coaching staff was concerned about him being a disruptive presence but there isn't anything to indicate that has ever been considered a high risk player in terms of off field issues.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

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.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

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.

[BostonCard]

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.

It would depend how you asked.

BC

[BostonCard]

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.

It would depend how you asked.

BC

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15417.msg167373#msg167373 date=1470697956]
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.

It would depend how you asked.

BC
[/quote]

Fair enough.  I suppose "Where do you see me fitting in?" and "So am I gonna have any competition, or will I just be the starter?" both fall under that umbrella.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15417.msg167373#msg167373 date=1470697956]
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.

It would depend how you asked.

BC
[/quote]

Fair enough.  I suppose "Where do you see me fitting in?" and "So am I gonna have any competition, or will I just be the starter?" both fall under that umbrella.

[BobK]

or how about hey coach I'm better than those and should start Day 1

[BobK]

or how about hey coach I'm better than those and should start Day 1

[JohnR34231]

If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.
At UCLA he got to start as a true freshman and now looks to be a high NFL draft choice when he decides to come out. I think that has worked out better for all concerned.

[JohnR34231]

If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.
At UCLA he got to start as a true freshman and now looks to be a high NFL draft choice when he decides to come out. I think that has worked out better for all concerned.

[washingtonismoney]

If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.

But an unlikely one -- believe Shaw called him one of the best QBs in the country. Shaw hasn't been phenomenally superlative about Burns or Chryst.

[washingtonismoney]

If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.

But an unlikely one -- believe Shaw called him one of the best QBs in the country. Shaw hasn't been phenomenally superlative about Burns or Chryst.

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=15417.msg167377#msg167377 date=1470699006]
If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.

But an unlikely one -- believe Shaw called him one of the best QBs in the country. Shaw hasn't been phenomenally superlative about Burns or Chryst.
[/quote]

If Shaw thought he was going to develop into one of the best QB's in the country and jump ahead of Burns and Chryst I have a hard time believing he wouldn't have taken him just because he thought his ego was a little outsized. Who knows, though.

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=15417.msg167377#msg167377 date=1470699006]
If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.

But an unlikely one -- believe Shaw called him one of the best QBs in the country. Shaw hasn't been phenomenally superlative about Burns or Chryst.
[/quote]

If Shaw thought he was going to develop into one of the best QB's in the country and jump ahead of Burns and Chryst I have a hard time believing he wouldn't have taken him just because he thought his ego was a little outsized. Who knows, though.

[washingtonismoney]

If Shaw thought he was going to develop into one of the best QB's in the country and jump ahead of Burns and Chryst I have a hard time believing he wouldn't have taken him just because he thought his ego was a little outsized. Who knows, though.

Possible Shaw didn't think Rosen was going to develop the way he did way back in 2014, and now recognizes what a QB he's turned out to be. You're right though.

[washingtonismoney]

If Shaw thought he was going to develop into one of the best QB's in the country and jump ahead of Burns and Chryst I have a hard time believing he wouldn't have taken him just because he thought his ego was a little outsized. Who knows, though.

Possible Shaw didn't think Rosen was going to develop the way he did way back in 2014, and now recognizes what a QB he's turned out to be. You're right though.

[Treebound]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=15417.msg167377#msg167377 date=1470699006]
If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.

But an unlikely one -- believe Shaw called him one of the best QBs in the country. Shaw hasn't been phenomenally superlative about Burns or Chryst.
[/quote]

Regarding the compliment, I think this is Shaw "playing the game within the game."  I think Rosen did learn some valuable lessons via the recruiting process and he's likely maturing as a QB and as a leader.  He and his team have yet to beat us in the years that they have been at UCLA.  I'm hoping Shaw and our new QB(s) will keep it that way in the near and long term. 

[Treebound]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=15417.msg167377#msg167377 date=1470699006]
If Josh had come to Stanford there is a fair chance he would be currently waiting his turn to play behind Burns and Chryst. Somehow I don't think that would have set well with him.

But an unlikely one -- believe Shaw called him one of the best QBs in the country. Shaw hasn't been phenomenally superlative about Burns or Chryst.
[/quote]

Regarding the compliment, I think this is Shaw "playing the game within the game."  I think Rosen did learn some valuable lessons via the recruiting process and he's likely maturing as a QB and as a leader.  He and his team have yet to beat us in the years that they have been at UCLA.  I'm hoping Shaw and our new QB(s) will keep it that way in the near and long term. 

[TrumpCard]

Shaw decided he did not want to work with Rosen.  Shaw is the CEO of the team and gets the privilege of making that decision.  Whether or not you think Rosen is going to implode in the way that Johnny Manziel did, there still is enough fodder just in that one interview to make a coach legitimately uneasy.  Just by way of example, Rosen drops S- and F-bombs in an interview with Sports Illustrated.  That's tacky to say the least, and it's hardly the only strange thing about the SI interview.  If Shaw passed on Rosen and then failed to land another QB capable of leading the team, that might have been a problem, but that's not what happened.  Now that Shaw has landed Costello, Mills, and West, the near-term future of the QB position at Stanford is reasonably secure, and it would be pretty tough to fault Shaw's recruiting strategy.   

[TrumpCard]

Shaw decided he did not want to work with Rosen.  Shaw is the CEO of the team and gets the privilege of making that decision.  Whether or not you think Rosen is going to implode in the way that Johnny Manziel did, there still is enough fodder just in that one interview to make a coach legitimately uneasy.  Just by way of example, Rosen drops S- and F-bombs in an interview with Sports Illustrated.  That's tacky to say the least, and it's hardly the only strange thing about the SI interview.  If Shaw passed on Rosen and then failed to land another QB capable of leading the team, that might have been a problem, but that's not what happened.  Now that Shaw has landed Costello, Mills, and West, the near-term future of the QB position at Stanford is reasonably secure, and it would be pretty tough to fault Shaw's recruiting strategy.   

[CTcard]

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. 

I see no particular reason to take Rosen at his word on why Shaw was put off. First of all, he may not know. Second ... of all, what is he going to say: "Yeah I was a total jerk at Stanford and annoyed everyone there"?

If David Shaw did something similar for Rosen, then he did Rosen a favor, and it looks like Rosen benefitted to some degree.

He may have benefited.
However, again I see no reason to take somebody at their word that a particular situation controlled his ego.
At any rate, his ego seems to remain healthy.

[CTcard]

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. 

I see no particular reason to take Rosen at his word on why Shaw was put off. First of all, he may not know. Second ... of all, what is he going to say: "Yeah I was a total jerk at Stanford and annoyed everyone there"?

If David Shaw did something similar for Rosen, then he did Rosen a favor, and it looks like Rosen benefitted to some degree.

He may have benefited.
However, again I see no reason to take somebody at their word that a particular situation controlled his ego.
At any rate, his ego seems to remain healthy.

[washingtonismoney]

[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15417.msg167373#msg167373 date=1470697956]
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. 

I see no particular reason to take Rosen at his word on why Shaw was put off. First of all, he may not know. Second ... of all, what is he going to say: "Yeah I was a total jerk at Stanford and annoyed everyone there"?
[/quote]

I heard a slightly different version of the story: that Rosen, or one of his family, asked about the depth chart -- that is, why Rosen wouldn't be backup right off the bat.

[washingtonismoney]

[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15417.msg167373#msg167373 date=1470697956]
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. 

I see no particular reason to take Rosen at his word on why Shaw was put off. First of all, he may not know. Second ... of all, what is he going to say: "Yeah I was a total jerk at Stanford and annoyed everyone there"?
[/quote]

I heard a slightly different version of the story: that Rosen, or one of his family, asked about the depth chart -- that is, why Rosen wouldn't be backup right off the bat.