03-17-2021, 07:49 PM
Why give 26 offers out when one will suffice?
![[Image: 56639f8552ebacfda13ad68d825106cf--gramma...uation.jpg]](https://i.pinimg.com/474x/56/63/9f/56639f8552ebacfda13ad68d825106cf--grammar-humor-grammar-and-punctuation.jpg)
BC
BC
Football Recruiting Class of 2022
03-22-2021, 08:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-22-2021, 10:43 PM by BostonCard.)
ILB target Langston Patterson committed to Vanderbilt today.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
(This post was last modified: 03-22-2021, 10:43 PM by BostonCard.)
ILB target Langston Patterson committed to Vanderbilt today.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
03-23-2021, 04:44 AM
(03-18-2021, 09:42 AM)CTcard Wrote:(03-17-2021, 07:49 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Why give 26 offers out when one will suffice?
BC
Beat me to it, though I was going to note it must be a sign that we REALLY want this guy. Maybe the plan is to offer him every day for six months.
I'm waiting for some recruit to say "I just got my 26th offer from the University of Stanford".
That would really light up the board.
(03-18-2021, 09:42 AM)CTcard Wrote:(03-17-2021, 07:49 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Why give 26 offers out when one will suffice?
BC
Beat me to it, though I was going to note it must be a sign that we REALLY want this guy. Maybe the plan is to offer him every day for six months.
I'm waiting for some recruit to say "I just got my 26th offer from the University of Stanford".
That would really light up the board.
03-23-2021, 10:18 AM
(03-22-2021, 08:06 PM)VB Card Wrote: ILB target Langston Patterson committed to Vanderbilt today.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
Patterson is from Nashville. Tough to beat the home town school.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(03-22-2021, 08:06 PM)VB Card Wrote: ILB target Langston Patterson committed to Vanderbilt today.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
Patterson is from Nashville. Tough to beat the home town school.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
03-26-2021, 12:24 PM
(03-23-2021, 10:18 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(03-22-2021, 08:06 PM)VB Card Wrote: ILB target Langston Patterson committed to Vanderbilt today.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
Patterson is from Nashville. Tough to beat the home town school.
Not just that. They are in a total rebuild with a brand-new coach (former DC at Notre Dame), and their top LBs are transferring. He could very easily start there from day 1.
(03-23-2021, 10:18 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(03-22-2021, 08:06 PM)VB Card Wrote: ILB target Langston Patterson committed to Vanderbilt today.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/Langston_patt/status/1374043047302955010?s=20[/tweet]
Patterson is from Nashville. Tough to beat the home town school.
Not just that. They are in a total rebuild with a brand-new coach (former DC at Notre Dame), and their top LBs are transferring. He could very easily start there from day 1.
03-26-2021, 01:30 PM
Don’t know if you’ve looked at our depth chart recently, but he could be starting for us from day 1 too.
BC
BC
Don’t know if you’ve looked at our depth chart recently, but he could be starting for us from day 1 too.
BC
BC
(03-26-2021, 01:30 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Don’t know if you’ve looked at our depth chart recently, but he could be starting for us from day 1 too.
BC
The difference is none of the guys on Vandy's roster were recruited by the new HC, and may not fit his system. Not arguing with you that ILB isn't a major position of need.
Patterson's "day 1" will be Levani Damuni and Tristan Sinclair starting as seniors, by the way. (And that's if both JMF and Miezan move on with eligibility left.)
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2021, 02:19 PM by SamuelMcF.)
(03-26-2021, 01:30 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Don’t know if you’ve looked at our depth chart recently, but he could be starting for us from day 1 too.
BC
The difference is none of the guys on Vandy's roster were recruited by the new HC, and may not fit his system. Not arguing with you that ILB isn't a major position of need.
Patterson's "day 1" will be Levani Damuni and Tristan Sinclair starting as seniors, by the way. (And that's if both JMF and Miezan move on with eligibility left.)
03-26-2021, 04:13 PM
(03-26-2021, 03:28 PM)CTcard Wrote:(03-26-2021, 02:17 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: . (And that's if both JMF and Miezan move on with eligibility left.)
Has there been any indication of that?
They are both listed on the spring roster, and both would only be true seniors next season.
Patterson, though, is in the class of 2022, so he would be a true freshman when JMF and Miezan would be fifth year seniors, if they stayed. Bottom line is that in the two classes ahead of Patterson, we've signed exactly two recruited linebackers total.
BC
(03-26-2021, 03:28 PM)CTcard Wrote:(03-26-2021, 02:17 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: . (And that's if both JMF and Miezan move on with eligibility left.)
Has there been any indication of that?
They are both listed on the spring roster, and both would only be true seniors next season.
Patterson, though, is in the class of 2022, so he would be a true freshman when JMF and Miezan would be fifth year seniors, if they stayed. Bottom line is that in the two classes ahead of Patterson, we've signed exactly two recruited linebackers total.
BC
03-26-2021, 04:37 PM
Everybody is counting on Miezan and JMF. If they get out of the first game healthy it will be a miracle.
03-26-2021, 08:05 PM
[tweet]https://twitter.com/JusticeFinkley/status/1375598486238986240?s=20[/tweet]
Stiff competition.
BC
Stiff competition.
BC
[tweet]https://twitter.com/JusticeFinkley/status/1375598486238986240?s=20[/tweet]
Stiff competition.
BC
Stiff competition.
BC
03-27-2021, 10:25 AM
Is Stanford going back to "having its hat on the table" so the recruit can make everyone think he's smart, when the reality is Stanford isn't a serious option for the recruit by Stanford's choice or his own?
The feeling I get is Stanford Football recruiting has really fallen off a cliff. Is this true, or just a perception I have that isn't based on anything but pure speculation?
The feeling I get is Stanford Football recruiting has really fallen off a cliff. Is this true, or just a perception I have that isn't based on anything but pure speculation?
Is Stanford going back to "having its hat on the table" so the recruit can make everyone think he's smart, when the reality is Stanford isn't a serious option for the recruit by Stanford's choice or his own?
The feeling I get is Stanford Football recruiting has really fallen off a cliff. Is this true, or just a perception I have that isn't based on anything but pure speculation?
The feeling I get is Stanford Football recruiting has really fallen off a cliff. Is this true, or just a perception I have that isn't based on anything but pure speculation?
(03-27-2021, 10:25 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Is Stanford going back to "having its hat on the table" so the recruit can make everyone think he's smart, when the reality is Stanford isn't a serious option for the recruit by Stanford's choice or his own?
The feeling I get is Stanford Football recruiting has really fallen off a cliff. Is this true, or just a perception I have that isn't based on anything but pure speculation?
I believe you're basing this on '21, which was indeed awful. Covid totally nullified the staff's main weapon in recruiting, the campus visit. (Contrary to what you may think, it generally works.) We saw a bunch of admitted recruits committing to hometown schools because they couldn't officially visit anywhere else, and could generally pop over to the local campus multiple times. With Kane Patterson we're seeing it again. Helps that Vandy is very good academically.
Staff responded to this new situation in '22 by firing off offers at a (relatively, of course) breakneck pace and speaking to recruits earlier and more, but it's still way harder to get kids to come to campus and walk around by themselves/with family due to NCAA restrictions. The fact that Gavin Sawchuk just did so is pretty cool.
Oh, and it doesn't help that the on-field product isn't what it was.
Also, Finkley is a realistic possibility. Not just a hat on the table.
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2021, 12:32 PM by SamuelMcF.)
(03-27-2021, 10:25 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Is Stanford going back to "having its hat on the table" so the recruit can make everyone think he's smart, when the reality is Stanford isn't a serious option for the recruit by Stanford's choice or his own?
The feeling I get is Stanford Football recruiting has really fallen off a cliff. Is this true, or just a perception I have that isn't based on anything but pure speculation?
I believe you're basing this on '21, which was indeed awful. Covid totally nullified the staff's main weapon in recruiting, the campus visit. (Contrary to what you may think, it generally works.) We saw a bunch of admitted recruits committing to hometown schools because they couldn't officially visit anywhere else, and could generally pop over to the local campus multiple times. With Kane Patterson we're seeing it again. Helps that Vandy is very good academically.
Staff responded to this new situation in '22 by firing off offers at a (relatively, of course) breakneck pace and speaking to recruits earlier and more, but it's still way harder to get kids to come to campus and walk around by themselves/with family due to NCAA restrictions. The fact that Gavin Sawchuk just did so is pretty cool.
Oh, and it doesn't help that the on-field product isn't what it was.
Also, Finkley is a realistic possibility. Not just a hat on the table.
03-27-2021, 03:35 PM
Agree with Samuel. The class of 2021 was a cluster, and we cannot afford to continue like that. Thankfully, it appears that the staff has (belatedly) reacted, and things should be better next year, and I expect will improve substantially in a couple years when the effects of COVID-19 dissipate. I agree that some of the effects were unavoidable; Stanford recruits nationally and a pandemic which makes travel more difficult and gives more salience to the benefits of staying close to home is going to disproportionately disadvantage us. On the other hand, I've noticed that the staff is generally not as nimble in responding to changing recruiting landscape than others. This is not the first time that this staff has been caught flat-footed (for example, we were slow to respond to changes as a result of the early signing period). So, if past is prologue, I expect that we will suffer for a couple years, adapt, and then get back to pretty god recruiting (both the classes of 2020 and 2019 were ranked #3 in the Pac-12, and I think top-quartile or top-tertile is what we are capable of), until there is some new change in the recruiting landscape, to which the staff will be slow to react, and so we will see a couple of below average classes (2021 was ranked #7 in the Pac-12, as was 2018).
BC
BC
Agree with Samuel. The class of 2021 was a cluster, and we cannot afford to continue like that. Thankfully, it appears that the staff has (belatedly) reacted, and things should be better next year, and I expect will improve substantially in a couple years when the effects of COVID-19 dissipate. I agree that some of the effects were unavoidable; Stanford recruits nationally and a pandemic which makes travel more difficult and gives more salience to the benefits of staying close to home is going to disproportionately disadvantage us. On the other hand, I've noticed that the staff is generally not as nimble in responding to changing recruiting landscape than others. This is not the first time that this staff has been caught flat-footed (for example, we were slow to respond to changes as a result of the early signing period). So, if past is prologue, I expect that we will suffer for a couple years, adapt, and then get back to pretty god recruiting (both the classes of 2020 and 2019 were ranked #3 in the Pac-12, and I think top-quartile or top-tertile is what we are capable of), until there is some new change in the recruiting landscape, to which the staff will be slow to react, and so we will see a couple of below average classes (2021 was ranked #7 in the Pac-12, as was 2018).
BC
BC
03-27-2021, 03:52 PM
(03-27-2021, 03:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Agree with Samuel. The class of 2021 was a cluster, and we cannot afford to continue like that. Thankfully, it appears that the staff has (belatedly) reacted, and things should be better next year, and I expect will improve substantially in a couple years when the effects of COVID-19 dissipate. I agree that some of the effects were unavoidable; Stanford recruits nationally and a pandemic which makes travel more difficult and gives more salience to the benefits of staying close to home is going to disproportionately disadvantage us. On the other hand, I've noticed that the staff is generally not as nimble in responding to changing recruiting landscape than others. This is not the first time that this staff has been caught flat-footed (for example, we were slow to respond to changes as a result of the early signing period). So, if past is prologue, I expect that we will suffer for a couple years, adapt, and then get back to pretty god recruiting (both the classes of 2020 and 2019 were ranked #3 in the Pac-12, and I think top-quartile or top-tertile is what we are capable of), until there is some new change in the recruiting landscape, to which the staff will be slow to react, and so we will see a couple of below average classes (2021 was ranked #7 in the Pac-12, as was 2018).While I agree the staff has been slow to react, I wonder to what degree that is determined by not recognizing the change as opposed to recognizing the change but being slow to develop a new plan. The latter may be caused by constraints on what the program is allowed to do. Early admits are an example. I am pretty sure that if they wanted to do them it would take time to get permission, as it probably did.
BC
(03-27-2021, 03:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Agree with Samuel. The class of 2021 was a cluster, and we cannot afford to continue like that. Thankfully, it appears that the staff has (belatedly) reacted, and things should be better next year, and I expect will improve substantially in a couple years when the effects of COVID-19 dissipate. I agree that some of the effects were unavoidable; Stanford recruits nationally and a pandemic which makes travel more difficult and gives more salience to the benefits of staying close to home is going to disproportionately disadvantage us. On the other hand, I've noticed that the staff is generally not as nimble in responding to changing recruiting landscape than others. This is not the first time that this staff has been caught flat-footed (for example, we were slow to respond to changes as a result of the early signing period). So, if past is prologue, I expect that we will suffer for a couple years, adapt, and then get back to pretty god recruiting (both the classes of 2020 and 2019 were ranked #3 in the Pac-12, and I think top-quartile or top-tertile is what we are capable of), until there is some new change in the recruiting landscape, to which the staff will be slow to react, and so we will see a couple of below average classes (2021 was ranked #7 in the Pac-12, as was 2018).While I agree the staff has been slow to react, I wonder to what degree that is determined by not recognizing the change as opposed to recognizing the change but being slow to develop a new plan. The latter may be caused by constraints on what the program is allowed to do. Early admits are an example. I am pretty sure that if they wanted to do them it would take time to get permission, as it probably did.
BC
03-28-2021, 05:50 PM
[tweet]https://twitter.com/GrantBingham2/status/1376294220198248450?s=20[/tweet]
Note, he put his top 8 out last month. Would we muscle in? Or is this a case of too little too late.
BC
Note, he put his top 8 out last month. Would we muscle in? Or is this a case of too little too late.
BC
[tweet]https://twitter.com/GrantBingham2/status/1376294220198248450?s=20[/tweet]
Note, he put his top 8 out last month. Would we muscle in? Or is this a case of too little too late.
BC
Note, he put his top 8 out last month. Would we muscle in? Or is this a case of too little too late.
BC
04-01-2021, 11:07 AM
[tweet]https://twitter.com/FisherA_/status/1377031342458871810[/tweet]
Makes sense why another OL offer came out quickly. Same HS as PWO OL Jason Amsler and reports a 4.5 GPA.
Makes sense why another OL offer came out quickly. Same HS as PWO OL Jason Amsler and reports a 4.5 GPA.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »