[OutsiderFan]

Is it OK to talk about recruiting on this board on signing day eve and signing day itself?

I know there is not a lot of suspense for Stanford fans, but recruiting is kind of the college football story right now.  Plus, guys are no longer going to be recruits tomorrow.  They will be commits.  I'd like to think there would be some discussion of the Stanford commits on the main board, and also about how Pac-12 and other known future opponents are doing.

I'll start the deviation by asking if anyone thinks Joshua Dobbs will end up signing with Stanford?

[OutsiderFan]

Is it OK to talk about recruiting on this board on signing day eve and signing day itself?

I know there is not a lot of suspense for Stanford fans, but recruiting is kind of the college football story right now.  Plus, guys are no longer going to be recruits tomorrow.  They will be commits.  I'd like to think there would be some discussion of the Stanford commits on the main board, and also about how Pac-12 and other known future opponents are doing.

I'll start the deviation by asking if anyone thinks Joshua Dobbs will end up signing with Stanford?

[StannyBoy]

I think Dobbs signs with Tennessee over ASU. Probably wants to focus on football so I don't see him taking the baseball scholarship from Stanford. USC lost another 5 star today, CB Jalen Ramsey. They also lost a 4 star DE and have 12 in their class. I don't think they will land any of the remaining whales or retain anyone who already dropped them, so I don't see how they can fill up their class.

[StannyBoy]

I think Dobbs signs with Tennessee over ASU. Probably wants to focus on football so I don't see him taking the baseball scholarship from Stanford. USC lost another 5 star today, CB Jalen Ramsey. They also lost a 4 star DE and have 12 in their class. I don't think they will land any of the remaining whales or retain anyone who already dropped them, so I don't see how they can fill up their class.

[StannyBoy]

SC just lost another 4 star, a DE/LB. This is hilarious. :)

[StannyBoy]

SC just lost another 4 star, a DE/LB. This is hilarious. :)

[FarmBoy]

For whatever reason, I'm much less in the loop this year on Stanford FB recruiting. Maybe it's because it's a small class, maybe it's because there don't seem to be many perceived program impacting recruits that we're in the hunt for, or maybe it's because most of my info was sparked through threads on the Cardboard that are no longer in the general discussion so I don't see them. Regardless, I'm not feel the "buzz" that we had last year.

It's too bad that there weren't more spots available in this class on which we could build from the Rose Bowl momentum. That seems like a lost opportunity, to some degree. Hopefully '13 plays out in an even more impressive fashion so the virtuous cycle of success and good recruiting can continue.

[FarmBoy]

For whatever reason, I'm much less in the loop this year on Stanford FB recruiting. Maybe it's because it's a small class, maybe it's because there don't seem to be many perceived program impacting recruits that we're in the hunt for, or maybe it's because most of my info was sparked through threads on the Cardboard that are no longer in the general discussion so I don't see them. Regardless, I'm not feel the "buzz" that we had last year.

It's too bad that there weren't more spots available in this class on which we could build from the Rose Bowl momentum. That seems like a lost opportunity, to some degree. Hopefully '13 plays out in an even more impressive fashion so the virtuous cycle of success and good recruiting can continue.

[washingtonismoney]

It's too bad that there weren't more spots available in this class on which we could build from the Rose Bowl momentum. That seems like a lost opportunity, to some degree. Hopefully '13 plays out in an even more impressive fashion so the virtuous cycle of success and good recruiting can continue.

I don't think that's how the chronology of how seasons build/deflate buzz works, at least for Stanford football. Generally, I think each season affects the recruiting class a year later -- i.e. class of 2014 recruits will be affected by this season's result; barring some sort of epic collapse/success, I doubt the 2013 season will affect them overly much.

Because Stanford recruiting is so path-dependent, it's hard to suddenly pick up recruits because of a momentum shift -- not too many kids are doing the academic work necessary, unless they were already on Stanford's radar. On the other hand, a school with lesser academic standards like Texas A&M or Ole Miss or even UCLA can just start offering/recruiting kids in the middle of a successful season.

[washingtonismoney]

It's too bad that there weren't more spots available in this class on which we could build from the Rose Bowl momentum. That seems like a lost opportunity, to some degree. Hopefully '13 plays out in an even more impressive fashion so the virtuous cycle of success and good recruiting can continue.

I don't think that's how the chronology of how seasons build/deflate buzz works, at least for Stanford football. Generally, I think each season affects the recruiting class a year later -- i.e. class of 2014 recruits will be affected by this season's result; barring some sort of epic collapse/success, I doubt the 2013 season will affect them overly much.

Because Stanford recruiting is so path-dependent, it's hard to suddenly pick up recruits because of a momentum shift -- not too many kids are doing the academic work necessary, unless they were already on Stanford's radar. On the other hand, a school with lesser academic standards like Texas A&M or Ole Miss or even UCLA can just start offering/recruiting kids in the middle of a successful season.

[Bruce Wang]

they were already on Stanford's radar. On the other hand, a school with lesser academic standards like Texas A&M or Ole Miss or even UCLA can just start offering/recruiting kids in the middle of a successful season.

On the other hand, a school with lesser ethical standards like U$C or Ole Miss or even Notre Dame can just start bribing kids in the middle of any season.

[Bruce Wang]

they were already on Stanford's radar. On the other hand, a school with lesser academic standards like Texas A&M or Ole Miss or even UCLA can just start offering/recruiting kids in the middle of a successful season.

On the other hand, a school with lesser ethical standards like U$C or Ole Miss or even Notre Dame can just start bribing kids in the middle of any season.

[FarmBoy]

Fair points, WIM, but if you look at last year, there were several last minute commitment for players who had been considering Stanford and schools like ND, U.SC, and UW. Having a strong year may not add a lot more kids to the recruiting funnel, but I bet it helps seal the deal. And doing it in a year after Andrew Luck may have had a greater confidence boost to any player waffling on the idea of whether Stanford can continue its success long term.

But you're probably right that the strong performance of the '12 team should encourage some players with borderline academics (borderline for Stanford admission that is) to recommit themselves to tougher classes and better grades. This touches on an aspect of our recruiting that I hadn't considered: you gotta think that if a player makes the academic commitment to make themselves eligible, that they're more likely to stay committed. Maybe a psych major can weigh in on that relationship. For most elite players, getting into a good football program involves submitting their game film, meeting with some coaches, and taking a few visits. A couple of days of their lives. But for an elite player who wants to go to Stanford, they may need to spend significant additional effort on classes, hours on homework, stress out on the outcome of non-football performance. You'd think that going through that would make you all the more committed.

[FarmBoy]

Fair points, WIM, but if you look at last year, there were several last minute commitment for players who had been considering Stanford and schools like ND, U.SC, and UW. Having a strong year may not add a lot more kids to the recruiting funnel, but I bet it helps seal the deal. And doing it in a year after Andrew Luck may have had a greater confidence boost to any player waffling on the idea of whether Stanford can continue its success long term.

But you're probably right that the strong performance of the '12 team should encourage some players with borderline academics (borderline for Stanford admission that is) to recommit themselves to tougher classes and better grades. This touches on an aspect of our recruiting that I hadn't considered: you gotta think that if a player makes the academic commitment to make themselves eligible, that they're more likely to stay committed. Maybe a psych major can weigh in on that relationship. For most elite players, getting into a good football program involves submitting their game film, meeting with some coaches, and taking a few visits. A couple of days of their lives. But for an elite player who wants to go to Stanford, they may need to spend significant additional effort on classes, hours on homework, stress out on the outcome of non-football performance. You'd think that going through that would make you all the more committed.

[washingtonismoney]

Fair points, WIM, but if you look at last year, there were several last minute commitment for players who had been considering Stanford and schools like ND, U.SC, and UW. Having a strong year may not add a lot more kids to the recruiting funnel, but I bet it helps seal the deal.

It may (or may not) help seal the deal, but the main thing is filling the funnel in the first place. For example, was the close really so bad (in the seal-the-deal sense) this year? Leaving aside academic casualties, it looks like we went 50/50 on late commits (Oser and Hooper to good guys; Smythe and Allen to not-so-good guys).

The problem with this class wasn't that we closed poorly, it was that we didn't have enough prospects in the pipeline in the first place.

[washingtonismoney]

Fair points, WIM, but if you look at last year, there were several last minute commitment for players who had been considering Stanford and schools like ND, U.SC, and UW. Having a strong year may not add a lot more kids to the recruiting funnel, but I bet it helps seal the deal.

It may (or may not) help seal the deal, but the main thing is filling the funnel in the first place. For example, was the close really so bad (in the seal-the-deal sense) this year? Leaving aside academic casualties, it looks like we went 50/50 on late commits (Oser and Hooper to good guys; Smythe and Allen to not-so-good guys).

The problem with this class wasn't that we closed poorly, it was that we didn't have enough prospects in the pipeline in the first place.

[admin]

It turns out that the software did have an elegant way to move messages. It just wasn't where I expected it  to be. Post away.

[admin]

It turns out that the software did have an elegant way to move messages. It just wasn't where I expected it  to be. Post away.

[admin]

It turns out that the software did have an elegant way to move messages. It just wasn't where I expected it  to be. Post away.

[admin]

It turns out that the software did have an elegant way to move messages. It just wasn't where I expected it  to be. Post away.

[admin]

It turns out that the software did have an elegant way to move messages. It just wasn't where I expected it  to be. Post away.

[admin]

It turns out that the software did have an elegant way to move messages. It just wasn't where I expected it  to be. Post away.