02-05-2014, 07:45 PM
Shaw and company sitting around the office all day with the drama done by 9am. Guess they decided to pass the time by loading up on next year's guys.
Class of 2015
02-06-2014, 01:23 AM
(02-05-2014, 07:45 PM)rudruff link Wrote:Shaw and company sitting around the office all day with the drama done by 9am. Guess they decided to pass the time by loading up on next year's guys.
In his press conference, Shaw was asked to comment on the other Pac 12 classes. He said he had "no idea" because he and the staff had been watching film all day. Love it! Good time to strike while the iron is hot.Â
(02-05-2014, 07:45 PM)rudruff link Wrote:Shaw and company sitting around the office all day with the drama done by 9am. Guess they decided to pass the time by loading up on next year's guys.
In his press conference, Shaw was asked to comment on the other Pac 12 classes. He said he had "no idea" because he and the staff had been watching film all day. Love it! Good time to strike while the iron is hot.Â
02-06-2014, 10:22 AM
The recent Stanford players have given the program some pure marketing gold: the Nerd Glasses, the phrase Party In The Backfield, even Skov's trademark Mohawk and eyeblack, while more individual, are instantly recognizable and linked to Stanford football, outside of just the realm of Stanford fandom. The Nerd Glasses were all over yesterday, particularly in Texas, with the entire Brandon Simmons clan donning them, and Solomon Thomas, the kick-off recruit on ESPNU, playfully working into his announcement both the quirky Tree mascot and the glasses. Combine these with the success of Andrew Luck, Zach Ertz, Coby Fleener, and above all Richard Sherman and Doug Baldwin, PLUS David Shaw appearing all over the Super Bowl, and you have to ask: has there ever been a better single moment in the history of Stanford at which to approach a recruit? Stanford's "cool" factor has to be off the charts for a lot of recruits. A program that can simultaneously produce an edgy, brash CB who is the best in the NFL, and can make your parents positively glow with pride, as was the case with Thomas's parents yesterday. If Shaw and his coaches had not been on the phones making offers, they would have been guilty of missing a golden opportunity.
There is no telling exactly how long all this will last. Stanford doesn't have the long history of dominance of a true Football Factory like Alabama or USC. Those program can go through a slump and always point to their past and get recruit's attention. And we don't have the bizarre mystique of Notre Dame. I think Stanford's success, so completely different in some ways for our PAC-12 rival to the north, is a bit similar to the rise of University of Oregon. We attract very different types of players, play polar opposite styles of football, and our program is squeaky clean while U of O seems to suffer constant run-ins with authorities, whether the NCAA or local law enforcement. But we are both programs that have had intermittent success in the past, but that have risen relatively recently and forced our way into the college football elite. It may seem odd to think of Stanford, a University that exists in the public imagination as one of the truly elitist institutions in the country, as an "outsider." But college football makes up its own little universe, and in THAT world, both Stanford and Oregon are clear outsiders, "New Money" folks who are making their way into the "Old Money" neighborhood, where all the cherry property is owned by the folks whose families seemed to have been there forever: Texas, Florida, Notre Dame, USC...the usual suspects. Residents of that neighborhood, rife with their internal rivalries, may love it when we best one of their neighbors, but collectively, that group would love nothing better than to oust all the interlopers, and get back to the golden days.
The coaches understand these dynamics, and just stole a march on the recruiting trail.
There is no telling exactly how long all this will last. Stanford doesn't have the long history of dominance of a true Football Factory like Alabama or USC. Those program can go through a slump and always point to their past and get recruit's attention. And we don't have the bizarre mystique of Notre Dame. I think Stanford's success, so completely different in some ways for our PAC-12 rival to the north, is a bit similar to the rise of University of Oregon. We attract very different types of players, play polar opposite styles of football, and our program is squeaky clean while U of O seems to suffer constant run-ins with authorities, whether the NCAA or local law enforcement. But we are both programs that have had intermittent success in the past, but that have risen relatively recently and forced our way into the college football elite. It may seem odd to think of Stanford, a University that exists in the public imagination as one of the truly elitist institutions in the country, as an "outsider." But college football makes up its own little universe, and in THAT world, both Stanford and Oregon are clear outsiders, "New Money" folks who are making their way into the "Old Money" neighborhood, where all the cherry property is owned by the folks whose families seemed to have been there forever: Texas, Florida, Notre Dame, USC...the usual suspects. Residents of that neighborhood, rife with their internal rivalries, may love it when we best one of their neighbors, but collectively, that group would love nothing better than to oust all the interlopers, and get back to the golden days.
The coaches understand these dynamics, and just stole a march on the recruiting trail.
The recent Stanford players have given the program some pure marketing gold: the Nerd Glasses, the phrase Party In The Backfield, even Skov's trademark Mohawk and eyeblack, while more individual, are instantly recognizable and linked to Stanford football, outside of just the realm of Stanford fandom. The Nerd Glasses were all over yesterday, particularly in Texas, with the entire Brandon Simmons clan donning them, and Solomon Thomas, the kick-off recruit on ESPNU, playfully working into his announcement both the quirky Tree mascot and the glasses. Combine these with the success of Andrew Luck, Zach Ertz, Coby Fleener, and above all Richard Sherman and Doug Baldwin, PLUS David Shaw appearing all over the Super Bowl, and you have to ask: has there ever been a better single moment in the history of Stanford at which to approach a recruit? Stanford's "cool" factor has to be off the charts for a lot of recruits. A program that can simultaneously produce an edgy, brash CB who is the best in the NFL, and can make your parents positively glow with pride, as was the case with Thomas's parents yesterday. If Shaw and his coaches had not been on the phones making offers, they would have been guilty of missing a golden opportunity.
There is no telling exactly how long all this will last. Stanford doesn't have the long history of dominance of a true Football Factory like Alabama or USC. Those program can go through a slump and always point to their past and get recruit's attention. And we don't have the bizarre mystique of Notre Dame. I think Stanford's success, so completely different in some ways for our PAC-12 rival to the north, is a bit similar to the rise of University of Oregon. We attract very different types of players, play polar opposite styles of football, and our program is squeaky clean while U of O seems to suffer constant run-ins with authorities, whether the NCAA or local law enforcement. But we are both programs that have had intermittent success in the past, but that have risen relatively recently and forced our way into the college football elite. It may seem odd to think of Stanford, a University that exists in the public imagination as one of the truly elitist institutions in the country, as an "outsider." But college football makes up its own little universe, and in THAT world, both Stanford and Oregon are clear outsiders, "New Money" folks who are making their way into the "Old Money" neighborhood, where all the cherry property is owned by the folks whose families seemed to have been there forever: Texas, Florida, Notre Dame, USC...the usual suspects. Residents of that neighborhood, rife with their internal rivalries, may love it when we best one of their neighbors, but collectively, that group would love nothing better than to oust all the interlopers, and get back to the golden days.
The coaches understand these dynamics, and just stole a march on the recruiting trail.
There is no telling exactly how long all this will last. Stanford doesn't have the long history of dominance of a true Football Factory like Alabama or USC. Those program can go through a slump and always point to their past and get recruit's attention. And we don't have the bizarre mystique of Notre Dame. I think Stanford's success, so completely different in some ways for our PAC-12 rival to the north, is a bit similar to the rise of University of Oregon. We attract very different types of players, play polar opposite styles of football, and our program is squeaky clean while U of O seems to suffer constant run-ins with authorities, whether the NCAA or local law enforcement. But we are both programs that have had intermittent success in the past, but that have risen relatively recently and forced our way into the college football elite. It may seem odd to think of Stanford, a University that exists in the public imagination as one of the truly elitist institutions in the country, as an "outsider." But college football makes up its own little universe, and in THAT world, both Stanford and Oregon are clear outsiders, "New Money" folks who are making their way into the "Old Money" neighborhood, where all the cherry property is owned by the folks whose families seemed to have been there forever: Texas, Florida, Notre Dame, USC...the usual suspects. Residents of that neighborhood, rife with their internal rivalries, may love it when we best one of their neighbors, but collectively, that group would love nothing better than to oust all the interlopers, and get back to the golden days.
The coaches understand these dynamics, and just stole a march on the recruiting trail.
02-06-2014, 10:39 AM
(02-06-2014, 10:22 AM)socalstanfan1 link Wrote:The recent Stanford players have given the program some pure marketing gold: the Nerd Glasses, the phrase Party In The Backfield, even Skov's trademark Mohawk and eyeblack, while more individual, are instantly recognizable and linked to Stanford football, outside of just the realm of Stanford fandom. The Nerd Glasses were all over yesterday, particularly in Texas, with the entire Brandon Simmons clan donning them, and Solomon Thomas, the kick-off recruit on ESPNU, playfully working into his announcement both the quirky Tree mascot and the glasses. Combine these with the success of Andrew Luck, Zach Ertz, Coby Fleener, and above all Richard Sherman and Doug Baldwin, PLUS David Shaw appearing all over the Super Bowl, and you have to ask: has there ever been a better single moment in the history of Stanford at which to approach a recruit? Stanford's "cool" factor has to be off the charts for a lot of recruits. A program that can simultaneously produce an edgy, brash CB who is the best in the NFL, and can make your parents positively glow with pride, as was the case with Thomas's parents yesterday. If Shaw and his coaches had not been on the phones making offers, they would have been guilty of missing a golden opportunity.
![[Image: 1510892_694432583911482_1556304358_n.jpg]](https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1/1510892_694432583911482_1556304358_n.jpg)
(02-06-2014, 10:22 AM)socalstanfan1 link Wrote:The recent Stanford players have given the program some pure marketing gold: the Nerd Glasses, the phrase Party In The Backfield, even Skov's trademark Mohawk and eyeblack, while more individual, are instantly recognizable and linked to Stanford football, outside of just the realm of Stanford fandom. The Nerd Glasses were all over yesterday, particularly in Texas, with the entire Brandon Simmons clan donning them, and Solomon Thomas, the kick-off recruit on ESPNU, playfully working into his announcement both the quirky Tree mascot and the glasses. Combine these with the success of Andrew Luck, Zach Ertz, Coby Fleener, and above all Richard Sherman and Doug Baldwin, PLUS David Shaw appearing all over the Super Bowl, and you have to ask: has there ever been a better single moment in the history of Stanford at which to approach a recruit? Stanford's "cool" factor has to be off the charts for a lot of recruits. A program that can simultaneously produce an edgy, brash CB who is the best in the NFL, and can make your parents positively glow with pride, as was the case with Thomas's parents yesterday. If Shaw and his coaches had not been on the phones making offers, they would have been guilty of missing a golden opportunity.
02-06-2014, 11:16 AM
IF (emphasis) Stanford ever considered changing its nickname again, like when it changed from "Indians" to "Cardinal," "Angry Nerds" would be a great one, IMO, for multiple reasons.
IF (emphasis) Stanford ever considered changing its nickname again, like when it changed from "Indians" to "Cardinal," "Angry Nerds" would be a great one, IMO, for multiple reasons.
02-06-2014, 03:05 PM
Stanford is "Old Money" football. Two of the founders of football coached here. We were "Old Money", lost the money, and have earned it back so are now "New Money". So we have the class of "Old Money" and the accomplishment of "New Money".
Stanford is "Old Money" football. Two of the founders of football coached here. We were "Old Money", lost the money, and have earned it back so are now "New Money". So we have the class of "Old Money" and the accomplishment of "New Money".
02-06-2014, 03:14 PM
(02-06-2014, 03:05 PM)Publius link Wrote:Stanford is "Old Money" football. Two of the founders of football coached here. We were "Old Money", lost the money, and have earned it back so are now "New Money". So we have the class of "Old Money" and the accomplishment of "New Money".
Stanford is historically "genteel poor," to use the hairsplitting of previous unequal ages.
(02-06-2014, 03:05 PM)Publius link Wrote:Stanford is "Old Money" football. Two of the founders of football coached here. We were "Old Money", lost the money, and have earned it back so are now "New Money". So we have the class of "Old Money" and the accomplishment of "New Money".
Stanford is historically "genteel poor," to use the hairsplitting of previous unequal ages.
02-06-2014, 04:33 PM
247's reporting an offer to Oregon RB/ATH Cameron Scarlett: https://twitter.com/JHopkins247/status/4...6283447297
247's reporting an offer to Oregon RB/ATH Cameron Scarlett: https://twitter.com/JHopkins247/status/4...6283447297
02-07-2014, 11:50 AM
5* DT, and #1 Texas player Daylon Mack gets an offer. 6'2" 310 lbs - sounds like a potential solution to the need for a nose tackle. Currently committed to aTm. Bet the 12th Man is nervous about his commitment now.
http://247sports.com/Player/Daylon-Mack-22227
Man, Shaw and team are fast out the gates for this class.
http://247sports.com/Player/Daylon-Mack-22227
Man, Shaw and team are fast out the gates for this class.
5* DT, and #1 Texas player Daylon Mack gets an offer. 6'2" 310 lbs - sounds like a potential solution to the need for a nose tackle. Currently committed to aTm. Bet the 12th Man is nervous about his commitment now.
http://247sports.com/Player/Daylon-Mack-22227
Man, Shaw and team are fast out the gates for this class.
http://247sports.com/Player/Daylon-Mack-22227
Man, Shaw and team are fast out the gates for this class.
02-07-2014, 01:21 PM
(02-06-2014, 03:05 PM)Publius link Wrote:Stanford is "Old Money" football. Two of the founders of football coached here. We were "Old Money", lost the money, and have earned it back so are now "New Money". So we have the class of "Old Money" and the accomplishment of "New Money".
Six of Stanford's coaches are in the College Hall of Fame, including Walter Camp (Father of Football), Glenn "Pop" Warner after whom the little league of football is named, Clark Shaughnessy (inventor of the T Formation), Andy Kerr, John Ralston and Fielding "Hurry-Up" Yost. By way of comparison, USC and UCLA each have had three coaches in the CFHoF. Cal has had four, and Notre Dame, six. 'Bama and Oklahoma had five each.
Yost was an interesting case. Yost coached for Michigan for about 45 years, but he coached at Stanford and San Jose State for one year, 1900. Yost would have been at home at football factories, he claimed that he attended Lafayette "only to play football." Yost invented the position of linebacker, and co-created the first ever Bowl game, the Rose Bowl between his new team (Michigan) and his old team (Stanford). His Michigan team went 56 games without a loss, finally losing to Amos Alonzo Stagg's University of Chicago. Yost was the first to claim "Football builds character," and his nickname "Hurry-Up" was related to the admonition he would give his special teams coverage units, "Hurry up and be the first down the field to cover the ball carrier." Yost was 7-2-1 in his only season at Stanford. He was a devout Christian who was the first coach to allow Jewish players on his team, but couldn't stand Notre Dame and Knute Rockne -- not because ND was Catholic, but because it was independent, allowed freshmen to play (giving them an extra year of experience) and that Rockne cut corners in recruiting -- in short, he thought ND was a football factory and pressured other schools in his conference to stop playing ND. He also didn't like Rockne's offensive innovation.
For his part, Rockne thought Yost was a hillbilly (Yost was from West Virginia and pronounced Michigan MEE she gan) who played boring, Neanderthal football and was a recruiting hypocrite.Â
Here's the story:
http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-rivalries
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(02-06-2014, 03:05 PM)Publius link Wrote:Stanford is "Old Money" football. Two of the founders of football coached here. We were "Old Money", lost the money, and have earned it back so are now "New Money". So we have the class of "Old Money" and the accomplishment of "New Money".
Six of Stanford's coaches are in the College Hall of Fame, including Walter Camp (Father of Football), Glenn "Pop" Warner after whom the little league of football is named, Clark Shaughnessy (inventor of the T Formation), Andy Kerr, John Ralston and Fielding "Hurry-Up" Yost. By way of comparison, USC and UCLA each have had three coaches in the CFHoF. Cal has had four, and Notre Dame, six. 'Bama and Oklahoma had five each.
Yost was an interesting case. Yost coached for Michigan for about 45 years, but he coached at Stanford and San Jose State for one year, 1900. Yost would have been at home at football factories, he claimed that he attended Lafayette "only to play football." Yost invented the position of linebacker, and co-created the first ever Bowl game, the Rose Bowl between his new team (Michigan) and his old team (Stanford). His Michigan team went 56 games without a loss, finally losing to Amos Alonzo Stagg's University of Chicago. Yost was the first to claim "Football builds character," and his nickname "Hurry-Up" was related to the admonition he would give his special teams coverage units, "Hurry up and be the first down the field to cover the ball carrier." Yost was 7-2-1 in his only season at Stanford. He was a devout Christian who was the first coach to allow Jewish players on his team, but couldn't stand Notre Dame and Knute Rockne -- not because ND was Catholic, but because it was independent, allowed freshmen to play (giving them an extra year of experience) and that Rockne cut corners in recruiting -- in short, he thought ND was a football factory and pressured other schools in his conference to stop playing ND. He also didn't like Rockne's offensive innovation.
For his part, Rockne thought Yost was a hillbilly (Yost was from West Virginia and pronounced Michigan MEE she gan) who played boring, Neanderthal football and was a recruiting hypocrite.Â
Here's the story:
http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-rivalries
Audaces fortuna iuvat
02-07-2014, 01:45 PM
(02-07-2014, 01:21 PM)Mick link Wrote:Six of Stanford's coaches are in the College Hall of Fame, including Walter Camp (Father of Football), Glenn "Pop" Warner after whom the little league of football is named, Clark Shaughnessy (inventor of the T Formation), Andy Kerr, John Ralston and Fielding "Hurry-Up" Yost.
Bill Walsh isn't in the College Hall of Fame? Will somebody fix this, please?
"I have nothing to say and I am saying it."
--- John Cage
(02-07-2014, 01:21 PM)Mick link Wrote:Six of Stanford's coaches are in the College Hall of Fame, including Walter Camp (Father of Football), Glenn "Pop" Warner after whom the little league of football is named, Clark Shaughnessy (inventor of the T Formation), Andy Kerr, John Ralston and Fielding "Hurry-Up" Yost.
Bill Walsh isn't in the College Hall of Fame? Will somebody fix this, please?
"I have nothing to say and I am saying it."
--- John Cage
(02-07-2014, 01:45 PM)Robbie link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=7902.msg83469#msg83469 date=1391804500]
Six of Stanford's coaches are in the College Hall of Fame, including Walter Camp (Father of Football), Glenn "Pop" Warner after whom the little league of football is named, Clark Shaughnessy (inventor of the T Formation), Andy Kerr, John Ralston and Fielding "Hurry-Up" Yost.
Bill Walsh isn't in the College Hall of Fame? Will somebody fix this, please?
[/quote]
He was 34-24-1 at Stanford with three minor bowls. His highest national ranking was #8, closing his first season back at #9. He had three winning seasons and two losing seasons. He was coach of the year for the league just one of those five years. So I'm not sure that qualifies for the College Football Hall of Fame.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(02-07-2014, 01:45 PM)Robbie link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=7902.msg83469#msg83469 date=1391804500]
Six of Stanford's coaches are in the College Hall of Fame, including Walter Camp (Father of Football), Glenn "Pop" Warner after whom the little league of football is named, Clark Shaughnessy (inventor of the T Formation), Andy Kerr, John Ralston and Fielding "Hurry-Up" Yost.
Bill Walsh isn't in the College Hall of Fame? Will somebody fix this, please?
[/quote]
He was 34-24-1 at Stanford with three minor bowls. His highest national ranking was #8, closing his first season back at #9. He had three winning seasons and two losing seasons. He was coach of the year for the league just one of those five years. So I'm not sure that qualifies for the College Football Hall of Fame.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
02-08-2014, 04:55 AM
Well, Bill Walsh is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and his Stanford connections are well-established. So too are Jim Harbaugh's and he isn't in either the pro football or college HOF. Nevertheless, it seems safe to say Stanford football's brand is still strengthened by their ties to Stanford.
Well, Bill Walsh is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and his Stanford connections are well-established. So too are Jim Harbaugh's and he isn't in either the pro football or college HOF. Nevertheless, it seems safe to say Stanford football's brand is still strengthened by their ties to Stanford.
02-08-2014, 10:59 AM
Bill Walsh deserves to be in the Stanford Hall of Fame, the Bay Area HOF, and the Pro Football HOF, but not the College Football Hall of Fame.
Although Walsh brought Stanford its first non-Rose Bowl victories, returned Stanford to winning after a downhill slide, brought innovative ideas to coaching that were later acknowledged in an NFL coaching job, produced a coaching tree throughout college and the NFL, advised Stanford in choosing a successful athletic director who positively influenced both football and Olympic sports, his influence on the college football scene overall was not that great. What he did for pro football and the 49ers goes without saying.
Although Walsh brought Stanford its first non-Rose Bowl victories, returned Stanford to winning after a downhill slide, brought innovative ideas to coaching that were later acknowledged in an NFL coaching job, produced a coaching tree throughout college and the NFL, advised Stanford in choosing a successful athletic director who positively influenced both football and Olympic sports, his influence on the college football scene overall was not that great. What he did for pro football and the 49ers goes without saying.
Bill Walsh deserves to be in the Stanford Hall of Fame, the Bay Area HOF, and the Pro Football HOF, but not the College Football Hall of Fame.
Although Walsh brought Stanford its first non-Rose Bowl victories, returned Stanford to winning after a downhill slide, brought innovative ideas to coaching that were later acknowledged in an NFL coaching job, produced a coaching tree throughout college and the NFL, advised Stanford in choosing a successful athletic director who positively influenced both football and Olympic sports, his influence on the college football scene overall was not that great. What he did for pro football and the 49ers goes without saying.
Although Walsh brought Stanford its first non-Rose Bowl victories, returned Stanford to winning after a downhill slide, brought innovative ideas to coaching that were later acknowledged in an NFL coaching job, produced a coaching tree throughout college and the NFL, advised Stanford in choosing a successful athletic director who positively influenced both football and Olympic sports, his influence on the college football scene overall was not that great. What he did for pro football and the 49ers goes without saying.
02-10-2014, 07:40 AM
http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2014/2/...recruiting
Salient points:
4.3 40
4.8 GPA - always love a GPA higher than a 40 time
Wants to play in a spread offense (uh-oh? - then again with the speed and athleticism we're getting I'd like to see us introduce spread concepts into the offense)
Listed Stanford first (I'm gonna go ahead and read too much into that)
Salient points:
4.3 40
4.8 GPA - always love a GPA higher than a 40 time
Wants to play in a spread offense (uh-oh? - then again with the speed and athleticism we're getting I'd like to see us introduce spread concepts into the offense)
Listed Stanford first (I'm gonna go ahead and read too much into that)
http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2014/2/...recruiting
Salient points:
4.3 40
4.8 GPA - always love a GPA higher than a 40 time
Wants to play in a spread offense (uh-oh? - then again with the speed and athleticism we're getting I'd like to see us introduce spread concepts into the offense)
Listed Stanford first (I'm gonna go ahead and read too much into that)
Salient points:
4.3 40
4.8 GPA - always love a GPA higher than a 40 time
Wants to play in a spread offense (uh-oh? - then again with the speed and athleticism we're getting I'd like to see us introduce spread concepts into the offense)
Listed Stanford first (I'm gonna go ahead and read too much into that)
02-13-2014, 03:25 PM
https://twitter.com/MiltonOL77/status/43...9314847745
Looks like we've offered an offensive guard out of Georgia. Highly ranked, as most of the early offers have been.
Looks like we've offered an offensive guard out of Georgia. Highly ranked, as most of the early offers have been.
https://twitter.com/MiltonOL77/status/43...9314847745
Looks like we've offered an offensive guard out of Georgia. Highly ranked, as most of the early offers have been.
Looks like we've offered an offensive guard out of Georgia. Highly ranked, as most of the early offers have been.
02-13-2014, 06:25 PM
https://twitter.com/tyjordan58
Looks like we've offered an offensive tackle out of Florida. 3* by 247 and he just got an impressive slew of offers. So we should expect to see his ratings rise. Go HOTs!
Looks like we've offered an offensive tackle out of Florida. 3* by 247 and he just got an impressive slew of offers. So we should expect to see his ratings rise. Go HOTs!
https://twitter.com/tyjordan58
Looks like we've offered an offensive tackle out of Florida. 3* by 247 and he just got an impressive slew of offers. So we should expect to see his ratings rise. Go HOTs!
Looks like we've offered an offensive tackle out of Florida. 3* by 247 and he just got an impressive slew of offers. So we should expect to see his ratings rise. Go HOTs!
02-14-2014, 07:13 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/recr...y-in-2014/
Nice article about Brandon Polk. We get the most mention due to the connection with Alex Carter (same high school).
Nice article about Brandon Polk. We get the most mention due to the connection with Alex Carter (same high school).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/recr...y-in-2014/
Nice article about Brandon Polk. We get the most mention due to the connection with Alex Carter (same high school).
Nice article about Brandon Polk. We get the most mention due to the connection with Alex Carter (same high school).
02-14-2014, 10:30 AM
Thanks Publius for forwarding these tweets. In general it is great to see such talented players showing interest in Stanford and vice versa. I am a bit concerned, however, in the fact that at least two of the fastest of this crop seem to be (rightly, IMO) fascinated by the spread offenses of non-Stanford teams.
My concern is that does the fact that we play and promote smash-mouth football diminish our eligibility pool? The current metric (per Coach Shaw) is that we have a pool of ~80 players that we can recruit. If we eliminate those players who are fast and like to play fast-forward-spread-offense-football, do we reduce our pool commensurately? Or, do we increase it by therefore being more attractive to the less athletic, but bigger kind?
Just wondering.....
My concern is that does the fact that we play and promote smash-mouth football diminish our eligibility pool? The current metric (per Coach Shaw) is that we have a pool of ~80 players that we can recruit. If we eliminate those players who are fast and like to play fast-forward-spread-offense-football, do we reduce our pool commensurately? Or, do we increase it by therefore being more attractive to the less athletic, but bigger kind?
Just wondering.....
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
Thanks Publius for forwarding these tweets. In general it is great to see such talented players showing interest in Stanford and vice versa. I am a bit concerned, however, in the fact that at least two of the fastest of this crop seem to be (rightly, IMO) fascinated by the spread offenses of non-Stanford teams.
My concern is that does the fact that we play and promote smash-mouth football diminish our eligibility pool? The current metric (per Coach Shaw) is that we have a pool of ~80 players that we can recruit. If we eliminate those players who are fast and like to play fast-forward-spread-offense-football, do we reduce our pool commensurately? Or, do we increase it by therefore being more attractive to the less athletic, but bigger kind?
Just wondering.....
My concern is that does the fact that we play and promote smash-mouth football diminish our eligibility pool? The current metric (per Coach Shaw) is that we have a pool of ~80 players that we can recruit. If we eliminate those players who are fast and like to play fast-forward-spread-offense-football, do we reduce our pool commensurately? Or, do we increase it by therefore being more attractive to the less athletic, but bigger kind?
Just wondering.....
All models are wrong; some models are useful......
George Box
02-14-2014, 10:47 AM
(02-14-2014, 10:30 AM)Stymie link Wrote:My concern is that does the fact that we play and promote smash-mouth football diminish our eligibility pool? The current metric (per Coach Shaw) is that we have a pool of ~80 players that we can recruit. If we eliminate those players who are fast and like to play fast-forward-spread-offense-football, do we reduce our pool commensurately? Or, do we increase it by therefore being more attractive to the less athletic, but bigger kind?
I think Shaw's comments about the player pool is more about grades. The number of 3+ star guys who can get admitted is small, he claims around 80. There are obviously more kids who can get admitted, but who might not be as talented.
I would guess that our style of football isn't a minus with most recruits. After all, the guys who are in the spread offenses may put up bigger numbers, but they're not NFL-ready mentally the same way someone who runs a west-coast offense and modern defense is.
(02-14-2014, 10:30 AM)Stymie link Wrote:My concern is that does the fact that we play and promote smash-mouth football diminish our eligibility pool? The current metric (per Coach Shaw) is that we have a pool of ~80 players that we can recruit. If we eliminate those players who are fast and like to play fast-forward-spread-offense-football, do we reduce our pool commensurately? Or, do we increase it by therefore being more attractive to the less athletic, but bigger kind?
I think Shaw's comments about the player pool is more about grades. The number of 3+ star guys who can get admitted is small, he claims around 80. There are obviously more kids who can get admitted, but who might not be as talented.
I would guess that our style of football isn't a minus with most recruits. After all, the guys who are in the spread offenses may put up bigger numbers, but they're not NFL-ready mentally the same way someone who runs a west-coast offense and modern defense is.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »