[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=7902.msg104791#msg104791 date=1415629174]
So what are the facts, wim?  Either the kid can do a 4.4 to 4.5 40 or he cannot, or maybe he will be able to once Turley gets a hold of him.  Lombardi thinks so, or has seen so, or has had someone told him so.  What's your problem with Lombardi's statement?  In either case, a 107-yd pick 6 on video tells me he is not just another kicker.....

The fastest combine time on record for a kicker was SC's David Buehler, who went 4.64. OK, so Jake Bailey is .16 seconds faster than the fastest kicker on record? Sure. Compounding the unlikelihood of Bailey's time is that Buehler only started kicking in college because Pete Carroll had enough freak athletes lounging around to spare. IIRC in high school he was a pretty well-regarded safety, and was recruited as such. So Bailey is faster than a guy who was recruited a legitimate athlete?

Extend the analysis even farther. Looking at the combine record for last year, about 13 guys ran times faster than a 4.48. You can't just extend the analysis and assume that that means about 13 guys matriculate into college football with such times, but it's not obviously hugely off either. (A bunch of factors why and why not: doesn't include small colleges, D-II, etc.; doesn't include perhaps some really good athletes with mediocre football skills; OTOH everyone's training specifically to ace the combine and so don't really run that fast in a football sense, etc.)

Allegedly Bailey is 6'2" 185. So, he's 6'2", 185 and a 4.48 runner? If true, Bailey's almost certainly the best athlete on his team. Hell, one of the best in the country. He'd be a credible NFL draft pick on measurements alone. Why is he being wasted kicking?

You have to assume an awful lot to believe that Bailey is a 4.48 runner. The more likely assumption is that Bailey doesn't run anything close to a 4.48.

Now, to be clear, I don't think this matters all that much. Tall tales are part of sports and they're part of what makes them fun. One of my high school friends went from starting one game and relieving the next to a complete game in the first and relieving the second to starting pitching and completing both halves of a doubleheader in a few short years of reunions. That's just fun. On the other hand, I happen to believe journalists shouldn't peddle highly-unlikely-to-be-true tales without some verification. It's a pretty minor misdemeanor, considering the significance, but still.
[/quote]

Thanks, wim.  I agree that the 4.48 is highly unlikely, but I still like the kid and his versatility.  Look forward to seeing him play in a year or two.

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=7902.msg104791#msg104791 date=1415629174]
So what are the facts, wim?  Either the kid can do a 4.4 to 4.5 40 or he cannot, or maybe he will be able to once Turley gets a hold of him.  Lombardi thinks so, or has seen so, or has had someone told him so.  What's your problem with Lombardi's statement?  In either case, a 107-yd pick 6 on video tells me he is not just another kicker.....

The fastest combine time on record for a kicker was SC's David Buehler, who went 4.64. OK, so Jake Bailey is .16 seconds faster than the fastest kicker on record? Sure. Compounding the unlikelihood of Bailey's time is that Buehler only started kicking in college because Pete Carroll had enough freak athletes lounging around to spare. IIRC in high school he was a pretty well-regarded safety, and was recruited as such. So Bailey is faster than a guy who was recruited a legitimate athlete?

Extend the analysis even farther. Looking at the combine record for last year, about 13 guys ran times faster than a 4.48. You can't just extend the analysis and assume that that means about 13 guys matriculate into college football with such times, but it's not obviously hugely off either. (A bunch of factors why and why not: doesn't include small colleges, D-II, etc.; doesn't include perhaps some really good athletes with mediocre football skills; OTOH everyone's training specifically to ace the combine and so don't really run that fast in a football sense, etc.)

Allegedly Bailey is 6'2" 185. So, he's 6'2", 185 and a 4.48 runner? If true, Bailey's almost certainly the best athlete on his team. Hell, one of the best in the country. He'd be a credible NFL draft pick on measurements alone. Why is he being wasted kicking?

You have to assume an awful lot to believe that Bailey is a 4.48 runner. The more likely assumption is that Bailey doesn't run anything close to a 4.48.

Now, to be clear, I don't think this matters all that much. Tall tales are part of sports and they're part of what makes them fun. One of my high school friends went from starting one game and relieving the next to a complete game in the first and relieving the second to starting pitching and completing both halves of a doubleheader in a few short years of reunions. That's just fun. On the other hand, I happen to believe journalists shouldn't peddle highly-unlikely-to-be-true tales without some verification. It's a pretty minor misdemeanor, considering the significance, but still.
[/quote]

Thanks, wim.  I agree that the 4.48 is highly unlikely, but I still like the kid and his versatility.  Look forward to seeing him play in a year or two.

[Bruce Wang]

Thanks, wim.  I agree that the 4.48 is highly unlikely, but I still like the kid and his versatility.  Look forward to seeing him play in a year or two.

We can at least agree that he runs faster than any punter we will ever see in a Stanford uniform.  Imagine the fake punt opportunities.

[Bruce Wang]

Thanks, wim.  I agree that the 4.48 is highly unlikely, but I still like the kid and his versatility.  Look forward to seeing him play in a year or two.

We can at least agree that he runs faster than any punter we will ever see in a Stanford uniform.  Imagine the fake punt opportunities.

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=7902.msg104841#msg104841 date=1415702543]
Thanks, wim.  I agree that the 4.48 is highly unlikely, but I still like the kid and his versatility.  Look forward to seeing him play in a year or two.

We can at least agree that he runs faster than any punter we will ever see in a Stanford uniform.  Imagine the fake punt opportunities.
[/quote]

And the fake field goals too.......

[Stymie]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=7902.msg104841#msg104841 date=1415702543]
Thanks, wim.  I agree that the 4.48 is highly unlikely, but I still like the kid and his versatility.  Look forward to seeing him play in a year or two.

We can at least agree that he runs faster than any punter we will ever see in a Stanford uniform.  Imagine the fake punt opportunities.
[/quote]

And the fake field goals too.......

[OutsiderFan]

Guys like Trent Irwin, Rasheem Green, Ken Brinson, Anree Saint-Armour, and Austin Maihen are in the news, and Stanford's recruiting needs at DL and WR are acute.  So naturally people are more interested in discussing a walk-on kicker's 40 time.

[OutsiderFan]

Guys like Trent Irwin, Rasheem Green, Ken Brinson, Anree Saint-Armour, and Austin Maihen are in the news, and Stanford's recruiting needs at DL and WR are acute.  So naturally people are more interested in discussing a walk-on kicker's 40 time.

[Spiny_Norman]

At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

[Spiny_Norman]

At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

[OutsiderFan]

At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

If they would just add an asterisk to every recruit's name who has taken two AP classes their Senior year, and two next to names who have taken two AP classes and plans/has submitted a Stanford application...

Anyone know if Christian Wilkins is a ** ?

[OutsiderFan]

At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

If they would just add an asterisk to every recruit's name who has taken two AP classes their Senior year, and two next to names who have taken two AP classes and plans/has submitted a Stanford application...

Anyone know if Christian Wilkins is a ** ?

[StannyBoy]

At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

not every kid is willing to discuss their grades, classes, & test scores.

[StannyBoy]

At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

not every kid is willing to discuss their grades, classes, & test scores.

[yvonne]

and many who have discussed them have exaggerated them

[yvonne]

and many who have discussed them have exaggerated them

[StannyBoy]

[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=7902.msg104852#msg104852 date=1415725908]
At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

If they would just add an asterisk to every recruit's name who has taken two AP classes their Senior year, and two next to names who have taken two AP classes and plans/has submitted a Stanford application...

Anyone know if Christian Wilkins is a ** ?
[/quote]

I have a good feeling on Wilkins. Last interview I saw he hadn't bothered to set up any additional official visits and didn't seem concerned. He's also at a private school which is always a plus.

[StannyBoy]

[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=7902.msg104852#msg104852 date=1415725908]
At this point in the process, the most important questions to ask about any interested recruit are, "Are they working on a Stanford application?  Have they submitted it?  How many AP classes are they taking this semester?"  This is information that you don't see most of the time in the 247, Scout and Rivals stories.

If they would just add an asterisk to every recruit's name who has taken two AP classes their Senior year, and two next to names who have taken two AP classes and plans/has submitted a Stanford application...

Anyone know if Christian Wilkins is a ** ?
[/quote]

I have a good feeling on Wilkins. Last interview I saw he hadn't bothered to set up any additional official visits and didn't seem concerned. He's also at a private school which is always a plus.

[stupac2]

not every kid is willing to discuss their grades, classes, & test scores.

Classes, at least, seem like they'd be easy to verify independently. That might be too much work or too invasive for recruiting reporters to look into, though. It certainly feels creepy to me. Then again, so does pretty much everything about recruiting, so maybe it's a common occurrence.

[stupac2]

not every kid is willing to discuss their grades, classes, & test scores.

Classes, at least, seem like they'd be easy to verify independently. That might be too much work or too invasive for recruiting reporters to look into, though. It certainly feels creepy to me. Then again, so does pretty much everything about recruiting, so maybe it's a common occurrence.

[stan01]

RB Cameron Scarlett, the number 1 recruit in the state of Oregon, is no longer considering Oregon.  This is a power back who is heavily recruited by Stanford.  In fact, Shaw flew to LA to watch him play the night before an early season Stanford game (Army?).  I don't know about his grades, but he attends Central Catholic, a private school that consistently sends students to Stanford. 

http://www.oregonlive.com/recruiting/ind...catho.html

[stan01]

RB Cameron Scarlett, the number 1 recruit in the state of Oregon, is no longer considering Oregon.  This is a power back who is heavily recruited by Stanford.  In fact, Shaw flew to LA to watch him play the night before an early season Stanford game (Army?).  I don't know about his grades, but he attends Central Catholic, a private school that consistently sends students to Stanford. 

http://www.oregonlive.com/recruiting/ind...catho.html

[TrumpCard]

I thought Scarlett was a lock to pick Stanford, but he talks up UCLA and kal more in that article.  When I read your post, I thought dropping Oregon was his choice, but, after reading the article, it sounds more like Oregon's offer may be off the table.  Overall, I am now a bit less optimistic about landing Scarlett, though I suspect Stanford remains the leader if/when he gets accepted.

[TrumpCard]

I thought Scarlett was a lock to pick Stanford, but he talks up UCLA and kal more in that article.  When I read your post, I thought dropping Oregon was his choice, but, after reading the article, it sounds more like Oregon's offer may be off the table.  Overall, I am now a bit less optimistic about landing Scarlett, though I suspect Stanford remains the leader if/when he gets accepted.

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford has two types of recruits:

1. Guys who will go to Stanford pretty much regardless of the football team's championship potential
2. Guys who will go to Stanford, but only if Stanford wins enough to given them a platform to promote their brand for next level

Cameron Scarlett seems like the second type to me.  He wants to play in an offense that will get him on the field early.  Oregon has no need for a RB this class, but because they get their Frosh on the field, Scarlett is going to have interest in them, particularly because they are local.  UCLA also will play True Frosh a lot as will Ca.l.

Shaw was just quoted in a story about Christian McCaffrey how he's not playing much basically because he's a Frosh; it takes a long time to learn the offense.  The elite recruits are less inclined to sign with schools that take them a long time to get on the field, by structure of offense.  They have to beat out guys ahead of them, but if they also see a built-in disadvantage because the offense is so complex, they are more likely to consider other options.

This isn't to say Stanford can't or won't land Scarlett or other top RBs with the current offensive style.  It is to say there are many advantages to having a less complex offense, and that Stanford could find it easier to recruit top talents with an offense that can get them on the field faster.

[OutsiderFan]

Stanford has two types of recruits:

1. Guys who will go to Stanford pretty much regardless of the football team's championship potential
2. Guys who will go to Stanford, but only if Stanford wins enough to given them a platform to promote their brand for next level

Cameron Scarlett seems like the second type to me.  He wants to play in an offense that will get him on the field early.  Oregon has no need for a RB this class, but because they get their Frosh on the field, Scarlett is going to have interest in them, particularly because they are local.  UCLA also will play True Frosh a lot as will Ca.l.

Shaw was just quoted in a story about Christian McCaffrey how he's not playing much basically because he's a Frosh; it takes a long time to learn the offense.  The elite recruits are less inclined to sign with schools that take them a long time to get on the field, by structure of offense.  They have to beat out guys ahead of them, but if they also see a built-in disadvantage because the offense is so complex, they are more likely to consider other options.

This isn't to say Stanford can't or won't land Scarlett or other top RBs with the current offensive style.  It is to say there are many advantages to having a less complex offense, and that Stanford could find it easier to recruit top talents with an offense that can get them on the field faster.

[CTcard]

Oregon has no need for a RB this class, but because they get their Frosh on the field, Scarlett is going to have interest in them, particularly because they are local. 

Is that true? (either part)

Does Oregon play more true frosh than Stanford?
The current Oregon depth chart has five true frosh as far as I can tell.
http://www.ourlads.com/ncaa-football-dep...egon/91625
The current Stanford depth chart has six true frosh.
http://stanford.scout.com/a.z?s=18&p=9&c...-1&yr=2015


Not a major point, but Oregon seems to think they need a RB this class. They have one committed - presumably one they either prefer, or believe are more likely to get, than Scarlett (assuming they really dropped their pursuit of the latter).
Their commit is Taj Griffin from Georgia, at least Scout rates him much higher than Scarlett. Griffin is a little guy, Scarlett bigger.

[CTcard]

Oregon has no need for a RB this class, but because they get their Frosh on the field, Scarlett is going to have interest in them, particularly because they are local. 

Is that true? (either part)

Does Oregon play more true frosh than Stanford?
The current Oregon depth chart has five true frosh as far as I can tell.
http://www.ourlads.com/ncaa-football-dep...egon/91625
The current Stanford depth chart has six true frosh.
http://stanford.scout.com/a.z?s=18&p=9&c...-1&yr=2015


Not a major point, but Oregon seems to think they need a RB this class. They have one committed - presumably one they either prefer, or believe are more likely to get, than Scarlett (assuming they really dropped their pursuit of the latter).
Their commit is Taj Griffin from Georgia, at least Scout rates him much higher than Scarlett. Griffin is a little guy, Scarlett bigger.

[BostonCard]

I think Outsider is comparing Royce Freeman, who as a true freshman has 170 carries for 945 yards to our own Christian McCaffrey, who has been impressive but had a limited role in our offense.  In Oregon's case, I think part of that is because Byron Marshall, a junior who last year had 1,038 yards rushing, is playing more at wide receiver, where he leads all receivers with 46 catches and 595 yards.  My sense is that this was as much due to Bralon Addison (Oregon's second leading receiver last year, and the top returning receiver) tearing his ACL.  Hard to know what the counterfactual would be, but I'm guessing if Addison hadn't gotten injured, Marshall would still be the number 1 running back and Freeman would have had a more limited role.

BC

[BostonCard]

I think Outsider is comparing Royce Freeman, who as a true freshman has 170 carries for 945 yards to our own Christian McCaffrey, who has been impressive but had a limited role in our offense.  In Oregon's case, I think part of that is because Byron Marshall, a junior who last year had 1,038 yards rushing, is playing more at wide receiver, where he leads all receivers with 46 catches and 595 yards.  My sense is that this was as much due to Bralon Addison (Oregon's second leading receiver last year, and the top returning receiver) tearing his ACL.  Hard to know what the counterfactual would be, but I'm guessing if Addison hadn't gotten injured, Marshall would still be the number 1 running back and Freeman would have had a more limited role.

BC

[CTcard]

I think Outsider is comparing Royce Freeman, who as a true freshman has 170 carries for 945 yards to our own Christian McCaffrey, who has been impressive but had a limited role in our offense. 

Undoubtedly he is.
However a single comparison of two different players doesn't tell us anything. No one can tell us how much Freeman would be playing were he at Stanford or McCaffrey at Oregon.

I thought it was worth noting the general impression (that Oregon plays their frosh and Stanford doesn't) doesn't necessarily match reality.
Of course it's quite possible that the minds of recruits don't match reality either.

[CTcard]

I think Outsider is comparing Royce Freeman, who as a true freshman has 170 carries for 945 yards to our own Christian McCaffrey, who has been impressive but had a limited role in our offense. 

Undoubtedly he is.
However a single comparison of two different players doesn't tell us anything. No one can tell us how much Freeman would be playing were he at Stanford or McCaffrey at Oregon.

I thought it was worth noting the general impression (that Oregon plays their frosh and Stanford doesn't) doesn't necessarily match reality.
Of course it's quite possible that the minds of recruits don't match reality either.

[yvonne]

I noticed that when asked about C.al, he said he wasn't interested initially because the team was in the dumps, but he likes the trajectory. Our trajectory...

[yvonne]

I noticed that when asked about C.al, he said he wasn't interested initially because the team was in the dumps, but he likes the trajectory. Our trajectory...

[TrumpCard]

Shaw was just quoted in a story about Christian McCaffrey how he's not playing much basically because he's a Frosh; it takes a long time to learn the offense.  The elite recruits are less inclined to sign with schools that take them a long time to get on the field, by structure of offense.  They have to beat out guys ahead of them, but if they also see a built-in disadvantage because the offense is so complex, they are more likely to consider other options.

I imagine there are some high school kids who assume they are so great that they would be stars as true freshmen.  See Josh Rosen.  Shaw wants a teachable kids with internal drive to work hard, learn a lot, and improve over the course of 4-5 years.  I certainly see the benefits of having the players who are so elite that they rightly think they can star right away, but there is something to be said for Shaw's model. 

[TrumpCard]

Shaw was just quoted in a story about Christian McCaffrey how he's not playing much basically because he's a Frosh; it takes a long time to learn the offense.  The elite recruits are less inclined to sign with schools that take them a long time to get on the field, by structure of offense.  They have to beat out guys ahead of them, but if they also see a built-in disadvantage because the offense is so complex, they are more likely to consider other options.

I imagine there are some high school kids who assume they are so great that they would be stars as true freshmen.  See Josh Rosen.  Shaw wants a teachable kids with internal drive to work hard, learn a lot, and improve over the course of 4-5 years.  I certainly see the benefits of having the players who are so elite that they rightly think they can star right away, but there is something to be said for Shaw's model. 

[stan01]

I thought Scarlett was a lock to pick Stanford, but he talks up UCLA and kal more in that article.  When I read your post, I thought dropping Oregon was his choice, but, after reading the article, it sounds more like Oregon's offer may be off the table.  Overall, I am now a bit less optimistic about landing Scarlett, though I suspect Stanford remains the leader if/when he gets accepted.

I was trying to be gracious, as was the title of the article.

[stan01]

I thought Scarlett was a lock to pick Stanford, but he talks up UCLA and kal more in that article.  When I read your post, I thought dropping Oregon was his choice, but, after reading the article, it sounds more like Oregon's offer may be off the table.  Overall, I am now a bit less optimistic about landing Scarlett, though I suspect Stanford remains the leader if/when he gets accepted.

I was trying to be gracious, as was the title of the article.

[Hank 91]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=7902.msg104923#msg104923 date=1415821583]

Shaw was just quoted in a story about Christian McCaffrey how he's not playing much basically because he's a Frosh; it takes a long time to learn the offense.  The elite recruits are less inclined to sign with schools that take them a long time to get on the field, by structure of offense.  They have to beat out guys ahead of them, but if they also see a built-in disadvantage because the offense is so complex, they are more likely to consider other options.

I imagine there are some high school kids who assume they are so great that they would be stars as true freshmen.  See Josh Rosen.  Shaw wants a teachable kids with internal drive to work hard, learn a lot, and improve over the course of 4-5 years.  I certainly see the benefits of having the players who are so elite that they rightly think they can star right away, but there is something to be said for Shaw's model.
[/quote]

This is something I've always wondered about. How do these elite programs (and I'm including Stanford in that group) recruit kids who have always been the best players on their teams and then convince them to stand on the sideines for a year or even two. I remember seeing an interview with Andrew Luck during his redshirt season, and he acknowledged that it was really hard for him to be watching. I posed this question to Shaw during media day:

GMC:
How has recruiting changed for you in the last five or six years? I would guess that four or five years ago you could say to kids, you can come in and you can compete, and they could realistically compete for playing time as a true freshman, but now the talent on the roster is so much higher. How do you manage that when you've got a kid coming in who's always been the best player on every team he's been on, and suddenly he's facing a year without being on the field?

Shaw:
I think sometimes we as older people don't completely understand it, but you have to remind yourself that great players look to play with other great players. If you're going to join a good team, they're going to have good players at your position. Sometimes situationally you'll be able to come in and play as a true freshman, maybe even start as a true freshman, but if you're joining a good football team, there's a chance you're gonna have to work your way up the pecking order. Some of those guys will still play as freshman, maybe not start, but as they get into their sophomore years they become big parts of what we do. And I think our guys have appreciated that we're not going to throw them out to the wolves until they're truly ready. Once they're ready physically, mentally, and emotionally as I say, we'll put 'em out there and let 'em go.

As people have said, some guys won't have the patience for this approach.

[Hank 91]

[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=7902.msg104923#msg104923 date=1415821583]

Shaw was just quoted in a story about Christian McCaffrey how he's not playing much basically because he's a Frosh; it takes a long time to learn the offense.  The elite recruits are less inclined to sign with schools that take them a long time to get on the field, by structure of offense.  They have to beat out guys ahead of them, but if they also see a built-in disadvantage because the offense is so complex, they are more likely to consider other options.

I imagine there are some high school kids who assume they are so great that they would be stars as true freshmen.  See Josh Rosen.  Shaw wants a teachable kids with internal drive to work hard, learn a lot, and improve over the course of 4-5 years.  I certainly see the benefits of having the players who are so elite that they rightly think they can star right away, but there is something to be said for Shaw's model.
[/quote]

This is something I've always wondered about. How do these elite programs (and I'm including Stanford in that group) recruit kids who have always been the best players on their teams and then convince them to stand on the sideines for a year or even two. I remember seeing an interview with Andrew Luck during his redshirt season, and he acknowledged that it was really hard for him to be watching. I posed this question to Shaw during media day:

GMC:
How has recruiting changed for you in the last five or six years? I would guess that four or five years ago you could say to kids, you can come in and you can compete, and they could realistically compete for playing time as a true freshman, but now the talent on the roster is so much higher. How do you manage that when you've got a kid coming in who's always been the best player on every team he's been on, and suddenly he's facing a year without being on the field?

Shaw:
I think sometimes we as older people don't completely understand it, but you have to remind yourself that great players look to play with other great players. If you're going to join a good team, they're going to have good players at your position. Sometimes situationally you'll be able to come in and play as a true freshman, maybe even start as a true freshman, but if you're joining a good football team, there's a chance you're gonna have to work your way up the pecking order. Some of those guys will still play as freshman, maybe not start, but as they get into their sophomore years they become big parts of what we do. And I think our guys have appreciated that we're not going to throw them out to the wolves until they're truly ready. Once they're ready physically, mentally, and emotionally as I say, we'll put 'em out there and let 'em go.

As people have said, some guys won't have the patience for this approach.