The CardBoard
Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? (/thread-25713.html)

Pages: 1 2

Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - calfan - 08-26-2025

Cal fan coming back after a while. Hate to say it but have been rooting for you guys (except against us) because I think we both stand a better chance in the next wave of realignment if we are both good on the field. Sorry to see the Hawaii loss and that awful QB performance.

I made a thread a while back about the portal and how Stanford cannot succeed unless it addresses the transfer issue. Just impossible to build a program through prep recruiting anymore. No matter how much you think you can be Clemson, you can't. The talent will leave every year for better opportunities (as they did this past offseason). And you are unable to bring in the requisite talent through the portal because they don't qualify and Stanford is stingy with transfers.

The truth is the vast majority of talent does not care about the Stanford degree, especially not to the same degree that the folks on this board do. They aren't going to stay for 4 years at a bad program or with low NIL payments just to get the degree. It's not worth it to them. You have to address the inbound issues which are at their core, eligibility / university issues.

Would you as Stanford alums be okay lowering the bar & opening up the transfer #s more? Would it affect your perception of the university? Curious.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - Papa John - 08-26-2025

According to 247sports, Stanford football brought in 18 transfers for this fall. Cal brought in 38. In 2024 Stanford had only 4 transfers and Cal had 23.

Stanford has greatly increased the number of transfers, and it has not affected my perception of the university.

So your question has been answered.

Are you OK with Cal lowering the bar and bringing in 38 transfers, which is the sixth-most in all of FBS football? Does it affect your perception of the university?

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - SkiBum80 - 08-26-2025

(08-26-2025, 02:48 PM)Papa John Wrote:  According to 247sports, Stanford football brought in 18 transfers for this fall. Cal brought in 38. In 2024 Stanford had only 4 transfers and Cal had 23.

Stanford has greatly increased the number of transfers, and it has not affected my perception of the university.

So your question has been answered.

Are you OK with Cal lowering the bar and bringing in 38 transfers, which is the sixth-most in all of FBS football? Does it affect your perception of the university?

Well said.
And to further say that, not knowing anything in detail from the inside, but looking from the outside, I credit ALuck and our new President for the big change in willingness to bring in far more transfers.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - Mick - 08-26-2025

Cal had 22 outgoing transfers with 18 of them from the offensive side. There are 14 offensive starters on the two-deep that were transfers, as well as ten transfers on the defensive two-deep and their kicker and punter. Cal has the 13th best transfer in D1.

Will the Transfer Portal Rescue Cal After 4 Losing Seasons?

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - 82lsju - 08-26-2025

(08-26-2025, 04:04 PM)Mick Wrote:  Cal had 22 outgoing transfers with 18 of them from the offensive side. There are 14 offensive starters on the two-deep that were transfers, as well as ten transfers on the defensive two-deep and their kicker and punter. Cal has the 13th best transfer in D1.

Will the Transfer Portal Rescue Cal After 4 Losing Seasons?

that was for the 2024 season, the article is from Aug 2024.

the 2025 On3 ranking is here

https://www.on3.com/transfer-portal/team-rankings/football/2025/

neither Cal nor Stanford are in the top 50.

the 2024 ranking is here and shows Cal at #13

https://www.on3.com/transfer-portal/team-rankings/football/2024/

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - fullmetal - 08-26-2025

The bar for transfers in general has always been higher than that of the high school senior applicant population for admission.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - old spanish trail - 08-26-2025

(08-26-2025, 05:25 PM)fullmetal Wrote:  The bar for transfers in general has always been higher than that of the high school senior applicant population for admission.

Looks like that may no longer be true for athlete transfers, and I'm fine with that.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - jacket3ree - 08-26-2025

Hey Calfan,

I root for Cal because happy wife, happy.....endings sometimes. And it is a fun place to watch football although we rarely go any more. If fact, my most recent game at Memorial was with a work friend and his wife (both Old Blues). I remember Cal beat a pretty bad Colorado team in the light rain and my friends had swanky access to the club area, so that was nice.

I do agree with you that Stanford and Cal are, or should try to be, tied at the realignment hip, the way USC and UCLA did it, and Oregon and Washington. A Bay Area axis with 7.7 million people in it, even if getting one percent of that interested in college football seems to be a chore. I'm cool if Cal and Stanford want to lead a west coast football conference renaissance (pointedly not inviting LA to join). That's better than wandering the land and ending up playing most games along the Atlantic Piedmont.

Garbage football is no way to get people interested in college football. I hope Luck and Rivera are truly successful because I think they are the two most important people to turn the clock back 10-15 years for Stanford and 15-20 years for Cal and making this all fun again. I mean, look at what you guys did at Gameday last year. I think you are a decent offensive caller away from really taking off. Fans are ready for it. Not sure about the fanbase to the southeast of you, but it could start with a fun team that wins.

Stanford, unfortunately, is about 60 decent transfers away from anything noteworthy anytime soon. The roster seems limiting from what we've seen so far. So, we can compete with Hawaii, I guess. What would Hawaii do against the rest of our schedule?  All that matters is what Luck thinks about lowering transfer restrictions and can convince upper management, which as far as I can tell is only Martinez and Levin. This is largely Luck's call.

Personally as an alum, I have zero problem with transfers. They sully nothing. My 40-year-old degree is still on the wall in my office (yep, just checked - furniture at this point). Maybe those transfers in are better players AND students AND people than the ones who transferred out. Maybe not. I don't care. I'm not hiring them to do anything; they aren't my friends; they aren't my family. If Stanford continues to suck, they will no longer be worth my time and effort ($), and there is plenty else to do on warm, sunny, fall weekends.*

My perception of the university won't change with a different "bar" for transfers. That perception was formed a long time ago, including catching a couple of football players cheating on tests I was grading, and I am still appreciative of what happened at the giant Taco Bell all those years ago no matter where Stanford sits in the power rankings. Like being rescued from a career start in Midland, Texas, a job, and a free education - things Cal did not offer btw, so here we are. At present, Stanford has far worse perception problems than a handful of transfers needed to keep the entertainment/branding arm viable.

But like I say, this is about what Luck thinks is the way forward and what he can convince the two people (I think) who are above him in matters of the field and locker room. I really hope he is up to this. Tough job.


*Speaking of tough jobs, I spent the weekend trying to eradicate bamboo from a maybe 5-foot strip between our driveway and the neighbor's fence. I might have removed three full linear feet in 15 hours of work. I forgot Stanford played in Week 0. My wife came out wondering if I wanted to watch or she'd keep watching baseball. So Stanford football or another four hours of back breaking bamboo removal, which both involve a lot of blood, sweat, tears, dirt-smeared sunscreen and ruining fences that need to be rebuilt before nightfall because Dan and Tracy next door have dogs and I don't want to be that a-hole? I had been at it for hours. Stanford won out, but I had some regrets about squandering some daylight after the fact.  I thought a lot about a tortured bamboo removal analogy to Stanford football, but can't think of how to represent the key to it all, which is massive compound lopers because losing a limb shoving the business end of a chainsaw into the mix of live shoots, fossilized bamboo wood, dirt, rocks, concrete and God knows what else is down there, while badass in a way, is actually pretty scary. Bamboo must be removed by the root, rhizomes and all. There is no easy chemical substitute and I tried them all.  Anyway, if anyone does know of a dump and die miracle (doesn't even need to be safe for animals), let me know. Thank you for your attention to this matter! JT

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - Giants - 08-26-2025

(08-26-2025, 06:17 PM)jacket3ree Wrote:  Hey Calfan,

I root for Cal because happy wife, happy.....endings sometimes. And it is a fun place to watch football although we rarely go any more. If fact, my most recent game at Memorial was with a work friend and his wife (both Old Blues). I remember Cal beat a pretty bad Colorado team in the light rain and my friends had pretty swanky access to the club area, so that was nice.

I do agree with you that Stanford and Cal are, or should try to be, tied at the realignment hip, the way USC and UCLA did it, and Oregon and Washington. A Bay Area axis with 7.7 million people in it, even if getting one percent of that interested in college football seems to be a chore. I'm cool if Cal and Stanford want to lead a west coast football conference renaissance (pointedly not inviting LA to join). That's better than wondering the land and ending up playing most games along the Atlantic Piedmont.

Garbage football is no way to get people interested in college football. I hope Luck and Rivera are truly successful because I think they are the two most important people to turn the clock back 10-15 years for Stanford and 15-20 years for Cal and making this all fun again. I mean, look at what you guys did at Gameday last year. I think you are a decent offensive caller away from really taking off. Fans are ready for it. Not sure about the fanbase to the southeast of you, but it could start with a fun team that wins.

Stanford, unfortunately, is about 60 decent transfers away from anything noteworthy anytime soon. The roster seems limiting from what we've seen so far. So, we can compete with Hawaii, I guess. What would Hawaii do against the rest of our schedule?  All that matters is what Luck thinks about lowering transfer restrictions and can convince upper management, which as far as I can tell is only Martinez and Levin. This is largely Luck's call.

Personally as an alum, I have zero problem with transfers. They sully nothing. My 40-year-old degree is still on the wall in my office (yep, just checked - furniture at this point). Maybe those transfers in are better players AND students AND people than the ones who transferred out. Maybe not. I don't care. I'm not hiring them to do anything; they aren't my friends; they aren't my family. If Stanford continues to suck, they will no longer be worth my time and effort ($), and there is plenty else to do on warm, sunny, fall weekends.*

My perception of the university won't change with a different "bar" for transfers. That perception was formed a long time ago, including catching a couple of football players cheating on tests I was grading, and I am still appreciative of what happened at the giant Taco Bell all those years ago no matter where Stanford sits in the power rankings. Like being rescued from a career start in Midland, Texas, a job, and a free education - things Cal did not offer btw, so here we are. At present, Stanford has far worse perception problems than a handful of transfers needed to keep the entertainment/branding arm viable.

But like I say, this is about what Luck thinks is the way forward and what he can convince the two people (I think) who are above him in matters of the field and locker room. I really hope he is up to this. Tough job.


*Speaking of tough jobs, I spent the weekend trying to eradicate bamboo from a maybe 5-yard strip between our driveway and the neighbor's fence. I might have removed three full linear feet in 15 hours of work. I forgot Stanford played in Week 0. My wife came out wondering if I wanted to watch or she'd keep watching baseball. So Stanford football or another four hours of back breaking bamboo removal, which both involve a lot of blood, sweat, tears, dirt-smeared sunscreen and ruining fences that need to be rebuilt before nightfall because Dan and Tracy next door have dogs and I don't want to be that a-hole? I had been at it for hours. Stanford won out, but I had some regrets about squandering some daylight after the fact.  I thought a lot about a tortured bamboo removal analogy to Stanford football, but can't think of how to represent the key to it all, which is massive compound lopers because losing a limb shoving the business end of a chainsaw into the mix of live shoots, fossilized bamboo wood, dirt, rocks, concrete and God knows what else is down there, while badass in a way, is actually pretty scary. Bamboo must be removed by the root, rhizomes and all. There is no easy chemical substitute and I tried them all.  Anyway, if anyone does know of a dump and die miracle (doesn't even need to be safe for animals), let me know. Thank you for your attention to this matter! JT

Which takes us to the old Ray Ratto observation (paraphrasing)….

What do Cal fans do on New Year’s Day?  Clean their rain gutters because there’s nothing worth watching on television.

Mudhead - Mudhead - 08-26-2025

(08-26-2025, 06:17 PM)jacket3ree Wrote:  Hey Calfan,

I root for Cal because happy wife, happy.....endings sometimes. And it is a fun place to watch football although we rarely go any more. If fact, my most recent game at Memorial was with a work friend and his wife (both Old Blues). I remember Cal beat a pretty bad Colorado team in the light rain and my friends had swanky access to the club area, so that was nice.

I do agree with you that Stanford and Cal are, or should try to be, tied at the realignment hip, the way USC and UCLA did it, and Oregon and Washington. A Bay Area axis with 7.7 million people in it, even if getting one percent of that interested in college football seems to be a chore. I'm cool if Cal and Stanford want to lead a west coast football conference renaissance (pointedly not inviting LA to join). That's better than wandering the land and ending up playing most games along the Atlantic Piedmont.

Garbage football is no way to get people interested in college football. I hope Luck and Rivera are truly successful because I think they are the two most important people to turn the clock back 10-15 years for Stanford and 15-20 years for Cal and making this all fun again. I mean, look at what you guys did at Gameday last year. I think you are a decent offensive caller away from really taking off. Fans are ready for it. Not sure about the fanbase to the southeast of you, but it could start with a fun team that wins.

Stanford, unfortunately, is about 60 decent transfers away from anything noteworthy anytime soon. The roster seems limiting from what we've seen so far. So, we can compete with Hawaii, I guess. What would Hawaii do against the rest of our schedule?  All that matters is what Luck thinks about lowering transfer restrictions and can convince upper management, which as far as I can tell is only Martinez and Levin. This is largely Luck's call.

Personally as an alum, I have zero problem with transfers. They sully nothing. My 40-year-old degree is still on the wall in my office (yep, just checked - furniture at this point). Maybe those transfers in are better players AND students AND people than the ones who transferred out. Maybe not. I don't care. I'm not hiring them to do anything; they aren't my friends; they aren't my family. If Stanford continues to suck, they will no longer be worth my time and effort ($), and there is plenty else to do on warm, sunny, fall weekends.*

My perception of the university won't change with a different "bar" for transfers. That perception was formed a long time ago, including catching a couple of football players cheating on tests I was grading, and I am still appreciative of what happened at the giant Taco Bell all those years ago no matter where Stanford sits in the power rankings. Like being rescued from a career start in Midland, Texas, a job, and a free education - things Cal did not offer btw, so here we are. At present, Stanford has far worse perception problems than a handful of transfers needed to keep the entertainment/branding arm viable.

But like I say, this is about what Luck thinks is the way forward and what he can convince the two people (I think) who are above him in matters of the field and locker room. I really hope he is up to this. Tough job.


*Speaking of tough jobs, I spent the weekend trying to eradicate bamboo from a maybe 5-foot strip between our driveway and the neighbor's fence. I might have removed three full linear feet in 15 hours of work. I forgot Stanford played in Week 0. My wife came out wondering if I wanted to watch or she'd keep watching baseball. So Stanford football or another four hours of back breaking bamboo removal, which both involve a lot of blood, sweat, tears, dirt-smeared sunscreen and ruining fences that need to be rebuilt before nightfall because Dan and Tracy next door have dogs and I don't want to be that a-hole? I had been at it for hours. Stanford won out, but I had some regrets about squandering some daylight after the fact.  I thought a lot about a tortured bamboo removal analogy to Stanford football, but can't think of how to represent the key to it all, which is massive compound lopers because losing a limb shoving the business end of a chainsaw into the mix of live shoots, fossilized bamboo wood, dirt, rocks, concrete and God knows what else is down there, while badass in a way, is actually pretty scary. Bamboo must be removed by the root, rhizomes and all. There is no easy chemical substitute and I tried them all.  Anyway, if anyone does know of a dump and die miracle (doesn't even need to be safe for animals), let me know. Thank you for your attention to this matter! JT

Advice for bamboo . This was given to me by a veteran of the bamboo wars when I was fighting..and losing them 20 years ago. “ I’ve tried everything to kill bamboo. I’ve used poison. I’ve dug a three foot deep ditch and lined it with plastic to stop the shoots from. Ovine laterally. I’ve tried a three foot wide stream. Nothing worked. You can’t kill or block bamboo.  But you can find the SOB who planted it and kill him! “. I couldn’t find the SOB who planted my bamboo but I gained  a measure of satisfaction dreaming of what I would do if I ever found him.  

My solution? I mowed or weed eated the bamboo sheets every time they got six inches high so they never put out lateral roots (rhizomes) ? I think ) and then waited for a freez to stop that years growth.  Then rinse and repeat. I don’t know how you get any respite in California if you don’t get a hard freeze.  Good luck

RE: Mudhead - Maple Leaf - 08-26-2025

(08-26-2025, 07:28 PM)Mudhead Wrote:  
(08-26-2025, 06:17 PM)jacket3ree Wrote:  Hey Calfan,

I root for Cal because happy wife, happy.....endings sometimes. And it is a fun place to watch football although we rarely go any more. If fact, my most recent game at Memorial was with a work friend and his wife (both Old Blues). I remember Cal beat a pretty bad Colorado team in the light rain and my friends had swanky access to the club area, so that was nice.

I do agree with you that Stanford and Cal are, or should try to be, tied at the realignment hip, the way USC and UCLA did it, and Oregon and Washington. A Bay Area axis with 7.7 million people in it, even if getting one percent of that interested in college football seems to be a chore. I'm cool if Cal and Stanford want to lead a west coast football conference renaissance (pointedly not inviting LA to join). That's better than wandering the land and ending up playing most games along the Atlantic Piedmont.

Garbage football is no way to get people interested in college football. I hope Luck and Rivera are truly successful because I think they are the two most important people to turn the clock back 10-15 years for Stanford and 15-20 years for Cal and making this all fun again. I mean, look at what you guys did at Gameday last year. I think you are a decent offensive caller away from really taking off. Fans are ready for it. Not sure about the fanbase to the southeast of you, but it could start with a fun team that wins.

Stanford, unfortunately, is about 60 decent transfers away from anything noteworthy anytime soon. The roster seems limiting from what we've seen so far. So, we can compete with Hawaii, I guess. What would Hawaii do against the rest of our schedule?  All that matters is what Luck thinks about lowering transfer restrictions and can convince upper management, which as far as I can tell is only Martinez and Levin. This is largely Luck's call.

Personally as an alum, I have zero problem with transfers. They sully nothing. My 40-year-old degree is still on the wall in my office (yep, just checked - furniture at this point). Maybe those transfers in are better players AND students AND people than the ones who transferred out. Maybe not. I don't care. I'm not hiring them to do anything; they aren't my friends; they aren't my family. If Stanford continues to suck, they will no longer be worth my time and effort ($), and there is plenty else to do on warm, sunny, fall weekends.*

My perception of the university won't change with a different "bar" for transfers. That perception was formed a long time ago, including catching a couple of football players cheating on tests I was grading, and I am still appreciative of what happened at the giant Taco Bell all those years ago no matter where Stanford sits in the power rankings. Like being rescued from a career start in Midland, Texas, a job, and a free education - things Cal did not offer btw, so here we are. At present, Stanford has far worse perception problems than a handful of transfers needed to keep the entertainment/branding arm viable.

But like I say, this is about what Luck thinks is the way forward and what he can convince the two people (I think) who are above him in matters of the field and locker room. I really hope he is up to this. Tough job.


*Speaking of tough jobs, I spent the weekend trying to eradicate bamboo from a maybe 5-foot strip between our driveway and the neighbor's fence. I might have removed three full linear feet in 15 hours of work. I forgot Stanford played in Week 0. My wife came out wondering if I wanted to watch or she'd keep watching baseball. So Stanford football or another four hours of back breaking bamboo removal, which both involve a lot of blood, sweat, tears, dirt-smeared sunscreen and ruining fences that need to be rebuilt before nightfall because Dan and Tracy next door have dogs and I don't want to be that a-hole? I had been at it for hours. Stanford won out, but I had some regrets about squandering some daylight after the fact.  I thought a lot about a tortured bamboo removal analogy to Stanford football, but can't think of how to represent the key to it all, which is massive compound lopers because losing a limb shoving the business end of a chainsaw into the mix of live shoots, fossilized bamboo wood, dirt, rocks, concrete and God knows what else is down there, while badass in a way, is actually pretty scary. Bamboo must be removed by the root, rhizomes and all. There is no easy chemical substitute and I tried them all.  Anyway, if anyone does know of a dump and die miracle (doesn't even need to be safe for animals), let me know. Thank you for your attention to this matter! JT

Advice for bamboo . This was given to me by a veteran of the bamboo wars when I was fighting..and losing them 20 years ago. “ I’ve tried everything to kill bamboo. I’ve used poison. I’ve dug a three foot deep ditch and lined it with plastic to stop the shoots from. Ovine laterally. I’ve tried a three foot wide stream. Nothing worked. You can’t kill or block bamboo.  But you can find the SOB who planted it and kill him! “. I couldn’t find the SOB who planted my bamboo but I gained  a measure of satisfaction dreaming of what I would do if I ever found him.  

My solution? I mowed or weed eated the bamboo sheets every time they got six inches high so they never put out lateral roots (rhizomes) ? I think ) and then waited for a freez to stop that years growth.  Then rinse and repeat. I don’t know how you get any respite in California if you don’t get a hard freeze.  Good luck

Panda's, they eat bamboo shoots, but only when the shoots are young.  Just think of the comments you will get from the neighbors and passer byes when they see the Panda(s), like:

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - calfan - 08-26-2025

Love the responses so far. To answer the first reply, am totally fine with increased transfers. Since Cal's such a big university and takes in so many transfers anyways, of course it doesn't affect the perception of the University. I think on some level I recognize the benefits of a great football team, and taking in some guys who obviously wouldn't have academically qualified through the usual path is an acceptable pill for me.

Glad to hear the sentiment here seems to be similar (as mentioned, I think we're tied at the hip for realignment) though I naturally presume the wider university outside of this board is much less sympathetic. Hopefully Luck can continue to open the floodgates for increased transfers.

Keep the replies coming! Very interested to hear what more folks think. Additionally am curious on whether you all care if the football players, once enrolled, engage at all in the classroom or just mail it in. If they're barely scraping by ("I didn't come here to play school") is that okay? Interested to hear thoughts.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - Goose - 08-27-2025

(08-26-2025, 10:04 PM)calfan Wrote:  Additionally am curious on whether you all care if the football players, once enrolled, engage at all in the classroom or just mail it in. If they're barely scraping by ("I didn't come here to play school") is that okay? Interested to hear thoughts.
I may be in the minority here, but yes, I care that the athletes are actually students that are indeed trying to get an education. After all, that is what universities are for. If a player that has no intention of being a "student" occupies a slot that could be occupied by somebody who is a student then the university is deviating from its values and primary mission. One could say these aren't "real" slots for students so nobody is actually being denied an opportunity by having such individuals admitted. If that is the case, the university has no business having them at all. They by design would not be there to be educated. There presence is therefore totally outside of the University's goals. I am unimpressed with the argument that the university has other entities that are not designed to educate students. I don't identify with those entities either and if their contribution to student education can't be adequately explained, they too should be deleted.
 
IMO college athletics is  (or rather was) interesting mostly because the athletes were also students and therefore we had something in common. I could identify with them. If they are just a bunch of talented athletes hired to entertain the masses I have nothing in common with them. They aren't "our lads", they are a pro team. I do watch and follow some pro teams, but I have no emotional attachment to these teams. It is just another form of entertainment.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - BostonCard - 08-27-2025

(08-27-2025, 01:01 AM)Goose Wrote:  
(08-26-2025, 10:04 PM)calfan Wrote:  Additionally am curious on whether you all care if the football players, once enrolled, engage at all in the classroom or just mail it in. If they're barely scraping by ("I didn't come here to play school") is that okay? Interested to hear thoughts.
I may be in the minority here, but yes, I care that the athletes are actually students that are indeed trying to get an education. After all, that is what universities are for. If a player that has no intention of being a "student" occupies a slot that could be occupied by somebody who is a student then the university is deviating from its values and primary mission. One could say these aren't "real" slots for students so nobody is actually being denied an opportunity by having such individuals admitted. If that is the case, the university has no business having them at all. They by design would not be there to be educated. There presence is therefore totally outside of the University's goals. I am unimpressed with the argument that the university has other entities that are not designed to educate students. I don't identify with those entities either and if their contribution to student education can't be adequately explained, they too should be deleted.
 
IMO college athletics is  (or rather was) interesting mostly because the athletes were also students and therefore we had something in common. I could identify with them. If they are just a bunch of talented athletes hired to entertain the masses I have nothing in common with them. They aren't "our lads", they are a pro team. I do watch and follow some pro teams, but I have no emotional attachment to these teams. It is just another form of entertainment.

I was going to speak up, but you pretty much said everything that I have to say.  The following was very sad to see (in the pinned roster thread):

Quote:b. Twenty-four players who transferred or are seeking a transfer; school year denoted is for 2025 season

Even if you take out the 11 players who will be fifth or sixth year seniors and thus (hopefully) got their Stanford degrees, that still leaves 13 players leaving without graduating from the school, and that doesn’t even include “heralded freshman QB Bear Bachmeier declared for Stanford and actually enrolled, participating in part of spring ball before entering the transfer portal and transferring to BYU before his freshman year began.”

And all of this, the revolving door of players, the accepting 17 transfers, the unrecognizable roster, gets us three straight 9 loss seasons and we’ll be lucky to even get that this year.  What are we even doing here?  If we are going to be uncompetitive, we might as well maintain our educational standards.

BC

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - Bruce Wang - 08-27-2025

If Stanford lowers the bar for transfers, it needs to be consistent with general practice ie it needs to stay above Kal's bar.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - 82lsju - 08-27-2025

(08-27-2025, 04:42 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Even if you take out the 11 players who will be fifth or sixth year seniors and thus (hopefully) got their Stanford degrees, that still leaves 13 players leaving without graduating from the school, and that doesn’t even include “heralded freshman QB Bear Bachmeier declared for Stanford and actually enrolled, participating in part of spring ball before entering the transfer portal and transferring to BYU before his freshman year began.”

And all of this, the revolving door of players, the accepting 17 transfers, the unrecognizable roster, gets us three straight 9 loss seasons and we’ll be lucky to even get that this year.  What are we even doing here?  If we are going to be uncompetitive, we might as well maintain our educational standards.

BC

at least one of those 13, Tiger Bachmeier, did graduate, he earned his BS in CS

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - BostonCard - 08-27-2025

Thanks, hopefully there are others in that list.

BC

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - old spanish trail - 08-27-2025

Thought I heard Bailey graduated.

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - BobK - 08-27-2025

Bailey graduated he is now a grad student at Texas Tech per his bio

RE: Would you accept lowered transfer restrictions? - JeebsOak - 08-27-2025

Degree from Mater Dei, Stanford and with more than six figures in the bank before 25. Good for him.