05-19-2017, 07:58 AM
Muir's had practice firing coaches before...let's hope he handles this one correctly and that we're all just too anxious.
Softball
05-19-2017, 08:05 AM
My deadline was last night. Based on two things: it's more than enough time. See Eric's post on Dawkins.Â
My mistake though I thought Earl was over Golf and would be back in Chicago today. He isn't.Â
That said how much time is needed?Â
My mistake though I thought Earl was over Golf and would be back in Chicago today. He isn't.Â
That said how much time is needed?Â
05-19-2017, 11:38 AM
Every time I see a "NEW" icon next to this thread, I think, "is this it?"Â Disappointment ensues every time.
05-19-2017, 12:28 PM
Not it jjj but a brief look at signee Maddy Dwyer
https://mobile.twitter.com/maddy__dwyer/...0624061441
https://mobile.twitter.com/maddy__dwyer/...0624061441
Not it jjj but a brief look at signee Maddy Dwyer
https://mobile.twitter.com/maddy__dwyer/...0624061441
https://mobile.twitter.com/maddy__dwyer/...0624061441
05-19-2017, 12:35 PM
(05-19-2017, 11:38 AM)JJJ link Wrote:Every time I see a "NEW" icon next to this thread, I think, "is this it?"Â Disappointment ensues every time.
+1. Except you (and now me) are also contributing to the problem! Maybe they're trying to do the classic 5 p.m. on Friday news drop so it gets buried? Except I actually think almost all relevant stakeholders would cheer, so it's not clear to me what they're waiting for absent some assurance they can get a better replacement.
(05-19-2017, 11:38 AM)JJJ link Wrote:Every time I see a "NEW" icon next to this thread, I think, "is this it?"Â Disappointment ensues every time.
+1. Except you (and now me) are also contributing to the problem! Maybe they're trying to do the classic 5 p.m. on Friday news drop so it gets buried? Except I actually think almost all relevant stakeholders would cheer, so it's not clear to me what they're waiting for absent some assurance they can get a better replacement.
05-19-2017, 03:05 PM
Sorry about the timing; in my defense, I was in Europe so it was already Thursday when I saw it.
BC
By the way, when was the last time that the #1 ranked team (by poll) was not one of the seeded teams in an NCAA tournament? Because Minnesota was ranked #1 in the coaches poll, but went unseeded.
BC
By the way, when was the last time that the #1 ranked team (by poll) was not one of the seeded teams in an NCAA tournament? Because Minnesota was ranked #1 in the coaches poll, but went unseeded.
Sorry about the timing; in my defense, I was in Europe so it was already Thursday when I saw it.
BC
By the way, when was the last time that the #1 ranked team (by poll) was not one of the seeded teams in an NCAA tournament? Because Minnesota was ranked #1 in the coaches poll, but went unseeded.
BC
By the way, when was the last time that the #1 ranked team (by poll) was not one of the seeded teams in an NCAA tournament? Because Minnesota was ranked #1 in the coaches poll, but went unseeded.
(05-19-2017, 05:17 PM)BobK link Wrote:I'll bite BC. Because Minny has the coach we really really want
100% agree Bob. Allister should be the No.1 priority, given she was the top choice for the players three years ago, and that I don't think Lonnie Alameda from FSU is realistic. Lonnie manages an NPF (pro softball) team in Florida, in addition to her responsibilities at Florida State. In addition, she has been able to get to the WCWS at FSU. Given all the controversy regarding Minnesota's seed snub, and her ace pitcher is graduating after this season, I don't see Minnesota as a realistic WCWS candidate, either this year or in the future. I saw their No. 2 pitcher pitch in relief today against Louisiana Tech today, and she wasn't very impressive. I think Minnesota's window closes after this year with the graduation of Sara Groenewegen.
Another reason why not making a change is so thoroughly unacceptable: we would be, by far, the top opening in this hiring cycle. Only one other Power 5 job (at GT in the ACC) is currently open. Regardless of the past couple of years, Georgia Tech is not comparable to the Stanford job in terms of conference affiliation, resources, history or ability to contend for national titles and WCWS berths.
(05-19-2017, 05:17 PM)BobK link Wrote:I'll bite BC. Because Minny has the coach we really really want
100% agree Bob. Allister should be the No.1 priority, given she was the top choice for the players three years ago, and that I don't think Lonnie Alameda from FSU is realistic. Lonnie manages an NPF (pro softball) team in Florida, in addition to her responsibilities at Florida State. In addition, she has been able to get to the WCWS at FSU. Given all the controversy regarding Minnesota's seed snub, and her ace pitcher is graduating after this season, I don't see Minnesota as a realistic WCWS candidate, either this year or in the future. I saw their No. 2 pitcher pitch in relief today against Louisiana Tech today, and she wasn't very impressive. I think Minnesota's window closes after this year with the graduation of Sara Groenewegen.
Another reason why not making a change is so thoroughly unacceptable: we would be, by far, the top opening in this hiring cycle. Only one other Power 5 job (at GT in the ACC) is currently open. Regardless of the past couple of years, Georgia Tech is not comparable to the Stanford job in terms of conference affiliation, resources, history or ability to contend for national titles and WCWS berths.
05-19-2017, 07:29 PM
(05-19-2017, 07:23 AM)eric link Wrote:Dawkins was fired on Mar 14 (maybe Mar 13 but the press release was on Mar 14)
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/3/14/210800885.aspx
the last game was Mar 9.
not sure when the banquet was but I'd guess not before Mar 14
Haase's hiring was announced on Mar 25
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/3/25/210833800.aspx
UAB's last game was Mar 19
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015%E2%80...tball_team
Thanks, Eric, that's very helpful.
Some pretty discouragingly illuminating history you've provided. However, I am continuing to monitor a little something that, for as long as it remains unchanged with each passing day, somewhat counteracts the increasing sense of doom that I myself feel with the passing of each successive uneventful news day. If and when any change in this "little something" should occur, at that point I'll have to concede that my supply of straws at which to grasp is approaching exhaustion and I am, therefore, on the brink of running the white flag of surrender (to hopelessness) up the pole.
(05-19-2017, 07:23 AM)eric link Wrote:Dawkins was fired on Mar 14 (maybe Mar 13 but the press release was on Mar 14)
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/3/14/210800885.aspx
the last game was Mar 9.
not sure when the banquet was but I'd guess not before Mar 14
Haase's hiring was announced on Mar 25
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/3/25/210833800.aspx
UAB's last game was Mar 19
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015%E2%80...tball_team
Thanks, Eric, that's very helpful.
Some pretty discouragingly illuminating history you've provided. However, I am continuing to monitor a little something that, for as long as it remains unchanged with each passing day, somewhat counteracts the increasing sense of doom that I myself feel with the passing of each successive uneventful news day. If and when any change in this "little something" should occur, at that point I'll have to concede that my supply of straws at which to grasp is approaching exhaustion and I am, therefore, on the brink of running the white flag of surrender (to hopelessness) up the pole.
Thanks, Bob, but let me be clear that I myself remain less than convinced that even now it's time to hoist the flag.
https://www.brainyquote.com/photos_tr/en...berra1.jpg
BobK (Wednesday, May 17): My thought is if we don't hear news by 5pm tomorrow, we won't.
Bob K (Friday, May 19): My deadline was last night. Based on two things: it's more than enough time. See Eric's post on Dawkins.
That said how much time is needed?
Been racking my brain, Bob, trying to conjure up yet another straw to grasp at. How about this:
The spirit is somewhat buoyed in this instance by the reminder that, as "outsiders," we are very much in the dark about what's happening on the "inside." It's no sure thing that the case of Dawkins' dismissal (with firing and hiring separated by a fairly significant amount of time) necessarily would serve as a model for how the firing and hiring process would play out, timing-wise, on the occasion of Hanson's dismissal. We cannot be certain that a reason of some sort for delaying The Announcement (for example, suppose Hanson was privately informed of her impending dismissal at which time she requested that she be extended the courtesy of being afforded the opportunity (up to the point of the announcement of the hiring of her successor) to interview elsewhere without having had the words "Official Stanford Reject" stamped on her forehead) -- one that perhaps at this very time is being respected by mutual agreement of the "inside" parties -- does not exist.
The answer to your question: We do not know.
https://www.brainyquote.com/photos_tr/en...berra1.jpg
BobK (Wednesday, May 17): My thought is if we don't hear news by 5pm tomorrow, we won't.
Bob K (Friday, May 19): My deadline was last night. Based on two things: it's more than enough time. See Eric's post on Dawkins.
That said how much time is needed?
Been racking my brain, Bob, trying to conjure up yet another straw to grasp at. How about this:
The spirit is somewhat buoyed in this instance by the reminder that, as "outsiders," we are very much in the dark about what's happening on the "inside." It's no sure thing that the case of Dawkins' dismissal (with firing and hiring separated by a fairly significant amount of time) necessarily would serve as a model for how the firing and hiring process would play out, timing-wise, on the occasion of Hanson's dismissal. We cannot be certain that a reason of some sort for delaying The Announcement (for example, suppose Hanson was privately informed of her impending dismissal at which time she requested that she be extended the courtesy of being afforded the opportunity (up to the point of the announcement of the hiring of her successor) to interview elsewhere without having had the words "Official Stanford Reject" stamped on her forehead) -- one that perhaps at this very time is being respected by mutual agreement of the "inside" parties -- does not exist.
The answer to your question: We do not know.
Thanks, Bob, but let me be clear that I myself remain less than convinced that even now it's time to hoist the flag.
https://www.brainyquote.com/photos_tr/en...berra1.jpg
BobK (Wednesday, May 17): My thought is if we don't hear news by 5pm tomorrow, we won't.
Bob K (Friday, May 19): My deadline was last night. Based on two things: it's more than enough time. See Eric's post on Dawkins.
That said how much time is needed?
Been racking my brain, Bob, trying to conjure up yet another straw to grasp at. How about this:
The spirit is somewhat buoyed in this instance by the reminder that, as "outsiders," we are very much in the dark about what's happening on the "inside." It's no sure thing that the case of Dawkins' dismissal (with firing and hiring separated by a fairly significant amount of time) necessarily would serve as a model for how the firing and hiring process would play out, timing-wise, on the occasion of Hanson's dismissal. We cannot be certain that a reason of some sort for delaying The Announcement (for example, suppose Hanson was privately informed of her impending dismissal at which time she requested that she be extended the courtesy of being afforded the opportunity (up to the point of the announcement of the hiring of her successor) to interview elsewhere without having had the words "Official Stanford Reject" stamped on her forehead) -- one that perhaps at this very time is being respected by mutual agreement of the "inside" parties -- does not exist.
The answer to your question: We do not know.
https://www.brainyquote.com/photos_tr/en...berra1.jpg
BobK (Wednesday, May 17): My thought is if we don't hear news by 5pm tomorrow, we won't.
Bob K (Friday, May 19): My deadline was last night. Based on two things: it's more than enough time. See Eric's post on Dawkins.
That said how much time is needed?
Been racking my brain, Bob, trying to conjure up yet another straw to grasp at. How about this:
The spirit is somewhat buoyed in this instance by the reminder that, as "outsiders," we are very much in the dark about what's happening on the "inside." It's no sure thing that the case of Dawkins' dismissal (with firing and hiring separated by a fairly significant amount of time) necessarily would serve as a model for how the firing and hiring process would play out, timing-wise, on the occasion of Hanson's dismissal. We cannot be certain that a reason of some sort for delaying The Announcement (for example, suppose Hanson was privately informed of her impending dismissal at which time she requested that she be extended the courtesy of being afforded the opportunity (up to the point of the announcement of the hiring of her successor) to interview elsewhere without having had the words "Official Stanford Reject" stamped on her forehead) -- one that perhaps at this very time is being respected by mutual agreement of the "inside" parties -- does not exist.
The answer to your question: We do not know.
05-21-2017, 09:25 PM
(05-18-2017, 08:31 AM)BobK link Wrote:https://www.echoak.com/2017/05/baseball-...st-family/
From the above article:
"At Stanford, Lauren has seen sporadic playing time. When given the chance to play consistently, though, she has delivered."
More specifically:
"At a tournament last year in Hawaii, the 5-foot-8 slugger hit a home run in three consecutive games, including a pinch-hit grand slam. It was part of a six-game stretch when she had 10 RBIs.
After that she saw only 17 at-bats the final two months of the season."
Are you reading Yet another exhibition of inferior coaching between the lines of this article?
This seemingly implied theme could and should be developed much more fully in this particular instance. Having delved deeply into the end-of-season (2016) statistics a year ago, I am informationally well-equipped to do the honors, and I shall, soon.
(05-18-2017, 08:31 AM)BobK link Wrote:https://www.echoak.com/2017/05/baseball-...st-family/
From the above article:
"At Stanford, Lauren has seen sporadic playing time. When given the chance to play consistently, though, she has delivered."
More specifically:
"At a tournament last year in Hawaii, the 5-foot-8 slugger hit a home run in three consecutive games, including a pinch-hit grand slam. It was part of a six-game stretch when she had 10 RBIs.
After that she saw only 17 at-bats the final two months of the season."
Are you reading Yet another exhibition of inferior coaching between the lines of this article?
This seemingly implied theme could and should be developed much more fully in this particular instance. Having delved deeply into the end-of-season (2016) statistics a year ago, I am informationally well-equipped to do the honors, and I shall, soon.
05-22-2017, 12:18 AM
I was at that tourney in Hawaii, we seemed to be playing good players who were doing well, and we looked like an offensive juggernaut. No idea about rpi of opponents etc but it sure was fun watching us winning.
05-22-2017, 12:47 PM
(05-22-2017, 12:18 AM)JJJ link Wrote:I was at that tourney in Hawaii, we seemed to be playing good players who were doing well, and we looked like an offensive juggernaut. No idea about rpi of opponents etc but it sure was fun watching us winning.
You know a coach's resume at a school is bad, when the only sentence in her coaching bio regarding her three years spent at the school detail a 4-1 performance against teams that finished #120 and #128 in RPI in a small non-conference tournament, and a random upset over a ranked team.
To wit: "Hanson guided Stanford through a challenging 2016 season filled with adversity. Despite the obstacles, Stanford (13-35, 0-24 Pac-12) produced a number of highlight moments including defeating No. 17/12 Missouri at the Mary Nutter Classic, a 4-1 showing at the Malihini Aloha Tournament in Hawaii and outstanding individual performances in Pac-12 play."
(05-22-2017, 12:18 AM)JJJ link Wrote:I was at that tourney in Hawaii, we seemed to be playing good players who were doing well, and we looked like an offensive juggernaut. No idea about rpi of opponents etc but it sure was fun watching us winning.
You know a coach's resume at a school is bad, when the only sentence in her coaching bio regarding her three years spent at the school detail a 4-1 performance against teams that finished #120 and #128 in RPI in a small non-conference tournament, and a random upset over a ranked team.
To wit: "Hanson guided Stanford through a challenging 2016 season filled with adversity. Despite the obstacles, Stanford (13-35, 0-24 Pac-12) produced a number of highlight moments including defeating No. 17/12 Missouri at the Mary Nutter Classic, a 4-1 showing at the Malihini Aloha Tournament in Hawaii and outstanding individual performances in Pac-12 play."
05-22-2017, 12:48 PM
https://twitter.com/pac12/status/866715309687816192
Congrats to all the all-Pac12 players (5 first team players, 2 second team players). Not bad for a team that, well, sucked.
BC
Congrats to all the all-Pac12 players (5 first team players, 2 second team players). Not bad for a team that, well, sucked.
BC
https://twitter.com/pac12/status/866715309687816192
Congrats to all the all-Pac12 players (5 first team players, 2 second team players). Not bad for a team that, well, sucked.
BC
Congrats to all the all-Pac12 players (5 first team players, 2 second team players). Not bad for a team that, well, sucked.
BC
05-22-2017, 12:56 PM
(05-22-2017, 12:48 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:https://twitter.com/pac12/status/866715309687816192
Congrats to all the all-Pac12 players (5 first team players, 2 second team players). Not bad for a team that, well, sucked.
BC
First, to clarify, these were All-Academic awards. We all know that Stanford student-athletes do not suck in the classroom, or to quote Cardale Jones, Stanford student-athletes "come here to play school" too. Secondly, softball has had great talent each of the last three years, including an All-American and multiple All-Pac-12 performers. The one constant has been the coaching, which has, to use your word BC, sucked.
(05-22-2017, 12:48 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:https://twitter.com/pac12/status/866715309687816192
Congrats to all the all-Pac12 players (5 first team players, 2 second team players). Not bad for a team that, well, sucked.
BC
First, to clarify, these were All-Academic awards. We all know that Stanford student-athletes do not suck in the classroom, or to quote Cardale Jones, Stanford student-athletes "come here to play school" too. Secondly, softball has had great talent each of the last three years, including an All-American and multiple All-Pac-12 performers. The one constant has been the coaching, which has, to use your word BC, sucked.
05-22-2017, 12:56 PM
3.99 in Mech.Eng for Carolyn Lee??!! How is that even possible?? No wonder she can plot the ball's trajectories so precisely.
05-22-2017, 02:53 PM
Yeah, sorry, I meant to clarify that. My understanding is that all-academic teams have a minimum gpa, so a lot of more talented softball players on other teams simply don't qualify.
BC
BC
Yeah, sorry, I meant to clarify that. My understanding is that all-academic teams have a minimum gpa, so a lot of more talented softball players on other teams simply don't qualify.
BC
BC
05-22-2017, 04:43 PM
(05-22-2017, 12:47 PM)d4cohn link Wrote:[quote author=JJJ link=topic=16598.msg193558#msg193558 date=1495437522]
I was at that tourney in Hawaii, we seemed to be playing good players who were doing well, and we looked like an offensive juggernaut. No idea about rpi of opponents etc but it sure was fun watching us winning.
You know a coach's resume at a school is bad, when the only sentence in her coaching bio regarding her three years spent at the school detail a 4-1 performance against teams that finished #120 and #128 in RPI in a small non-conference tournament, and a random upset over a ranked team.
To wit: "Hanson guided Stanford through a challenging 2016 season filled with adversity. Despite the obstacles, Stanford (13-35, 0-24 Pac-12) produced a number of highlight moments including defeating No. 17/12 Missouri at the Mary Nutter Classic, a 4-1 showing at the Malihini Aloha Tournament in Hawaii and outstanding individual performances in Pac-12 play."
[/quote]
You are absolutely right. My point was not to defend the coach but to say that the team has players capable of winning, reacting to the Lauren article. It can be done, but hanson't been so far...
(05-22-2017, 12:47 PM)d4cohn link Wrote:[quote author=JJJ link=topic=16598.msg193558#msg193558 date=1495437522]
I was at that tourney in Hawaii, we seemed to be playing good players who were doing well, and we looked like an offensive juggernaut. No idea about rpi of opponents etc but it sure was fun watching us winning.
You know a coach's resume at a school is bad, when the only sentence in her coaching bio regarding her three years spent at the school detail a 4-1 performance against teams that finished #120 and #128 in RPI in a small non-conference tournament, and a random upset over a ranked team.
To wit: "Hanson guided Stanford through a challenging 2016 season filled with adversity. Despite the obstacles, Stanford (13-35, 0-24 Pac-12) produced a number of highlight moments including defeating No. 17/12 Missouri at the Mary Nutter Classic, a 4-1 showing at the Malihini Aloha Tournament in Hawaii and outstanding individual performances in Pac-12 play."
[/quote]
You are absolutely right. My point was not to defend the coach but to say that the team has players capable of winning, reacting to the Lauren article. It can be done, but hanson't been so far...
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »