[CTcard]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=14388.msg152856#msg152856 date=1452807267]
I am not sure any of last year's graduate transfers were going to be starters at Stanford, possibly Skov the most likely. Hopkins and Skov were the only two who were starters at their new homes - with Skov off and on.

Other than Lyons' lack of PT at UM this year, do you have reason to think Lyons would not have won 1 of the 5 DB positions at Stanford this year?  Do you think Shuler will lose the C position next year?  Do you think Rector would lose his starting WR position next year?
[/quote]

- Lyons losing his starting job last year.
- Rumors that the coaches were higher on several of the younger guys.
- Rumors that he asked if he would start if he returned and was told he would "compete for a starting position".

Shuler and Rector were not among last year's transfers.
I would expect both to start, along with Hooper had he stayed. For Shuler there may be some question as he was already subbed out on short yardage and there's been some grumbling - but I think he would most likely hold on.

I was addressing the issue from a football perspective only.  Obviously, there are academic considerations as well (which probably favor Stanford in most cases anyway), but I view these decisions as football driven, so that's the perspective of my post.

I guess you have to think about what one's football future might be.
Of the guys who transferred last year, all except Lyons appear to have received more playing time than they would have had at Stanford. So their moves were not to their personal football detriment. 

Anyone who leaves for the NFL is clearly attempting to make a decision based solely on their football future. They may be mistaken in their chances at the next level, but for the most part those aren't going to change a lot by sticking around one more year. [Rector and Shuler for example have put plenty on tape.]

Do you disagree with my new hypothesis about Shaw?

I guess you mean, "Shaw is a good mentor, but that he gives tough love that is difficult for some kids to take when they get in his doghouse."

I guess I agree in the sense that this is roughly true about every football coach - though perhaps some less so on being a good mentor in the first place.


On Shaw in particular I mostly don't have information to have an opinion about this level of detail in his coaching style.

It seems pretty clear that Shaw was the players' choice to succeed Harbaugh, so those players liked him at that time. That may or not be on point about his ways being tough to take for some players. However, the role of an assistant is far different from that of the head guy - so whatever was true then may have changed substantially by now.

There are a few anecdotal pieces of evidence. Remound Wright had his disciplinary run-ins; suspended for spring practice twice if I remember correctly. He came in as a rather heralded recruit, had trouble getting time, finally became the starter, then lost the job. Yet, he seems rather happy with his experience on the football team if the letter he wrote (and was posted here) reflects any true feelings.
But that is one guy, not the whole team.

Other guys have made comments about how great and supportive Shaw and the entire team have been. Those have mainly been guys in the spotlight who seem most definitely NOT in the doghouse, so they may not have much value in understanding how guys on the out feel. And of course they will not feel as good.


In summary, as far as I can tell (which is limited) there don't seem to be any substantial locker room problems on this team. Guys leaving early to try to make it to the NFL, or to try to find playing time elsewhere, or just to look for a different experience for personal reasons are a sign of the times and not by themselves indicative of any problem. If they leave with a degree in hand, I will be a little sad as a fan not to have them on my team for one more year, but won't begrudge them the opportunity or see it as a flaw in the program.

[CTcard]

[quote author=CTcard link=topic=14388.msg152856#msg152856 date=1452807267]
I am not sure any of last year's graduate transfers were going to be starters at Stanford, possibly Skov the most likely. Hopkins and Skov were the only two who were starters at their new homes - with Skov off and on.

Other than Lyons' lack of PT at UM this year, do you have reason to think Lyons would not have won 1 of the 5 DB positions at Stanford this year?  Do you think Shuler will lose the C position next year?  Do you think Rector would lose his starting WR position next year?
[/quote]

- Lyons losing his starting job last year.
- Rumors that the coaches were higher on several of the younger guys.
- Rumors that he asked if he would start if he returned and was told he would "compete for a starting position".

Shuler and Rector were not among last year's transfers.
I would expect both to start, along with Hooper had he stayed. For Shuler there may be some question as he was already subbed out on short yardage and there's been some grumbling - but I think he would most likely hold on.

I was addressing the issue from a football perspective only.  Obviously, there are academic considerations as well (which probably favor Stanford in most cases anyway), but I view these decisions as football driven, so that's the perspective of my post.

I guess you have to think about what one's football future might be.
Of the guys who transferred last year, all except Lyons appear to have received more playing time than they would have had at Stanford. So their moves were not to their personal football detriment. 

Anyone who leaves for the NFL is clearly attempting to make a decision based solely on their football future. They may be mistaken in their chances at the next level, but for the most part those aren't going to change a lot by sticking around one more year. [Rector and Shuler for example have put plenty on tape.]

Do you disagree with my new hypothesis about Shaw?

I guess you mean, "Shaw is a good mentor, but that he gives tough love that is difficult for some kids to take when they get in his doghouse."

I guess I agree in the sense that this is roughly true about every football coach - though perhaps some less so on being a good mentor in the first place.


On Shaw in particular I mostly don't have information to have an opinion about this level of detail in his coaching style.

It seems pretty clear that Shaw was the players' choice to succeed Harbaugh, so those players liked him at that time. That may or not be on point about his ways being tough to take for some players. However, the role of an assistant is far different from that of the head guy - so whatever was true then may have changed substantially by now.

There are a few anecdotal pieces of evidence. Remound Wright had his disciplinary run-ins; suspended for spring practice twice if I remember correctly. He came in as a rather heralded recruit, had trouble getting time, finally became the starter, then lost the job. Yet, he seems rather happy with his experience on the football team if the letter he wrote (and was posted here) reflects any true feelings.
But that is one guy, not the whole team.

Other guys have made comments about how great and supportive Shaw and the entire team have been. Those have mainly been guys in the spotlight who seem most definitely NOT in the doghouse, so they may not have much value in understanding how guys on the out feel. And of course they will not feel as good.


In summary, as far as I can tell (which is limited) there don't seem to be any substantial locker room problems on this team. Guys leaving early to try to make it to the NFL, or to try to find playing time elsewhere, or just to look for a different experience for personal reasons are a sign of the times and not by themselves indicative of any problem. If they leave with a degree in hand, I will be a little sad as a fan not to have them on my team for one more year, but won't begrudge them the opportunity or see it as a flaw in the program.