[qwerty49]

What bothers me is that the portal is the type of "new" development in the landscape that requires some degree of adjustment to the way the program views and addresses some issues (e.g. redshirting freshmen, some aspects of recruiting, etc).  Another such "new" development would have been the early signing period and its implications on the recruiting process (including spring official visits).  

I don't really see a lot of evidence that our program handles change very well.  The optics, which unfortunately tend to be personality-driven, seem to suggest otherwise.

Of course, the proof will ultimately be in the pudding, in terms of W-L performance, player development, recruiting success, etc.  And with Stanford, there's just very little margin for error -- I'm sure a lot of us feel that this year we could have easily been anywhere from 3-9 to 7-5 with a few breaks either way.

[qwerty49]

What bothers me is that the portal is the type of "new" development in the landscape that requires some degree of adjustment to the way the program views and addresses some issues (e.g. redshirting freshmen, some aspects of recruiting, etc).  Another such "new" development would have been the early signing period and its implications on the recruiting process (including spring official visits).  

I don't really see a lot of evidence that our program handles change very well.  The optics, which unfortunately tend to be personality-driven, seem to suggest otherwise.

Of course, the proof will ultimately be in the pudding, in terms of W-L performance, player development, recruiting success, etc.  And with Stanford, there's just very little margin for error -- I'm sure a lot of us feel that this year we could have easily been anywhere from 3-9 to 7-5 with a few breaks either way.