11-27-2019, 06:21 PM
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...attendance
Is Shaw coaching the women's basketball team as well?
BC
Is Shaw coaching the women's basketball team as well?
BC
The CardBoard
/
C-House!
/
The CardBoard
/
Catch-all merged Stanford football sucks thread (if your thread disappeared it was probably merged into this thread)
Catch-all merged Stanford football sucks thread (if your thread disappeared it was probably merged into this thread)
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...attendance
Is Shaw coaching the women's basketball team as well?
BC
Is Shaw coaching the women's basketball team as well?
BC
11-27-2019, 08:52 PM
(11-27-2019, 02:00 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: For the umpteenth time, the ILB coach is not responsible for recruiting ILBs. An assistant coach may have input on recruits brought in at his position, but recruiting responsibilities are primarily based on geography.
Apologies if my tone seems harsh. It's just frustrating to me to see assistants inaccurately lauded with extra praise (e.g. Bloomgren) or unfairly criticized (e.g. Hansen) for recruiting results.
Yes and no. The initial recruiting effort comes from a regional structure, but when a recruit comes on campus you bet your bippy the position coach is heavily involved, and for good reason. That will be the coach who is responsible for developing the player once he arrives on campus.
No recruit makes a decision without spending time with his prospective position coach. Whiffing on ILBs two years in a row is as much Hansen's responsibility as it is anyone else's.
(11-27-2019, 02:00 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: For the umpteenth time, the ILB coach is not responsible for recruiting ILBs. An assistant coach may have input on recruits brought in at his position, but recruiting responsibilities are primarily based on geography.
Apologies if my tone seems harsh. It's just frustrating to me to see assistants inaccurately lauded with extra praise (e.g. Bloomgren) or unfairly criticized (e.g. Hansen) for recruiting results.
Yes and no. The initial recruiting effort comes from a regional structure, but when a recruit comes on campus you bet your bippy the position coach is heavily involved, and for good reason. That will be the coach who is responsible for developing the player once he arrives on campus.
No recruit makes a decision without spending time with his prospective position coach. Whiffing on ILBs two years in a row is as much Hansen's responsibility as it is anyone else's.
11-28-2019, 03:00 AM
(11-27-2019, 02:48 PM)BostonCard Wrote: That is not exactly right. The position coach is still responsible for the overall recruitment strategy, identifying players to go after and prioritizing amongst them, and is jointly responsible for their individual recruitment. And although the coach responsible for geography has administrative responsibility for particular recruits, and is the primary point of contact, it would be illogical for the position coach not to be heavily involved. If you ever read recruits' twitter feeds when they commit, you will see that they typically thank Coach Shaw, their future position coach, and the primary recruiter for their region.
I think if a position coach is having recruitment issues, it is fair to question the position coach's ability to identify, pursue, and close on recruits.
BC
exactly BC. Hansen may not have geographical responsibility for a ILB recruit, but he has the call on offer/pursuit unless overruled by Anderson and Shaw, and both appear pretty deferential to position coaches. this year (again) Hansen opted for a short throw -- essentially 2 offers in play, one of which we didn't push much and the other we hoped to flip after he verballed to Northwestern. given the issues at ILB, hard to fathom such lack of depth on the offer board.
(11-27-2019, 02:48 PM)BostonCard Wrote: That is not exactly right. The position coach is still responsible for the overall recruitment strategy, identifying players to go after and prioritizing amongst them, and is jointly responsible for their individual recruitment. And although the coach responsible for geography has administrative responsibility for particular recruits, and is the primary point of contact, it would be illogical for the position coach not to be heavily involved. If you ever read recruits' twitter feeds when they commit, you will see that they typically thank Coach Shaw, their future position coach, and the primary recruiter for their region.
I think if a position coach is having recruitment issues, it is fair to question the position coach's ability to identify, pursue, and close on recruits.
BC
exactly BC. Hansen may not have geographical responsibility for a ILB recruit, but he has the call on offer/pursuit unless overruled by Anderson and Shaw, and both appear pretty deferential to position coaches. this year (again) Hansen opted for a short throw -- essentially 2 offers in play, one of which we didn't push much and the other we hoped to flip after he verballed to Northwestern. given the issues at ILB, hard to fathom such lack of depth on the offer board.
11-28-2019, 05:25 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-28-2019, 09:00 AM by OutsiderFan.)
What y’all are unspooling about ILB recruiting is leading me to this question. How can an institution with a brand for cultivating smart, have a football program being so cosmically stupid? Just two offers to ILBs? This crosses the line from already self-destructive hubris, to pure incompetence.
Among the many things David Shaw must address is changing his mindset about recruiting. His desire to not take commitments from players when pursuing other guys is admirable, but he has to keep in mind, there are thousands of people relying on him to put a good product on the field.
Thinking you have a deal with a party and then getting aced out by some other one who offers more perceived value in the end, is part of life. Nobody takes their 2nd choice after their first comes available, if a contract with #2 hasn’t been signed yet. Moreover, if Shaw is worried that he might get a better commit than one who will commit sooner, just tell his second choice to hold off on his commitment until later. This whole “all offers are actionable” philosophy is just totally self-defeating. It’s as foolish as not using Spring for official visits. You want to use all the leverage you have to bring in as many good players as possible. Shaw is objectively not using all available leverage he has available.
If someone can make the case for these recruiting approaches making sense, I’m all ears, but I do not believe a policy to not tell recruits the program has better options after they feel they have a spot, creates any goodwill that can be leveraged to land better classes in the future. Frankly, the whole notion that a Stanford offer is special should be seen as even more reason to be more selfish about how they are used. Stanford already makes kids jump through hoops nobody else does, so why not be more calculating with offers and takes?
Among the many things David Shaw must address is changing his mindset about recruiting. His desire to not take commitments from players when pursuing other guys is admirable, but he has to keep in mind, there are thousands of people relying on him to put a good product on the field.
Thinking you have a deal with a party and then getting aced out by some other one who offers more perceived value in the end, is part of life. Nobody takes their 2nd choice after their first comes available, if a contract with #2 hasn’t been signed yet. Moreover, if Shaw is worried that he might get a better commit than one who will commit sooner, just tell his second choice to hold off on his commitment until later. This whole “all offers are actionable” philosophy is just totally self-defeating. It’s as foolish as not using Spring for official visits. You want to use all the leverage you have to bring in as many good players as possible. Shaw is objectively not using all available leverage he has available.
If someone can make the case for these recruiting approaches making sense, I’m all ears, but I do not believe a policy to not tell recruits the program has better options after they feel they have a spot, creates any goodwill that can be leveraged to land better classes in the future. Frankly, the whole notion that a Stanford offer is special should be seen as even more reason to be more selfish about how they are used. Stanford already makes kids jump through hoops nobody else does, so why not be more calculating with offers and takes?
(This post was last modified: 11-28-2019, 09:00 AM by OutsiderFan.)
What y’all are unspooling about ILB recruiting is leading me to this question. How can an institution with a brand for cultivating smart, have a football program being so cosmically stupid? Just two offers to ILBs? This crosses the line from already self-destructive hubris, to pure incompetence.
Among the many things David Shaw must address is changing his mindset about recruiting. His desire to not take commitments from players when pursuing other guys is admirable, but he has to keep in mind, there are thousands of people relying on him to put a good product on the field.
Thinking you have a deal with a party and then getting aced out by some other one who offers more perceived value in the end, is part of life. Nobody takes their 2nd choice after their first comes available, if a contract with #2 hasn’t been signed yet. Moreover, if Shaw is worried that he might get a better commit than one who will commit sooner, just tell his second choice to hold off on his commitment until later. This whole “all offers are actionable” philosophy is just totally self-defeating. It’s as foolish as not using Spring for official visits. You want to use all the leverage you have to bring in as many good players as possible. Shaw is objectively not using all available leverage he has available.
If someone can make the case for these recruiting approaches making sense, I’m all ears, but I do not believe a policy to not tell recruits the program has better options after they feel they have a spot, creates any goodwill that can be leveraged to land better classes in the future. Frankly, the whole notion that a Stanford offer is special should be seen as even more reason to be more selfish about how they are used. Stanford already makes kids jump through hoops nobody else does, so why not be more calculating with offers and takes?
Among the many things David Shaw must address is changing his mindset about recruiting. His desire to not take commitments from players when pursuing other guys is admirable, but he has to keep in mind, there are thousands of people relying on him to put a good product on the field.
Thinking you have a deal with a party and then getting aced out by some other one who offers more perceived value in the end, is part of life. Nobody takes their 2nd choice after their first comes available, if a contract with #2 hasn’t been signed yet. Moreover, if Shaw is worried that he might get a better commit than one who will commit sooner, just tell his second choice to hold off on his commitment until later. This whole “all offers are actionable” philosophy is just totally self-defeating. It’s as foolish as not using Spring for official visits. You want to use all the leverage you have to bring in as many good players as possible. Shaw is objectively not using all available leverage he has available.
If someone can make the case for these recruiting approaches making sense, I’m all ears, but I do not believe a policy to not tell recruits the program has better options after they feel they have a spot, creates any goodwill that can be leveraged to land better classes in the future. Frankly, the whole notion that a Stanford offer is special should be seen as even more reason to be more selfish about how they are used. Stanford already makes kids jump through hoops nobody else does, so why not be more calculating with offers and takes?
11-28-2019, 08:42 AM
(11-27-2019, 05:15 PM)Mick Wrote:13.5(11-27-2019, 01:52 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Starting next week, I expect Shaw to hit the recruiting trail pretty hard. I predict several trips to personally scout off the radar talent hidden in the Pacific Islander communities. The Samoas, Fiji, Tahiti, Tonga, and even Hawaii certainly have talent for Shaw to discover. Of course, he'll bring along his dad and the rest of the family to help evaluate. . . .
What's your mental over/under of his rounds of golf on the recruiting trip?
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
(11-27-2019, 05:15 PM)Mick Wrote:13.5(11-27-2019, 01:52 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Starting next week, I expect Shaw to hit the recruiting trail pretty hard. I predict several trips to personally scout off the radar talent hidden in the Pacific Islander communities. The Samoas, Fiji, Tahiti, Tonga, and even Hawaii certainly have talent for Shaw to discover. Of course, he'll bring along his dad and the rest of the family to help evaluate. . . .
What's your mental over/under of his rounds of golf on the recruiting trip?
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
11-28-2019, 09:59 AM
Probably the most important of Shaw’s career. These kids are to smart to be fooled. Absolutely no excuses, just hard work ahead.
11-29-2019, 06:52 AM
And for once taking responsibility for him and his staff for their contributions to a lousy season and not dumping this on his players with comments about "execution" and "making plays" and "being close" and "being just a few plays." When you finish 4-8 and at least half of those losses are by 15+ points, you're not close and it's not just making a play here and there. You are being dominated - far too often.
These players deserve better coaching, and they deserve a head coach who takes responsibility for the program's failures this season.
These players deserve better coaching, and they deserve a head coach who takes responsibility for the program's failures this season.
And for once taking responsibility for him and his staff for their contributions to a lousy season and not dumping this on his players with comments about "execution" and "making plays" and "being close" and "being just a few plays." When you finish 4-8 and at least half of those losses are by 15+ points, you're not close and it's not just making a play here and there. You are being dominated - far too often.
These players deserve better coaching, and they deserve a head coach who takes responsibility for the program's failures this season.
These players deserve better coaching, and they deserve a head coach who takes responsibility for the program's failures this season.
Nonsense.
Shaw has earned a lot of trust and good will.
While there comes a time for every coach who had past success but is no longer the right person for the job, we are a ways off from that now.
Clearly, there are areas that need to be fixed, and he deserves a chance to fix them. And I think he will. Shaw and Petersen are both high-quality coaches who can have an off-year.
Shaw has earned a lot of trust and good will.
While there comes a time for every coach who had past success but is no longer the right person for the job, we are a ways off from that now.
Clearly, there are areas that need to be fixed, and he deserves a chance to fix them. And I think he will. Shaw and Petersen are both high-quality coaches who can have an off-year.
(This post was last modified: 11-29-2019, 10:40 AM by Snorlax94.)
Nonsense.
Shaw has earned a lot of trust and good will.
While there comes a time for every coach who had past success but is no longer the right person for the job, we are a ways off from that now.
Clearly, there are areas that need to be fixed, and he deserves a chance to fix them. And I think he will. Shaw and Petersen are both high-quality coaches who can have an off-year.
Shaw has earned a lot of trust and good will.
While there comes a time for every coach who had past success but is no longer the right person for the job, we are a ways off from that now.
Clearly, there are areas that need to be fixed, and he deserves a chance to fix them. And I think he will. Shaw and Petersen are both high-quality coaches who can have an off-year.
11-29-2019, 11:12 AM
I initially thought 123rd scoring offense, but the Mills affect has launched the team up to 110th scoring offense
11-29-2019, 11:38 AM
(11-29-2019, 08:14 AM)Phogge Wrote: NCAA rushing.For those in July that wished Stanford would run less and pass more in 2019. Wish granted. Now, can we please return to power running and Ogre lines?
It may be boring to some, but it was a much more enjoyable way to spend a football season. Hopefully run-oriented recruits will view 2019 and the lack of depth as a reason to commit to Stanford.
FWIW - Ole Miss, in the Egg Bowl, demonstrated the type of stupid stuff college players might think to try on the field. I remain thankful that Stanford, under Coach Shaw, does not have players doing stuff like that week to week.
That would have been an awful way to lose a rivalry game. Yes, it was to go to OT, but still the penalty cost them that chance.
https://sports.yahoo.com/dog-pee-td-cele...56371.html
(11-29-2019, 08:14 AM)Phogge Wrote: NCAA rushing.For those in July that wished Stanford would run less and pass more in 2019. Wish granted. Now, can we please return to power running and Ogre lines?
It may be boring to some, but it was a much more enjoyable way to spend a football season. Hopefully run-oriented recruits will view 2019 and the lack of depth as a reason to commit to Stanford.
FWIW - Ole Miss, in the Egg Bowl, demonstrated the type of stupid stuff college players might think to try on the field. I remain thankful that Stanford, under Coach Shaw, does not have players doing stuff like that week to week.
That would have been an awful way to lose a rivalry game. Yes, it was to go to OT, but still the penalty cost them that chance.
https://sports.yahoo.com/dog-pee-td-cele...56371.html
Just a friendly neighborhood moderator reminder that the norm for the Cardboard is that posters should only start new a thread if there isn't already a quasi-active thread that encapsulates the broad topic of the new post. As there seem to be several active threads assessing the status of our football team, I'd encourage posters to consider whether another new thread is necessary. This helps ensure other topics don't get lost in the shuffle, which is especially important during a time of year in which many of our athletic teams are in action.
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Just a friendly neighborhood moderator reminder that the norm for the Cardboard is that posters should only start new a thread if there isn't already a quasi-active thread that encapsulates the broad topic of the new post. As there seem to be several active threads assessing the status of our football team, I'd encourage posters to consider whether another new thread is necessary. This helps ensure other topics don't get lost in the shuffle, which is especially important during a time of year in which many of our athletic teams are in action.
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
11-29-2019, 01:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-29-2019, 01:44 PM by cardcrimson.)
Understand, but I have to admit, I didn't realize our running game had become that bad. Through the first 8 games, Scarlett averaged 87.5, with 5 games over 90 and one over 150; the last three, 97 total.
(11-29-2019, 11:39 AM)2006alum Wrote: Just a friendly neighborhood moderator reminder that the norm for the Cardboard is that posters should only start new a thread if there isn't already a quasi-active thread that encapsulates the broad topic of the new post. As there seem to be several active threads assessing the status of our football team, I'd encourage posters to consider whether another new thread is necessary. This helps ensure other topics don't get lost in the shuffle, which is especially important during a time of year in which many of our athletic teams are in action.
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
(This post was last modified: 11-29-2019, 01:44 PM by cardcrimson.)
Understand, but I have to admit, I didn't realize our running game had become that bad. Through the first 8 games, Scarlett averaged 87.5, with 5 games over 90 and one over 150; the last three, 97 total.
(11-29-2019, 11:39 AM)2006alum Wrote: Just a friendly neighborhood moderator reminder that the norm for the Cardboard is that posters should only start new a thread if there isn't already a quasi-active thread that encapsulates the broad topic of the new post. As there seem to be several active threads assessing the status of our football team, I'd encourage posters to consider whether another new thread is necessary. This helps ensure other topics don't get lost in the shuffle, which is especially important during a time of year in which many of our athletic teams are in action.
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
11-29-2019, 02:00 PM
(11-29-2019, 01:38 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Understand, but I have to admit, I didn't realize our running game had become that bad. Through the first 8 games, Scarlett averaged 87.5, with 5 games over 90 and one over 150; the last three, 97 total.
(11-29-2019, 11:39 AM)2006alum Wrote: Just a friendly neighborhood moderator reminder that the norm for the Cardboard is that posters should only start new a thread if there isn't already a quasi-active thread that encapsulates the broad topic of the new post. As there seem to be several active threads assessing the status of our football team, I'd encourage posters to consider whether another new thread is necessary. This helps ensure other topics don't get lost in the shuffle, which is especially important during a time of year in which many of our athletic teams are in action.
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Correlation is not causation, of course. But, we are 0-3 in those last three games, while we were 4-4 against those first eight.
BC
(11-29-2019, 01:38 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Understand, but I have to admit, I didn't realize our running game had become that bad. Through the first 8 games, Scarlett averaged 87.5, with 5 games over 90 and one over 150; the last three, 97 total.
(11-29-2019, 11:39 AM)2006alum Wrote: Just a friendly neighborhood moderator reminder that the norm for the Cardboard is that posters should only start new a thread if there isn't already a quasi-active thread that encapsulates the broad topic of the new post. As there seem to be several active threads assessing the status of our football team, I'd encourage posters to consider whether another new thread is necessary. This helps ensure other topics don't get lost in the shuffle, which is especially important during a time of year in which many of our athletic teams are in action.
Thanks, and happy turkey weekend!
Correlation is not causation, of course. But, we are 0-3 in those last three games, while we were 4-4 against those first eight.
BC
11-29-2019, 02:09 PM
Hey John, did you ever date Haley Mills?
Three good words: Linebacker Casey Toohill. There you go pal.
Three good words: Linebacker Casey Toohill. There you go pal.
11-29-2019, 02:20 PM
With all do respect, nonsense. Time to fess up and admit that there is blame to be spread everywhere.
11-29-2019, 03:55 PM
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »