12-31-2020, 01:46 PM
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
Davis Mills going pro
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
12-31-2020, 01:55 PM
(12-31-2020, 01:46 PM)82lsju Wrote: https://gostanford.com/news/2020/12/31/f...VSlMhBJDxU
Best of luck. QB heavy draft, maybe he's hoping for a late round pick up by the Niners.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
(12-31-2020, 01:46 PM)82lsju Wrote: https://gostanford.com/news/2020/12/31/f...VSlMhBJDxU
Best of luck. QB heavy draft, maybe he's hoping for a late round pick up by the Niners.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
12-31-2020, 01:58 PM
Graduating with a degree in March! Very impressive. Thanks and best of luck!
12-31-2020, 02:02 PM
Not at all surprised after Fehoko, Dalman, and Sarell all declared.
Next year could be rough on offense. We already know it's not going to be very good on defense.
Next year could be rough on offense. We already know it's not going to be very good on defense.
12-31-2020, 02:04 PM
Maybe Stanford will get some consideration? The QB position is wide open.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
Maybe Stanford will get some consideration? The QB position is wide open.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
12-31-2020, 02:14 PM
(12-31-2020, 02:04 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Maybe Stanford will get some consideration? The QB position is wide open.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
Has to sit for a year, right?
(12-31-2020, 02:04 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Maybe Stanford will get some consideration? The QB position is wide open.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
Has to sit for a year, right?
12-31-2020, 02:19 PM
(12-31-2020, 02:14 PM)bbm233 Wrote:(12-31-2020, 02:04 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Maybe Stanford will get some consideration? The QB position is wide open.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
Has to sit for a year, right?
It is expected that NCAA will pass a rule in March allowing a one time transfer without sitting out. The transfer portal will become chaos. Hilsinki is interesting but he wouldn't have a clear path to starting over McKee and West so I think he would go to a lower tier school or somewhere else where it is easier to start (ala Dylan McCaffrey going to play for his dad at Northern Colorado).
(12-31-2020, 02:14 PM)bbm233 Wrote:(12-31-2020, 02:04 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Maybe Stanford will get some consideration? The QB position is wide open.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...fer-portal
Has to sit for a year, right?
It is expected that NCAA will pass a rule in March allowing a one time transfer without sitting out. The transfer portal will become chaos. Hilsinki is interesting but he wouldn't have a clear path to starting over McKee and West so I think he would go to a lower tier school or somewhere else where it is easier to start (ala Dylan McCaffrey going to play for his dad at Northern Colorado).
12-31-2020, 02:20 PM
(12-31-2020, 02:02 PM)winflop Wrote: Not at all surprised after Fehoko, Dalman, and Sarell all declared.
Next year could be rough on offense. We already know it's not going to be very good on defense.
Yep, I think 2021 could be a difficult year.
Mills is another player who we didn't get anywhere close to the productivity we expected when we signed him.
(12-31-2020, 02:02 PM)winflop Wrote: Not at all surprised after Fehoko, Dalman, and Sarell all declared.
Next year could be rough on offense. We already know it's not going to be very good on defense.
Yep, I think 2021 could be a difficult year.
Mills is another player who we didn't get anywhere close to the productivity we expected when we signed him.
12-31-2020, 02:21 PM
Like cardcrimson noted, this is a QB-heavy draft. I've seen some mocks (I know, I know) by reputable analysts with SIX QBs going in the first round, and they ain't named Davis Mills.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
Like cardcrimson noted, this is a QB-heavy draft. I've seen some mocks (I know, I know) by reputable analysts with SIX QBs going in the first round, and they ain't named Davis Mills.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
12-31-2020, 02:27 PM
One thought I think I mentioned elsewhere, the 2021 season is by no means a certain thing, at least in any sense of normalcy, especially in Santa Clara County. Even a little uncertainty could have contributed to the decision.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
One thought I think I mentioned elsewhere, the 2021 season is by no means a certain thing, at least in any sense of normalcy, especially in Santa Clara County. Even a little uncertainty could have contributed to the decision.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
12-31-2020, 02:44 PM
Oh well. Great thing we signed a top ten recruiting class this year that will help us reload. /s
Oh well. Great thing we signed a top ten recruiting class this year that will help us reload. /s
12-31-2020, 02:49 PM
Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
12-31-2020, 03:15 PM
(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
"opt out culture"? Each of the players who has announced his intention to leave will complete their degree before leaving. I would describe the culture in a way that Silicon Valley could recognize - "continuous reinvention."
Shaw has to continue to adapt to an environment where he cannot count on 5th year players. He has to create an environment where players can reach their peak level of contribution within a year or two, not three or four.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
"opt out culture"? Each of the players who has announced his intention to leave will complete their degree before leaving. I would describe the culture in a way that Silicon Valley could recognize - "continuous reinvention."
Shaw has to continue to adapt to an environment where he cannot count on 5th year players. He has to create an environment where players can reach their peak level of contribution within a year or two, not three or four.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
12-31-2020, 03:16 PM
(12-31-2020, 02:21 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: Like cardcrimson noted, this is a QB-heavy draft. I've seen some mocks (I know, I know) by reputable analysts with SIX QBs going in the first round, and they ain't named Davis Mills.He will move up draft boards. The more time NFL looks at him and spends time with him, the more they are going to like him. He is a complete player. I bet he goes in the first three rounds and is one of the top 6 QBs taken.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
(12-31-2020, 02:21 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: Like cardcrimson noted, this is a QB-heavy draft. I've seen some mocks (I know, I know) by reputable analysts with SIX QBs going in the first round, and they ain't named Davis Mills.He will move up draft boards. The more time NFL looks at him and spends time with him, the more they are going to like him. He is a complete player. I bet he goes in the first three rounds and is one of the top 6 QBs taken.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
12-31-2020, 03:17 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2020, 03:20 PM by OutsiderFan.)
David Shaw's refusal to adapt to all the forces working against his program seem to be coming home to roost in a very bad way for Stanford Football.
You can't recruit small classes thinking guys are going to redshirt and stay for four years, have complex systems that take 2 years to get the best players contributing on the field, and then have them leave after using 2-3 years of eligibility. It's unsustainable.
It's possible the more offers for 2022 is evidence of a shift in philosophy, but as long as there are no coaching staff changes, I'm inclined to think they are a reaction to a desperate situation more than proactive change.
You need to recruit classes of 25 each year, to have position groups grow up with each other, and easily withstand early departures that are now the rule not exception.
It's just so demoralizing to see a kid like Marvin Mims, who was committed to Stanford, rack up 37 catches for 610 yards and 9 TDs in 11 games for Oklahoma as a True Frosh. You know how many TDs Connor Wedington has in 31 games for Stanford? ONE! And in 20 more games, he has just 300 more yards.
You can't recruit small classes thinking guys are going to redshirt and stay for four years, have complex systems that take 2 years to get the best players contributing on the field, and then have them leave after using 2-3 years of eligibility. It's unsustainable.
It's possible the more offers for 2022 is evidence of a shift in philosophy, but as long as there are no coaching staff changes, I'm inclined to think they are a reaction to a desperate situation more than proactive change.
You need to recruit classes of 25 each year, to have position groups grow up with each other, and easily withstand early departures that are now the rule not exception.
It's just so demoralizing to see a kid like Marvin Mims, who was committed to Stanford, rack up 37 catches for 610 yards and 9 TDs in 11 games for Oklahoma as a True Frosh. You know how many TDs Connor Wedington has in 31 games for Stanford? ONE! And in 20 more games, he has just 300 more yards.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2020, 03:20 PM by OutsiderFan.)
David Shaw's refusal to adapt to all the forces working against his program seem to be coming home to roost in a very bad way for Stanford Football.
You can't recruit small classes thinking guys are going to redshirt and stay for four years, have complex systems that take 2 years to get the best players contributing on the field, and then have them leave after using 2-3 years of eligibility. It's unsustainable.
It's possible the more offers for 2022 is evidence of a shift in philosophy, but as long as there are no coaching staff changes, I'm inclined to think they are a reaction to a desperate situation more than proactive change.
You need to recruit classes of 25 each year, to have position groups grow up with each other, and easily withstand early departures that are now the rule not exception.
It's just so demoralizing to see a kid like Marvin Mims, who was committed to Stanford, rack up 37 catches for 610 yards and 9 TDs in 11 games for Oklahoma as a True Frosh. You know how many TDs Connor Wedington has in 31 games for Stanford? ONE! And in 20 more games, he has just 300 more yards.
You can't recruit small classes thinking guys are going to redshirt and stay for four years, have complex systems that take 2 years to get the best players contributing on the field, and then have them leave after using 2-3 years of eligibility. It's unsustainable.
It's possible the more offers for 2022 is evidence of a shift in philosophy, but as long as there are no coaching staff changes, I'm inclined to think they are a reaction to a desperate situation more than proactive change.
You need to recruit classes of 25 each year, to have position groups grow up with each other, and easily withstand early departures that are now the rule not exception.
It's just so demoralizing to see a kid like Marvin Mims, who was committed to Stanford, rack up 37 catches for 610 yards and 9 TDs in 11 games for Oklahoma as a True Frosh. You know how many TDs Connor Wedington has in 31 games for Stanford? ONE! And in 20 more games, he has just 300 more yards.
(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
Um, Stanford is oil to the opt out culture. It’s essentially a one way street. Too hard to get in as a transfer. The new rules - recruiting changes and opt outs- hurt Stanford.
(12-31-2020, 03:15 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
"opt out culture"? Each of the players who has announced his intention to leave will complete their degree before leaving. I would describe the culture in a way that Silicon Valley could recognize - "continuous reinvention."
Shaw has to continue to adapt to an environment where he cannot count on 5th year players. He has to create an environment where players can reach their peak level of contribution within a year or two, not three or four.
Agree. Completely.
(12-31-2020, 02:21 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: Like cardcrimson noted, this is a QB-heavy draft. I've seen some mocks (I know, I know) by reputable analysts with SIX QBs going in the first round, and they ain't named Davis Mills.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
He was hurt. Then got hosed by the Pac-12 in a shortened season. Still, he showed enough to make it obvious to anyone looking that he’s the most talented QB Stanford has had since Luck. Excellent arm skills, presence in the pocket, can throw on the run, and while not a dual threat guy, he’s mobile.
I wish we saw him more. Personally I expect to see him on Sundays.
(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
Um, Stanford is oil to the opt out culture. It’s essentially a one way street. Too hard to get in as a transfer. The new rules - recruiting changes and opt outs- hurt Stanford.
(12-31-2020, 03:15 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
"opt out culture"? Each of the players who has announced his intention to leave will complete their degree before leaving. I would describe the culture in a way that Silicon Valley could recognize - "continuous reinvention."
Shaw has to continue to adapt to an environment where he cannot count on 5th year players. He has to create an environment where players can reach their peak level of contribution within a year or two, not three or four.
Agree. Completely.
(12-31-2020, 02:21 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: Like cardcrimson noted, this is a QB-heavy draft. I've seen some mocks (I know, I know) by reputable analysts with SIX QBs going in the first round, and they ain't named Davis Mills.
I know he lost some weapons. But my goodness, he's started eleven games. He has in no way permeated the national college football consciousness. He doesn't have the tape to warrant a GM taking a risk on him. Just from a pure financial perspective, I don't understand him feeling like he's better positioned to take the leap now vs. after another year.
When you're hoping to be a late round pick, then how is this the right play? If he comes back, puts down a good year on tape, and he comes out in a less-loaded draft, that's millions more in his pocket and a team that is committed to him as a high pick (leading to more chances, the benefit of the doubt, etc.) rather than a team that isn't invested in him, either financially or in terms of draft capital.
Little and Adebo? Those decisions make sense. They've shown enough. I can even understand Fehoko, especially since he took a mission. He's 23 with great measurables, and some team is gonna pick him up, probably on Day 2. But Sarell? And now Mills?
Maybe it's just as simple as looking around, seeing who's coming back on offense, and betting that he's not going to be protected well and won't have good enough weapons to improve his stock. And if that's the case, then ok, I guess--I'll know that I don't need to keep my Saturdays free next fall. But gosh, it's hard not to look back at his career and not think of it as anything other than a major disappointment compared to expectations. That couldn't be helped this year, of course, but such is life.
He was hurt. Then got hosed by the Pac-12 in a shortened season. Still, he showed enough to make it obvious to anyone looking that he’s the most talented QB Stanford has had since Luck. Excellent arm skills, presence in the pocket, can throw on the run, and while not a dual threat guy, he’s mobile.
I wish we saw him more. Personally I expect to see him on Sundays.
12-31-2020, 04:00 PM
players are leaving early all over the country - skipping redshirt 5th years, leaving after 3, forgoing bowl games.
i wonder if the ncaa's hard-line stance on sharing some of the tv proceeds with the players isn't coming back to bite the schools. many players may be thinking, "cheat us out of a reasonable share? fine, we're out of here!"
i wonder if the ncaa's hard-line stance on sharing some of the tv proceeds with the players isn't coming back to bite the schools. many players may be thinking, "cheat us out of a reasonable share? fine, we're out of here!"
players are leaving early all over the country - skipping redshirt 5th years, leaving after 3, forgoing bowl games.
i wonder if the ncaa's hard-line stance on sharing some of the tv proceeds with the players isn't coming back to bite the schools. many players may be thinking, "cheat us out of a reasonable share? fine, we're out of here!"
i wonder if the ncaa's hard-line stance on sharing some of the tv proceeds with the players isn't coming back to bite the schools. many players may be thinking, "cheat us out of a reasonable share? fine, we're out of here!"
12-31-2020, 04:02 PM
(12-31-2020, 03:15 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
"opt out culture"? Each of the players who has announced his intention to leave will complete their degree before leaving. I would describe the culture in a way that Silicon Valley could recognize - "continuous reinvention."
Shaw has to continue to adapt to an environment where he cannot count on 5th year players. He has to create an environment where players can reach their peak level of contribution within a year or two, not three or four.
Even Bama isn't winning with a bunch or freshman and sophomores. Thats not realistic and never has been. Also forget 5 years we can't even keep them for 4 years
If anything I think Shaw has to go against the grain and tell recruits from the beginning that they're expected to stay for 4-5 years. But it would never happen because its a PR nightmare.
(12-31-2020, 03:15 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(12-31-2020, 02:49 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: Guys I don't think Shaw is going to be here much longer. It seems like the culture Shaw and Harbaugh built here is oil to the "opt out cultures" water. It iust doesn't mix.
"opt out culture"? Each of the players who has announced his intention to leave will complete their degree before leaving. I would describe the culture in a way that Silicon Valley could recognize - "continuous reinvention."
Shaw has to continue to adapt to an environment where he cannot count on 5th year players. He has to create an environment where players can reach their peak level of contribution within a year or two, not three or four.
Even Bama isn't winning with a bunch or freshman and sophomores. Thats not realistic and never has been. Also forget 5 years we can't even keep them for 4 years
If anything I think Shaw has to go against the grain and tell recruits from the beginning that they're expected to stay for 4-5 years. But it would never happen because its a PR nightmare.
12-31-2020, 04:32 PM
(12-31-2020, 04:02 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: ...Even Bama isn't winning with a bunch or freshman and sophomores. Thats not realistic and never has been. Also forget 5 years we can't even keep them for 4 years
fwiw, Alabama has 8 FR or SO in the offensive 2-deep, including 3 SO starters. on defense, Alabama has 11 FR or SO in the 2-deep including 5 FR/SO starters. Alabama plays (and develops) young talent rather than deferring to seniority. I wish Shaw would do more of that (or both).
(12-31-2020, 04:02 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: ...Even Bama isn't winning with a bunch or freshman and sophomores. Thats not realistic and never has been. Also forget 5 years we can't even keep them for 4 years
fwiw, Alabama has 8 FR or SO in the offensive 2-deep, including 3 SO starters. on defense, Alabama has 11 FR or SO in the 2-deep including 5 FR/SO starters. Alabama plays (and develops) young talent rather than deferring to seniority. I wish Shaw would do more of that (or both).
12-31-2020, 04:42 PM
(12-31-2020, 04:32 PM)slide Wrote:(12-31-2020, 04:02 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: ...Even Bama isn't winning with a bunch or freshman and sophomores. Thats not realistic and never has been. Also forget 5 years we can't even keep them for 4 years
fwiw, Alabama has 8 FR or SO in the offensive 2-deep, including 3 SO starters. on defense, Alabama has 11 FR or SO in the 2-deep including 5 FR/SO starters. Alabama plays (and develops) young talent rather than deferring to seniority. I wish Shaw would do more of that (or both).
How many of those sophomores are RS sophomores? Either way a majority of the players are uppclassmen, winning with freshman and sophomores is not realistic even at Bama where they can take 25+ recuiting classed every year and cut players on whim.
(12-31-2020, 04:32 PM)slide Wrote:(12-31-2020, 04:02 PM)AthleticsDynasty Wrote: ...Even Bama isn't winning with a bunch or freshman and sophomores. Thats not realistic and never has been. Also forget 5 years we can't even keep them for 4 years
fwiw, Alabama has 8 FR or SO in the offensive 2-deep, including 3 SO starters. on defense, Alabama has 11 FR or SO in the 2-deep including 5 FR/SO starters. Alabama plays (and develops) young talent rather than deferring to seniority. I wish Shaw would do more of that (or both).
How many of those sophomores are RS sophomores? Either way a majority of the players are uppclassmen, winning with freshman and sophomores is not realistic even at Bama where they can take 25+ recuiting classed every year and cut players on whim.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »