[cardcrimson]

Hope you're both proud at the state of Stanford football you both created.  The cupboards weren't this bare even in the early 2000s.

That said, I still have faith in the new staff and the new team.

[cardcrimson]

Hope you're both proud at the state of Stanford football you both created.  The cupboards weren't this bare even in the early 2000s.

That said, I still have faith in the new staff and the new team.

[PAsportsfan]

Add MTL.

So sad.

[PAsportsfan]

Add MTL.

So sad.

[lex24]

David Shaw‘s legacy is also three Pac 12 Championships. A number equal to the amount of championships they had in the previous 40.  

 He left the cupboard bare and the last few years were not pretty to say the least. But I will always appreciate what he accomplished in the earlier years.

Stanford, as an institution is also going to have to either adjust to the new reality or get used to being trashed. We will see what happens. But I’m not optimistic. I don’t care who is coaching. If you have essentially a one-way portal and you’re not willing to join the NIL revolution, big time, then you have no chance. I don’t know if that’s on Muir or not. I kind of doubt it. I suspect it comes from higher up.

[lex24]

David Shaw‘s legacy is also three Pac 12 Championships. A number equal to the amount of championships they had in the previous 40.  

 He left the cupboard bare and the last few years were not pretty to say the least. But I will always appreciate what he accomplished in the earlier years.

Stanford, as an institution is also going to have to either adjust to the new reality or get used to being trashed. We will see what happens. But I’m not optimistic. I don’t care who is coaching. If you have essentially a one-way portal and you’re not willing to join the NIL revolution, big time, then you have no chance. I don’t know if that’s on Muir or not. I kind of doubt it. I suspect it comes from higher up.

[PAsportsfan]

Oh my god.

I can’t believe my eyes.

[PAsportsfan]

Oh my god.

I can’t believe my eyes.

[cardcrimson]

David Shaw‘s legacy is also three Pac 12 Championships. A number equal to the amount of championships that had in the previous 40.  

 He left the cupboard bare and the last few years were not pretty to say the least. But I will always appreciate what he accomplished in the earlier years.

Lex. I love you and trust you. If you had been one the sidelines coaching and not handling the sticks, we would have won those games and certainly wouldn't have lost to Michigan State. . . .

[cardcrimson]

David Shaw‘s legacy is also three Pac 12 Championships. A number equal to the amount of championships that had in the previous 40.  

 He left the cupboard bare and the last few years were not pretty to say the least. But I will always appreciate what he accomplished in the earlier years.

Lex. I love you and trust you. If you had been one the sidelines coaching and not handling the sticks, we would have won those games and certainly wouldn't have lost to Michigan State. . . .

[lex24]

David Shaw‘s legacy is also three Pac 12 Championships. A number equal to the amount of championships that had in the previous 40.  

 He left the cupboard bare and the last few years were not pretty to say the least. But I will always appreciate what he accomplished in the earlier years.

Lex. I love you and trust you. If you had been one the sidelines coaching and not handling the sticks, we would have won those games and certainly wouldn't have lost to Michigan State. . . .

Shaw always got blamed for the losses and no credit for the wins. Sorry, but I’m simply not one that accepts that. I’m gonna give him his due for what he accomplished and blame him for the last few years and how he left things. Which I think is fair.

Otherwise, I hope that will be my last David Shaw comment. If there’s one topic I’m completely and totally sick of, that’s it.

[lex24]

David Shaw‘s legacy is also three Pac 12 Championships. A number equal to the amount of championships that had in the previous 40.  

 He left the cupboard bare and the last few years were not pretty to say the least. But I will always appreciate what he accomplished in the earlier years.

Lex. I love you and trust you. If you had been one the sidelines coaching and not handling the sticks, we would have won those games and certainly wouldn't have lost to Michigan State. . . .

Shaw always got blamed for the losses and no credit for the wins. Sorry, but I’m simply not one that accepts that. I’m gonna give him his due for what he accomplished and blame him for the last few years and how he left things. Which I think is fair.

Otherwise, I hope that will be my last David Shaw comment. If there’s one topic I’m completely and totally sick of, that’s it.

[Mick]

I value Shaw for the work he did for Harbaugh and for a few years after Harbaugh. But Shaw is 14-28 over the last four seasons. He showed signs of retiring in place several years before he actually retired.

Speaking as a manager over the past thirty years, I have eliminated once-effective, now-ineffective executives. Twice, I waited too long to get rid of poor employees. Always regretted it.

Muir should be fired. He let the head coach of the most important sport rot in place, in a turbulent atmosphere with changing implications brought about by NIL and the transfer portal. I have no confidence in Muir...at all. His second most important head coach runs a year-after-year mediocre program.

It doesn't have to be this bad. Really, it doesn't.

[Mick]

I value Shaw for the work he did for Harbaugh and for a few years after Harbaugh. But Shaw is 14-28 over the last four seasons. He showed signs of retiring in place several years before he actually retired.

Speaking as a manager over the past thirty years, I have eliminated once-effective, now-ineffective executives. Twice, I waited too long to get rid of poor employees. Always regretted it.

Muir should be fired. He let the head coach of the most important sport rot in place, in a turbulent atmosphere with changing implications brought about by NIL and the transfer portal. I have no confidence in Muir...at all. His second most important head coach runs a year-after-year mediocre program.

It doesn't have to be this bad. Really, it doesn't.

[Snorlax94]

Hope you're both proud at the state of Stanford football you both created.  The cupboards weren't this bare even in the early 2000s.

That said, I still have faith in the new staff and the new team.

Wow, I was surprised when I saw this but I shouldn't be — certain fans will continue to blame Coach David Shaw — the winningest coach in Stanford history — for every loss forever.

I don’t mind the loss. I don’t mind losing big in a time of transition. But tonight’s team did not play fundamentally sound football.

On the kickoff touchdown, there was no pocket, and like 5 players simultaneously over-ran the return man and were grossly out of position to make a play.

How is this David Shaw’s fault? You draw up your kickoff plays, you assign lanes, you close a pocket, you shed blockers, you tackle.

Kickoff teams were pretty sound every year Coach Shaw’s tenure.

So the players now aren’t playing sound football. Maybe the schemes have changed and they need more time to learn them. Some coaches and coordinators have been promoted to levels they’ve never coached at before, or are coaching at the Power 5 level for the first time.

This is Coach Troy Taylor’s team. To the extent that a player gets into position but cannot make the play because the other player is faster/more athletic, you can blame the previous coach. But if USC scores and many Stanford players are out of position, that is the current coach’s fault.

It is always possible to play sound, disciplined football. And Coach Taylor and crew need to make that happen. Fast.

[Snorlax94]

Hope you're both proud at the state of Stanford football you both created.  The cupboards weren't this bare even in the early 2000s.

That said, I still have faith in the new staff and the new team.

Wow, I was surprised when I saw this but I shouldn't be — certain fans will continue to blame Coach David Shaw — the winningest coach in Stanford history — for every loss forever.

I don’t mind the loss. I don’t mind losing big in a time of transition. But tonight’s team did not play fundamentally sound football.

On the kickoff touchdown, there was no pocket, and like 5 players simultaneously over-ran the return man and were grossly out of position to make a play.

How is this David Shaw’s fault? You draw up your kickoff plays, you assign lanes, you close a pocket, you shed blockers, you tackle.

Kickoff teams were pretty sound every year Coach Shaw’s tenure.

So the players now aren’t playing sound football. Maybe the schemes have changed and they need more time to learn them. Some coaches and coordinators have been promoted to levels they’ve never coached at before, or are coaching at the Power 5 level for the first time.

This is Coach Troy Taylor’s team. To the extent that a player gets into position but cannot make the play because the other player is faster/more athletic, you can blame the previous coach. But if USC scores and many Stanford players are out of position, that is the current coach’s fault.

It is always possible to play sound, disciplined football. And Coach Taylor and crew need to make that happen. Fast.

[PersonalLegend]

“Shaw had better kickoff teams” is not the retort you think it is. 

Shaw had better talent for the first two thirds of his tenure, then went off the rails. Good players play fundamentally sound football and also have the athleticism to make up for mistakes collectively and individually. 

Certain fans will defend Shaw for his body of work, which is correct. Then they will defend Shaw for what he left, which is indefensible.

[PersonalLegend]

“Shaw had better kickoff teams” is not the retort you think it is. 

Shaw had better talent for the first two thirds of his tenure, then went off the rails. Good players play fundamentally sound football and also have the athleticism to make up for mistakes collectively and individually. 

Certain fans will defend Shaw for his body of work, which is correct. Then they will defend Shaw for what he left, which is indefensible.

[Farm93]

The portal is the more enduring problem, but I understand why some need to find a person or two to blame for last night's thrashing.

What USC did last year, and what Colorado did this year are not possible at Stanford.   In both cases their recruiting and roster situations were in real peril, but the portal solved everything, and more.

Most FBS schools that have seen a head coach departure in the last few years have seen transfer numbers at least as dramatic as Stanford's situation.  When programs see a coach depart the program will need 20+ incoming transfers to offset the departures.   Programs most eager to win quickly seem to also purge those that are not going to fit the new coach scheme, and that is definitely not going to happen at Stanford.

It would have been great for Shaw to win 10+ games until the year he departed, but that is not usually how coaches leave in college football. 

The one-way portal means Stanford will see a very weak roster whenever a coach leaves.    For me the impact of the one-way portal on a coaching change is tough to see because I think it helps justify keeping Haase in his position.   

Stanford's status as an elite university with nearly impossible admissions standards is inconsistent with then allowing Stanford to accept 20-40 transfer "students" to a football program that are marginal students, will only stay for 5-17 months, and almost certainly will not graduate with a degree. 

My concern for TT and Stanford is that almost every team I saw win in week 0, 1 & 2 featured starters in major roles that had been in the portal over the offseason.   Even for teams that were successful in 2021 and 2022 they experienced massive portal disruptions and enhancements. 

I can't imagine an NFL team winning in the league without utilizing free-agency and now in 2023 I can't imagine a college football team getting 8+ wins with a roster built almost exclusively from HS recruiting.

I always believed NIL opportunities and the transfer portal would empower players in ways that would be detrimental for Stanford football, but a net positive for student-athletes in the USA.   Living in that reality here in 2023 is not enjoyable, but I still like the idea that athletes at least have a chance to monetize their value with NILs and transfers.

[Farm93]

The portal is the more enduring problem, but I understand why some need to find a person or two to blame for last night's thrashing.

What USC did last year, and what Colorado did this year are not possible at Stanford.   In both cases their recruiting and roster situations were in real peril, but the portal solved everything, and more.

Most FBS schools that have seen a head coach departure in the last few years have seen transfer numbers at least as dramatic as Stanford's situation.  When programs see a coach depart the program will need 20+ incoming transfers to offset the departures.   Programs most eager to win quickly seem to also purge those that are not going to fit the new coach scheme, and that is definitely not going to happen at Stanford.

It would have been great for Shaw to win 10+ games until the year he departed, but that is not usually how coaches leave in college football. 

The one-way portal means Stanford will see a very weak roster whenever a coach leaves.    For me the impact of the one-way portal on a coaching change is tough to see because I think it helps justify keeping Haase in his position.   

Stanford's status as an elite university with nearly impossible admissions standards is inconsistent with then allowing Stanford to accept 20-40 transfer "students" to a football program that are marginal students, will only stay for 5-17 months, and almost certainly will not graduate with a degree. 

My concern for TT and Stanford is that almost every team I saw win in week 0, 1 & 2 featured starters in major roles that had been in the portal over the offseason.   Even for teams that were successful in 2021 and 2022 they experienced massive portal disruptions and enhancements. 

I can't imagine an NFL team winning in the league without utilizing free-agency and now in 2023 I can't imagine a college football team getting 8+ wins with a roster built almost exclusively from HS recruiting.

I always believed NIL opportunities and the transfer portal would empower players in ways that would be detrimental for Stanford football, but a net positive for student-athletes in the USA.   Living in that reality here in 2023 is not enjoyable, but I still like the idea that athletes at least have a chance to monetize their value with NILs and transfers.

[81alum]

The portal is the more enduring problem, but I understand why some need to find a person or two to blame for last night's thrashing.

What USC did last year, and what Colorado did this year are not possible at Stanford.   In both cases their recruiting and roster situations were in real peril, but the portal solved everything, and more.

Most FBS schools that have seen a head coach departure in the last few years have seen transfer numbers at least as dramatic as Stanford's situation.  When programs see a coach depart the program will need 20+ incoming transfers to offset the departures.   Programs most eager to win quickly seem to also purge those that are not going to fit the new coach scheme, and that is definitely not going to happen at Stanford.

It would have been great for Shaw to win 10+ games until the year he departed, but that is not usually how coaches leave in college football. 

The one-way portal means Stanford will see a very weak roster whenever a coach leaves.    For me the impact of the one-way portal on a coaching change is tough to see because I think it helps justify keeping Haase in his position.   

Stanford's status as an elite university with nearly impossible admissions standards is inconsistent with then allowing Stanford to accept 20-40 transfer "students" to a football program that are marginal students, will only stay for 5-17 months, and almost certainly will not graduate with a degree. 

My concern for TT and Stanford is that almost every team I saw win in week 0, 1 & 2 featured starters in major roles that had been in the portal over the offseason.   Even for teams that were successful in 2021 and 2022 they experienced massive portal disruptions and enhancements. 

I can't imagine an NFL team winning in the league without utilizing free-agency and now in 2023 I can't imagine a college football team getting 8+ wins with a roster built almost exclusively from HS recruiting.

I always believed NIL opportunities and the transfer portal would empower players in ways that would be detrimental for Stanford football, but a net positive for student-athletes in the USA.   Living in that reality here in 2023 is not enjoyable, but I still like the idea that athletes at least have a chance to monetize their value with NILs and transfers.

I've been avoiding this thread because I am so, so, so tired of beating the dead horse.  But Farm, I find myself in agreement with much of your thoughtful analysis.  The recruiting paradigm has now shifted--the most successful, elite teams are no longer going to (primarily) sustain their excellence over time by recruiting high school players, but by recruiting "proven" transfers from lesser programs and programs with coaching transitions.    Can Stanford field a 2012 caliber team the old-fashioned way--by recruiting high school students and building them up over 4 and 5 years?  Can we do that while our chief rivals routinely take massive shortcuts and can plug any weakness with just six months notice?  If TT can do that, he will be a much bigger miracle worker than Harbaugh.

[81alum]

The portal is the more enduring problem, but I understand why some need to find a person or two to blame for last night's thrashing.

What USC did last year, and what Colorado did this year are not possible at Stanford.   In both cases their recruiting and roster situations were in real peril, but the portal solved everything, and more.

Most FBS schools that have seen a head coach departure in the last few years have seen transfer numbers at least as dramatic as Stanford's situation.  When programs see a coach depart the program will need 20+ incoming transfers to offset the departures.   Programs most eager to win quickly seem to also purge those that are not going to fit the new coach scheme, and that is definitely not going to happen at Stanford.

It would have been great for Shaw to win 10+ games until the year he departed, but that is not usually how coaches leave in college football. 

The one-way portal means Stanford will see a very weak roster whenever a coach leaves.    For me the impact of the one-way portal on a coaching change is tough to see because I think it helps justify keeping Haase in his position.   

Stanford's status as an elite university with nearly impossible admissions standards is inconsistent with then allowing Stanford to accept 20-40 transfer "students" to a football program that are marginal students, will only stay for 5-17 months, and almost certainly will not graduate with a degree. 

My concern for TT and Stanford is that almost every team I saw win in week 0, 1 & 2 featured starters in major roles that had been in the portal over the offseason.   Even for teams that were successful in 2021 and 2022 they experienced massive portal disruptions and enhancements. 

I can't imagine an NFL team winning in the league without utilizing free-agency and now in 2023 I can't imagine a college football team getting 8+ wins with a roster built almost exclusively from HS recruiting.

I always believed NIL opportunities and the transfer portal would empower players in ways that would be detrimental for Stanford football, but a net positive for student-athletes in the USA.   Living in that reality here in 2023 is not enjoyable, but I still like the idea that athletes at least have a chance to monetize their value with NILs and transfers.

I've been avoiding this thread because I am so, so, so tired of beating the dead horse.  But Farm, I find myself in agreement with much of your thoughtful analysis.  The recruiting paradigm has now shifted--the most successful, elite teams are no longer going to (primarily) sustain their excellence over time by recruiting high school players, but by recruiting "proven" transfers from lesser programs and programs with coaching transitions.    Can Stanford field a 2012 caliber team the old-fashioned way--by recruiting high school students and building them up over 4 and 5 years?  Can we do that while our chief rivals routinely take massive shortcuts and can plug any weakness with just six months notice?  If TT can do that, he will be a much bigger miracle worker than Harbaugh.

[OutsiderFan]

Interesting how on the Badgers vs. Cougars ABC broadcast, it was pointed out how the Cougars know they aren't going to get a lot of transfers so they are doing all they can to keep their best players from transferring. Two of their best players are 6th year Seniors on defense who didn't transfer after last year when they could have, and were instrumental in their Saturday win.

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

If you aren't willing to do these things, you don't belong competing in the same division with those who do. Stanford thought it was "keeping up with the Joneses" by allowing early official visits and enrollees. That's like running 5k and thinking you're done, when you actually must complete a marathon.

* I'm not claiming transfers are a panacea for Cal, just pointing out how even Cal is willing to adapt.

[OutsiderFan]

Interesting how on the Badgers vs. Cougars ABC broadcast, it was pointed out how the Cougars know they aren't going to get a lot of transfers so they are doing all they can to keep their best players from transferring. Two of their best players are 6th year Seniors on defense who didn't transfer after last year when they could have, and were instrumental in their Saturday win.

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

If you aren't willing to do these things, you don't belong competing in the same division with those who do. Stanford thought it was "keeping up with the Joneses" by allowing early official visits and enrollees. That's like running 5k and thinking you're done, when you actually must complete a marathon.

* I'm not claiming transfers are a panacea for Cal, just pointing out how even Cal is willing to adapt.

[Mick]

I wonder what WSU does to keep the players who could transfer out?

[Mick]

I wonder what WSU does to keep the players who could transfer out?

[82lsju]

yes, thx to Shaw for the Rose Bowls!!!

yes, the last four years were very bad, 2020 probably got us one more year of Shaw as it might have made some "hopeful" for the future

on the transfers out, almost all of ours graduated.  By the end of their fourth year most players have 16 quarters of school (summer before entry and between each year), players who enter in Jan before the regular frosh will have 18 quarters of school by the end of four years, hard to imagine them not having more than enough units to graduate after four years (even harder to imagine if they enroll with any AP credits), we may begin to see more players graduate and become grad transfers after three years (12 quarters of school).  And I don't see Stanford graduate schools giving any admissions break to our football players or any grad transfers in

on transfers in (either undergrad or grad), we may get a few like this year but getting major contributors transferring in will likely be a few and far between phenomena.

[82lsju]

yes, thx to Shaw for the Rose Bowls!!!

yes, the last four years were very bad, 2020 probably got us one more year of Shaw as it might have made some "hopeful" for the future

on the transfers out, almost all of ours graduated.  By the end of their fourth year most players have 16 quarters of school (summer before entry and between each year), players who enter in Jan before the regular frosh will have 18 quarters of school by the end of four years, hard to imagine them not having more than enough units to graduate after four years (even harder to imagine if they enroll with any AP credits), we may begin to see more players graduate and become grad transfers after three years (12 quarters of school).  And I don't see Stanford graduate schools giving any admissions break to our football players or any grad transfers in

on transfers in (either undergrad or grad), we may get a few like this year but getting major contributors transferring in will likely be a few and far between phenomena.

[M T]

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

A football-first school can't do those things.  Stanford should never become a football-first school.

Has there been any (good, non-self selecting) survey of football importance to the Stanford's 16,000+ students?

[M T]

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

A football-first school can't do those things.  Stanford should never become a football-first school.

Has there been any (good, non-self selecting) survey of football importance to the Stanford's 16,000+ students?

[Snorlax94]

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

A football-first school can't do those things.  Stanford should never become a football-first school.

Has there been any (good, non-self selecting) survey of football importance to the Stanford's 16,000+ students?

I agree with MT’s sentiment but is the list even true?

I had a JC transfer in my frosh dorm.

The number of transfers is increasing, so they are clearly open to it.

Are students pushed out after 4 undergraduate years? Couldn’t they just declare as double majors and get another undergraduate degree?

I don’t know that Stanford “looks down” on NIL, though, I agree there has been a lack of vision and execution, and this is harming the athletic programs. One reason so many great tech companies come out of Stanford grads is that since at least the time of Frederick Terman encouraging Hewlett and Packard to start a company, Stanford has created an environment where students are encouraged to and can take their work knowledge and even projects (say, in search engines) and turn them into business ventures. I believe Stanford is the right place for student athletes, but we need a Frederick Terman of NIL.

[Snorlax94]

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

A football-first school can't do those things.  Stanford should never become a football-first school.

Has there been any (good, non-self selecting) survey of football importance to the Stanford's 16,000+ students?

I agree with MT’s sentiment but is the list even true?

I had a JC transfer in my frosh dorm.

The number of transfers is increasing, so they are clearly open to it.

Are students pushed out after 4 undergraduate years? Couldn’t they just declare as double majors and get another undergraduate degree?

I don’t know that Stanford “looks down” on NIL, though, I agree there has been a lack of vision and execution, and this is harming the athletic programs. One reason so many great tech companies come out of Stanford grads is that since at least the time of Frederick Terman encouraging Hewlett and Packard to start a company, Stanford has created an environment where students are encouraged to and can take their work knowledge and even projects (say, in search engines) and turn them into business ventures. I believe Stanford is the right place for student athletes, but we need a Frederick Terman of NIL.

[Mick]

When I toured Cal with my sons, the person leading the tour said that it would be tricky for most students to graduate in four years, and to both budget and expect to graduate in five or even six years. Obviously that was a class access issue that Stanford doesn't have, but I thought it was interesting.

[Mick]

When I toured Cal with my sons, the person leading the tour said that it would be tricky for most students to graduate in four years, and to both budget and expect to graduate in five or even six years. Obviously that was a class access issue that Stanford doesn't have, but I thought it was interesting.

[2006alum]

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

A football-first school can't do those things.  Stanford should never become a football-first school.

Has there been any (good, non-self selecting) survey of football importance to the Stanford's 16,000+ students?

I agree with MT’s sentiment but is the list even true?

I had a JC transfer in my frosh dorm.

The number of transfers is increasing, so they are clearly open to it.

It's definitely not true. I'm living proof they admit JC transfers. ;)

[2006alum]

Stanford simply has to be more flexible. It can't:

- Refuse JC transfers
- Limit itself to a few undergrad transfers (even Cal has like 27 transfers)*
- Require the highest admissions standards of everyone with whom it competes
- Require Grad School admission to stay for a 5th year and push guys to graduate in 4 years
- Look down on or not fully embrace NIL collectives, and paying players

A football-first school can't do those things.  Stanford should never become a football-first school.

Has there been any (good, non-self selecting) survey of football importance to the Stanford's 16,000+ students?

I agree with MT’s sentiment but is the list even true?

I had a JC transfer in my frosh dorm.

The number of transfers is increasing, so they are clearly open to it.

It's definitely not true. I'm living proof they admit JC transfers. ;)

[BobK]

Stanford had a JC transfer MBB last season. He played a couple of years. Last season he was in grad school

[BobK]

Stanford had a JC transfer MBB last season. He played a couple of years. Last season he was in grad school

[norcard10]

Hope you're both proud at the state of Stanford football you both created.  The cupboards weren't this bare even in the early 2000s.

That said, I still have faith in the new staff and the new team.

Give us a break, the buddy teevens years at the bottom were stacked with dreadful 3 and 2 star players.  There are a slew of 4 stars on the current roster still.

Shaw's coaching was a liability in the end - especially with offense.  But it wasn't all on him.  NIL stance by Stanford was and still is slow.

[norcard10]

Hope you're both proud at the state of Stanford football you both created.  The cupboards weren't this bare even in the early 2000s.

That said, I still have faith in the new staff and the new team.

Give us a break, the buddy teevens years at the bottom were stacked with dreadful 3 and 2 star players.  There are a slew of 4 stars on the current roster still.

Shaw's coaching was a liability in the end - especially with offense.  But it wasn't all on him.  NIL stance by Stanford was and still is slow.