[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Leftcoast]

I don't know, a "Stanford source" coming from a sports reporter sounds like a coach or player.  I mean what other choices are there for an out of area pro-fro?  A friend on campus?  A tweet from a lower level AD employee? I would think a direct link from admissions seems unlikely. 

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[Hurlburt88]

I have a hard time imagining that a REAL stanford source would ever divulge anything like that publicly.  I hope I am not being pollyanna in my belief.  ???

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.

[socalstanfan1]

We don't really know what he means by "a Stanford source." I don't think that necessarily means someone who works for the university. And not necessarily someone with hard information either.

I suppose a "Stanford source" could mean a student.  But Bonugera later tweeted that he got both pieces of information (about not getting accepted, and about that not being accurate) from people he trusted (implying someone who would be in a position with access to information. 

If reporters are citing "Stanford source" and it's just some student on campus, that in itself is a bit shady, IMO.  Of course, it would not be surprising for reporters to do something like that, but I actually believe most reporters who cite something like that actually do have a source in a position to gain the information.

One possibility crossed my mind: the first source, and the second source, might be the same person.  After seeing Bonugera tweet a rejection and realizing how that would effect the recruit, the source might go back and tell Bonugera he should not tweet THAT info; Bonugera goes back and says another source, equally credible as the "first" tells him it isn't true.