[OutsiderFan]

It seems to me there has been a significant decline in recruiting discussion after the creation of the recruiting board on this site.  Is that my imagination, or is it true?

Here we are, just about two months from signing day and there seems to be less recruiting discussion than last year.  Is this because the board moved or because there just isn't much going on on the recruiting front this year due to a small class and not too many elite prospects to get excited about the 2013 class?

And speaking of that, I'm curious to know if Stanford being a game from going to the Rose Bowl in a rebuilding year, is having any momentum on the recruiting trail, in terms of poaching or becoming serious contenders for recruits that were potentially buying into the "Stanford will go back to being mediocre when Luck leaves" meme and now see Stanford is a Top 10 program.  And might Stanford be able to parlay four straight wins over USC and their 7-5 in a national championship contending year, into pulling some recruits from USC? 

[OutsiderFan]

It seems to me there has been a significant decline in recruiting discussion after the creation of the recruiting board on this site.  Is that my imagination, or is it true?

Here we are, just about two months from signing day and there seems to be less recruiting discussion than last year.  Is this because the board moved or because there just isn't much going on on the recruiting front this year due to a small class and not too many elite prospects to get excited about the 2013 class?

And speaking of that, I'm curious to know if Stanford being a game from going to the Rose Bowl in a rebuilding year, is having any momentum on the recruiting trail, in terms of poaching or becoming serious contenders for recruits that were potentially buying into the "Stanford will go back to being mediocre when Luck leaves" meme and now see Stanford is a Top 10 program.  And might Stanford be able to parlay four straight wins over USC and their 7-5 in a national championship contending year, into pulling some recruits from USC? 

[tfeldstein]

I think it's silly to have a recruiting board, but this ain't my site. We are going to underperform this year for a lot of reasons, but that is mitigated by a great 2012 class, Burns, Owusu, Kalambayi and a few others and what could be a much better 2014 class. We were victimized by a bad academic pool, too few offers, and stepping on our own d*** with a few kids like Isaac and Alex Anzalone.

[tfeldstein]

I think it's silly to have a recruiting board, but this ain't my site. We are going to underperform this year for a lot of reasons, but that is mitigated by a great 2012 class, Burns, Owusu, Kalambayi and a few others and what could be a much better 2014 class. We were victimized by a bad academic pool, too few offers, and stepping on our own d*** with a few kids like Isaac and Alex Anzalone.

[OutsiderFan]

stepping on our own dick with a few kids like Isaac and Alex Anzalone.

Please unwind the "stepping on our own d***" metaphor into real examples.

[OutsiderFan]

stepping on our own dick with a few kids like Isaac and Alex Anzalone.

Please unwind the "stepping on our own d***" metaphor into real examples.

[Bruce Wang]

I think it's a function of the small class.

I love discussing recruiting.  My original suggestion was not to move it to a separate board, but to keep a thread at the top for each class, like the original 2013 thread that was on the top of the main board.  But I'm just the newbie, so am happy to go along with whatever the powers to be decide.  You guys run a terrific board.  Intelligent and civil discussion, and always good for a laugh or chuckle from the wit so often on display.  It really is too bad the rest of the Internet is not like this.

Anyhow speaking of recruiting, I've been keeping tabs on Ryan Burns and he is having a terrific year.  The knock against him was his 2011 stats, which more informed observers attributed to the team's simple offense.  This year he's thriving in a more sophisticated offense.  He's set a school record for yards and his undefeated team is headed to the Virginia Division AAA (largest) State Semifinal.  Between Hogan, Carter, The State of Virginia should change it's motto to "Virginia is for Stanford Lovers"

Between him, Lloyd and Keller Chryst who still sports a Stanford helmet on his Twitter page and who reminds Harbs of Andrew Luck, we could be headed to another QB controversy down the road - of the high class problem variety.

[Bruce Wang]

I think it's a function of the small class.

I love discussing recruiting.  My original suggestion was not to move it to a separate board, but to keep a thread at the top for each class, like the original 2013 thread that was on the top of the main board.  But I'm just the newbie, so am happy to go along with whatever the powers to be decide.  You guys run a terrific board.  Intelligent and civil discussion, and always good for a laugh or chuckle from the wit so often on display.  It really is too bad the rest of the Internet is not like this.

Anyhow speaking of recruiting, I've been keeping tabs on Ryan Burns and he is having a terrific year.  The knock against him was his 2011 stats, which more informed observers attributed to the team's simple offense.  This year he's thriving in a more sophisticated offense.  He's set a school record for yards and his undefeated team is headed to the Virginia Division AAA (largest) State Semifinal.  Between Hogan, Carter, The State of Virginia should change it's motto to "Virginia is for Stanford Lovers"

Between him, Lloyd and Keller Chryst who still sports a Stanford helmet on his Twitter page and who reminds Harbs of Andrew Luck, we could be headed to another QB controversy down the road - of the high class problem variety.

[Roberton3]

Count me as a vote for having recruiting on the same board with everything else, the way it used to be.  It's not a big deal either way, but it's easier to check one page than two, and I don't see any advantage to separating them.

[Roberton3]

Count me as a vote for having recruiting on the same board with everything else, the way it used to be.  It's not a big deal either way, but it's easier to check one page than two, and I don't see any advantage to separating them.

[oman]

A seperate board to me is not a problem at all.  My issue is that I simply have not been thinking about recruiting -- too many other issues to worry about on this team this year.  Now that things are slowing down I am very interested in it.  So I am checking those threads and I assume they are going to get busier. 

I am interested in the "underperform for a lot of reasons" claim by bowlerbust, because other than the small size, I have no idea what those reasons are.

[oman]

A seperate board to me is not a problem at all.  My issue is that I simply have not been thinking about recruiting -- too many other issues to worry about on this team this year.  Now that things are slowing down I am very interested in it.  So I am checking those threads and I assume they are going to get busier. 

I am interested in the "underperform for a lot of reasons" claim by bowlerbust, because other than the small size, I have no idea what those reasons are.

[oman]

Oh, and can someone move this thread to the recruiting board?

[oman]

Oh, and can someone move this thread to the recruiting board?

[fullmetal]

I keep forgetting to check the recruiting board, fwiw.  :(

[fullmetal]

I keep forgetting to check the recruiting board, fwiw.  :(

[jayasena]

I think it's a function of the small class.

I love discussing recruiting.  My original suggestion was not to move it to a separate board, but to keep a thread at the top for each class, like the original 2013 thread that was on the top of the main board.

I thought the single thread was a bad idea (sorry). It made it really hard to have a cohesive thread of discussion about a specific recruit (as we often do) if all recruiting for the year is in the same thread. So I thought, at the time, the separate board was a much better idea.

However, since the creation of the new board, I've never visited it except when I see a "this thread was moved..." placeholder on the main board. In fact, a lot of times I've forgotten the other board even exists. I'm starting to think that two boards is also perhaps sub-optimal. Maybe the software provides stats on how many people visit each of the boards and Yvonne or someone has a better feel for how it's panning out. Or maybe it just needs more time to become second nature for forgetful people like me.

On the other hand, is it really that bad to have it all on one board with multiple recruiting threads interspersed with other discussions? We are still a fairly small community and much larger ones seem to keep all discussions (at least for football) on the same board.

[jayasena]

I think it's a function of the small class.

I love discussing recruiting.  My original suggestion was not to move it to a separate board, but to keep a thread at the top for each class, like the original 2013 thread that was on the top of the main board.

I thought the single thread was a bad idea (sorry). It made it really hard to have a cohesive thread of discussion about a specific recruit (as we often do) if all recruiting for the year is in the same thread. So I thought, at the time, the separate board was a much better idea.

However, since the creation of the new board, I've never visited it except when I see a "this thread was moved..." placeholder on the main board. In fact, a lot of times I've forgotten the other board even exists. I'm starting to think that two boards is also perhaps sub-optimal. Maybe the software provides stats on how many people visit each of the boards and Yvonne or someone has a better feel for how it's panning out. Or maybe it just needs more time to become second nature for forgetful people like me.

On the other hand, is it really that bad to have it all on one board with multiple recruiting threads interspersed with other discussions? We are still a fairly small community and much larger ones seem to keep all discussions (at least for football) on the same board.

[washingtonismoney]

To go back to the other issue -- assessing 2013 recruiting:

1) relative to expectations, it's under-elite-talented (as the recruiting services have it) -- I'll guess we end up with five or six four-stars in the class on Rivals, which is OK but not spectacular. Reasons probably include so-so academics and the staff being surprised by the increased tempo of recruiting (which they seem to have corrected nicely for the 2014 class.)

2) needs were mostly filled: big needs coming into the class were linebackers and tight ends. They've done that. As the year progressed it became obvious that wideouts needed addressing; fortunately we have pretty good traction there.

3) the bottom end of the class is really quite good relative to previous classes, but that's more a subjective feeling than something I can quantify.

Overall, if you want to do the compete-for-a-Rose-Bowl every year thing, you can't have too many classes like this. Barring an incredible finish, the pressure is on Shaw et. al. to produce a monster class in 2014. Fortunately, the potential is there.

[washingtonismoney]

To go back to the other issue -- assessing 2013 recruiting:

1) relative to expectations, it's under-elite-talented (as the recruiting services have it) -- I'll guess we end up with five or six four-stars in the class on Rivals, which is OK but not spectacular. Reasons probably include so-so academics and the staff being surprised by the increased tempo of recruiting (which they seem to have corrected nicely for the 2014 class.)

2) needs were mostly filled: big needs coming into the class were linebackers and tight ends. They've done that. As the year progressed it became obvious that wideouts needed addressing; fortunately we have pretty good traction there.

3) the bottom end of the class is really quite good relative to previous classes, but that's more a subjective feeling than something I can quantify.

Overall, if you want to do the compete-for-a-Rose-Bowl every year thing, you can't have too many classes like this. Barring an incredible finish, the pressure is on Shaw et. al. to produce a monster class in 2014. Fortunately, the potential is there.

[StannyBoy]

our 2014 class should rivals last year's class. A ton of top recruits have Stanford very high if not their leader. And if you look past the size of the current class I think it will end up being pretty solid.

[StannyBoy]

our 2014 class should rivals last year's class. A ton of top recruits have Stanford very high if not their leader. And if you look past the size of the current class I think it will end up being pretty solid.

[Hank 91]

Here's something else to think about. Let's assume Stanford wins on Friday night and heads to the Rose Bowl. A kid from the Class of 2014 will think back as far as his college football memory will take him, probably all the way back to when he was in the 8th grade. Here's what Stanford football looks like since that kid was 14:

2009: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Toby Gerhart
2010: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Victory in Orange)
2011: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Loss in Fiesta)
2012: BCS Bowl (Probable victory in Rose)
2013: Preseason Top 5, probably even better than the 2012 team

Who wouldn't want to be a part of that tradition?

[Hank 91]

Here's something else to think about. Let's assume Stanford wins on Friday night and heads to the Rose Bowl. A kid from the Class of 2014 will think back as far as his college football memory will take him, probably all the way back to when he was in the 8th grade. Here's what Stanford football looks like since that kid was 14:

2009: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Toby Gerhart
2010: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Victory in Orange)
2011: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Loss in Fiesta)
2012: BCS Bowl (Probable victory in Rose)
2013: Preseason Top 5, probably even better than the 2012 team

Who wouldn't want to be a part of that tradition?

[jayasena]

Here's something else to think about. Let's assume Stanford wins on Friday night and heads to the Rose Bowl. A kid from the Class of 2014 will think back as far as his college football memory will take him, probably all the way back to when he was in the 8th grade. Here's what Stanford football looks like since that kid was 14:

2009: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Toby Gerhart
2010: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Victory in Orange)
2011: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Loss in Fiesta)
2012: BCS Bowl (Probable victory in Rose)
2013: Preseason Top 5, probably even better than the 2012 team

Who wouldn't want to be a part of that tradition?

Are those the Woofing Gods that I see sharpening their tridents? ;)

[jayasena]

Here's something else to think about. Let's assume Stanford wins on Friday night and heads to the Rose Bowl. A kid from the Class of 2014 will think back as far as his college football memory will take him, probably all the way back to when he was in the 8th grade. Here's what Stanford football looks like since that kid was 14:

2009: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Toby Gerhart
2010: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Victory in Orange)
2011: Voldemort Trophy Finalist, Andrew Luck; BCS Bowl (Loss in Fiesta)
2012: BCS Bowl (Probable victory in Rose)
2013: Preseason Top 5, probably even better than the 2012 team

Who wouldn't want to be a part of that tradition?

Are those the Woofing Gods that I see sharpening their tridents? ;)

[socalstanfan1]

Thinking about this year's class vs. previous classes:  to some degree we will begin to find that the advantage of being a top-notch team is mitigated, just a little, by the amount of talent that was brought in that made us a top school in the first place.  If athletes are looking for places they can play right away, some may shy away from a team that seems loaded with guys in front of them.  We might get an OL or DL this cycle, but whoever comes in better be great if they want to get on the field.  Obviously this is a good problem to have, but when you combine it with the tough academic standards, some may shy away.

It may also be worthwhile to think of these three recruiting classes, ('12, '13, '14) as a cluster and see how they look come 15 months from now, after signing day 2014.  If we have a top-5 class in 2012, and a small class that still has some impact players in 2013, followed by another blockbuster class in 2014, then I think all is well.  This is just one of those years when, for whatever reason, things didn't quite fall our way.  (Of course, I haven't given up on landing a few top recruits, like Johnny Johnson and Jordan Cunningham and Devon Allen, and turning this into a small but great class.)  If a lot of these students who are interested for 2014 fall through, then I'll start to be concerned.

Finally, recruiting classes are like draft classes in the NFL.  Sometimes those that look great on paper don't turn out that way on the field, and those that seem, well, "meh" at the time they take place end up being fantastic.  Really, did anyone seriously think that Ed Reynolds would turn out as excellently as he has when he signed?  Or Ben Gardner?  Or Terrance Brown?  None of these guys was highly regarded when they signed.  All are now starters and major contributors to the best D in the Pac-12, and perhaps in the country.  I'll reserve my judgment on the class of 2013 for a year or so after they find their way to campus.

[socalstanfan1]

Thinking about this year's class vs. previous classes:  to some degree we will begin to find that the advantage of being a top-notch team is mitigated, just a little, by the amount of talent that was brought in that made us a top school in the first place.  If athletes are looking for places they can play right away, some may shy away from a team that seems loaded with guys in front of them.  We might get an OL or DL this cycle, but whoever comes in better be great if they want to get on the field.  Obviously this is a good problem to have, but when you combine it with the tough academic standards, some may shy away.

It may also be worthwhile to think of these three recruiting classes, ('12, '13, '14) as a cluster and see how they look come 15 months from now, after signing day 2014.  If we have a top-5 class in 2012, and a small class that still has some impact players in 2013, followed by another blockbuster class in 2014, then I think all is well.  This is just one of those years when, for whatever reason, things didn't quite fall our way.  (Of course, I haven't given up on landing a few top recruits, like Johnny Johnson and Jordan Cunningham and Devon Allen, and turning this into a small but great class.)  If a lot of these students who are interested for 2014 fall through, then I'll start to be concerned.

Finally, recruiting classes are like draft classes in the NFL.  Sometimes those that look great on paper don't turn out that way on the field, and those that seem, well, "meh" at the time they take place end up being fantastic.  Really, did anyone seriously think that Ed Reynolds would turn out as excellently as he has when he signed?  Or Ben Gardner?  Or Terrance Brown?  None of these guys was highly regarded when they signed.  All are now starters and major contributors to the best D in the Pac-12, and perhaps in the country.  I'll reserve my judgment on the class of 2013 for a year or so after they find their way to campus.

[Redrum]

Because, mostly,  I'm old and set in my ways.  But also, when football season is over,  the board gets much less active and the recruiting news keeps fresh information and opinions coming in.  It's almost a visual thing.  Walk into an open but almost empty bar somewhere and it's not inviting.  You think "What's the deal w/ this place?'  Same deal with the board.  I like to check in and see what's happening.  When there are not many new posts, it's just gives off a dead vibe.  Then people don't check in as often and the deadness impression gets stronger.  Just my opinion.

[Redrum]

Because, mostly,  I'm old and set in my ways.  But also, when football season is over,  the board gets much less active and the recruiting news keeps fresh information and opinions coming in.  It's almost a visual thing.  Walk into an open but almost empty bar somewhere and it's not inviting.  You think "What's the deal w/ this place?'  Same deal with the board.  I like to check in and see what's happening.  When there are not many new posts, it's just gives off a dead vibe.  Then people don't check in as often and the deadness impression gets stronger.  Just my opinion.

[dabigv13]

Bringing this thread back from the dead---

I much prefer a single board. Is this something that can be put to a vote?

[dabigv13]

Bringing this thread back from the dead---

I much prefer a single board. Is this something that can be put to a vote?

[Redrum]

I'm all about unity.  And, once the football season is over,  recruiting posts help take up the slack.

[Redrum]

I'm all about unity.  And, once the football season is over,  recruiting posts help take up the slack.

[slide]

Bringing this thread back from the dead---

I much prefer a single board. Is this something that can be put to a vote?

+1

I voted that way in the poll too.

[slide]

Bringing this thread back from the dead---

I much prefer a single board. Is this something that can be put to a vote?

+1

I voted that way in the poll too.

[oman]

Like the dual boards.

My snack thread would have been totally inappropriate for this board.

[oman]

Like the dual boards.

My snack thread would have been totally inappropriate for this board.

[DC]

Bringing this thread back from the dead---

I much prefer a single board. Is this something that can be put to a vote?

I forgot all about the recruiting thread and haven't been reading it.  So I agree with you.

[DC]

Bringing this thread back from the dead---

I much prefer a single board. Is this something that can be put to a vote?

I forgot all about the recruiting thread and haven't been reading it.  So I agree with you.