[CTcard]

<p>

[quote="CTcard" pid='253406' dateline='1567190528']
CTcard, isn't Shaw 1-3 in South Bend? Losses in 2012 (at least, according to the officials), 2014 and 2018.

<br></p><p><br></p><p>You know, I was staring at that and thinking something looked wrong. I must have slipped an odd-numbered year in there by mistake. <br></p><p>Will go fix the original post. <br></p>

... and of course I mess up the correction as well. [Thanks Terry - below]
Originally I had the Army win and missed one und loss. That's 3-3 ... or something. No more tired Friday afternoon posting.

[CTcard]

<p>

[quote="CTcard" pid='253406' dateline='1567190528']
CTcard, isn't Shaw 1-3 in South Bend? Losses in 2012 (at least, according to the officials), 2014 and 2018.

<br></p><p><br></p><p>You know, I was staring at that and thinking something looked wrong. I must have slipped an odd-numbered year in there by mistake. <br></p><p>Will go fix the original post. <br></p>

... and of course I mess up the correction as well. [Thanks Terry - below]
Originally I had the Army win and missed one und loss. That's 3-3 ... or something. No more tired Friday afternoon posting.

[terry]

<p>

</p><p><br></p><p>By my count, under Shaw Stanford is <strike>3-2</strike> 2-3 in football games in the Eastern time zone. I believe all three losses were in South Bend. Wins in Durham, and South Bend. <br></p><p><br></p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>Stanford won at Army in 2013, so add one more to the W column.</p>

[terry]

<p>

</p><p><br></p><p>By my count, under Shaw Stanford is <strike>3-2</strike> 2-3 in football games in the Eastern time zone. I believe all three losses were in South Bend. Wins in Durham, and South Bend. <br></p><p><br></p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>Stanford won at Army in 2013, so add one more to the W column.</p>

[winflop]

I'm not worried about the lack of depth in multiple areas on the roster for this weekend's game, but I am VERY worried about it over the course of a 12-game season. One of the contributors to this is not having enough scholarship players. I get that Shaw wants to have a couple available for walk-ons coming out of spring practice and/or fall camp, but he doesn't need to be <80 to do that.

I'd feel better about OL depth with an 8- or 9-man two-deep. There was a time when we had 10 guys on the two-deep OL
I'd feel better about ILB depth with 4 solid reliable players. We have 1, maybe 2.
I'd feel better about SS/FS with at least 2 solid reliable players. I'm concerned we don't even have 1
Last year there was a big injury risk at QB because of the failure to have a scholarship QB in every class. Thankfully KJ stayed healthy all year.

Recruiting hasn't adjusted to the new reality which is that more players are leaving early, grad transferring, or taking medical retirement. I really hope that RJ, Troy Clardy, or someone else who covers Stanford football starts asking Shaw these questions because I think it is at the core of problems not just for this year but in the past and especially going forward.

[winflop]

I'm not worried about the lack of depth in multiple areas on the roster for this weekend's game, but I am VERY worried about it over the course of a 12-game season. One of the contributors to this is not having enough scholarship players. I get that Shaw wants to have a couple available for walk-ons coming out of spring practice and/or fall camp, but he doesn't need to be <80 to do that.

I'd feel better about OL depth with an 8- or 9-man two-deep. There was a time when we had 10 guys on the two-deep OL
I'd feel better about ILB depth with 4 solid reliable players. We have 1, maybe 2.
I'd feel better about SS/FS with at least 2 solid reliable players. I'm concerned we don't even have 1
Last year there was a big injury risk at QB because of the failure to have a scholarship QB in every class. Thankfully KJ stayed healthy all year.

Recruiting hasn't adjusted to the new reality which is that more players are leaving early, grad transferring, or taking medical retirement. I really hope that RJ, Troy Clardy, or someone else who covers Stanford football starts asking Shaw these questions because I think it is at the core of problems not just for this year but in the past and especially going forward.

[Austroturf]

<p>

I'm not worried about the lack of depth in multiple areas on the roster for this weekend's game, but I am VERY worried about it over the course of a 12-game season. One of the contributors to this is not having enough scholarship players. I get that Shaw wants to have a couple available for walk-ons coming out of spring practice and/or fall camp, but he doesn't need to be &lt;80 to do that.

I'd feel better about OL depth with an 8- or 9-man two-deep. There was a time when we had 10 guys on the two-deep OL
I'd feel better about ILB depth with 4 solid reliable players. We have 1, maybe 2.
I'd feel better about SS/FS with at least 2&nbsp;solid reliable players. I'm concerned we don't even have 1
Last year there was a big injury risk at QB because of the failure to have a scholarship QB in every class. Thankfully KJ stayed healthy all year.

Recruiting hasn't adjusted to the new reality which is that more players are leaving early, grad transferring, or taking medical retirement. I really hope that RJ, Troy Clardy, or someone else who covers Stanford football starts asking Shaw these questions because I think it is at the core of problems not just for this year but in the past and especially going forward.

</p><p><br></p><p>Excellent post.&nbsp; This is also a development I am concerned about.&nbsp; Players, on the whole, used to complete their eligibility.&nbsp; With Shaw's penchant for red-shirting all but a tiny minority of players, it often means we only get two years of solid production out of really good&nbsp;players before the lure of the NFL becomes (economically) irresistible.&nbsp; Costello already flirted with the draft last year (after his red-shirt sophomore year!).&nbsp; Imagine if JJ and Kaden Smith had returned for their final years of eligibility (JJ played three years, Kaden only two).&nbsp; In any case, it is a development that needs to be taken into account, together with the phenomenon of grad transfers.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

[Austroturf]

<p>

I'm not worried about the lack of depth in multiple areas on the roster for this weekend's game, but I am VERY worried about it over the course of a 12-game season. One of the contributors to this is not having enough scholarship players. I get that Shaw wants to have a couple available for walk-ons coming out of spring practice and/or fall camp, but he doesn't need to be &lt;80 to do that.

I'd feel better about OL depth with an 8- or 9-man two-deep. There was a time when we had 10 guys on the two-deep OL
I'd feel better about ILB depth with 4 solid reliable players. We have 1, maybe 2.
I'd feel better about SS/FS with at least 2&nbsp;solid reliable players. I'm concerned we don't even have 1
Last year there was a big injury risk at QB because of the failure to have a scholarship QB in every class. Thankfully KJ stayed healthy all year.

Recruiting hasn't adjusted to the new reality which is that more players are leaving early, grad transferring, or taking medical retirement. I really hope that RJ, Troy Clardy, or someone else who covers Stanford football starts asking Shaw these questions because I think it is at the core of problems not just for this year but in the past and especially going forward.

</p><p><br></p><p>Excellent post.&nbsp; This is also a development I am concerned about.&nbsp; Players, on the whole, used to complete their eligibility.&nbsp; With Shaw's penchant for red-shirting all but a tiny minority of players, it often means we only get two years of solid production out of really good&nbsp;players before the lure of the NFL becomes (economically) irresistible.&nbsp; Costello already flirted with the draft last year (after his red-shirt sophomore year!).&nbsp; Imagine if JJ and Kaden Smith had returned for their final years of eligibility (JJ played three years, Kaden only two).&nbsp; In any case, it is a development that needs to be taken into account, together with the phenomenon of grad transfers.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

[BostonCard]

<p>I think we’ll see three categories of players.</p><p>The ones who are ready and good enough to be on the two deep&nbsp;will play</p><p>The ones who are ready but maybe not quite good enough to crack the two deep will play up to four games, especially in garbage time and special teams and will redshirt</p><p>The ones who aren’t physically ready won’t play</p><p><br></p><p>The four game limit adds a lot of flexibility.</p><p><br></p><p>BC</p>

[BostonCard]

<p>I think we’ll see three categories of players.</p><p>The ones who are ready and good enough to be on the two deep&nbsp;will play</p><p>The ones who are ready but maybe not quite good enough to crack the two deep will play up to four games, especially in garbage time and special teams and will redshirt</p><p>The ones who aren’t physically ready won’t play</p><p><br></p><p>The four game limit adds a lot of flexibility.</p><p><br></p><p>BC</p>

[Goose]

<p>

</p><p>Excellent post.&nbsp; This is also a development I am concerned about.&nbsp; Players, on the whole, used to complete their eligibility.&nbsp; With Shaw's penchant for red-shirting all but a tiny minority of players, it often means we only get two years of solid production out of really good&nbsp;players before the lure of the NFL becomes (economically) irresistible.&nbsp; Costello already flirted with the draft last year (after his red-shirt sophomore year!).&nbsp; Imagine if JJ and Kaden Smith had returned for their final years of eligibility (JJ played three years, Kaden only two).&nbsp; In any case, it is a development that needs to be taken into account, together with the phenomenon of grad transfers.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>I agree that it is a problem. I suspect the staff is fully aware of it, but there may be little they can really do to adjust. I think that Shaw has shown that he will play the best players, even if they are freshmen. It may be that the staff has preferred "veteran" players too much, but I think that is changing. The problem really is that the pool of admissible players who are able to really contribute is small, and not increasing in size. If we now get fewer years out of these players, we are going to have fewer players, period. Yes, it would be great if we had 10 good or at least adequate OL candidates available this year. However, were there 10 such guys who could get in and actually contribute? Having more players on the roster who aren't very good doesn't help us. Other schools can attack the problem by just recruiting more guys. More guys will go through the program but will stay for less time. We can't really do that, the pool is too small.</p><p><br></p><p>One area where we could possibly get more players is the Grad Transfer route. However, the really good football players tend to go to the NFL, not grad school. There are exceptions (Brennan Scarlett). We need to find those guys. This will help a bit, but there really aren't enough of them to matter a lot. Hopefully, it can at least cancel out our losses due to Grad Transfers. It should be noted that many grad transfers are by guys who lost their starting job to another player. That kind of limits the quality of what you can expect to get. Sometimes it is a "fit" issue, and those players can actually be quite good in a different scheme. There are also some players who are moving up from FCS or lower to play in the "big leagues". We have to monitor the "transfer wire".<br></p>

[Goose]

<p>

</p><p>Excellent post.&nbsp; This is also a development I am concerned about.&nbsp; Players, on the whole, used to complete their eligibility.&nbsp; With Shaw's penchant for red-shirting all but a tiny minority of players, it often means we only get two years of solid production out of really good&nbsp;players before the lure of the NFL becomes (economically) irresistible.&nbsp; Costello already flirted with the draft last year (after his red-shirt sophomore year!).&nbsp; Imagine if JJ and Kaden Smith had returned for their final years of eligibility (JJ played three years, Kaden only two).&nbsp; In any case, it is a development that needs to be taken into account, together with the phenomenon of grad transfers.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>I agree that it is a problem. I suspect the staff is fully aware of it, but there may be little they can really do to adjust. I think that Shaw has shown that he will play the best players, even if they are freshmen. It may be that the staff has preferred "veteran" players too much, but I think that is changing. The problem really is that the pool of admissible players who are able to really contribute is small, and not increasing in size. If we now get fewer years out of these players, we are going to have fewer players, period. Yes, it would be great if we had 10 good or at least adequate OL candidates available this year. However, were there 10 such guys who could get in and actually contribute? Having more players on the roster who aren't very good doesn't help us. Other schools can attack the problem by just recruiting more guys. More guys will go through the program but will stay for less time. We can't really do that, the pool is too small.</p><p><br></p><p>One area where we could possibly get more players is the Grad Transfer route. However, the really good football players tend to go to the NFL, not grad school. There are exceptions (Brennan Scarlett). We need to find those guys. This will help a bit, but there really aren't enough of them to matter a lot. Hopefully, it can at least cancel out our losses due to Grad Transfers. It should be noted that many grad transfers are by guys who lost their starting job to another player. That kind of limits the quality of what you can expect to get. Sometimes it is a "fit" issue, and those players can actually be quite good in a different scheme. There are also some players who are moving up from FCS or lower to play in the "big leagues". We have to monitor the "transfer wire".<br></p>

[martyup]

<p>It just dawned on me that I'll bet Luck is now happy he stayed for his senior season.&nbsp; I'll bet that season gave him much better memories than those of his NFL career.</p>

[martyup]

<p>It just dawned on me that I'll bet Luck is now happy he stayed for his senior season.&nbsp; I'll bet that season gave him much better memories than those of his NFL career.</p>

[stupac2]

<p>I'm packing up my bags now, and I seem to have lost the clear plastic reusable water bottle I used last year. The only one I can find is a purple Northwestern bottle that someone left at my house and never claimed. Can't decide if I should use it or not...<br></p>

[stupac2]

<p>I'm packing up my bags now, and I seem to have lost the clear plastic reusable water bottle I used last year. The only one I can find is a purple Northwestern bottle that someone left at my house and never claimed. Can't decide if I should use it or not...<br></p>

[SamuelMcF]

<p>

</p><p>I agree that it is a problem. I suspect the staff is fully aware of it, but there may be little they can really do to adjust. I think that Shaw has shown that he will play the best players, even if they are freshmen. It may be that the staff has preferred "veteran" players too much, but I think that is changing. The problem really is that the pool of admissible players who are able to really contribute is small, and not increasing in size. If we now get fewer years out of these players, we are going to have fewer players, period. Yes, it would be great if we had 10 good or at least adequate OL candidates available this year. <b>However, were there 10 such guys who could get in and actually contribute? </b>Having more players on the roster who aren't very good doesn't help us. Other schools can attack the problem by just recruiting more guys. More guys will go through the program but will stay for less time. We can't really do that, the pool is too small.</p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">There absolutely were, and are every year. OL and QB are 2 positions where we've never struggled to recruit high-caliber guys with good grades.&nbsp;Taking just 1 ON PURPOSE in 2018 (who won't even contribute and will likely medically retire)&nbsp;was total&nbsp;malpractice and put us in the position we're in now. There were plenty of '18 candidates had we cast a wider net as in all other classes, rather than only pursuing a guy who committed to UGA and never appeared seriously interested.</span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p>One area where we could possibly get more players is the Grad Transfer route. However, the really good football players tend to go to the NFL, not grad school. There are exceptions (Brennan Scarlett). We need to find those guys. This will help a bit, but there really aren't enough of them to matter a lot. Hopefully, it can at least cancel out our losses due to Grad Transfers. It should be noted that many grad transfers are by guys who lost their starting job to another player. That kind of limits the quality of what you can expect to get. Sometimes it is a "fit" issue, and those players can actually be quite good in a different scheme. There are also some players who are moving up from FCS or lower to play in the "big leagues". We have to monitor the "transfer wire".<br></p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>This I agree with. There were a couple high-profile grad transfers last season who had the academics, including a guard from GT who we could've desperately used. (He went to Texas.)&nbsp;</p><p><br></p><p>It's also hard to find guys who are transferring in from JuCos, since the transfer acceptance rate at Stanford is even lower than the undergrad acceptance rate. And a lot of&nbsp;the good JuCo kids are former D1 commits who either didn't academically qualify for their original school or had character concerns/failed drug tests, etc.&nbsp;</p>

[SamuelMcF]

<p>

</p><p>I agree that it is a problem. I suspect the staff is fully aware of it, but there may be little they can really do to adjust. I think that Shaw has shown that he will play the best players, even if they are freshmen. It may be that the staff has preferred "veteran" players too much, but I think that is changing. The problem really is that the pool of admissible players who are able to really contribute is small, and not increasing in size. If we now get fewer years out of these players, we are going to have fewer players, period. Yes, it would be great if we had 10 good or at least adequate OL candidates available this year. <b>However, were there 10 such guys who could get in and actually contribute? </b>Having more players on the roster who aren't very good doesn't help us. Other schools can attack the problem by just recruiting more guys. More guys will go through the program but will stay for less time. We can't really do that, the pool is too small.</p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">There absolutely were, and are every year. OL and QB are 2 positions where we've never struggled to recruit high-caliber guys with good grades.&nbsp;Taking just 1 ON PURPOSE in 2018 (who won't even contribute and will likely medically retire)&nbsp;was total&nbsp;malpractice and put us in the position we're in now. There were plenty of '18 candidates had we cast a wider net as in all other classes, rather than only pursuing a guy who committed to UGA and never appeared seriously interested.</span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p>One area where we could possibly get more players is the Grad Transfer route. However, the really good football players tend to go to the NFL, not grad school. There are exceptions (Brennan Scarlett). We need to find those guys. This will help a bit, but there really aren't enough of them to matter a lot. Hopefully, it can at least cancel out our losses due to Grad Transfers. It should be noted that many grad transfers are by guys who lost their starting job to another player. That kind of limits the quality of what you can expect to get. Sometimes it is a "fit" issue, and those players can actually be quite good in a different scheme. There are also some players who are moving up from FCS or lower to play in the "big leagues". We have to monitor the "transfer wire".<br></p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>This I agree with. There were a couple high-profile grad transfers last season who had the academics, including a guard from GT who we could've desperately used. (He went to Texas.)&nbsp;</p><p><br></p><p>It's also hard to find guys who are transferring in from JuCos, since the transfer acceptance rate at Stanford is even lower than the undergrad acceptance rate. And a lot of&nbsp;the good JuCo kids are former D1 commits who either didn't academically qualify for their original school or had character concerns/failed drug tests, etc.&nbsp;</p>

[Mick]

<p>I'm packing up my bags now, and I seem to have lost the clear plastic reusable water bottle I used last year. The only one I can find is a purple Northwestern bottle that someone left at my house and never claimed. Can't decide if I should use it or not...<br></p>

Maybe good for, ahem, water elimination..

---

<p>

</p><p>I agree that it is a problem. I suspect the staff is fully aware of it, but there may be little they can really do to adjust. I think that Shaw has shown that he will play the best players, even if they are freshmen. It may be that the staff has preferred "veteran" players too much, but I think that is changing. The problem really is that the pool of admissible players who are able to really contribute is small, and not increasing in size. If we now get fewer years out of these players, we are going to have fewer players, period. Yes, it would be great if we had 10 good or at least adequate OL candidates available this year. <b>However, were there 10 such guys who could get in and actually contribute? </b>Having more players on the roster who aren't very good doesn't help us. Other schools can attack the problem by just recruiting more guys. More guys will go through the program but will stay for less time.  We can't really do that, the pool is too small.</p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">There absolutely were, and are every year. OL and QB are 2 positions where we've never struggled to recruit high-caliber guys with good grades.&nbsp;Taking just 1 ON PURPOSE in 2018 (who won't even contribute and will likely medically retire)&nbsp;was total&nbsp;malpractice and put us in the position we're in now. There were plenty of '18 candidates had we cast a wider net as in all other classes, rather than only pursuing a guy who committed to UGA and never appeared seriously interested.</span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p>One area where we could possibly get more players is the Grad Transfer route. However, the really good football players tend to go to the NFL, not grad school. There are exceptions (Brennan Scarlett). We need to find those guys. This will help a bit, but there really aren't enough of them to matter a lot. Hopefully, it can at least cancel out our losses due to Grad Transfers. It should be noted that many grad transfers are by guys who lost their starting job to another player. That kind of limits the quality of what you can expect to get. Sometimes it is a "fit" issue, and those players can actually be quite good in a different scheme. There are also some players who are moving up from FCS or lower to play in the "big leagues". We have to monitor the "transfer wire".<br></p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>This I agree with. There were a couple high-profile grad transfers last season who had the academics, including a guard from GT who we could've desperately used. (He went to Texas.)&nbsp;</p><p><br></p><p>It's also hard to find guys who are transferring in from JuCos, since the transfer acceptance rate at Stanford is even lower than the undergrad acceptance rate. And a lot of&nbsp;the good JuCo kids are former D1 commits who either didn't academically qualify for their original school or had character concerns/failed drug tests, etc.&nbsp;</p>

Along those lines, I wonder if Aaron Rodgers would have been admitted as a juco transfer.  He had an amazing career at Butte CC, with a HS 3.6 gpa and a 1300 SAT on the old 1600 format.  Today, that's 88th percentile overall.

[Mick]

<p>I'm packing up my bags now, and I seem to have lost the clear plastic reusable water bottle I used last year. The only one I can find is a purple Northwestern bottle that someone left at my house and never claimed. Can't decide if I should use it or not...<br></p>

Maybe good for, ahem, water elimination..

---

<p>

</p><p>I agree that it is a problem. I suspect the staff is fully aware of it, but there may be little they can really do to adjust. I think that Shaw has shown that he will play the best players, even if they are freshmen. It may be that the staff has preferred "veteran" players too much, but I think that is changing. The problem really is that the pool of admissible players who are able to really contribute is small, and not increasing in size. If we now get fewer years out of these players, we are going to have fewer players, period. Yes, it would be great if we had 10 good or at least adequate OL candidates available this year. <b>However, were there 10 such guys who could get in and actually contribute? </b>Having more players on the roster who aren't very good doesn't help us. Other schools can attack the problem by just recruiting more guys. More guys will go through the program but will stay for less time.  We can't really do that, the pool is too small.</p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">There absolutely were, and are every year. OL and QB are 2 positions where we've never struggled to recruit high-caliber guys with good grades.&nbsp;Taking just 1 ON PURPOSE in 2018 (who won't even contribute and will likely medically retire)&nbsp;was total&nbsp;malpractice and put us in the position we're in now. There were plenty of '18 candidates had we cast a wider net as in all other classes, rather than only pursuing a guy who committed to UGA and never appeared seriously interested.</span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;"><br></span></p><p><meta charset="utf-8"><span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">

</span><br></p><p>One area where we could possibly get more players is the Grad Transfer route. However, the really good football players tend to go to the NFL, not grad school. There are exceptions (Brennan Scarlett). We need to find those guys. This will help a bit, but there really aren't enough of them to matter a lot. Hopefully, it can at least cancel out our losses due to Grad Transfers. It should be noted that many grad transfers are by guys who lost their starting job to another player. That kind of limits the quality of what you can expect to get. Sometimes it is a "fit" issue, and those players can actually be quite good in a different scheme. There are also some players who are moving up from FCS or lower to play in the "big leagues". We have to monitor the "transfer wire".<br></p><p>

</p><p><br></p><p>This I agree with. There were a couple high-profile grad transfers last season who had the academics, including a guard from GT who we could've desperately used. (He went to Texas.)&nbsp;</p><p><br></p><p>It's also hard to find guys who are transferring in from JuCos, since the transfer acceptance rate at Stanford is even lower than the undergrad acceptance rate. And a lot of&nbsp;the good JuCo kids are former D1 commits who either didn't academically qualify for their original school or had character concerns/failed drug tests, etc.&nbsp;</p>

Along those lines, I wonder if Aaron Rodgers would have been admitted as a juco transfer.  He had an amazing career at Butte CC, with a HS 3.6 gpa and a 1300 SAT on the old 1600 format.  Today, that's 88th percentile overall.