Class of 2016 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Class of 2016 (/thread-6799.html)

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 09:41 AM)ChicagoVisitor link Wrote:[quote author=BobK link=topic=9617.msg155098#msg155098 date=1454343779]
By my count we have 4 spots open right now.  I'd say how but when trump posts some critical info people jumped all over him.  Why the anger over news? 

I don't know, speaking only for myself I appreciate the tidbits of info that you and trump have provided. I joined Rivals during a promo period but beyond a couple weeks during the year for me it would be too much info and forum conversation. Right now I am tempted.
[/quote]

I did the same.  You can do monthly memberships, so I figured paying $10 for the month before signing day was pretty reasonable, and I'll cancel it thereafter.  I'm always vaguely interested in recruiting, but this month is when it redlines and then it drops back down for the rest of the year, when I'm much more interested in the team that we'll actually be putting on the field.  As long as Rivals lets you do monthly memberships, I would imagine I'll keep doing that, since an annual membership just seems like too much when I get my Stanford football discussion fix right here for free. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ChicagoCard - 02-01-2016

One thing I didn't like was that I couldn't cancel my membership on the Rivals Web site. Had to phone and endure an obnoxious phone tree. Then again, the more memberships the better for Mr Drukarev.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - washingtonismoney - 02-01-2016

FWIW, ESPN's crew predicts McCulloch to Texas and Robertson to Stanford: http://insider.espn.go.com/college-sports/recruiting/football/insider/story/_/id/14643907/recruiting-updates-every-top-uncommitted-player-2016-class

---

Re: Class of 2016 - TrumpCard - 02-01-2016

Pryts just followed a couple more Stsnford commits.
It would be pretty amazing to flip kids from Michigan, Penn St., and Texas (not to mention BC and Purdue) all in the same class.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - Treebound - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 09:22 AM)BobK link Wrote:By my count we have 4 spots open right now.  I'd say how but when trump posts some critical info people jumped all over him.  Why the anger over news? 

I agree with BobK.  I'm thankful to those of you that can share the news.  Yes, perhaps we should be a little sensitive of timing with things pulled from Andy, but there are plenty of other sources out there.  Trying to keep tabs on everything is a challenge.  This the most collaborative of the sites, along with some great humor and OT posts.  Let's keep it positive and fun and insightful.   

I do believe two of our commits are headed out on LDS missions, so that should free two spots if I'm not mistaken.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - OutsiderFan - 02-01-2016

McCullough to Texas
Pryts to Stanford
Powell to Stanford

New Alabama 247 story from 1/31 on Robertson has quote from him saying Stanford is #1. 
http://247sports.com/Bolt/Robertson-talks-Tide-predicts-2-more-titles-under-Saban-43307080

Someone who has been saying Robertson is not a Stanford option for the last several weeks needs to explain why Stanford now seems to be an option for him. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - kuz - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 10:51 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:McCullough to Texas
Pryts to Stanford
Powell to Stanford

New Alabama 247 story from 1/31 on Robertson has quote from him saying Stanford is #1. 
http://247sports.com/Bolt/Robertson-talks-Tide-predicts-2-more-titles-under-Saban-43307080

Someone who has been saying Robertson is not a Stanford option for the last several weeks needs to explain why Stanford now seems to be an option for him.

Because the Stanford staff hadn't been in contact with Robertson in many many months but reached out to him a week or so ago once Robertson made it clear that he would be willing to sign well after National Signing Day.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - PalmTree - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 10:51 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:McCullough to Texas
Pryts to Stanford
Powell to Stanford

New Alabama 247 story from 1/31 on Robertson has quote from him saying Stanford is #1. 
http://247sports.com/Bolt/Robertson-talks-Tide-predicts-2-more-titles-under-Saban-43307080

Someone who has been saying Robertson is not a Stanford option for the last several weeks needs to explain why Stanford now seems to be an option for him.

From listening to the interview, I just hear Robertson mentioning Stanford first, but not saying we are his #1.  Granted, the interviewer asked questions about every other school pursuing him but Stanford, but he doesn't say anything else about Stanford beside that one mention.  His mom hasn't been to any of the campuses, so I really think that's the main driver for the delay in his announcing.  If he does get admitted and visits, then let's hope Hulk's rule comes to pass - until then, I'm not holding my breath

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 10:43 AM)Treebound link Wrote:[quote author=BobK link=topic=9617.msg155098#msg155098 date=1454343779]
By my count we have 4 spots open right now.  I'd say how but when trump posts some critical info people jumped all over him.  Why the anger over news? 

I agree with BobK.  I'm thankful to those of you that can share the news.  Yes, perhaps we should be a little sensitive of timing with things pulled from Andy, but there are plenty of other sources out there.  Trying to keep tabs on everything is a challenge.  This the most collaborative of the sites, along with some great humor and OT posts.  Let's keep it positive and fun and insightful.   

I do believe two of our commits are headed out on LDS missions, so that should free two spots if I'm not mistaken.
[/quote]

Yep, Fehoko and Kaufusi are both expected to take missions, I believe.  So with 24 commits currently, that gets us down to 22 guys that will count for next year, assuming we count Bailey McElwain (the only commit to have not yet revealed his admissions status, though his Twitter feed is very pro-Stanford and his activity suggests he's still intent on coming).  That means Powell, Pryts, and McCulloch all have spots if they want them.  Assuming a sweep of those three (which is by no means guaranteed), adding Robertson to the class would require either one of our current guys to flip or would take some, ahem, "roster management." 

(02-01-2016, 10:51 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:McCullough to Texas
Pryts to Stanford
Powell to Stanford

New Alabama 247 story from 1/31 on Robertson has quote from him saying Stanford is #1. 
http://247sports.com/Bolt/Robertson-talks-Tide-predicts-2-more-titles-under-Saban-43307080

Someone who has been saying Robertson is not a Stanford option for the last several weeks needs to explain why Stanford now seems to be an option for him. 

First, I didn't see any quotes listing Stanford as his #1 option, just that he listed Stanford first when discussing his four finalists.  Stanford may well still be his top choice, but it's not explicitly in that piece. 

Second, I'm pretty sure you're not referring to me as the person who has been saying Robertson isn't an option, but I'll offer my two cents anyway.  As for Robertson's chances, I've always assumed the fact he needed substantial test score improvement to even have a chance (according to Demetris himself), yet according to his schedule was visiting other schools during the October and November SAT dates--indicating that he probably wouldn't retake it, meaning he couldn't get the score he needed by signing day--was the reason for people here saying he wasn't really an option, along with the fact that his publicly reported GPA appears to be 3.2, per this website (http://www.theplay-book.com/athletes/demetris-robertson/), though I have no idea if that's current or not.  If Demetris is confident he did well on the late January SAT and feels he'll get that score, perhaps that's the reason for his continued public affection for Stanford.  But all we really know right now is that Demetris is saying that Stanford is an option; we don't know that Stanford really is an option.  For instance, he hasn't said that he's been admitted to Stanford, and given that he's still waiting on a score, we don't even know if he's submitted an application to Stanford (the deadline for undergrad admissions having already passed).  Maybe he'll come, maybe he won't--I have no earthly idea--but I don't see him stating that Stanford is one of his four finalists as meaning anything has materially changed with his recruitment.  Since he'll apparently be signing after Signing Day, perhaps there's a chance he gets the score he needs and other academic things (like 7th semester grades) break his way.  But it just seems like a lot of things need to separately break our way for this one to work out. 

---

Rivals site - Redrum - 02-01-2016

I took a leap of faith and renewed for another year of Rivals.  Drukarev is a full-throttle hustler and I think the Stanford Rivals site has better national and local recruiting resources at hand than Scout.  During certain periods of the past year, though there was hardly anything going on concerning Stanford and the number of posts seriously dried up.  The Bootleg recruiting is mostly limping along on Scout national guys.  Not terrible, but meh.  Several posts on Bootleg about guys planning not to renew subscriptions.  The difference is the Bootleg has all-year conversations (worth it to me ), while the Rivals (The Farm Report)  pay board really has that cyclic activity.  Enough defectors from the Bootleg  or dual member Cardboarders or triple site member sad Stanford football addicts (moi )and maybe Rivals might stay acceptably active to be worth it year round.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - CTcard - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 09:22 AM)BobK link Wrote:By my count we have 4 spots open right now.  I'd say how but when trump posts some critical info people jumped all over him.  Why the anger over news? 

Nobody jumped on Trump for posting critical info. I asked Trump if he could tell us any more about where the info came from; expecting to hear "from Drukarev" but also thinking it could be anything from a twitter note to "I am not at liberty to say" or a million other things.

The reply got jumped on a bit, because it appeared to be critical of having the question asked and didn't contain an answer (though certainly enough reference to figure out the answer for those on the board a while).

Stuff that gets posted here has sources that range from "I woke up this morning with this feeling" to "I heard from someone on the staff that ...", and of course lately a lot of "TOS reports ...". I don't think it is any surprise that people might be interested at least on which end of the spectrum a particular tidbit resides. Personally I don't mind either no answer or "I am not at liberty to say" - but it doesn't seem egregious to ask the question when an original post doesn't make it clear.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - yvonne - 02-01-2016

https://twitter.com/Dylan_Powell74/status/694200060406583296

He's from MO, so that's Central Time.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - TrumpCard - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 11:57 AM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=BobK link=topic=9617.msg155098#msg155098 date=1454343779]
By my count we have 4 spots open right now.  I'd say how but when trump posts some critical info people jumped all over him.  Why the anger over news? 

Nobody jumped on Trump for posting critical info. I asked Trump if he could tell us any more about where the info came from; expecting to hear "from Drukarev" but also thinking it could be anything from a twitter note to "I am not at liberty to say" or a million other things.

The reply got jumped on a bit, because it appeared to be critical of having the question asked and didn't contain an answer (though certainly enough reference to figure out the answer for those on the board a while).

Stuff that gets posted here has sources that range from "I woke up this morning with this feeling" to "I heard from someone on the staff that ...", and of course lately a lot of "TOS reports ...". I don't think it is any surprise that people might be interested at least on which end of the spectrum a particular tidbit resides. Personally I don't mind either no answer or "I am not at liberty to say" - but it doesn't seem egregious to ask the question when an original post doesn't make it clear.
[/quote]

FYI, I always post a publicly available source so that others can evaluate it.  I generally don't attribute to CSR (including info from the posters, not just from Andy) unless it's a free article, and I don't particularly like attributing to CSR because there is a paywall.  I can't think of a time that I had access to any other useful sources. 

Edit:  When I say that I don't attribute to CSR, the reality is more that I don't post very much info from behind CSR's paywall.  I did in this case to squelch what I viewed as an insidious thread that one of the current offerees was being squeezed out and because Jordan Fox already signed an LOI last year, which means that it is appropriate for the coaches to discuss his status. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - OutsiderFan - 02-01-2016

OK, on Demetris...

Though I wasn't necessarily singling anyone out, thank you for the explanation as to why people wrote him off.  Makes total sense.  One thing I have to say regarding where Stanford sits with him is Robertson has since June I believe said Stanford is his #1.  He may not have explicitly said this in his most recent interview, but he's maintained Stanford as his top choice since Summer '15, through the Army game, and more importantly, hasn't said anyone else other than Stanford is his #1 since.  I maintained it would be crazy for someone to say a school was his top choice when it wasn't an option, so at least I feel vindicated and have a healthy amount of respect for the kid for being honest.  He had a plan and he's following through on it. 

My guess is the SEC scribes don't honestly believe someone in Georgia would leave the SEC for Stanford. That's why they don't talk about Stanford.  The Georgia writers seem to give the most deference to Stanford.  Alabama doesn't even acknowledge Stanford exists.  And ND, they are just like Michigan and UCLA writers; everyone wants to go there. 

If Stanford's coaches have reached out, then it does seem Robertson to Stanford has legs.  The only reason for him to put off signing this week is to see if he's admitted to Stanford and to visit the campus. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - BostonCard - 02-01-2016

A couple quick thoughts on the somewhat difficult relationship between this free site and other paid sites.

1) Posting a fact is not a copyright violation.  Facts are by definition not subject to copyright, even if they were initially disclosed behind a paywall.

2) Posting something from behind a paywall may be a violation of the terms of service of the website it was obtained from.  Though usually, nobody is going to be booted out for disclosing something that will become public information sooner rather than later...

2a) It may earn you a talking to
2b) For someone who is putting a lot of work into getting the information and trying to earn a living by it, it can be tough to see
2c) On the flip side, it can serve as free advertising for these other sites and might entice more people to subscribe
2d) Thus, it probably would make sense to clarify what, if anything can be disclosed

3) Generally speaking, it is probably a good idea to differentiate between speculation (even if well informed) and sourced information.  Linking to publicly posted information or embedding tweets should be encouraged.

4) Over time, it becomes apparent who has inside information and is reliable and who is prone to speculation.  I take certain people's pronouncements here as gospel; others with smaller or larger grains of salt.  But it's still the internet, and not everyone knows whether a poster is reliable.

5) In addition to #2 above, sourcing of information behind a paywall presents an additional quandary.  On the one hand, doing so would differentiate it from speculation.  On the other hand, while this site and others are all on the same (pro-Stanford) side, the ethos of the Cardboard was to be generally non-commercial.  While occasionally saying things like "Andy really works hard and has established great connections and is a wealth of recruiting information and may be worth a subscription" is fine, consistently sending links to paywalled content could be interpreted as solicitation and would probably upset some people over here.  Discretion is advised.

6) I know that sometimes it is hard to watch people engaging in idle speculation that (due to deeper knowledge that cannot or should not be disclosed) one knows is unfounded.  But remember, in the end it will all declare itself and we will all find out the truth anyways soon enough (Wednesday, to be exact).

7) Lastly, we are all on the same side here.  While we may not always agree on everything, I'd like to think we all mean well.  If something written on the board could be taken two ways, one innocuous and one malignant, it is best to assume that it was meant innocuously.  There is no sense in getting into an argument over a quick post on an internet message board that likely wasn't meant personally.

BC

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 12:21 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:OK, on Demetris...

Though I wasn't necessarily singling anyone out, thank you for the explanation as to why people wrote him off.  Makes total sense.  One thing I have to say regarding where Stanford sits with him is Robertson has since June I believe said Stanford is his #1.  He may not have explicitly said this in his most recent interview, but he's maintained Stanford as his top choice since Summer '15, through the Army game, and more importantly, hasn't said anyone else other than Stanford is his #1 since.  I maintained it would be crazy for someone to say a school was his top choice when it wasn't an option, so at least I feel vindicated and have a healthy amount of respect for the kid for being honest.  He had a plan and he's following through on it. 

My guess is the SEC scribes don't honestly believe someone in Georgia would leave the SEC for Stanford. That's why they don't talk about Stanford.  The Georgia writers seem to give the most deference to Stanford.  Alabama doesn't even acknowledge Stanford exists.  And ND, they are just like Michigan and UCLA writers; everyone wants to go there. 

If Stanford's coaches have reached out, then it does seem Robertson to Stanford has legs.  The only reason for him to put off signing this week is to see if he's admitted to Stanford and to visit the campus.

Yeah, maybe tiny baby legs, but I'll agree that it's at least possible at this point.  Just doesn't seem likely enough for me to get my hopes up. :)

---

Re: Class of 2016 - Treebound - 02-01-2016

If he postpones his decision beyond signing day then I will be a Robertson fan whether he comes to Stanford or not.  To me, it will signal that this scholar athlete is serious about getting the best education and about reaching his full potential.    He could take the easy route and just commit to one of the other schools that require no real application and have minimal admission requirements.  He's really going for it and yes, I hope he makes the hurdle, but hat's off to him for giving it his best shot!  That's great!  I can't wait to see how this plays out.    I'm sure the other schools are not as thrilled should he delay - his signal would be clear at that point.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 02-01-2016

BC, good post.  I think what rubs people the wrong way isn't the posting of information, but rather the vague allusions to certain information and, when inevitably pressed for details, the referral to the pay sites.  I don't care enough to be annoyed by it, but I have noticed it, and understand why it would bother some.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - yvonne - 02-01-2016

(02-01-2016, 01:04 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:2) Posting something from behind a paywall may be a violation of the terms of service of the website it was obtained from.  Though usually, nobody is going to be booted out for disclosing something that will become public information sooner rather than later...

2a) It may earn you a talking to
2b) For someone who is putting a lot of work into getting the information and trying to earn a living by it, it can be tough to see
2c) On the flip side, it can serve as free advertising for these other sites and might entice more people to subscribe
2d) Thus, it probably would make sense to clarify what, if anything can be disclosed



5) In addition to #2 above, sourcing of information behind a paywall presents an additional quandary.  On the one hand, doing so would differentiate it from speculation.  On the other hand, while this site and others are all on the same (pro-Stanford) side, the ethos of the Cardboard was to be generally non-commercial.  While occasionally saying things like "Andy really works hard and has established great connections and is a wealth of recruiting information and may be worth a subscription" is fine, consistently sending links to paywalled content could be interpreted as solicitation and would probably upset some people over here.  Discretion is advised.

I wrestle with this. On the one hand, I know that Andy would like the advertising; on the other hand, I know that he works very hard on the information behind the paywall. These can be in conflict, particularly during the heavy recruiting season. And to paraphrase Tevye, on the other hand, I want to limit commercial activity on the site. To wit, I boot hit and run advertisers and site promoters.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - kuz - 02-01-2016

The reason for vagueness is (more or less) that Andy Drukarev has asked that exclusive information not be posted on other sites. For example, it had been known for the last month that Hamilton and Pryts were still considering Stanford despite being committed elsewhere (and Pryts has not flipped yet), but Andy asked that it not be leaked publicly.

In any case, Andy's job (which he does excellently) is paid for by subscribers, so if all of his recruiting tidbits were leaked then no one would subscribe. I, and several of the other posters on both sites, feel like it's inevitable that some exclusive information make its way over here, but that if people here really do want more detailed answers then they should be willing to pay the guy who does all the work.

---