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 - CTcard - 02-03-2016

We have pictures on the official site of Peek wearing a B.erkeley shirt and Swann wearing a t.rojans uniform.

Hopefully in the future we can view these as trophies from vanquished foes.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - stanfan95118 - 02-03-2016

So who was the potential "stealth" some were talking about?

---

Re: Class of 2016 - yvonne - 02-03-2016

Pryts, I think. He never officially decommitted.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2016

At various points in the past few weeks, the "stealths" were either Eboh (when committed to Texas), Hamilton (Michigan), and Pryts (Penn State).  Hamilton and Pryts were more stealthy, however, as they remained pretty silent about their Stanford interest for a looooong time.  (Eboh was also a January offer, whereas Hamilton and Pryts held Stanford offers since pretty early on in the recruiting process, I believe.)

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2016

Anyone else entirely distracted by the status of Bailey McElwain?  He's pro-Stanford on Twitter, including positive comments about Pryts today, yet he hasn't sent in his letter of intent and the coaching staff has effectively said that the class is done.  He's apparently having a signing ceremony with others at his high school right now, but since the class is already at the limit of 25 (and the staff has said that we've received "all 25 letters of intent" we expect today), he can't be signing a letter of intent.

Could be a non-binding letter of acceptance, I suppose.  But I crave resolution. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ChicagoCard - 02-03-2016

There must be at least one extra spot, what if McCulloch had chosen Stanford?

---

Re: Class of 2016 - washingtonismoney - 02-03-2016

https://twitter.com/ESPN_Pac12blog/status/694988293943873536

Insider but the headline's what matters.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - donkey687 - 02-03-2016

There are 2 extra spots because 2 guys are going on missions and won't count toward the 25 per class limit. 

McElwain and Robertson are possibilities, but I don't know what is really going on with them.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - CTcard - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 01:44 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:Anyone else entirely distracted by the status of Bailey McElwain?  He's pro-Stanford on Twitter, including positive comments about Pryts today, yet he hasn't sent in his letter of intent and the coaching staff has effectively said that the class is done.  He's apparently having a signing ceremony with others at his high school right now, but since the class is already at the limit of 25 (and the staff has said that we've received "all 25 letters of intent" we expect today), he can't be signing a letter of intent.

Could be a non-binding letter of acceptance, I suppose.  But I crave resolution.

I can't give you resolution, but a few words on what seem the most logical rumors.

McElwain seems perhaps to not yet be accepted to Stanford. Sounded more like something was missing rather than something wasn't good enough, but I don't know. At any rate, Stanford has tweeted that all NLIs are in, so I wouldn't expect anything more today from McElwain (though I suppose he might explain his situation to a reporter).

It seems likely that the two LDS mission candidates (Fehoko and Kaufusi) may not have actually signed NLIs. This is just my surmise given that there is a limit of 25 NLIs that Stanford can accept and that in a practical sense, an NLI will be meaningless if they go on a mission. Nevertheless, Stanford football is commenting upon these two so they must have signed something. An alternative possibility is that they signed a written letter of acceptance. That would also allow Stanford to comment and would have some meaning (they are accepted).

---

Re: Class of 2016 - BigEasyCard - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 01:44 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:Anyone else entirely distracted by the status of Bailey McElwain?  He's pro-Stanford on Twitter, including positive comments about Pryts today, yet he hasn't sent in his letter of intent and the coaching staff has effectively said that the class is done.  He's apparently having a signing ceremony with others at his high school right now, but since the class is already at the limit of 25 (and the staff has said that we've received "all 25 letters of intent" we expect today), he can't be signing a letter of intent.

Could be a non-binding letter of acceptance, I suppose.  But I crave resolution.

So do I.  I hope this ends well for him.

The 25 signees today include two who plan to take missions, so there may still be two spots left.

Geaux Cardinal!

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 01:47 PM)ChicagoVisitor link Wrote:There must be at least one extra spot, what if McCulloch had chosen Stanford?

I assume that the coaches would have had one of the Hawaii guys or Pacific Time guys sign something non-binding instead of a letter of intent. 

(02-03-2016, 02:03 PM)donkey687 link Wrote:There are 2 extra spots because 2 guys are going on missions and won't count toward the 25 per class limit. 

McElwain and Robertson are possibilities, but I don't know what is really going on with them.

There's clearly room in the class from an "initial counter" perspective (i.e., the 25 guys who show up the fall and get scholarships).  Only 25 of those allowed, and Fehoko and Kaufusi won't count toward that number, so McElwain could still be on track to join the team.  It's the separate limit of 25 LOIs from December-May that might create an issue, since Fehoko and Kaufusi both signed LOIs today (or have at least been reported as signing LOIs).  Assuming admissions is fine, McElwain can absolutely sign a LOI in June and start offseason workouts on time with the rest of the class, but we'd need to wait to get something binding from him, I think. 

Also, McElwain apparently just announced at his high school signing ceremony that he's going to Stanford.  Big flag in front of him and everything.  No details on his formal status so far, though.  So maybe we're comfortable enough with his commitment that we don't need anything signed until June?

And yes, something academic or administrative might still be in play.  Hopefully it's no big deal and Bailey comes on campus with the rest of the class. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - Mick - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 02:13 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:[quote author=ChicagoVisitor link=topic=9617.msg155456#msg155456 date=1454532465]
There must be at least one extra spot, what if McCulloch had chosen Stanford?

I assume that the coaches would have had one of the Hawaii guys or Pacific Time guys sign something non-binding instead of a letter of intent. 

(02-03-2016, 02:03 PM)donkey687 link Wrote:There are 2 extra spots because 2 guys are going on missions and won't count toward the 25 per class limit. 

McElwain and Robertson are possibilities, but I don't know what is really going on with them.

There's clearly room in the class from an "initial counter" perspective (i.e., the 25 guys who show up the fall and get scholarships).  Only 25 of those allowed, and Fehoko and Kaufusi won't count toward that number, so McElwain could still be on track to join the team.  It's the separate limit of 25 LOIs from December-May that might create an issue, since Fehoko and Kaufusi both signed LOIs today (or have at least been reported as signing LOIs).  Assuming admissions is fine, McElwain can absolutely sign a LOI in June and start offseason workouts on time with the rest of the class, but we'd need to wait to get something binding from him, I think. 

Also, McElwain apparently just announced at his high school signing ceremony that he's going to Stanford.  Big flag in front of him and everything.  No details on his formal status so far, though.  So maybe we're comfortable enough with his commitment that we don't need anything signed until June?

And yes, something academic or administrative might still be in play.  Hopefully it's no big deal and Bailey comes on campus with the rest of the class.
[/quote]


Out of broad curiosity, are there any statistics available concerning athletes who take missions and how often they either (a) decide not to play football or (b) decide to go to another school subsequent to their mission?

---

Re: Class of 2016 - 82lsju - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 02:19 PM)Mick link Wrote:Out of broad curiosity, are there any statistics available concerning athletes who take missions and how often they either (a) decide not to play football or (b) decide to go to another school subsequent to their mission?

one data point, Taysom Hill (in 2009?) committed to Stanford then went to BYU after his mission

---

Re: Class of 2016 - CTcard - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 02:13 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:It's the separate limit of 25 LOIs from December-May that might create an issue, since Fehoko and Kaufusi both signed LOIs today (or have at least been reported as signing LOIs).  Assuming admissions is fine, McElwain can absolutely sign a LOI in June and start offseason workouts on time with the rest of the class, but we'd need to wait to get something binding from him, I think. 

Generally, there is no need to sign a NLI* to receive a scholarship, play football, or most anything else.
I believe there are some restrictions on attending fall camp before an individual has begun school, but I don't think any of those are related to a NLI.

Here is the official NLI web site.
http://www.nationalletter.org/index.html


*It seems the previously this was usually referred to as a Letter Of Intent (LOI). Now that seems to be replace by National Letter of Intent (NLI).

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 02:31 PM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=ColoradoTree link=topic=9617.msg155464#msg155464 date=1454534003]

It's the separate limit of 25 LOIs from December-May that might create an issue, since Fehoko and Kaufusi both signed LOIs today (or have at least been reported as signing LOIs).  Assuming admissions is fine, McElwain can absolutely sign a LOI in June and start offseason workouts on time with the rest of the class, but we'd need to wait to get something binding from him, I think. 

Generally, there is no need to sign a NLI* to receive a scholarship, play football, or most anything else.
I believe there are some restrictions on attending fall camp before an individual has begun school, but I don't think any of those are related to a NLI.

Here is the official NLI web site.
http://www.nationalletter.org/index.html


*It seems the previously this was usually referred to as a Letter Of Intent (LOI). Now that seems to be replace by National Letter of Intent (NLI).
[/quote]

Right, you don't have to sign the letter of intent, but there's no contractual relationship between you and the school until you either (1) enroll and sign a grant-in-aid agreement, or (2) sign a letter of intent, right?  In other words, Bailey may well still be coming, but it's not a sure thing until something formal gets signed, I don't think.

And regarding terminology, I agree that NLI seems to be the preferred (or at least official) nomenclature.  As I deal with contracts quite a bit, though, using anything other than "LOI" as shorthand for a letter of intent is tough.  ;)

---

Re: Class of 2016 - CTcard - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 02:41 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:Right, you don't have to sign the letter of intent, but there's no contractual relationship between you and the school until you either (1) enroll and sign a grant-in-aid agreement, or (2) sign a letter of intent, right?  In other words, Bailey may well still be coming, but it's not a sure thing until something formal gets signed, I don't think.

Yep.

There are a few possibilities here.

One is that Stanford has used its allotment of NLIs so that McElwain (and anyone else who might be coming) won't be able to sign one. From their point of view, that should be perfectly acceptable as they don't obligate themselves to anything but Stanford basically has obligated itself by accepting them (and perhaps sending a grant-in-aid agreement). However, it could also mean that Stanford cannot talk about them publicly.

By the way, that would have to be true IF the LDS mission guys actually signed a NLI.

Another is that there is something pending on McElwain's admission. I have seen rumor to that effect, but it may not be valid.

In addition, as I understand the signing period, McElwain cannot sign after April 1 until late next fall.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - ColoradoTree - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 02:51 PM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=ColoradoTree link=topic=9617.msg155474#msg155474 date=1454535681]
Right, you don't have to sign the letter of intent, but there's no contractual relationship between you and the school until you either (1) enroll and sign a grant-in-aid agreement, or (2) sign a letter of intent, right?  In other words, Bailey may well still be coming, but it's not a sure thing until something formal gets signed, I don't think.

Yep.

There are a few possibilities here.

One is that Stanford has used its allotment of NLIs so that McElwain (and anyone else who might be coming) won't be able to sign one. From their point of view, that should be perfectly acceptable as they don't obligate themselves to anything but Stanford basically has obligated itself by accepting them (and perhaps sending a grant-in-aid agreement). However, it could also mean that Stanford cannot talk about them publicly.

By the way, that would have to be true IF the LDS mission guys actually signed a NLI.

Another is that there is something pending on McElwain's admission. I have seen rumor to that effect, but it may not be valid.

In addition, as I understand the signing period, McElwain cannot sign after April 1 until late next fall.
[/quote]

1. Regarding his admission, it certainly raises questions when he's the only one not to publicly announce something.  Hopefully it's something administrative that can be cleared up in the coming weeks rather than something more drastic. 

2.  Regarding the mission guys (Fehoko and Kaufusi) signing NLIs, since the coaching staff has been commenting on them publicly today, I have to assume that they signed NLIs rather than something non-binding. 

3.  Regarding NLI signing dates, I think you're right.  That said, it would be simple enough for him to simply wait until after May 31, however, and then sign an "institutional offer of financial aid" and enroll in the summer along with the rest of the incoming class (sans Fehoko and Kaufusi, of course).  That would bind him to the class, provide him a scholarship, and not set him back timewise.  Here's the operative NCAA bylaw:

Quote:13.9.2.3 Limitation on Number of National Letter of Intent/Offer of Financial Aid Signings—Bowl
Subdivision Football. [FBS] In bowl subdivision football, there shall be an annual limit of 25 on the number
of prospective student-athletes who may sign a National Letter of Intent or an institutional offer of financial
aid from December 1 through May 31.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - CTcard - 02-03-2016

(02-03-2016, 03:09 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:2.  Regarding the mission guys (Fehoko and Kaufusi) signing NLIs, since the coaching staff has been commenting on them publicly today, I have to assume that they signed NLIs rather than something non-binding. 

I believe that if they have signed a "written acceptance of admission" then the coaches can discuss them.
But maybe that is out of date.

Quote:3.  Regarding NLI signing dates, I think you're right.  That said, it would be simple enough for him to simply wait until after May 31, however, and then sign an "institutional offer of financial aid" and enroll in the summer along with the rest of the incoming class (sans Fehoko and Kaufusi, of course).

Indeed, that is my guess as to the course of action IF the mission guys did sign a NLI. It actually doesn't bind the student, the "institutional offer of financial aid" only binds the institution. [From memory]
Actually enrolling binds the student athlete, however.

---

Re: Class of 2016 - TrumpCard - 02-03-2016

A follow up to my earlier posts regarding the student athletes who will walk-on at Stanford.  To the best of my knowledge, the class now consists of QB Richardson, QB Peus, OG Gutwald, WR Schwartz, DB Parson, and K Riccitelli.  That's a really impressive group that will end up contributing in ways that are seen and unseen.  NSD is mostly about the scholarship kids, with good reason, but I still count the entering class as being 31, not just the 25 on scholarship. 

---

Re: Class of 2016 - BostonCard - 02-03-2016

Yup.  Let's remember this walk-on class:

https://twitter.com/jeffreytroj/status/694918009517834240

BC

---