Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - 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: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants (/thread-24635.html)
+- 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: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants (/thread-24635.html)
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - msqueri - 12-04-2023
You definitely want Rogers back. If there’s room McLaughlin would be a big boost to. I follow the roster math very closely and I don’t have much of a sense how we get there. But if I had a magic wand Rogers, McLaughlin, and Phillips (already announced) would be top of the list.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - SkiBum80 - 12-04-2023
(12-04-2023, 06:55 PM)msqueri Wrote: Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - msqueri - 12-04-2023
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701741325' Wrote: 1701741325[/url]']Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Goose - 12-04-2023
(12-04-2023, 07:18 PM)msqueri Wrote:SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701741325' Wrote: 1701741325[/url]']Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
https://stanford_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/pdf9/2525685.pdf
Quote:Stanford’s commitment to its student-athletes on athletic scholarship is to provide support that will
enable each student to complete their undergraduate degree in four years. Fifth-year aid is not
guaranteed for any student without prior written approval from the Athletic Director.
This is a 2013 document, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in this regard.
Also https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - BobK - 12-04-2023
https://x.com/lheyer77/status/1731862727998464013?s=46
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - SamuelMcF - 12-04-2023
(12-04-2023, 07:18 PM)msqueri Wrote:SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701741325' Wrote: 1701741325[/url]']Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
Seems like Lucas Heyer could be one of those. (Bob beat me to the announcement!)
FWIW, the staff has been very active in following transfer OL. Very clear we're (rightly, of course) looking to upgrade/supplement the room.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - SkiBum80 - 12-04-2023
(12-04-2023, 07:25 PM)Goose Wrote:(12-04-2023, 07:18 PM)msqueri Wrote:SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701741325' Wrote: 1701741325[/url]']Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
https://stanford_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/pdf9/2525685.pdf
Quote:Stanford’s commitment to its student-athletes on athletic scholarship is to provide support that will
enable each student to complete their undergraduate degree in four years. Fifth-year aid is not
guaranteed for any student without prior written approval from the Athletic Director.
This is a 2013 document, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in this regard.
Also https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships
Appreciate the news and links.
So in coming to a PAC-12 school, how was Coach Prime able to come in and basically kick out a huuge number of Colorado players still on scholarship?
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - qwerty49 - 12-04-2023
(12-04-2023, 10:02 PM)SkiBum80 Wrote:(12-04-2023, 07:25 PM)Goose Wrote:(12-04-2023, 07:18 PM)msqueri Wrote:SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701741325' Wrote: 1701741325[/url]']Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
https://stanford_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/pdf9/2525685.pdf
Quote:Stanford’s commitment to its student-athletes on athletic scholarship is to provide support that will
enable each student to complete their undergraduate degree in four years. Fifth-year aid is not
guaranteed for any student without prior written approval from the Athletic Director.
This is a 2013 document, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in this regard.
Also https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships
Appreciate the news and links.
So in coming to a PAC-12 school, how was Coach Prime able to come in and basically kick out a huuge number of Colorado players still on scholarship?
I seem to recall something to the effect that athletic scholarships are technically one year and not four, ie on a year-to-year, renewable basis.
Is my recollection correct?
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Giants - 12-04-2023
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701752539' Wrote: 1701752539[/url]']
Goose dateline='[url=tel:1701743129' Wrote: 1701743129[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701742696' Wrote: 1701742696[/url]']
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701741325' Wrote: 1701741325[/url]']Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
Not only not a blow but extremely likely to not be Pogorelc’s choice. Our scholarship math is stark. You can basically think about it like this: any upperclassmen who weren’t starters and leave are a gift. Many of them will be told to move on. Just the roster math.
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
https://stanford_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/pdf9/2525685.pdf
Quote:Stanford’s commitment to its student-athletes on athletic scholarship is to provide support that will
enable each student to complete their undergraduate degree in four years. Fifth-year aid is not
guaranteed for any student without prior written approval from the Athletic Director.
This is a 2013 document, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in this regard.
Also https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships
Appreciate the news and links.
So in coming to a PAC-12 school, how was Coach Prime able to come in and basically kick out a huuge number of Colorado players still on scholarship?
Not one player lost his CU scholarship. Those who lost their athletic scholarships were awarded academic scholarships to complete their education. Of course, a number of guys chose to leave Colorado for opportunities elsewhere.
The PAC-12 rules bind schools to a four year commitment. This precluded Colorado from dumping the players on the street.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - SkiBum80 - 12-05-2023
Giants dateline='[url=tel:1701757209' Wrote: 1701757209[/url]']Ahh.. that explains it thanks
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701752539' Wrote: 1701752539[/url]']
Goose dateline='[url=tel:1701743129' Wrote: 1701743129[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701742696' Wrote: 1701742696[/url]']
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701742286' Wrote: 1701742286[/url]']
Do you think it is to the point where some non-seniors that had been on scholarship but also are deep down in the depth chart, might not be offered to renew their scholarship next year? (not sure if we have guaranteed multi-year scholarships or not)
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
https://stanford_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/pdf9/2525685.pdf
Quote:Stanford’s commitment to its student-athletes on athletic scholarship is to provide support that will
enable each student to complete their undergraduate degree in four years. Fifth-year aid is not
guaranteed for any student without prior written approval from the Athletic Director.
This is a 2013 document, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in this regard.
Also https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships
Appreciate the news and links.
So in coming to a PAC-12 school, how was Coach Prime able to come in and basically kick out a huuge number of Colorado players still on scholarship?
Not one player lost his CU scholarship. Those who lost their athletic scholarships were awarded academic scholarships to complete their education. Of course, a number of guys chose to leave Colorado for opportunities elsewhere.
The PAC-12 rules bind schools to a four year commitment. This precluded Colorado from dumping the players on the street.
To anyones knowledge, has Stanford ever done this? That is, convert a football scholarship to an academic one, effectively kicking a player off the team but not out of the school?
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - SamuelMcF - 12-05-2023
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701760024' Wrote: 1701760024[/url]']
Giants dateline='[url=tel:1701757209' Wrote: 1701757209[/url]']Ahh.. that explains it thanks
SkiBum80 dateline='[url=tel:1701752539' Wrote: 1701752539[/url]']
Goose dateline='[url=tel:1701743129' Wrote: 1701743129[/url]']
msqueri dateline='[url=tel:1701742696' Wrote: 1701742696[/url]']
I don’t know. I think it is extremely likely there are non-seniors the staff is not trying to keep/make feel warm and fuzzy about being welcome, but whether scholarships are actually pulled is another thing. Don’t know.
https://stanford_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/pdf9/2525685.pdf
Quote:Stanford’s commitment to its student-athletes on athletic scholarship is to provide support that will
enable each student to complete their undergraduate degree in four years. Fifth-year aid is not
guaranteed for any student without prior written approval from the Athletic Director.
This is a 2013 document, but I seriously doubt anything has changed in this regard.
Also https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships
Appreciate the news and links.
So in coming to a PAC-12 school, how was Coach Prime able to come in and basically kick out a huuge number of Colorado players still on scholarship?
Not one player lost his CU scholarship. Those who lost their athletic scholarships were awarded academic scholarships to complete their education. Of course, a number of guys chose to leave Colorado for opportunities elsewhere.
The PAC-12 rules bind schools to a four year commitment. This precluded Colorado from dumping the players on the street.
To anyones knowledge, has Stanford ever done this? That is, convert a football scholarship to an academic one, effectively kicking a player off the team but not out of the school?
Harbaugh did it.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - 81alum - 12-05-2023
(12-05-2023, 12:07 AM)SkiBum80 Wrote: To anyones knowledge, has Stanford ever done this? That is, convert a football scholarship to an academic one, effectively kicking a player off the team but not out of the school?The scholarships are covered when a player like Ally Beebe had to leave the WBB team very early in her career for medical reasons, she did not consume one of the 15 WBB scholarships after her medical retirement but nor was she cut off. I am not sure what the source of funds are for those scholarships but the Pac 12 does require that scholarships be honored for four years.
I always thought a 4 year scholarship was the ethical thing to do and thought it was an important reform when those guarantees came in. But I also thought it unfair that the University made a four year commitment to the student-athlete, but the student-athlete no longer makes a four year commitment to the University.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - BobK - 12-05-2023
We have several on medical type scholarships right now. Like Beebe was.
But converting to academic. Sorry I really doubt.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Goose - 12-05-2023
(12-05-2023, 09:27 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Harbaugh did it.
The OP has insights that I do not on these type of questions, but it would be helpful in this case if one issue was clarified. I think we all know that Harbaugh would make offers to recruits that he would not honor if it was "convenient". But, did Harbaugh actually "cut" players once they were on the team and somehow get them off the 85 player limit? I could easily imagine a few such things happening by "mutual consent", but I am unaware of that happening (unsurprisingly). I would expect that anybody who got "cut" that felt it was inappropriate/involuntary would have gone public about it, because there was no portal to easily preserve a football career in those years.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Jamesy - 12-05-2023
(12-05-2023, 10:00 AM)Goose Wrote:(12-05-2023, 09:27 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Harbaugh did it.
The OP has insights that I do not on these type of questions, but it would be helpful in this case if one issue was clarified. I think we all know that Harbaugh would make offers to recruits that he would not honor if it was "convenient". But, did Harbaugh actually "cut" players once they were on the team and somehow get them off the 85 player limit? I could easily imagine a few such things happening by "mutual consent", but I am unaware of that happening (unsurprisingly). I would expect that anybody who got "cut" that felt it was inappropriate/involuntary would have gone public about it, because there was no portal to easily preserve a football career in those years.
I heard or read somewhere that there is a provision that allows coaches in their first year to cut any player they want from the team without counting against the scholarship limit, but the school has to honor the remaining years of their four year scholarship if they don't transfer somewhere else.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Mick - 12-05-2023
(12-05-2023, 10:16 AM)Jamesy Wrote:(12-05-2023, 10:00 AM)Goose Wrote:(12-05-2023, 09:27 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Harbaugh did it.
The OP has insights that I do not on these type of questions, but it would be helpful in this case if one issue was clarified. I think we all know that Harbaugh would make offers to recruits that he would not honor if it was "convenient". But, did Harbaugh actually "cut" players once they were on the team and somehow get them off the 85 player limit? I could easily imagine a few such things happening by "mutual consent", but I am unaware of that happening (unsurprisingly). I would expect that anybody who got "cut" that felt it was inappropriate/involuntary would have gone public about it, because there was no portal to easily preserve a football career in those years.
I heard or read somewhere that there is a provision that allows coaches in their first year to cut any player they want from the team without counting against the scholarship limit, but the school has to honor the remaining years of their four year scholarship if they don't transfer somewhere else.
Is that a Stanford provision, a Pac-12 provision (or ACC provision) or an NCAA provision?
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - 81alum - 12-05-2023
(12-05-2023, 10:33 AM)Mick Wrote: Is that a Stanford provision, a Pac-12 provision (or ACC provision) or an NCAA provision?That is a very important question. Does the ACC have the same 4 year guarantees that the Pac 12 has (had)? Or has the 4 year guarantee now become a nationwide rule?
For that matter, what happens to the status of a 4 year scholarship guaranteed by the Pac 12 when a team leaves the Pac 12? Could a slimy team (maybe one in southern California?) dump players and assert that the guarantee is void because they are no longer bound by Pac 12 rules?
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - BobK - 12-05-2023
It's a Stanford provision, not decided by the ACC.
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Goose - 12-05-2023
(12-05-2023, 10:42 AM)BobK Wrote: It's a Stanford provision, not decided by the ACC.I do agree Stanford has it's own rules that guarantee scholarships can't be canceled for "athletic performance". These rules predate the 2015 NCAA rules that mandate exactly that (for P5 conferences + ND). The situation is explained more simply and transparently in
https://informedathlete.com/the-facts-about-guaranteed-multi-year-ncaa-di-scholarships/
RE: Stanford football transfers - Outgoing/portal entrants - Jamesy - 12-05-2023
Found the provision, from the NCAA. Source: https://theathletic.com/3321504/2022/05/19/college-football-oversigning-runoffs-roster-management/
The whole article is interesting but here's the pertinent excerpt.
Quote:Some programs have figured out they could already do this. First-year coaches have had an obscure loophole at their disposal in recent years to run off players they don’t want and free up more scholarships. In The Athletic’s story inside the hiring of Riley on Tuesday, Antonio Morales and Stewart Mandel reported that USC’s compliance department discovered a little-known NCAA bylaw that allowed Riley and his new regime to drop 10 scholarship players from their roster this offseason.
The rule they’ve been using — 15.5.1.7 — is known as the “Aid After Departure of Head Coach” bylaw. Newly hired coaches can remove a player from their 85-man scholarship roster but keep them on scholarship as long as they stop playing. A few of those Trojans players who were cut have transferred out, but USC assistant AD for football Joseph Wood told The Athletic that seven members of the 2021 team remain enrolled and on scholarship but are off the roster.
“We obviously forced some of the attrition here,” Riley said.
College football coaches have been able to use this loophole since 2017. Who figured it out first? How many of them have taken advantage? It’s hard to say. These programs aren’t too interested in publicizing their methods for dumping players from their rosters. You’ll mostly hear about it through word of mouth from other coaches. One Power 5 head coach who used the bylaw to drop three players this spring cited several other programs in the middle of rebuilds who’ve done it as well. But if a program hasn’t gone through one of these transitions, the rule might not be on their radar. USC’s administration didn’t know about it until they began preparing for their search.
When the bylaw was first established, its intended use wasn’t to help purge players off college football rosters. The concept arose in 2009 at a time when the NCAA was trying to confront its issues in another sport. The Men’s Basketball Academic Enhancement Group was established in 2007 to develop solutions for the concerning graduation rates and APRs in the sport. That group recommended this amendment, believing it would give men’s basketball players going through a coaching change more freedom to stay in school and graduate. They were aiming to help the players who had two or three semesters left to complete their degree and didn’t wish to transfer.
So 15.5.1.7 was adopted in the summer of 2010 as a men’s basketball-only rule. And it stayed that way until 2016, when the D-I Council’s Student-Athlete Experience Committee proposed that this exception should be allowed in all other sports. That revision went into effect in August 2017. Again, the proposal suggested this would provide more flexibility for student-athletes: “A student-athlete who wishes to remain at an institution to complete his or her degree will be much more likely to be able to do so with the opportunity to continue to receive athletically related financial aid.”
But then came another revision in 2018. The Atlantic 10 — a non-football conference — proposed that the rule should be extended to “a full year after the departure of the previous coach.” Why? Because basketball coaches often get hired in April. The A-10 believed giving players more time to decide on their continued participation was only fair and pitched this as an advancement for student-athlete well-being. The Men’s Basketball Oversight Committee actually opposed the proposal, calling it unnecessary. Football Oversight took no formal position, saying more discussion and research was needed. But every other committee supported it, and it was adopted in May 2019.
Thanks to that amendment, a college football coach hired in December doesn’t have just one offseason to flip a roster this way. They essentially have 18 months to remove players from their 85-man roster by offering to maintain their aid.