WBB news - 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: WBB news (/thread-26136.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: WBB news (/thread-26136.html)
RE: katebru552 - petersalas - 04-11-2026
I don’t think any of our players are going to have a hard time finding a home, if they do not withdraw their names from the portal. I believe they will have options are may not be in a rush to make a decision. They are probably also waiting to see what’s going to happen at Stanford.
(04-11-2026, 02:14 PM)katebru552 Wrote: I hope the players that didn’t give thanks to the coaches haven’t shot themselves in the foot. Don’t they realize that coaches from one team talk to the coaches of the team they are leaving? If they had a negative attitude or were rude/indifferent to the coaches, that’s going to be reported to a potentially interested team. I find it interesting that only one of the seven have found a team and I wonder how much of it is the Stanford coaches’ report on them and their attitude.(04-10-2026, 02:06 PM)MV72018 Wrote:(04-10-2026, 11:33 AM)BobK Wrote: Excellent post 2006. Sums it all up
The fact that only one has committed of the 7 leads me to believe there are good conversations going on with the players both in the portal and not
One alternate explanation: they decided to jump ship so recently, post-Lara, they haven't yet had enough time to forge serious relationships with other programs that could eventually lead to commitments to them.
RE: katebru552 - 2006alum - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 02:14 PM)katebru552 Wrote: I hope the players that didn’t give thanks to the coaches haven’t shot themselves in the foot. Don’t they realize that coaches from one team talk to the coaches of the team they are leaving? If they had a negative attitude or were rude/indifferent to the coaches, that’s going to be reported to a potentially interested team. I find it interesting that only one of the seven have found a team and I wonder how much of it is the Stanford coaches’ report on them and their attitude.(04-10-2026, 02:06 PM)MV72018 Wrote:(04-10-2026, 11:33 AM)BobK Wrote: Excellent post 2006. Sums it all up
The fact that only one has committed of the 7 leads me to believe there are good conversations going on with the players both in the portal and not
One alternate explanation: they decided to jump ship so recently, post-Lara, they haven't yet had enough time to forge serious relationships with other programs that could eventually lead to commitments to them.
I doubt it. The posts were all perfectly professional, they just omitted any nice words about the coaches. And one of the players whose post was most telling of them all, Harper Peterson, has already committed to Tennessee, so clearly she didn't have trouble finding a landing pad.
It does raise an interesting question, though - do coaches recruiting players in the portal contact the coaches from the schools they're transferring from? That feels like a weird conflict of interest and I'm not sure the coaches at the "from" school would be super excited to sell their former players, regardless, at least in instances outside of the occasional grad transfer.
RE: katebru552 - Goose - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 03:20 PM)2006alum Wrote: It does raise an interesting question, though - do coaches recruiting players in the portal contact the coaches from the schools they're transferring from? That feels like a weird conflict of interest and I'm not sure the coaches at the "from" school would be super excited to sell their former players, regardless, at least in instances outside of the occasional grad transfer.Maybe they make a call after the deed is done, certainly not before unless the player tells their prospective new coach it would be OK/good to do so. In some cases the decision to split is mutual or driven by the "from" coach. In those cases, talking is probably to be expected. Otherwise, I doubt the "from" coach would say anything at all. Too easy to get sued. I am also not so sure a "to" coach would trust what they heard.
RE: WBB news - BostonCard - 04-11-2026
Interesting; at my company we gave a directive that basically said that if we can't give a positive reference then we should decline.
BC
RE: WBB news - BobK - 04-11-2026
In my day it was eligible for rehire or not eligible
RE: WBB news - fullmetal - 04-11-2026
Interesting that Peterson is heading to Tennessee given that Tennessee's program is the only one in worse straits than Stanford -- Tennessee's entire team has transferred out with the (thus far) sole exception of a single recruit (Gabby Minus, #47 nationally, #14 PF), who is no doubt thinking hard. #5-ranked Oliviyah Edwards (#1 PF) has requested a release from her letter of intent, so maybe Minus is content to be a lock for the starting PF spot. Edwards had offers from USC, South Carolina, and LSU.
https://www.cbssports.com/womens-college-basketball/news/tennessee-womens-basketball-transfer-portal-loi-release/
"Tennessee Women’s Basketball Left with Single Recruit After 8 Players Enter NCAA Transfer Portal"
https://justwomenssports.com/reads/tennessee-womens-basketball-ncaa-transfer-portal-roster-crisis-2026/
Peterson is the third transfer signed to Tennessee (Liberty's Avery Mills and Northern Arizona's Naomi White are the first two).
https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/tennessee-womens-basketball-lands-20-182806109.html
Tennessee Kim Caldwell clearly lost her whole locker room with her losing hockey-style five-sub defensive strategy, and even a midseason switch back to a conventional substitution strategy did not help the win-loss issue. I assume there will be no further coaching shenanigans regarding substitutions next season, but who knows.
RE: WBB news - Nurdyguy - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 03:03 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(04-11-2026, 12:12 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: Since we are all left waiting for next week’s announcement. Heres my no insider prediction of what’s to come.Can't argue with that prediction! That said, the chance of it coming true isn't very great. One scenario here is that Donahoe has actually been working behind the scenes for quite some time, but it's taking so long because he can't convince anyone to take the job (much like what I believe happened with the football program). This roster has been cratered and as many have posted, it will be tough to bolster through the portal given Stanford's restrictions. The NYT summed up coaching at Stanford (football) with: "“Academic rigor. Difficulty of transfers. Has money,” “But would need a developmental approach and unique style that might take a cycle of older players hitting at the right time.” It's quite possible that the best coaching candidates (La Roque, Rueck, etc.) might just view the Stanford women's basketball head coach job as career suicide...
Stanford will announce Kate Paye is stepping down. It will be announced in such a way that it appears she did so voluntarily. There will be no reference to any allegations or investigation. This will be done to keep the negative publicity out of the news.
Stanford will quickly hire Lindy La Roque as the next HC. She will be tasked with saving the program she played for. Tara will be heavily involved in her hiring. Stanford will limit themselves by only looking at female candidates. She will bring most of her staff and some of her players. 1 or 2 current assistants (those were least complicit) could stay on as assistants. The rest of the staff will be gone.
Anyone else care to venture a prediction?
I think you nailed it. Until the Stanford Administration is forced to adapt to the new NIL era by embracing upperclassmen and graduate transfers as all the other successful programs do, I see no hope for our success in revenue sports. I agree that most potential coaches recognize that coaching our teams under Stanford's current hostile posture toward the portal is career suicide, and they'll continue to stay away. The few who are enticed to come will not be able to compete without the portal reloads needed in this day and age and will eventually lose their careers. So until we fix that core problem, the rest really won't matter. I'll still cheer for our teams regardless of their records, though. It just won't be as fun.
RE: WBB news - BostonCard - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 05:56 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: I think you nailed it. Until the Stanford Administration is forced to adapt to the new NIL era by embracing upperclassmen and graduate transfers as all the other successful programs do, I see no hope for our success in revenue sports.
What did you mean by your choice of words "is forced to adapt"?
BC
RE: WBB news - 2006alum - 04-11-2026
The part that kills me is if we had a coach the players didn't find toxic and who coached well enough to deliver on the promise of the recruits we had, I'm not sure we'd have a single transfer out this season. If we'd made the tournament and maybe even made the round of 32, I think everyone would return thinking at least the Sweet Sixteen was possible, if not further.
We had the recruits, and they stayed when Tara retired. We just didn't have the coaching to develop them or keep them. All the portal and NIL changes is that unhappy players can exit more rapidly, so let's focus on ensuring they're not unhappy.
RE: WBB news - BostonCard - 04-11-2026
I don't know about that. Players can elect to enter the portal for a whole host of reasons, even if the team is winning and players like the coach.
A) Obviously, more NIL money elsewhere
B) Playing time; a player buried on the bench could transfer for an opportunity to start at a place where there are fewer players ahead
C) A chance at a national title. Maybe you hope for more than the Sweet Sixteen
But of course, for any of the above, the barrier for pulling the trigger is going to be much lower if you are unhappy with the coach or the team's performance (or, it will be higher if the coaching staff is beloved by the players and the outlook for the future is positive).
But I think the wrestling team transfers show that good coaches and on the mat success only gets you so far.
BC
RE: WBB news - Nurdyguy - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 06:09 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(04-11-2026, 05:56 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: I think you nailed it. Until the Stanford Administration is forced to adapt to the new NIL era by embracing upperclassmen and graduate transfers as all the other successful programs do, I see no hope for our success in revenue sports.
What did you mean by your choice of words "is forced to adapt"?
BC
What I mean is that Stanford's revenue sports have so far resigned themselves to accept that reloading with talented upperclassmen and grad transfers in the portal is somehow not the Stanford way, thus tying at least one hand behind the coaches' backs. By forced to adapt, I mean that I hope the Stanford Administration will eventually be forced to recognize that their hostility toward the portal is killing their revenue sports and the careers of the coaches who have been forced to do more with less, and that the Stanford Administration will thus be forced to adapt their approach to the portal, allowing the necessary upperclassmen and graduate reloads needed to save Stanford revenue sports performance.
RE: WBB news - 82lsju - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 07:10 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote:(04-11-2026, 06:09 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(04-11-2026, 05:56 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: I think you nailed it. Until the Stanford Administration is forced to adapt to the new NIL era by embracing upperclassmen and graduate transfers as all the other successful programs do, I see no hope for our success in revenue sports.
What did you mean by your choice of words "is forced to adapt"?
BC
What I mean is that Stanford's revenue sports have so far resigned themselves to accept that reloading with talented upperclassmen and grad transfers in the portal is somehow not the Stanford way, thus tying at least one hand behind the coaches' backs. By forced to adapt, I mean that I hope the Stanford Administration will eventually be forced to recognize that their hostility toward the portal is killing their revenue sports and the careers of the coaches who have been forced to do more with less, and the Stanford Administration will be thus forced to adapt their approach to the portal, allowing necessary upperclassmen and graduate reloads, to save Stanford revenue sports performance.
Stanford accepts a low number of applicants as either undergrad applicant or undergrad transfer applicants (and years ago I was rejected as a frosh admit and accepted as a transfer admit), athletes appear to get a bit of a break from the average admit (which I am OK with). To the best of my knowledge Stanford has limited undergrad transfers to bring in up to 90 quarter units of credit so someone transferring as an undergrad after completing three or four (if one was redshirt year) years elsewhere would not obviously be transferring with an objective of graduating "on time" and I'm not sure how much of that is a factor in undergrad transfer acceptances. I don't expect (or think) that the grad schools should admit athletes that they would not admit if they were not an athlete given the low rate of those grad transfers who actually get a degree from the college they gra transferred to (this based on the several years ago NCAA grad transfer graduation rates that they appear to have stopped publishing, I assume because in the "big sports" for football, MBB, and WBB, the grad degree attainment rates were very low). The post-bacc program seem to be the biggest accomodation for grad transfer who are not of interest to the various grad schools, I am also ok with that.
I am a long time football season ticket holder who is not happy with the last 6-8 years of on field performance, but my cohort is aging out so our opinions matter less and less, but over the last ten year I have not seen "replacements" to take our place at home games. I'm expecting the upcoming season in Lot 2 (aka El Camino Grove) to be sparsely populated based on the declines we've seen over the last few years.
RE: WBB news - Goose - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 07:10 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: By forced to adapt, I mean that I hope the Stanford Administration will eventually be forced to recognize that their hostility toward the portal is killing their revenue sports and the careers of the coaches who have been forced to do more with less, and the Stanford Administration will be thus forced to adapt their approach to the portal, allowing necessary upperclassmen and graduate reloads, to save Stanford revenue sports performance.That assumes that the Stanford Administration values "saving Stanford revenue sports performance" more than they value the current transfer approach. In the main, I think they do not. They are willing to tweak around the edges, but fundamentally changing the system to admit basically anybody the coaches want is IMO never ever going to happen. One of the "hopeful" outcomes on this board involved the UNLV coach bringing two of her players with her. I am guessing that the UNLV team does not contain two players (of whatever skill set) that could get admitted to Stanford as transfer students.
RE: WBB news - crackpot - 04-11-2026
Skim Mulkey is hinting that we have a portal pickup.
I can't tell if I should be happy about this news, or depressed (TBH, more depressed).
RE: WBB news - Hieronymus - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 07:10 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote:(04-11-2026, 06:09 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(04-11-2026, 05:56 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: I think you nailed it. Until the Stanford Administration is forced to adapt to the new NIL era by embracing upperclassmen and graduate transfers as all the other successful programs do, I see no hope for our success in revenue sports.
What did you mean by your choice of words "is forced to adapt"?
BC
What I mean is that Stanford's revenue sports have so far resigned themselves to accept that reloading with talented upperclassmen and grad transfers in the portal is somehow not the Stanford way, thus tying at least one hand behind the coaches' backs. By forced to adapt, I mean that I hope the Stanford Administration will eventually be forced to recognize that their hostility toward the portal is killing their revenue sports and the careers of the coaches who have been forced to do more with less, and the Stanford Administration will be thus forced to adapt their approach to the portal, allowing necessary upperclassmen and graduate reloads, to save Stanford revenue sports performance.
The grad transfer problem looks the least solvable to my eyes. A lot of programs only have a handful of spots, and it doesn’t seem feasible to manufacture a spot for an athlete in many cases. In addition we have smart athletes who are much more likely to graduate in 3 years vs. most college athletes. So it’s a double whammy.
Coaching can be fixed.
NIL can be fixed.
To a degree, admissions maybe still can be eased. Maybe.
But I don’t see a solution for the grad transfer issue, or the you need to be at a certain academic level to make it at Stanford.
RE: WBB news - 2006alum - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 08:27 PM)crackpot Wrote: Skim Mulkey is hinting that we have a portal pickup.Same. I can't in good conscious feel good about ANY player announcing she's coming here tomorrow when I and 80 percent of the fan base is praying the coaching staff is overhauled on Monday.
I can't tell if I should be happy about this news, or depressed (TBH, more depressed).
RE: WBB news - Nurdyguy - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 08:37 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:(04-11-2026, 07:10 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote:(04-11-2026, 06:09 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(04-11-2026, 05:56 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: I think you nailed it. Until the Stanford Administration is forced to adapt to the new NIL era by embracing upperclassmen and graduate transfers as all the other successful programs do, I see no hope for our success in revenue sports.
What did you mean by your choice of words "is forced to adapt"?
BC
What I mean is that Stanford's revenue sports have so far resigned themselves to accept that reloading with talented upperclassmen and grad transfers in the portal is somehow not the Stanford way, thus tying at least one hand behind the coaches' backs. By forced to adapt, I mean that I hope the Stanford Administration will eventually be forced to recognize that their hostility toward the portal is killing their revenue sports and the careers of the coaches who have been forced to do more with less, and the Stanford Administration will be thus forced to adapt their approach to the portal, allowing necessary upperclassmen and graduate reloads, to save Stanford revenue sports performance.
The grad transfer problem looks the least solvable to my eyes. A lot of programs only have a handful of spots, and it doesn’t seem feasible to manufacture a spot for an athlete in many cases. In addition we have smart athletes who are much more likely to graduate in 3 years vs. most college athletes. So it’s a double whammy.
Coaching can be fixed.
NIL can be fixed.
To a degree, admissions maybe still can be eased. Maybe.
But I don’t see a solution for the grad transfer issue, or the you need to be at a certain academic level to make it at Stanford.
You're right that Stanford's inability to reload through transfers like other teams will probably never be solved, but not because it's universally impossible. It's because our Stanford Administration is making a conscious choice to keep making it difficult to bring in the upper-class and graduate transfers that Stanford's revenue sports need to compete. We have an idealistic view that we will just build through freshmen, which sounds noble, but is not realistic in the transfer era. We impose extra transfer restrictions on ourselves, and I don't mean just grades. The other schools we compete against find a way to provide the graduate slots their teams need, and Stanford could do that, too, if we had the will. When Stanford WBB lost Lauren Betts, we brought in no portal transfers. Then, we only brought in Tess Heal and Mary Ashley Stevenson when we lost Kiki, and no transfers in when we lost Tess and Jzaniya. UCLA transferred in Lauren Betts, Jania Barker, Timea Gardiner, Charlisse Leger-Walker, and Gina Kneepkens during that same timeframe, and we all know what TCU has done. They're killing it in the NCAA tournament. We're in the WBIT.
Even the best coaches must be able to reload with quality upper-class and graduate players in the portal in revenue sports, so I don't think Stanford will be able to get back to prominence or attract good coaches who care about their careers until our Stanford Administration eliminates its hostility to transfers. And that hostility to transfers is a conscious choice that our Stanford Administration continues to make...and something they could change, but they won't unless someone forces them.
triangle2 - triangle2 - 04-11-2026
(04-11-2026, 08:27 PM)crackpot Wrote: Skim Mulkey is hinting that we have a portal pickup.
I can't tell if I should be happy about this news, or depressed (TBH, more depressed).
My guess is it’s Ryann Bennett from UC Davis - sophomore and 2nd team All Conference in the Big West.
RE: WBB news - Goose - 04-12-2026
(04-11-2026, 09:22 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: Even the best coaches must be able to reload with quality upper-class and graduate players in the portal in revenue sports, so I don't think Stanford will be able to get back to prominence or attract good coaches who care about their careers until our Stanford Administration eliminates its hostility to transfers. And that hostility to transfers is a conscious choice that our Stanford Administration continues to make...and something they could change, but they won't unless someone forces them.First of all, Stanford is not "hostile" to transfers in general. There are however limiting factors. First, the number of students Stanford accepts is more-or-less fixed. Therefore for every transfer in there notionally has to be a transfer out. Stanford is unwilling to adopt a policy of reserving transfer in slots for athletes for corresponding athletes who transfer out. Second, like the freshman admissions process Stanford is not willing to give absolute preference to athletes. Athletes do get some preference, but definitely not a free pass in. Third, the transfer process, like all Stanford processes it seems, is structured and "measured", i.e. slow. You aren't going to get a yes/no in 48 hours in general.
These factors inherently limit the utility of the transfer portal. Add to that the academic degree of difficulty for Stanford admissions of any kind and it becomes clear that the transfer in path, while still useful, is never going to be a "reload" the entire team every year option. Some of the "friction" in transfer admissions has been mitigated. More probably can and will be. However, it is never going to approach what is possible at e.g. UCLA or ASU. Student body size and admission standards alone ensure that.
As far as "somebody" forcing Stanford to fundamentally change its transfer policies, no such "somebody" exists. Even the president has to satisfy a large academic constituency that is not supportive of absolute athletic preferences in admissions, transfer or otherwise. Some of the limitations are structural. As an example, Stanford has about 8000 undergraduate students UCLA has about 33,000. The transfers in to UCLA are a lot easier to fit into the norms of the school than they are at Stanford simply based on quantity.
RE: WBB news - jonnyss - 04-12-2026
i sent 2 emails to donahoe. in the first i suggested involving nneka, as someone comparable to andrew luck, in investigation and recommendations. i received the same generic response others have posted. the second follows - my email below, his reply above:
Hi John -
Thank you for your messages and support of Stanford basketball. I can assure you that senior Athletic Dept leaders (including me) have been talking with all of the players, and in many cases their parents. The entire portal process has been dynamic for Stanford and everyone. While we may not have gotten everything right, I can assure you that we are not being passive.
Your suggestion about a statement is a good one. Thanks for offering it.
Most importantly thank you for your 35 year support of Stanford basketball.
Thank you
John
hi john -
stanford athletics reacted very slowly when usc and ucla left for the big 10. can we please react more quickly this time?
i am concerned we may once again close the barn door after the horse has left.
must you remain silent?
may i respectfully suggest you make some sort of statement? if you have legal concerns, make it constructive rather than blaming —for example, “i am of course concerned about the large number of women’s basketball players who have entered the portal. please know that we are talking to all involved and hoping to formulate a path forward as soon as possible.
thanks,
john