5th Year Decision Thread - 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: 5th Year Decision Thread (/thread-18712.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: 5th Year Decision Thread (/thread-18712.html)
RE: rich_matta2@yahoo.com - Goose - 12-14-2019
(12-14-2019, 08:42 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(12-13-2019, 08:17 PM)Goose Wrote:(12-13-2019, 06:13 PM)teejers1 Wrote: The bottom line is this: Stanford and/or the football program is not appealing enough for these kids to stay. And until we learn definitively that these kids were booted out via graduation and couldn't get into a grad program - which I find exceedingly hard to believe, given the easy option of just holding back Winter/Spring quarters and then taking some classes next fall - I view this as another indication of things going a bit awry.Do you in all seriousness not understand why a high achiever, goal oriented individual would be adverse to intentionally wasting a year by artificially postponing graduation in order to play football??? You are quite right that if that course of action is the only way you could stay at Stanford, it would generally not be appealing enough to stay at Stanford, no matter what else Stanford did. There are undoubtedly special cases where a player wants to take some particular classes where staying an "extra" year may make sense, but it certainly is not the general case.
It is also important to realize that these players have actually gone through four years of practices, strength and conditioning, and spring football at Stanford. This is a grind. There aren't many "new experiences" to be had by doing it again. While playing another season with "your guys" may be attractive, the vast majority of your classmates will be moving on. Playing another year elsewhere to pay for a graduate degree, coupled with whatever additional insights that will come from a new place actually makes sense. I am pretty sure that if one of the players was giving up football and going to another school, nobody would find that remarkable. Playing one more year to do the same should not be any more unusual.
???
Do you in all seriousness not understand that the concern is NOT with those transferring and hanging up the cleats; but rather, those going to another program to play one last year of football instead of at Stanford? That was the entire thrust of my questioning of your statement in bold about showing the NFL something else.
I stand by my comments/concerns about kids who got meaningful PT last season, were expected to get the same this season, and instead enter the portal to play somewhere else. And they're not leaving Podunk U to play somewhere else. They're leaving Stanford University.
Every fan of Stanford football should be concerned and wonder WTH is going on.
OK, I guess I still am not communicating. My point is that going someplace else that is not Stanford University after graduating is common. If the person happens to have eligibility left and chooses to use it to pay for their education, that is just smart. Sticking around Stanford just to play football isn't worth it to them. You seem to believe that it should be, and the fact that it is not is somehow a defect in the program. I have pointed out that for a goal oriented guy who is going to give up football in a year anyway, spending a year at Stanford just to play football isn't going to be very attractive no matter what the program does. He has been there and done that. Time for the 40 year decision go into effect. Seems pretty obvious to me. When you have your degree, you go on to what is next. For each person, what that is may be different. Hanging around to play football most probably isn't it. Also, it is clear in my post, I think, that I am making the point that if going someplace else and hanging up your cleats is unremarkable, going someplace else and NOT hanging up you cleats is also unremarkable. Either way, you are graduating and moving on. These two things are not "morally" different IMHO.
As far as "your statement in bold", I think you have me confused with CardinalSagehen. AFAIK, I have mode no statements in bold on this subject.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - BostonCard - 12-14-2019
[tweet]https://twitter.com/mike_williams52/status/1205714243657580544?s=21[/tweet]
Not sure what this Williams tweet is alluding to, but Mike Eubanks liked it, so it probably doesn’t mean getting to work at another school.
BC
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - Phogge - 12-15-2019
Let me know if any OT these guys meet Kurt Russell coming out of the Portal.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - d4cohn - 12-15-2019
(12-14-2019, 11:34 PM)BostonCard Wrote: [tweet]https://twitter.com/mike_williams52/status/1205714243657580544?s=21[/tweet]
Not sure what this Williams tweet is alluding to, but Mike Eubanks liked it, so it probably doesn’t mean getting to work at another school.
BC
Yeah, I thought his other tweet possibly suggested he was giving up football for his fifth year.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - CardinalSagehen - 12-15-2019
More from Uncle Julio below. I think this can be taken at face value and covers both the 40-year decision and football.
[twitter]https://twitter.com/mike_williams52/status/1206417524104945664[/twitter]
lex24 - lex24 - 12-16-2019
Discussion is heavy on conjecture, light on facts. There may be any number of reasons why 5th year goes into portal. My guess is that if you asked each one, you would get varied answers. But it’s just a guess. If anyone has actual information, let’s hear it.
RE: lex24 - winflop - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 04:59 AM)lex24 Wrote: Discussion is heavy on conjecture, light on facts. There may be any number of reasons why 5th year goes into portal. My guess is that if you asked each one, you would get varied answers. But it’s just a guess. If anyone has actual information, let’s hear it.
I was told by a former player that for Williams & Swann, their decisions have nothing to do with academics.
But frankly I don't care what the reasons are for the five guys who clearly would be starting or on the two-deep. Something has them wanting to leave and it doesn't reflect well on the program. Meanwhile, Shaw sits in his ivory tower taking zero action after the worst season in his HC career.
RE: lex24 - cardcrimson - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 04:59 AM)lex24 Wrote: Discussion is heavy on conjecture, light on facts. There may be any number of reasons why 5th year goes into portal. My guess is that if you asked each one, you would get varied answers. But it’s just a guess. If anyone has actual information, let’s hear it.
When has that ever stopped the folks on a sports board. Facts?!? Come on Lex, you know better. . . .
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - qwerty49 - 12-16-2019
(12-14-2019, 11:34 PM)BostonCard Wrote: [tweet]https://twitter.com/mike_williams52/status/1205714243657580544?s=21[/tweet]
Not sure what this Williams tweet is alluding to, but Mike Eubanks liked it, so it probably doesn’t mean getting to work at another school.
BC
Mike liking the tweet could be just wishing him well. Elsewhere, that is.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - OutsiderFan - 12-16-2019
Wilner (and Shaw) chime in...
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/12/16/stanford-is-dominating-the-transfer-portal-what-gives-on-the-farm/
Still a lot of things in flux, obviously.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - BostonCard - 12-16-2019
A few interesting tidbits...
He projects 22 signing day scholarships for 2020; we are currently at 19. I know we are hoping for a couple more, but three more I think is on the upper bound of what we expecting.
Quote:Harrington, the backup tight end, likely would return for 2020 if Colby Parkinson enters the NFL Draft; and Eboh, a starting cornerback early in the season who lost his job, might return if Paulson Adebo turns pro.
Wilner doesn't reveal whether he's pulling that conjecture out of his butt or if is based on anything. I had not heard that Eboh or Harrington were making their decisions on who is coming back.
Wilner rightly notes that "The situation is potentially more dire on defense if Williams and Swann depart."
BC
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - CTcard - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 11:55 AM)BostonCard Wrote: He projects 22 signing day scholarships for 2020; we are currently at 19. I know we are hoping for a couple more, but three more I think is on the upper bound of what we expecting.
He = Wilner?
Any indication if that was based upon anything?
If it is 22, where does that put us versus the scholarship limit?
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - BostonCard - 12-16-2019
"he" does in fact refer to WIlner.
There are a lot of moving pieces in terms of scholarship spots. It depends on who else enters the portal and whether any of those in the portal withdraw their name and come back. There is also the matter of whether Parkinson and/or Adebo go pro.
By my math, if we do in fact get 22, we will probably be at the 80 - 85 scholarships level.
BC
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - CTcard - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 12:16 PM)BostonCard Wrote: There are a lot of moving pieces in terms of scholarship spots.
It is those moving pieces that I was trying to track down.
I thought you wrote a post with the scholarship count for next year, as far as we knew at the time.
I couldn't find it looking around just now, and was hoping you'd point to it or recalculate.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - BostonCard - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 01:02 PM)CTcard Wrote: I thought you wrote a post with the scholarship count for next year, as far as we knew at the time.
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=18725
Bob started the thread; I added to it, last updated with Little's return.
BC
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - SamuelMcF - 12-16-2019
God I hate giving Wilner clicks. But he's generally on the mark here. I also don't think we get 22... 20-21 most likely IMO, unless we count an LDS guy (would be c/o '22 so I don't count him). Roughly the class size I'd ideally want every year. The "smaller" classes should be 18, not 15.
He does make a good point about more than half our scholarships going to underclassmen. This, folks, is why the '18 class was so disastrous for the team, and why our depth seemed nonexistent this year. If you have 5-7 guys that don't make an impact in a given class, that's pretty normal/understandable when the class size is 20+. When the class size is 15 and you're giving a scholarship to a walk-on S in the next class because he's already better than a scholarship RS Fr who has an entire year of practice and S&C under his belt? Yikes.
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - BostonCard - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 01:23 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: God I hate giving Wilner clicks. But he's generally on the mark here. I also don't think we get 22... 20-21 most likely IMO, unless we count an LDS guy (would be c/o '22 so I don't count him). Roughly the class size I'd ideally want every year. The "smaller" classes should be 18, not 15.
He does make a good point about more than half our scholarships going to underclassmen. This, folks, is why the '18 class was so disastrous for the team, and why our depth seemed nonexistent this year. If you have 5-7 guys that don't make an impact in a given class, that's pretty normal/understandable when the class size is 20+. When the class size is 15 and you're giving a scholarship to a walk-on S in the next class because he's already better than a scholarship RS Fr who has an entire year of practice and S&C under his belt? Yikes.
Right, your analysis reveals why Wilner is not a great journalist. He tells us the what, but he doesn't tell us the how or why; it's a factually correct but skin deep article. Ultimately, we will be fighting this problem until 2022, when the members of the 2018 class would be seniors. At that point, we will hopefully have four full classes of 18-22 recruits. But as long as the hole is there, we will be struggling with depth, inexperience, or both.
BC
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - OutsiderFan - 12-16-2019
I don't think the issue is the 2018 class size as much as the failure to develop and coach up the roster to at least its expected performance based on recruiting ranking. Stanford did after all win the conference two years after a signing class of 12 in 2013. In recent years, every 5th season Stanford has had a low rated/small recruiting class. But in every year except those "anomaly years" Stanford has had a Top 25 national recruiting class. So in some respects 2018 was right on schedule.
Of course, the last conference championship came on the heels of a Top 10 recruiting class. That is more the norm. I don't think Stanford WBB and WVB would be so great right now if getting recruiting classes ranked in the 20s year after year. But based on recruiting rankings, Shaw is clearly getting less than he should out of the talent he has recruited. It stands to reason that if recruiting slips further, he will start losing more than he wins annually. The 2020 season should be a very good one based on the '16 and '17 classes, but not if key contributors leave early.
Stanford Pac-12 signing class ranks (national)
As of now 2020: 3 (21)
2019: 4 (21)
2018: 7 (40)
2017: 2 (14)
2016: 3 (16)
2015: 5 (24)
2014: 2 (13)
2013: 11 (52)
2012: 1 (7)
2011: 4 (22)
2010: 6 (25)
2009: 3 (21)
2008: 9 (47)
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - BostonCard - 12-16-2019
The difference between 2013 and 2018 was that 2013 followed a big and deep class. The 2018 class followed a small (but high quality class). You can't have small back-to-back classes and not expect to have problems down the line.
BC
RE: 5th Year Decision Thread - gailtate - 12-16-2019
(12-16-2019, 12:16 PM)BostonCard Wrote: "he" does in fact refer to WIlner.
There are a lot of moving pieces in terms of scholarship spots. It depends on who else enters the portal and whether any of those in the portal withdraw their name and come back. There is also the matter of whether Parkinson and/or Adebo go pro.
By my math, if we do in fact get 22, we will probably be at the 80 - 85 scholarships level.
BC
It's not easy to envision Parkinson or Adebo in the NFL. Adebo, maybe, if he can be coached up. The physical tools seem to be there. Parkinson needs a ton of route-running tutelage and body leverage/control. Compare him to Fleener, Ertz, Hewitt, Reuland, Toilolo, Dray, et. al.