It's Tavita Pritchard! - 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: It's Tavita Pritchard! (/thread-25910.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: It's Tavita Pritchard! (/thread-25910.html)
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - norcard10 - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 11:32 AM)MV72018 Wrote:(11-29-2025, 06:49 AM)Mick Wrote:(11-29-2025, 12:10 AM)norcard10 Wrote:(11-28-2025, 11:54 PM)KartyFan Wrote:(11-28-2025, 08:23 PM)norcard10 Wrote: Taylor showed progress on the field with the scores (especially with the ACC transition in the second year) and a disastrous roster. His offense (does anyone remember the Colorado game?) has been more exciting to watch that whatever cluster shawvita rolled out during their last 4 years. This would have been a pivotal year for taylor with most of his key recruits as juniors. Pritchard was likely not a head coach cancidate for any of the myriad of college head coach openings out there. Nor should he be.
Troy Taylor's on-field results don't really matter since we had to fire him for behavioral reasons, right? He was a bad hire. Maybe there was no way of figuring that out before hiring him. All the more reason not to get too high or too low on any candidate before you see results.
I think Tavita is better suited for Stanford than anywhere else (that doesn't necessarily mean he will succeed!), so I'm not too concerned that nobody else was interested.
Recruiting and the portal will be very telling. If we somehow end up with a worse o-line this year than next year, we've got a problem on our hands. If we are solidly in the plus category in the transfer portal and close on a decent recruiting class, we might have a shot at a bowl next year.
I am not predicting greatness but am open to it!
The problem with Shawvita wasn't recruiting. They had top notch recruits but the offensive coaching was abysmal. I need to see a 180 from vanilla and uninspiring offense from tavita to be convinced. Hopefully he's learned his ways since the twilight of his tenure with Shaw.
I support the hire. I think it is the best that Stanford could do under the circumstances, and if Pritchard can ramp up the recruiting and introduce an exceptional offensive scheme, then I think it can really work.
I do hope that half-a-dozen versions of the question "How did David Shaw fail, and how will you succeed in his place" was asked and answered in depth. But I am as optimistic as when Stanford hired an FCS coach from the Pioneer Football League as their head coach.
“…And if Pritchard can…introduce an exceptional offensive scheme …” That’s a nice hope and a brobdingnagian IF. Are there ANY grounds for thinking it’s more than a pipe dream? I’m not aware of any.
Yes, if Andrew Luck becomes Andrew Luck, Andrew Luck Director of Offense
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - chrisk - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 10:35 AM)paloalto Wrote: I never liked the idea of a head coach with no HC experience and track record although it often works out. A HC has to make tough decisions with confidence and sometimes reprimand subordinates who are not getting the job done. Hopefully Pritchard is up to that. At 35 he may be Stanford's coach for the next three decades. I hope it works out.
I was watching ACC Huddle on ACCN. The guys were saying in today's world money for player acquisition/retention is more important than the head coach.
I agree that additional funding is better spent on players than a head coach. Pritchard is 38, the same age as Shaw was when he was hired. Shaw lasted 12 years, which turned out to be too long. After his early success, there were people hoping/suggesting that Shaw would finish his career with Stanford. Pritchard would do well to exceed the average tenure of stanfordhead coach. Shaw, Ralston, and even Willingham are outliers.
RE: Chip.burns@glenborough.com - ADPinWDC - 11-29-2025
(11-28-2025, 04:25 PM)sunnyside sudser Wrote: Makes me wonder how many people turned us down
I think plenty of top candidates turned us down.
Lane Kiffin, Urban Meyer, Peterson... are not coming to Stanford -- they only care about NatChamps.
Pritchard did a decent job on Offense 2023-24 with the new QB J.Daniels for Wash Commanders into NFL Playoffs last year, to NFC Champ game vs powerful Eagles.
Pritchard probably sees limited upside with Commanders so take the leap.
But we need to pay for a strong DefCo. $2M+
Pritchard doesn't do Defense.
Harbaugh brought in Fangio to shift to 3-4.
Fangio trained up Mason, who had us beat Oregon.
Maybe Luck thinks Luck can handle recruiting, more than Pritchard. Likely true.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - fullmetal - 11-29-2025
Do we need to get all new defensive faces though? What better way to garner goodwill among the best coaches on staff right now than to retain those who deserve it and not force them and their families to got through another round of job hunting and family relocation upheaval?
Players benefit from continuity, good coaches will be grateful to not be kicked to the curb, and let's face it--Pritchard would have to lean on the entire Stanford contact tree to start hiring a staff from scratch. There are some coaches who deserve to be retained: the Big Game defensive effort was a resoundingly successful audition. Why not focus on points of crucial need and roll with what's been working so far?
Moneyball, but with time as well as money.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - Mick - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 11:32 AM)MV72018 Wrote:(11-29-2025, 06:49 AM)Mick Wrote:(11-29-2025, 12:10 AM)norcard10 Wrote:(11-28-2025, 11:54 PM)KartyFan Wrote:(11-28-2025, 08:23 PM)norcard10 Wrote: Taylor showed progress on the field with the scores (especially with the ACC transition in the second year) and a disastrous roster. His offense (does anyone remember the Colorado game?) has been more exciting to watch that whatever cluster shawvita rolled out during their last 4 years. This would have been a pivotal year for taylor with most of his key recruits as juniors. Pritchard was likely not a head coach cancidate for any of the myriad of college head coach openings out there. Nor should he be.
Troy Taylor's on-field results don't really matter since we had to fire him for behavioral reasons, right? He was a bad hire. Maybe there was no way of figuring that out before hiring him. All the more reason not to get too high or too low on any candidate before you see results.
I think Tavita is better suited for Stanford than anywhere else (that doesn't necessarily mean he will succeed!), so I'm not too concerned that nobody else was interested.
Recruiting and the portal will be very telling. If we somehow end up with a worse o-line this year than next year, we've got a problem on our hands. If we are solidly in the plus category in the transfer portal and close on a decent recruiting class, we might have a shot at a bowl next year.
I am not predicting greatness but am open to it!
The problem with Shawvita wasn't recruiting. They had top notch recruits but the offensive coaching was abysmal. I need to see a 180 from vanilla and uninspiring offense from tavita to be convinced. Hopefully he's learned his ways since the twilight of his tenure with Shaw.
I support the hire. I think it is the best that Stanford could do under the circumstances, and if Pritchard can ramp up the recruiting and introduce an exceptional offensive scheme, then I think it can really work.
I do hope that half-a-dozen versions of the question "How did David Shaw fail, and how will you succeed in his place" was asked and answered in depth. But I am as optimistic as when Stanford hired an FCS coach from the Pioneer Football League as their head coach.
“…And if Pritchard can…introduce an exceptional offensive scheme …” That’s a nice hope and a massive IF. Are there ANY grounds for thinking it’s more than a pipe dream? I’m not aware of any.
I'm inferring the possibility given that a proven NFL winning quarterback interviewed and hired Pritchard. Presumably Luck knows about exceptional and less-than-exceptional offensive schemes and how to discern the difference.
Does anyone know if Reich was part of the interviewing process?
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - HalloHaleakala - 11-29-2025
(11-28-2025, 03:23 PM)martyup Wrote: Let's hope TP can get Stanford Football out of the toilet bowl and into a New Year's Day bowl.And, ultimately, out of a slowly dying conference and into a burgeoning one (the Big Ten).
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - norcard10 - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 02:30 PM)Mick Wrote:(11-29-2025, 11:32 AM)MV72018 Wrote:(11-29-2025, 06:49 AM)Mick Wrote:(11-29-2025, 12:10 AM)norcard10 Wrote:(11-28-2025, 11:54 PM)KartyFan Wrote: Troy Taylor's on-field results don't really matter since we had to fire him for behavioral reasons, right? He was a bad hire. Maybe there was no way of figuring that out before hiring him. All the more reason not to get too high or too low on any candidate before you see results.
I think Tavita is better suited for Stanford than anywhere else (that doesn't necessarily mean he will succeed!), so I'm not too concerned that nobody else was interested.
Recruiting and the portal will be very telling. If we somehow end up with a worse o-line this year than next year, we've got a problem on our hands. If we are solidly in the plus category in the transfer portal and close on a decent recruiting class, we might have a shot at a bowl next year.
I am not predicting greatness but am open to it!
The problem with Shawvita wasn't recruiting. They had top notch recruits but the offensive coaching was abysmal. I need to see a 180 from vanilla and uninspiring offense from tavita to be convinced. Hopefully he's learned his ways since the twilight of his tenure with Shaw.
I support the hire. I think it is the best that Stanford could do under the circumstances, and if Pritchard can ramp up the recruiting and introduce an exceptional offensive scheme, then I think it can really work.
I do hope that half-a-dozen versions of the question "How did David Shaw fail, and how will you succeed in his place" was asked and answered in depth. But I am as optimistic as when Stanford hired an FCS coach from the Pioneer Football League as their head coach.
“…And if Pritchard can…introduce an exceptional offensive scheme …” That’s a nice hope and a massive IF. Are there ANY grounds for thinking it’s more than a pipe dream? I’m not aware of any.
I'm inferring the possibility given that a proven NFL winning quarterback interviewed and hired Pritchard. Presumably Luck knows about exceptional and less-than-exceptional offensive schemes and how to discern the difference.
Does anyone know if Reich was part of the interviewing process?
did luck lose internet access during the last 4 years of shawvita era? he is a self proclaimed luddite after all
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - chrisk - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 02:31 PM)HalloHaleakala Wrote:(11-28-2025, 03:23 PM)martyup Wrote: Let's hope TP can get Stanford Football out of the toilet bowl and into a New Year's Day bowl.And, ultimately, out of a slowly dying conference and into a burgeoning one (the Big Ten).
The Big Ten will not be accepting applications anytime soon.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - Spiny_Norman - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 03:57 PM)chrisk Wrote:(11-29-2025, 02:31 PM)HalloHaleakala Wrote:(11-28-2025, 03:23 PM)martyup Wrote: Let's hope TP can get Stanford Football out of the toilet bowl and into a New Year's Day bowl.And, ultimately, out of a slowly dying conference and into a burgeoning one (the Big Ten).
The Big Ten will not be accepting applications anytime soon.
Fox Sports The Big Ten will not be accepting applications anytime soon for the Big Ten.
Fox Sports initiated the addition of the 4 West Coast schools to the Big Ten. They will decide when/if any further expansion happens.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - ADPinWDC - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 08:06 AM)Goose Wrote:(11-29-2025, 12:10 AM)norcard10 Wrote: The problem with Shawvita wasn't recruiting. They had top notch recruits but the offensive coaching was abysmal. I need to see a 180 from vanilla and uninspiring offense from tavita to be convinced. Hopefully he's learned his ways since the twilight of his tenure with Shaw.I totally disagree. Recruiting was a massive part of the problem. Shavita wanted to run the ball, but they lost the ability to recruit an OL that could run block. For a while, they still had OLs that could pass block at least a bit, but subsequently even that became impossible. Both Stanford and Kal have suffered from the inability to recruit and coach up competent offensive lines for "many" years at this point. Even when Bryce Love was putting up his gaudy numbers the Stanford OL wasn't good. The statement about BL was that all he needed was a crack and he was gone. His OL generally couldn't produce even that crack, and that is why BL also has lots of < 3 yard runs. From 2017 on Stanford's OL became an increasingly severe problem.
Our dismal slide since 2017 proves this point loudly.
And the turnaround achieved by Harbaugh was clearly focused on getting 4-star, 5-star linemen, which we had with Gerhart in 2009, then Luck, then for McCaffrey in 2015-16.
O-Line gotta be #1 on the punch list for Restoration.
How many Stanford O-Line were drafted to NFL from 2009 until now, in which years?
EXAMPLES
David DeCastro: A first-round pick in the 2012 NFL draft who played for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Joshua Garnett: A first-round pick in the 2016 NFL draft who played for the San Francisco 49ers.
Cameron Fleming: An offensive tackle who was drafted by the New England Patriots in the fourth round of the 2014 NFL draft.
Jonathan Martin, drafted in 2012
Drew Dalman, still playing for Bears, 2017-2020
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - norcard10 - 11-29-2025
(11-29-2025, 06:56 PM)ADPinWDC Wrote:(11-29-2025, 08:06 AM)Goose Wrote:(11-29-2025, 12:10 AM)norcard10 Wrote: The problem with Shawvita wasn't recruiting. They had top notch recruits but the offensive coaching was abysmal. I need to see a 180 from vanilla and uninspiring offense from tavita to be convinced. Hopefully he's learned his ways since the twilight of his tenure with Shaw.I totally disagree. Recruiting was a massive part of the problem. Shavita wanted to run the ball, but they lost the ability to recruit an OL that could run block. For a while, they still had OLs that could pass block at least a bit, but subsequently even that became impossible. Both Stanford and Kal have suffered from the inability to recruit and coach up competent offensive lines for "many" years at this point. Even when Bryce Love was putting up his gaudy numbers the Stanford OL wasn't good. The statement about BL was that all he needed was a crack and he was gone. His OL generally couldn't produce even that crack, and that is why BL also has lots of < 3 yard runs. From 2017 on Stanford's OL became an increasingly severe problem.
Our dismal slide since 2017 proves this point loudly.
And the turnaround achieved by Harbaugh was clearly focused on getting 4-star, 5-star linemen, which we had with Gerhart in 2009, then Luck, then for McCaffrey in 2015-16.
O-Line gotta be #1 on the punch list for Restoration.
How many Stanford O-Line were drafted to NFL from 2009 until now, in which years?
EXAMPLES
David DeCastro: A first-round pick in the 2012 NFL draft who played for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Joshua Garnett: A first-round pick in the 2016 NFL draft who played for the San Francisco 49ers.
Cameron Fleming: An offensive tackle who was drafted by the New England Patriots in the fourth round of the 2014 NFL draft.
Jonathan Martin, drafted in 2012
Drew Dalman, still playing for Bears, 2017-2020
Did people forget Walker Little, Foster Sarrell, Myles Hinton, along with a slew of other 4 star OL to boot? In your list above, only Garnett was a 4 star - the others were all 3 stars per 247sports. The fact that harbaugh did more with less is a testament to his player development ability - something people complained loudly about with Shawvita.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - 82lsju - 11-30-2025
(11-29-2025, 11:21 AM)norcard10 Wrote: [
$200M is the rumored total fund raising amount. More than enough. And did people forget Shaw was getting paid $9M?
There's no reason Stanford couldn't pay competitively for an actual top coach.
https://sportsdata.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/coach
$9M would be top 13. I can't come to terms that we settled with Tavita for monetary reasons. More likely this was a character safe hire post the Taylor mess. It certainly isn't based on coaching accomplishments.
I'm not even asking for a CFP level coach however. I would have been thrilled with someone that had proven head coaching success at any level. San Diego State, Tulane, or Vandy headcoach as an example. Vandy's head coach was only receiving $3.7M before the extension he just signed.
Shaw was paid $9m in one year, his last few years (except for that year) he made ~$6.5m. Taylor in the most recent Stanford form 990 was paid ~$3m.
I finally read the entire press release and found this interesting
Quote:Reich, who combined a 14-year playing career as an NFL quarterback with 18 seasons in various coaching roles, will remain as a senior advisor to Pritchard moving forward.
https://gostanford.com/news/2025/11/28/tavita-pritchard-named-bradford-m-freeman-director-of-football
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - jacket3ree - 11-30-2025
That is indeed interesting, 82.
This might work if Stanford moneyballs this thing and (probably over)pays for good players while having an army of analyst/mentors in the building who know what they are doing. I don't want Pritchard as the OC (either he was terrible before or just Shaw's puppet; I'm not sure which is worse). I thought maybe a Chip Kelly on staff as mad scientist - he can even be remote; Vic Fangio must be bored with the Eagles or -- not really paying attention to why they are off this year -- gets fired. Something comfy to do and he can't say 'no' to Skov. Or anyone who wants to leave a legacy to up and coming go-getters as a pay it forward thing. People Luck and Pritchard were in the locker room with seem to be who we are going to get. Even the Blue Raiders want to win and Mason is 0.333. Hopefully the nepo program can thrive. It should be patently obvious that winning the ACC is not that hard and we have at least a year until FSU gets its shit together.
My initial response to the hire was the same as the text I received from my son. "Looks like Stanford is giving up football. Luck is in way over his head." My second response was: "It is so much healthier not to care." My current response is: "They could have made this move last March. I don't get it. That's right, what do I know about any of this anyway."
Indiana is one example. Find a coach that has won at every level but yours, have it work out, then pay a shitton of money. Big10 money. Virginia is a better example. They too have ACC money. More than Stanford's share, but still ACC money. Instead of firing Elliott, they pumped money into NIL and player acquisition and are on the cusp of the playoff. They sucked as bad as Stanford for three years and....instant turnaround. If Stanford wants to puff up around academic "standards" that's on them.
This is clearly Luck's show and I really hope we aren't calling for his head in a few years. I sincerely appreciate the risk to his legacy Andrew Luck is willing to take to right the ship he loves.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - Jamesy - 11-30-2025
(11-30-2025, 12:24 PM)82lsju Wrote:(11-29-2025, 11:21 AM)norcard10 Wrote: [
$200M is the rumored total fund raising amount. More than enough. And did people forget Shaw was getting paid $9M?
There's no reason Stanford couldn't pay competitively for an actual top coach.
https://sportsdata.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/coach
$9M would be top 13. I can't come to terms that we settled with Tavita for monetary reasons. More likely this was a character safe hire post the Taylor mess. It certainly isn't based on coaching accomplishments.
I'm not even asking for a CFP level coach however. I would have been thrilled with someone that had proven head coaching success at any level. San Diego State, Tulane, or Vandy headcoach as an example. Vandy's head coach was only receiving $3.7M before the extension he just signed.
Shaw was paid $9m in one year, his last few years (except for that year) he made ~$6.5m. Taylor in the most recent Stanford form 990 was paid ~$3m.
I finally read the entire press release and found this interesting
Quote:Reich, who combined a 14-year playing career as an NFL quarterback with 18 seasons in various coaching roles, will remain as a senior advisor to Pritchard moving forward.
https://gostanford.com/news/2025/11/28/tavita-pritchard-named-bradford-m-freeman-director-of-football
In his postgame press conference last night, Reich commented on this saying he'll always be available by phone and might come out to campus a few times.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - ADPinWDC - 11-30-2025
(11-29-2025, 08:03 PM)norcard10 Wrote:(11-29-2025, 06:56 PM)ADPinWDC Wrote:(11-29-2025, 08:06 AM)Goose Wrote:(11-29-2025, 12:10 AM)norcard10 Wrote: The problem with Shawvita wasn't recruiting. They had top notch recruits but the offensive coaching was abysmal. I need to see a 180 from vanilla and uninspiring offense from tavita to be convinced. Hopefully he's learned his ways since the twilight of his tenure with Shaw.I totally disagree. Recruiting was a massive part of the problem. Shavita wanted to run the ball, but they lost the ability to recruit an OL that could run block. For a while, they still had OLs that could pass block at least a bit, but subsequently even that became impossible. Both Stanford and Kal have suffered from the inability to recruit and coach up competent offensive lines for "many" years at this point. Even when Bryce Love was putting up his gaudy numbers the Stanford OL wasn't good. The statement about BL was that all he needed was a crack and he was gone. His OL generally couldn't produce even that crack, and that is why BL also has lots of < 3 yard runs. From 2017 on Stanford's OL became an increasingly severe problem.
Our dismal slide since 2017 proves this point loudly.
And the turnaround achieved by Harbaugh was clearly focused on getting 4-star, 5-star linemen, which we had with Gerhart in 2009, then Luck, then for McCaffrey in 2015-16.
O-Line gotta be #1 on the punch list for Restoration.
How many Stanford O-Line were drafted to NFL from 2009 until now, in which years?
EXAMPLES
David DeCastro: A first-round pick in the 2012 NFL draft who played for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Joshua Garnett: A first-round pick in the 2016 NFL draft who played for the San Francisco 49ers.
Cameron Fleming: An offensive tackle who was drafted by the New England Patriots in the fourth round of the 2014 NFL draft.
Jonathan Martin, drafted in 2012
Drew Dalman, still playing for Bears, 2017-2020
Did people forget Walker Little, Foster Sarrell, Myles Hinton, along with a slew of other 4 star OL to boot? In your list above, only Garnett was a 4 star - the others were all 3 stars per 247sports. The fact that harbaugh did more with less is a testament to his player development ability - something people complained loudly about with Shawvita.
Good points. AND, I like our odds if we start with 4/5 star linemen that we can get.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - 82lsju - 11-30-2025
Quote:Grade: C+
Luck didn't make the most imaginative hire here. He went with a close friend who needs no introduction to Stanford and the vision for success there. But Pritchard hasn't been a head coach before and wasn't mentioned as being on the radar for many other college or NFL jobs. Stanford is really betting on potential here. He only really knows Stanford, which might work out in this case, but he also must learn from what happened toward the end of David Shaw's tenure and chart out a new path. -- Rittenberg
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/47002863/grading-2025-college-football-head-coaching-hires#stan
the C+ for the hire is the lowest of the grades given in the article
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - BostonCard - 11-30-2025
My response "of course its Pritchard". Matt Squeri had this pegged in his 50-some odd coach list. Something like 8 years ago when he was our OC and everyone was maligning that Shavita offense I noted that within the AD Pritchard is viewed as future head coach material. My complaint now, as it was then, is that while I can believe that he will be an outstanding head coach in 5-10 years, it is usually the combination of innate qualities (leadership, management, intellect, people skills, all of which Pritchard supposedly has in spades) and experience, which is somewhat lacking. Back when he was elevated to OC, I said that I wished he had flown the coop and had a chance to work with a couple more experienced coaches to learn different systems and how to succeed somewhere other than Stanford. He now has experience with the Washington Commanders, but two years, none as head coach, means that he will learn from his mistakes here, instead of making them somewhere else and bringing his learnings to Stanford.
To me, his career has some parallels to Lane Kiffin's. Assistant coach to a highly successful head coach (Pete Carrol), rising to OC, and then made a head coach probably before he was ready. Kiffin at least first floundered around with the Raiders (and had a one year stop in Tennessee) before being brought back to USC, where he floundered a bit, ending with the infamous tarmac firing. Now, of course, after stops at Alabama as a coordinator, Florida Atlantic, and most recently at Ole Miss, he just got lured to LSU for stupid money. I could see a similar trajectory for Pritchard, where he struggles at Stanford for a few years, goes somewhere else and builds back to a very successful career. Of course, picking up a USC retread might make more sense for an FBS team than a Stanford flunky, so I hope Pritchard succeeds as much for his own sake as for ours.
So, I'm Missouri on this hire. I hope he succeeds, of course, and think that he has many of the ingredients to do so. But I could see him flailing a while before figuring it out. And I continue to believe that the headwinds facing Stanford generally and Stanford Football specifically are going to be very tough for any coach, much less an inexperienced one, to overcome. As much as there is a pervasive feeling that much as the Green Lantern, Stanford Football can accomplish whatever it wants and that its failure is due to a lack of willpower (something that is shared by the fanbases of all 133 FBS teams), the truth is that there are substantial countervailing institutional pressures that limit the long term trajectory of the team, and sadly, I think those pressures are only getting stronger.
I don't expect Pritchard to restore Stanford to the highs we saw under Harbaugh and the early Shaw years, but honestly, I don't think any coach would be able to.
BC
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - Spiny_Norman - 11-30-2025
Tavita should already be working on his first priority - retaining current players. Under the new NCAA rules, a player has a 15 day window to submit his name to the portal beginning 5 days after the announcement of a new coach. Stanford players can decide to transfer as soon as this Wednesday or Thursday through December 18 or 19. Or if they want, they can wait for the official window which is January 2-16.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - 82lsju - 11-30-2025
(11-30-2025, 09:08 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: Tavita should already be working on his first priority - retaining current players. Under the new NCAA rules, a player has a 15 day window to submit his name to the portal beginning 5 days after the announcement of a new coach. Stanford players can decide to transfer as soon as this Wednesday or Thursday through December 18 or 19. Or if they want, they can wait for the official window which is January 2-16.
he'll probably be on the red eye from DC to SFO after the Commandeers game. His intro press conference is 10am PT on Tuesday.
RE: It's Tavita Pritchard! - norcard10 - 11-30-2025
on the plus side,
mariota played a hell of a game tonight