Portal tracker - Printable Version

Portal tracker - 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: Portal tracker (/thread-23809.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

RE: Portal tracker - lex24 - 12-05-2022

(12-04-2022, 10:15 PM)Treebound Wrote: Thrilled to hear that you teach at Stanford as well, CardCoug. My question for you changes Lex's scenario: What if said player can actually become a co-term masters student? Many students that I know are or have been taking full advantage of a Stanford co-term degree. Yes, some programs are more difficult to qualify for, but I think this is a path that the new coach/AD team need to try to figure out.

If you can keep these student athletes doing well on the field and in the classroom, then the co-term door should be easier to take advantage of and getting a Masters at Stanford vs in Bloomington or most other places would be the optimal choice. The Co-term should be another useful tool to keep student athletes here in the program and engaged in both athletic and academic pursuits that most other schools can not match.

Good question and point. Mine is simple - kids futures are more important than our desires relating to the football team. And I’m not going to blame any college student for putting his or her future first. Nor am I going to criticize a coach for supporting that.

(12-05-2022, 04:21 AM)PersonalLegend Wrote: All good opinions. Most reinforce exactly the “rational” approach that Shaw has wrecked the program with. Ludicrous indeed to be loyal to a mission outside your short-term self interest.

Enjoy 3-9.

Stanford football is dead. May it be resurrected.

Yeah, cause your needs as a fan outweighs the need of the students. Stanford can figure out a way to get back on track. Hire a dynamic coach. Open the portal to bring in transfers. . NIL. That’s the current landscape. Either embrace it; or join the Ivy League.

But blaming the kids for “selfishness” or Shaw for “allowing” them to decide their future is “ludicrous.”

RE: Portal tracker - msqueri - 12-05-2022

This is a theological topic on which I don't expect to persuade those inclined in a different direction than me, but what I've always found ludicrous is that so many people associated with Stanford think we admit scholarship football players for them to get an education or to benefit them in any way. THAT is ludicrous. If this were about filling out the university with Stanford Men we wouldn't make such massive admissions exceptions to get the best football players possible. If this were about doing right by the kids we'd focus on under-privileged charity cases. If this were about giving them the best education possible we'd opt out of using our allowed amount of practice/football time and cancel spring practice except as voluntary unorganized workouts so players could study abroad and such like regular students. We don't do any of that. Because that would be ludicrous while still pretending to be major college football.

As long as Stanford is going to let in inferior students compared to the rest of the student body in order to bolster the football program and plow tens of millions of dollars into the operation, it's not "ludicrous" for PersonalLegend or me to expect Stanford football to act like a real college football program. Stanford makes certain choices to play at the big boy table and those choices are made not for the reasons we claim but to bolster the university's prestige, provide revenue for other sports, and build school pride/connections with alumni. All of the high-minded good of the student-athlete stuff is what loses sight of that mission. Many at Stanford bought the line they sold the world for public relations. We're high on our own supply.

Unless Stanford wants to drop out of major college football (with all the second and third order consequences for non-football sports, university prestige and revenue, alumni connection, etc.), we should run the football program in a way geared toward competitiveness. The high-minded stuff should inform red lines we don't cross so as to not undermine the values of the university, but they shouldn't be the priority.

RE: Portal tracker - Phogge - 12-05-2022

To all the greats that have provided thrills for almost 70 years. To Bobby Garrett, to Bill Tarr, to Plunk, to Roger Stilwell, to Don Parish, to Margerum, Schonert, Darrin, Skov, Murf, Reynolds, Mac, Bryce and the drummer who did the Stanford spell in the late 60's... thank you.

All that said I am announcing that I'm entering the Fan Portal to further my fandom. I am in the process of selecting my new destination and may still have an interest if the Stanford program can become a Lazarus for the second time. I doubt it.

RE: Portal tracker - MVDan - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 10:18 AM)Phogge Wrote: To all the greats that have provided thrills for almost 70 years. To Bobby Garrett, to Bill Tarr, to Plunk, to Roger Stilwell, to Don Parish, to Margerum, Schonert, Darrin, Skov, Murf, Reynolds, Mac, Bryce and the drummer who did the Stanford spell in the late 60's... thank you.

All that said I am announcing that I'm entering the Fan Portal to further my fandom. I am in the process of selecting my new destination and may still have an interest if the Stanford program can become a Lazarus for the second time. I doubt it.

Go State!

RE: Portal tracker - Chupacabra - 12-05-2022

There are three answers to this issue:

Start winning again. Make guys want to stay.
Let the portal be a two-way door instead of exit only.
Manage NIL.

This is NOT a problem about letting a player do what's best for his future. 0% that. This is a good, human thing and criticism of it is misguided.

Winning is obvious. Make guys want to stay.

The portal is part of the landscape now, embrace it. Players transfer from every program, even Alabama has eight players in the portal. But you can't just let it lead to attrition. Do we think there aren't players from other programs who wouldn't leap at the opportunity to enroll at Stanford and play college football? Particularly grad transfers??

As for NIL, Stanford is uniquely positioned in Silicon Valley to potentially provide very valuable NIL exposure. Creating and maintaining a good NIL office is critical but can become a great asset to the Stanford athletic community.

Fix those things. Appreciate the value to treating the athlete like a human instead of a commodity. That's part of what makes Stanford unique. Don't lose it.

RE: Portal tracker - msqueri - 12-05-2022

4. Recruit football players as football players and to be football players (recruit players based on who can be admitted and help football team the most, less talk of 40 year decision, Stanford Men, etc. and more talk of team, brotherhood, football goals, etc.)

RE: Portal tracker - dabigv13 - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 11:25 AM)msqueri Wrote: 4. Recruit football players as football players and to be football players (recruit players based on who can be admitted and help football team the most, less talk of 40 year decision, Stanford Men, etc. and more talk of team, brotherhood, football goals, etc.)

I think this concept is an interesting one, but I don't think it's really a major problem, and one that would not really be solvable anyway.

We have to consider that the players who can get admitted and want to attend Stanford will on average probably be more concerned with getting a good degree. Talking up that aspect also helps us get the few really bright guys who also are great football players.

If we didn't sell the 40 year decision aspect would we be any better off? I really doubt it.

Maybe the culture can be changed internally in a way that will encourage more returning players and more focus on football. But we aren't USC, and we won't be USC, and I don't think we beat USC by trying to copy USC.

Stanford's academic prestige is our distinguishing factor and we wouldn't have had the Harbaugh/Shaw glory days without it. If Harbaugh/Shaw are at, say, ASU, are they going to get Andrew Luck to come?

RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 11:25 AM)msqueri Wrote: 4. Recruit football players as football players and to be football players (recruit players based on who can be admitted and help football team the most, less talk of 40 year decision, Stanford Men, etc. and more talk of team, brotherhood, football goals, etc.)

I mean, sure, but these things are largely platitudes, and while maybe identifying the right "phenotype" will help at the margins, are you really going to not recruit the next Bryce Love just because he wants to be a pediatrician more than he wants to be a football player? Do you seriously turn down the next Andrew Luck just because he is the quintessential "Stanford man", so much so that he walked away from the sport and a multi-million dollar contract? And, of course, recruiting a football player to be a football player can also hurt you; Christian McCaffrey, perhaps the quintessential football first player was so football first that he didn't play in the Sun Bowl so as to avoid getting injured and jeopardize his professional football self.

You recruit guys who can play football, and if they have outside ambitions, you lean into that as a selling point (because, let's face it, it is the biggest source of differentiation from other teams, and how we can attract players who might otherwise go to USC, Notre Dame, or Michigan), and if not, you lean into the brotherhood and the possibility of resurrecting the program. When they are here, sure, you try to instill a culture of camaraderie and brotherhood, but these guys are not stupid; they won't all eat the BS.

The best you can do is to align incentives. Develop players so that those with eligibility can get the sense that staying at Stanford will improve their draft stock, or, at least, not hurt it. Become better as a team so that players aren't forced to chose between being competitive elsewhere and staying being a basement-dweller at Stanford. Develop a pathway for players to get a master's degree at Stanford rather than forcing them to chose between brotherhood and football goals at Stanford and getting brotherhood and football goals AND a master's degree elsewhere.

BC

RE: Portal tracker - SamuelMcF - 12-05-2022

(12-03-2022, 06:54 PM)winflop Wrote: Last year the average for FBS teams was 16 players entering the portal. It was 12 the year before. This is why I'm not getting up in arms. Not only have we not yet reached last year's average, but the vast majority are grad transfers which is a whole different thing from the TWO undergrad transfers (Hinton, Allen). Never saw Allen on the field and he was 5th on the depth chart at the start of the season so I'm not going to shed a lot of tears on that one. Hinton got playing time but anytime his name was ever mentioned it wasn't positive coverage.

Jacob Mangum-Farrar and Aeneas DiCosmo have both entered the portal, bringing our total to - you guessed it - 16 players! (Actually it's 17 if you count Tobe Umerah, which I don't since he medically retired.)

I assume by "Allen" you mean Arlen Harris, who was a 4* recruit. I would consider the fact that he's leaving BECAUSE he never saw the field in favor of a walk-on and a converted safety, and the guys in front of him are injury-prone so odds were very good he'd play a lot moving forward.

We currently have 3 undergrad transfers - you're missing walk-on Jacob Katona.

I would also be much more "up in arms" about the fact that 8 of these 16 players (so far) were starters, and 4 were team captains. Then again, I actually encourage starting the rebuild by getting the stench of Shaw out of the program as quickly as possible. Keep the young guys with potential here to be coached up by a real coach.

RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 12:21 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(12-03-2022, 06:54 PM)winflop Wrote: Last year the average for FBS teams was 16 players entering the portal. It was 12 the year before. This is why I'm not getting up in arms. Not only have we not yet reached last year's average, but the vast majority are grad transfers which is a whole different thing from the TWO undergrad transfers (Hinton, Allen). Never saw Allen on the field and he was 5th on the depth chart at the start of the season so I'm not going to shed a lot of tears on that one. Hinton got playing time but anytime his name was ever mentioned it wasn't positive coverage.

Jacob Mangum-Farrar and Aeneas DiCosmo have both entered the portal, bringing our total to - you guessed it - 16 players! (Actually it's 17 if you count Tobe Umerah, which I don't since he medically retired.)

I assume by "Allen" you mean Arlen Harris, who was a 4* recruit. I would consider the fact that he's leaving BECAUSE he never saw the field in favor of a walk-on and a converted safety, and the guys in front of him are injury-prone so odds were very good he'd play a lot moving forward.

We currently have 3 undergrad transfers - you're missing walk-on Jacob Katona.

I would also be much more "up in arms" about the fact that 8 of these 16 players (so far) were starters, and 4 were team captains. Then again, I actually encourage starting the rebuild by getting the stench of Shaw out of the program as quickly as possible. Keep the young guys with potential here to be coached up by a real coach.

Was Lieber in front of Harris on the depth chart? By the time Lieber was starting, Harris had left the team.

Also, if Harris really couldn't beat out a walk-on and converted safety, what makes you think he'd play a lot going forward. Even granting that Smith (by the way, wasn't conventional wisdom that he would transfer as well?) and Filkins were injury-prone, those injuries happened this year, and yet Harris didn't see the field (though I suspect had he not left the team, he probably would have, out of necessity).

BC

RE: Portal tracker - Austroturf - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 12:51 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Was Lieber in front of Harris on the depth chart? By the time Lieber was starting, Harris had left the team.

Also, if Harris really couldn't beat out a walk-on and converted safety, what makes you think he'd play a lot going forward. Even granting that Smith (by the way, wasn't conventional wisdom that he would transfer as well?) and Filkins were injury-prone, those injuries happened this year, and yet Harris didn't see the field (though I suspect had he not left the team, he probably would have, out of necessity).

BC

Yes, I have been waiting for Smith's announcement. The rumor mill had him ditching the program at the end of the year, with the injury not really season-ending. Let's see.

RE: Portal tracker - Jamesy - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 12:51 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(12-05-2022, 12:21 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(12-03-2022, 06:54 PM)winflop Wrote: Last year the average for FBS teams was 16 players entering the portal. It was 12 the year before. This is why I'm not getting up in arms. Not only have we not yet reached last year's average, but the vast majority are grad transfers which is a whole different thing from the TWO undergrad transfers (Hinton, Allen). Never saw Allen on the field and he was 5th on the depth chart at the start of the season so I'm not going to shed a lot of tears on that one. Hinton got playing time but anytime his name was ever mentioned it wasn't positive coverage.

Jacob Mangum-Farrar and Aeneas DiCosmo have both entered the portal, bringing our total to - you guessed it - 16 players! (Actually it's 17 if you count Tobe Umerah, which I don't since he medically retired.)

I assume by "Allen" you mean Arlen Harris, who was a 4* recruit. I would consider the fact that he's leaving BECAUSE he never saw the field in favor of a walk-on and a converted safety, and the guys in front of him are injury-prone so odds were very good he'd play a lot moving forward.

We currently have 3 undergrad transfers - you're missing walk-on Jacob Katona.

I would also be much more "up in arms" about the fact that 8 of these 16 players (so far) were starters, and 4 were team captains. Then again, I actually encourage starting the rebuild by getting the stench of Shaw out of the program as quickly as possible. Keep the young guys with potential here to be coached up by a real coach.

Was Lieber in front of Harris on the depth chart? By the time Lieber was starting, Harris had left the team.

Also, if Harris really couldn't beat out a walk-on and converted safety, what makes you think he'd play a lot going forward. Even granting that Smith (by the way, wasn't conventional wisdom that he would transfer as well?) and Filkins were injury-prone, those injuries happened this year, and yet Harris didn't see the field (though I suspect had he not left the team, he probably would have, out of necessity).

BC

Harris would have played ahead of Leigber. As BC pointed out, Leigber only got converted after Harris left the team. I was more surprised that Robinson was ahead of Harris on the depth chart given that Harris was a four-star vs a walk-on. I hope this wasn't one of those cases where the coaches wanted to preserve a redshirt...

(12-05-2022, 01:11 PM)Austroturf Wrote:
(12-05-2022, 12:51 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Was Lieber in front of Harris on the depth chart? By the time Lieber was starting, Harris had left the team.

Also, if Harris really couldn't beat out a walk-on and converted safety, what makes you think he'd play a lot going forward. Even granting that Smith (by the way, wasn't conventional wisdom that he would transfer as well?) and Filkins were injury-prone, those injuries happened this year, and yet Harris didn't see the field (though I suspect had he not left the team, he probably would have, out of necessity).

BC

Yes, I have been waiting for Smith's announcement. The rumor mill had him ditching the program at the end of the year, with the injury not really season-ending. Let's see.

Smith had a season-ending injury.

RE: Portal tracker - PersonalLegend - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 09:15 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(12-04-2022, 10:15 PM)Treebound Wrote: Thrilled to hear that you teach at Stanford as well, CardCoug. My question for you changes Lex's scenario: What if said player can actually become a co-term masters student? Many students that I know are or have been taking full advantage of a Stanford co-term degree. Yes, some programs are more difficult to qualify for, but I think this is a path that the new coach/AD team need to try to figure out.

If you can keep these student athletes doing well on the field and in the classroom, then the co-term door should be easier to take advantage of and getting a Masters at Stanford vs in Bloomington or most other places would be the optimal choice. The Co-term should be another useful tool to keep student athletes here in the program and engaged in both athletic and academic pursuits that most other schools can not match.

Good question and point. Mine is simple - kids futures are more important than our desires relating to the football team. And I’m not going to blame any college student for putting his or her future first. Nor am I going to criticize a coach for supporting that.

(12-05-2022, 04:21 AM)PersonalLegend Wrote: All good opinions. Most reinforce exactly the “rational” approach that Shaw has wrecked the program with. Ludicrous indeed to be loyal to a mission outside your short-term self interest.

Enjoy 3-9.

Stanford football is dead. May it be resurrected.

Yeah, cause your needs as a fan outweighs the need of the students. Stanford can figure out a way to get back on track. Hire a dynamic coach. Open the portal to bring in transfers. . NIL. That’s the current landscape. Either embrace it; or join the Ivy League.

But blaming the kids for “selfishness” or Shaw for “allowing” them to decide their future is “ludicrous.”

Lex, we’ve been at this for a long time. I don’t know why you would attack my needs as a fan. I’m not a fan. I had my time on the field. Lots of it. I have, I guess you could say, earned the right to observe. And, yes, selfishness permeates the model now. It is what it is. I shouldn’t let my tone imply blame for the players. It’s all on the culture.

And yes, Shaw wrecked it. Thoroughly. I can’t see where portal and NIL are as much to blame as internal rot and lack of urgency. But then again what do I know?

RE: Portal tracker - winflop - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 11:25 AM)msqueri Wrote: 4. Recruit football players as football players and to be football players (recruit players based on who can be admitted and help football team the most, less talk of 40 year decision, Stanford Men, etc. and more talk of team, brotherhood, football goals, etc.)

I don't see where Stanford is having significant challenges bringing in quality football players who are also students worthy of admission. Five of Shaw's last six recruiting classes were in the top 25. The talent is coming in the door, and I expect it will continue no matter who the head coach is.

The challenges lie in what happens after that. Player development, S&C, NIL opportunities, retention, managing the portal, having schemes that take advantage of those talents, and on and on and on. The new head coach will have a problem in every single one of these areas to solve.

RE: Portal tracker - Jamesy - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 02:38 PM)winflop Wrote:
(12-05-2022, 11:25 AM)msqueri Wrote: 4. Recruit football players as football players and to be football players (recruit players based on who can be admitted and help football team the most, less talk of 40 year decision, Stanford Men, etc. and more talk of team, brotherhood, football goals, etc.)

I don't see where Stanford is having significant challenges bringing in quality football players who are also students worthy of admission. Five of Shaw's last six recruiting classes were in the top 25. The talent is coming in the door, and I expect it will continue no matter who the head coach is.

The challenges lie in what happens after that. Player development, S&C, NIL opportunities, retention, managing the portal, having schemes that take advantage of those talents, and on and on and on. The new head coach will have a problem in every single one of these areas to solve.

Agree with this 100%. Recruiting as a whole is solid/on-par with the past 10 years. If we fix player development, scheme, and S&C with the new staff, I think the NIL opportunities, portal management, and retention will improve.

Mildly surprised that there's no Stanford activity in the transfer portal today. Supposedly this is the busiest transfer portal activity day of the year.

RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-05-2022

It is very hard to disentangle Shaw's contribution from secular changes in college football since he started. Broadly, anything that lowers the barrier to transfer is going to hurt Stanford more than other schools, because of internal reasons, the flow will favor students transfer out over transferring in.

To wit:

First, the graduate transfer rule eliminated the one-year waiting period for players who graduated transferring. This is a good thing for student-athletes, but disproportionately hurts Stanford, since a) our players graduate at a higher rate than other schools, b) it is harder to get into a Stanford graduate program than at other schools, and c) we disproportionately have relied on fifth year seniors historically.

Then, the transfer portal made it easier to transfer. It is easier to put your name in a web portal than it is to do the legwork to contact other programs to find out if they are looking for a transfer and whether they would consider you.

Third, the COVID year generally wreaked havoc on everyone, and has dramatically increased transferring throughout college football (which, as I mentioned hurts Stanford more than other places). As winflop noted, outbound transfers have been increasing (12 in 2020, 16 in 2021), but for pretty much everywhere else, the number of outbound transfers can be balanced by the number of inbound transfers, so the net effect is the difference in quality between the two. That is not possible at Stanford, and even if we were to be able to keep the number of outbound transfers to half our peer school average, that still is a net negative compared to a world in which transfers of any kind are very rare.

Fourth, opening the portal and eliminating the penalty for undergraduate transfers further increases mobility between schools.

I'm all for a "culture" that encourages loyalty to the team and school, but let's be honest here, comparing today to 13 years ago is an apples to oranges comparison, because it was hard for someone who wanted to transfer to do so. I doubt players in the past were more loyal or that the culture was all that much different; they just had no choice and didn't know any better.

I guess we will see if our next coach can change things around. If this is all "culture rot" instigated by Shaw, then that's a fixable issue. If not, then our best hope is the efforts that Shaw undertook to decrease the restrictions on inbound transfers bear fruit.

BC

RE: Portal tracker - SamuelMcF - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 02:48 PM)Jamesy Wrote: Mildly surprised that there's no Stanford activity in the transfer portal today. Supposedly this is the busiest transfer portal activity day of the year.

DiCosmo and JMF both entered today.

RE: Portal tracker - OutsiderFan - 12-05-2022

[tweet]https://twitter.com/247Sports/status/1599894244365242368[/tweet]

RE: Portal tracker - msqueri - 12-05-2022

Great post, BC. What your analysis elides though is the strong evidence aside from the culture portal that we have a culture of leaving. Stanford players in recent year go to the NFL as soon as it is even halfway plausible. While the transfer portal may be a national dynamic we can't control, almost everybody leaving for the NFL no matter what their prospects is highly unusual.

Dalton Schultz, Harrison Phillips, JJ Arcega-Whiteside, Simi Fehoko, Connor Wedington, Kaden Smith, Colby Parkinson, Nate Herbig, Drew Dalman, Walker Little, Foster Sarell, Thomas Booker, Tucker Fisk, Scooter Harrington, Curtis Robinson, Justin Reid, Quenton Meeks, Paulson Adebo, and Davis Mills all left eligibility on the table to try their hand at the NFL, not to mention guys I'm probably forgetting (I'm not even counting fringier guys but important players like Malik Antoine and Thomas Schaffer), and that is just in the NFL drafts since 2018. Not a single one of those was a first round draft pick. In fact, Little and Arcega-Whiteside were the only ones who were even second round picks.

We also have guys leaving before they've even gotten to a fourth year on campus (without degrees) alarmingly often. Under Shaw Shaw the following players left after their third years: Andrus Peat (first round), Austin Hooper (third round), Solomon Thomas (first round), Christian McCaffrey (first round), Justin Reid (third round), Quenton Meeks (undrafted), Nate Herbig (undrafted), Simi Fehoko (fifth round), Kaden Smith (sixth round), Colby Parkinson (fourth round). That's a lot of leaving before the degree just to be Day 2/3/undrafted picks.

Last time I checked it out, in a three draft span we had 11 players declare compared to seven for USC, six for Washington, four for Arizona State, four for UCLA, three for Oregon, three for Oregon State, two for Colorado, two for Utah, two for Arizona, one for Washington State, and zero for Cal. It's not because we had that many more NFL prospects than anybody else. In those drafts Washington had 14 players drafted, Oregon 13, Utah 12, Stanford 12, USC 11, UCLA seven, Arizona State five, Colorado five, Oregon State five, Cal four, Washington State three, and Arizona three.

It's quite clear that Stanford players have been bolting at the first chance they can. The transfer portal is part of that, though you're right there are reasons for it outside our control. But it's just one symptom of a larger culture of leaving. The NFL departures of guys like Mills, Sarell, Dalman, Parkinson, and Fehoko is what makes most clear Stanford players no longer have loyalty or sense of team. Those aren't departures other programs see. A healthy program might have lost two of those guys.

RE: Portal tracker - 82lsju - 12-05-2022

(12-05-2022, 04:13 PM)msqueri Wrote: The NFL departures of guys like Mills, Sarell, Dalman, Parkinson, and Fehoko is what makes most clear Stanford players no longer have loyalty or sense of team. Those aren't departures other programs see. A healthy program might have lost two of those guys.

or they thought that they would not get much better/improve their draft position by staying, contributing factors to that are likely the coaching staff and the prospects for the team. Hopefully the next coaching staff has a positive impact on those factors.