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)
+- 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)
RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 03:58 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: [tweet]https://twitter.com/247Sports/status/1599894244365242368[/tweet]
Keep in mind that "today" is when undergraduates could enter the portal, but there is an exception for teams undergoing a coaching transition, so you might expect specifically that today there would be more transfers at other schools. That being said, we still have fewer outbound undergraduate transfers than some of these other schools, which I guess is good.
BC
(12-05-2022, 04:21 PM)82lsju Wrote:(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.
Agree. Take a guy like Parkinson, who was the #1 rated tight end coming out of high school, probably had visions of himself being drafted in the first or second round. I wonder if he was thinking that he wants to go to the NFL ASAP (back in 2019) while he was still draftable in the 4th round than continue to flounder at Stanford and risk falling to UDFA.
BC
RE: Portal tracker - SamuelMcF - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 05:15 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(12-05-2022, 04:21 PM)82lsju Wrote:(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.
Agree. Take a guy like Parkinson, who was the #1 rated tight end coming out of high school, probably had visions of himself being drafted in the first or second round. I wonder if he was thinking that he wants to go to the NFL ASAP (back in 2019) while he was still draftable in the 4th round than continue to flounder at Stanford and risk falling to UDFA.
BC
I think you guys are talking past each other a little bit.
Matt's definition of "a healthy program" is exactly a program where a kid will not "continue to flounder" (and thus bolt at first opportunity).
"Loyalty and sense of team" are increased when said team is winning and successfully developing its players.
(12-05-2022, 03:58 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: [tweet]https://twitter.com/247Sports/status/1599894244365242368[/tweet]
I'm not sure about some of the others, but compare the fact that Clemson had just one starter out of those 11 to Stanford having EIGHT of 16.
RE: Portal tracker - Giants - 12-05-2022
Part of the transfer equation is the 2020 eligibility exemption. Many schools have been boxed into a corner in which they only have a handful of guys who have exhausted their eligibility. In order to bring a “normal number” of high school recruits, a reduction in numbers must occur. I’m guessing a lot of schools are encouraging guys to put their name in the portal.
RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 05:37 PM)Giants Wrote: Part of the transfer equation is the 2020 eligibility exemption. Many schools have been boxed into a corner in which they only have a handful of guys who have exhausted their eligibility. In order to bring a “normal number” of high school recruits, a reduction in numbers must occur. I’m guessing a lot of schools are encouraging guys to put their name in the portal.
Yeah, I would expect that at the very top schools, having outbound transfers is a way to get rid of deadweight. In the past, a player who might have been over-recruited by a younger player might have stuck around for four years (or been forced out); now they see the writing on the wall and leave on their own accord, allowing the program to bring in more 5* recruits.
BC
RE: Portal tracker - lex24 - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 12:08 PM)BostonCard 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 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
Signing McCaffrey hurt Stanford? C’mon, BC. That’s just silly.
I’ll say if right now - all you Christian McCaffreys out there - Come Join the Band. And If you want to opt out of a lower tier bowl a year after leading Stanford to a PAC whatever the hell # is left title and a Rose Bowl win after being one of the most exciting players in Stanford history - you have my blessing….
BTW- I don’t think that’s why he opted out of the Sun Bowl. But I’ve argued that one enough.
RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 05:25 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote: I think you guys are talking past each other a little bit.
Matt's definition of "a healthy program" is exactly a program where a kid will not "continue to flounder" (and thus bolt at first opportunity).
"Loyalty and sense of team" are increased when said team is winning and successfully developing its players.
As I interpreted what Matt was saying, above and beyond guys leaving because the team sucked and they were not developing, we were recruiting players who were more in it for themselves than for the team, and instilling in them a culture that it was not just acceptable, but encouraged to do what is best for them even if it harmed the team.
I'm at least a little skeptical of the latter. I think we can adequately explain what is being observed with the combination of secular changes to college football, one-off factors due to the pandemic, and the fact that the team sucked and players were not developing. I don't think the idea of "Stanford men" is something we ought to avoid, as Andrew Luck and Bryce Love coming back can attest, nor does recruiting a "football first" player protect you from a Christian McCaffrey eschewing playing in a bowl game in order to preserve his draft position.
The answer to me is not to avoid recruiting "Stanford men" who might have interests outside of football or that we shouldn't tout the 40-year decision. In fact, to the extent that we can offer incoming high school athletes a good value proposition (especially now) it isn't that they will be joining a team that is going to play in front of packed stadia or have a realistic shot at going to the CFP. The value proposition is that Stanford is a place where they can thrive both in football and academically, and differentiates us from, say, ASU.
I would focus on aligning incentives for the players to the team goals. That means improving play, demonstrating that players can develop while at Stanford and improve their draft stock, and finding a path way for those who want to pursue a graduate degree in their fifth year to do so at Stanford. To me, that seems like an easier win/win lift than to try to convince players with pro potential to forgo their best interests by staying at Stanford instead of going pro or trying to convince those who don't have a professional future not to grad transfer and instead just delay their graduation quarter.
BC
(12-05-2022, 06:43 PM)lex24 Wrote: Signing McCaffrey hurt Stanford? C’mon, BC. That’s just silly.
Of course not, I'm using McCaffrey to make two points. First, by the logic espoused by some here, McCaffrey was somehow symptomatic of the culture rot that occurred at Stanford (and may have contributed to it) because he didn't put the team's interests ahead of his own. And secondly, that recruiting football-first guys is how you get players not to leave eligibility on the table.
I think more broadly, this shows the paradox that the culture theory creates. Among players who are not going to go to the NFL, you want them to prioritize football over other pursuits, such as graduate degrees. But amongst the players who can be drafted with eligibility remaining, then you want them to prioritize sticking around to get their degree (or even take a fifth year) over declaring early for the NFL draft (and thus prioritize other pursuits, over football), since if they prioritize football they can pursue their passion and get paid for it (perhaps less of an issue now with NIL).
BC
RE: Portal tracker - Jamesy - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 03:41 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(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.
Thanks. I must have missed their social media posts. Guess it was the day for the lb room to empty out
RE: Portal tracker - 82lsju - 12-05-2022
what's the "best site" to monitor transfer portal activity?
I've been following
https://247sports.com/Season/2023-Football/TransferPortal/
is there a better site?
RE: Portal tracker - martyup - 12-05-2022
(12-05-2022, 10:18 AM)Phogge Wrote: aid 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.
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia...ipo=images]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2F3o6ZtpynOiYCiiWIYU%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=497416e00d121789785b11aadadc185f137a09c4899ad0991070ddb3dd75a953&ipo=images)
Anyone get it?
RE: Portal tracker - Austroturf - 12-06-2022
(12-05-2022, 04:21 PM)82lsju Wrote:(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.
Yes, this is my thinking, too. As I watched players exit the program with eligibility on the table, it was clear that something was awry, especially when their draft prospects were not excellent. In my view, it started when Meeks declared early after the 2017 season.
Meeks had a stellar freshman year and played a major role in some important Stanford victories in 2015 (two picks vs. Wazzu, pick-six in the Iowa game). I saw him as an anchor in a great defensive backfield during the coming years. But he showed no significant improvement in his sophomore and junior years and, in fact, seemed to be regressing. Clearly, as an insider with a view of the team none of us had, Meeks decided that 1) he wasn't going to improve any further in the Stanford program and 2) there weren't going to be any more Rose Bowls to shine in; so he cashed his chips, forewent his senior year, jumped into the draft and then failed to be drafted and had to sign as an undrafted free agent with the Jaguars.
Meeks bounced around the league, saw a minimal amount of action in 2020 and now is CB for the St. Louis Battlehawks. Maybe he wasn't NFL material after all. But he showed enough ability in his freshman year that an excellent college football career should have been his destiny. He was definitely NOT ready for the draft after his junior year; but nothing in the program compelled him to stay. And that story has repeated itself multiple times since then.
RE: Portal tracker - Austroturf - 12-06-2022
(12-05-2022, 08:20 PM)82lsju Wrote: what's the "best site" to monitor transfer portal activity?
I've been following
https://247sports.com/Season/2023-Football/TransferPortal/
is there a better site?
I'm also using this one. Haven't found a better one yet.
(12-05-2022, 05:25 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(12-05-2022, 05:15 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(12-05-2022, 04:21 PM)82lsju Wrote:(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.
Agree. Take a guy like Parkinson, who was the #1 rated tight end coming out of high school, probably had visions of himself being drafted in the first or second round. I wonder if he was thinking that he wants to go to the NFL ASAP (back in 2019) while he was still draftable in the 4th round than continue to flounder at Stanford and risk falling to UDFA.
BC
I think you guys are talking past each other a little bit.
Matt's definition of "a healthy program" is exactly a program where a kid will not "continue to flounder" (and thus bolt at first opportunity).
"Loyalty and sense of team" are increased when said team is winning and successfully developing its players.
I agree with this. If the program is healthy and winning, players will want to stick around (assuming they are getting the playing time they expect, which should be the case for the best players). When excellent players are transferring out or leaving early with eligibility on the table, it's not really lack of loyalty but rather lack of belief in the program.
Austin Jones is the primary example: he bolted to USC because he clearly did not believe in the Stanford football program. Lack of loyalty? Perhaps. But if he had seen his path at Stanford track previous RB careers (Gerhart, Taylor, Gaffney, McCaffrey, Love), he would not have left. Running futilely behind a dysfunctional O-line was what he wanted to avoid by becoming a Trojan. So far, it has worked out pretty well for him. In 2022, he wasn't even RB#1 for much of the season at USC, yet he has rushed for nearly twice as many yards as he did at Stanford in 2021 on only 6 more carries.
RE: Portal tracker - needle - 12-06-2022
(12-05-2022, 08:20 PM)82lsju Wrote: what's the "best site" to monitor transfer portal activity?
I've been following
https://247sports.com/Season/2023-Football/TransferPortal/
is there a better site?
Saw this spreadsheet linked on Reddit, I think. You can sort by team or position.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1eG3HvjnpwOQfFtpuxJ8ucYNmbr8quYtGAsqn6BP_IRs/htmlview
RE: Portal tracker - lex24 - 12-06-2022
Part of this “debate” is, I think, a bunch of us older folks longing for a bygone era. “Loyalty” in the old days was “stronger”. It was also forced. Kids had very few options. Sure, they could transfer and play after sitting out a year. But that wasn’t much of a choice. So, once in the program, kids were generally “stuck”. Their coaches had no such limitations.
Most of us, I think, are parents. As such, we want our kids to have options. Today, those options are plentiful in College sports. The portal, early entry into the NFL, NIL.
I make no bones about my distaste for SC. Calling their team a band of mercenaries. But I don’t blame the kids. What would you have done if you were Caleb Williams? Or Addison. What advice would you have given them?
If you are 20 and playing football; perhaps with NFL aspirations, perhaps not, and you are in a situation not to your liking - be it the school, the coaches, the program or for that matter your playing time - are you going to place “loyalty “ over your future? Why? Your coaches aren’t. Not for the most part. You play a sport where your next play always may be your last. If you are NFL material, your shelf life is short - as is the years of your earning power within the sport. Plus college is supposed to be one of the best times of your life.
Simply put- I’m not going to blame any kid for putting his life, future and college experience first. One that leaves at end of the year for what he perceives is greener pastures is not being “ disloyal”. He is simply doing what he perceives as what is best for his future. Which is what I believe all of us want for our own kids. There is nothing “wrong” about that.
RE: Portal tracker - SkiBum80 - 12-06-2022
(12-06-2022, 07:05 AM)needle Wrote:(12-05-2022, 08:20 PM)82lsju Wrote: what's the "best site" to monitor transfer portal activity?
I've been following
https://247sports.com/Season/2023-Football/TransferPortal/
is there a better site?
Saw this spreadsheet linked on Reddit, I think. You can sort by team or position.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1eG3HvjnpwOQfFtpuxJ8ucYNmbr8quYtGAsqn6BP_IRs/htmlview
Thanks that link.
Very interesting.
Given the numbers of our players bolting, I think the new coach should offer transfers in to the entire Whittier Poets squad.
46 of em in the portal.
They should meet our academic standards as they are Poets after all.
RE: Portal tracker - cardcrimson - 12-06-2022
(12-06-2022, 11:20 AM)SkiBum80 Wrote:(12-06-2022, 07:05 AM)needle Wrote:(12-05-2022, 08:20 PM)82lsju Wrote: what's the "best site" to monitor transfer portal activity?
I've been following
https://247sports.com/Season/2023-Football/TransferPortal/
is there a better site?
Saw this spreadsheet linked on Reddit, I think. You can sort by team or position.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1eG3HvjnpwOQfFtpuxJ8ucYNmbr8quYtGAsqn6BP_IRs/htmlview
Thanks that link.
Very interesting.
Given the numbers of our players bolting, I think the new coach should offer transfers in to the entire Whittier Poets squad.
46 of em in the portal.
They should meet our academic standards as they are Poets after all.
Dead Poets Society, at least for football and a few others. . . .
https://www.whittier.edu/news/tue-11152022-340-pm/whittier-college-makes-changes-poet-athletics
RE: Portal tracker - CardinalSagehen - 12-06-2022
(12-06-2022, 11:51 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(12-06-2022, 11:20 AM)SkiBum80 Wrote: Given the numbers of our players bolting, I think the new coach should offer transfers in to the entire Whittier Poets squad.
46 of em in the portal.
They should meet our academic standards as they are Poets after all.
Dead Poets Society, at least for football and a few others. . . .
https://www.whittier.edu/news/tue-11152022-340-pm/whittier-college-makes-changes-poet-athletics
No, no, noooooo! This is sad news for Cecil Sagehen. My SCIAC Champion Sagehens padded their record against the Poets, not once but twice this year! The scores were 59-0 (non-conference) and 43-12 (conference). Who are we going to beat up now? Making matters worse, I doubt we can pick up any of the Poets as transfers due to academic standards for undergrads and the fact that we don't even have a grad school! Nooooooooo!
RE: Portal tracker - Treebound - 12-06-2022
Love the "Fighting Poets" mascot.
Interesting to see that Harvard has 20 student athletes in the portal. Perhaps there are a few that can be admitted as transfers from some of the Ivies, if they can compete for a spot. Not ideal, but the portal strategy will likely take some time for Stanford to figure out and I don't see the door opening wide from Dean Shaw's team overnight.
As for OFs comments. There are good and bad actors in most/all places and UCB has had its share of scandals as well.
The truth will out on this issue with MTL, whether Jerry Yang's Trustee investigation goes there or not.
RE: Portal tracker - BostonCard - 12-06-2022
(12-06-2022, 04:05 PM)Treebound Wrote: Love the "Fighting Poets" mascot.
Interesting to see that Harvard has 20 student athletes in the portal. Perhaps there are a few that can be admitted as transfers from some of the Ivies, if they can compete for a spot. Not ideal, but the portal strategy will likely take some time for Stanford to figure out and I don't see the door opening wide from Dean Shaw's team overnight.
As for OFs comments. There are good and bad actors in most/all places and UCB has had its share of scandals as well.
The truth will out on this issue with MTL, whether Jerry Yang's Trustee investigation goes there or not.
As has been mentioned elsewhere, Ivy League schools limit players to four, not five, years of eligibility. Therefore, with the additional COVID year, every academic senior would have to transfer in order to continue to play football.
BC
RE: Portal tracker - Phogge - 12-06-2022
i think that ed cummings was related to e.e. he played the greatest defensive game in stanford history against michigan state. voted the usa defensive player of the week by upi.
RE: Portal tracker - BobK - 12-06-2022
One of the greatest performances I have ever seen. Ed Cummings was great