11-05-2018, 05:41 PM
(11-05-2018, 04:40 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: It's not selection bias. You stated that he was hurt and didn't come to a Stanford camp, so the coaches never got to see him play. My point is that Atherton isn't very far away, and could have seen him play if they wanted to.
And for what it's worth:
Hand-timed 4.49 in the 40 his Junior year, before he hurt his leg.
Struggled to recover, but did.
As a senior rushed for 862 yards on 106 carries, and caught 10 passes for 224 yards.
Played every snap on defense.
Interesting article. Apparently the kid had a lot of heart in high school.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2014/12/25/s...-the-year/
Oh, and one more interesting tidbit from the article. He was pretty much a year younger than most of the seniors that year, turning 17 during his senior year. Another year certainly would have added some muscle, one would think.
And my question to you is how many guys who never would have panned out would they have had to drive out to to find one Ben Burr Kirven? How many dead ends would they have had to pursue in order to find one guy who was worthy of a scholarship?
All of this hand wringing would be much more understandable if there was a post here from back in 2013 asking why we weren't offering this guy from M-A who wants to come to Stanford. But the first mention of Ben Burr Kirven on this board is here:
https://thecardboard.org/board/showthrea...ght=Kirven
You can fill a book with the names of all the players the staff passed over who wound up being contributors and even stars at other teams. But you can fill an entire library with the names of the players the staff passed over who never amounted to anything, and those never get posted on message boards as "woulda/coulda/shoulda's"
BC
