[slide]

Goose -- Western Washington and USan Diego aren't proving grounds for D-1 recruiting.  far from it.  and Stanford, by choice, doesn't devote the resources or emphasis (starting from the top) to recruiting that our competitive peers do.  I wish it were not so, but again this is by choice.  the good news is Stanford's cache and the 40 year decision.  it means we don't have to be the 1st to offer a kid, but we can't be last either (like Hilinski or NPF the prior year).  and given how small (by choice to some extent) our recruiting boards are per coach, we should not be out recruited in terms of contacts or attention to detail.  coaches at an Alabama or a UGA or Notre Dame will have boards with 3, 4 or 5x the names our coaches do.  

not the solution but a few thought starters on improving recruiting:

• name a recruiting coordinator (and add compensation for the job)
  
• add 2 or 3 support staff devoted to recruiting and pulling transcripts (a coach does this now)
  
• more early offers, especially to 4 and 5-star recruits
  
• utilize Spring Official Visits
  
• use all (or nearly all) 56 Official Visits allowed every year (we probably run 50 to 60% utilization rate)
  
• leverage available opportunities for in-home visits, use them with recruits and as program marketing initiatives (and go to kids' homes who have not already committed)
  
• develop better relationships with head coaches, Athletic Directors and counselors at feeder schools (particularly needed at head coach level)
  
• institute at least weekly staff routines of reviewing recruits and making offers 
  
• don't leave unused scholarships on the table
  
• no gap years at QB recruiting (evaluations are already spotty so numbers matter)
  

[slide]

Goose -- Western Washington and USan Diego aren't proving grounds for D-1 recruiting.  far from it.  and Stanford, by choice, doesn't devote the resources or emphasis (starting from the top) to recruiting that our competitive peers do.  I wish it were not so, but again this is by choice.  the good news is Stanford's cache and the 40 year decision.  it means we don't have to be the 1st to offer a kid, but we can't be last either (like Hilinski or NPF the prior year).  and given how small (by choice to some extent) our recruiting boards are per coach, we should not be out recruited in terms of contacts or attention to detail.  coaches at an Alabama or a UGA or Notre Dame will have boards with 3, 4 or 5x the names our coaches do.  

not the solution but a few thought starters on improving recruiting:

• name a recruiting coordinator (and add compensation for the job)
  
• add 2 or 3 support staff devoted to recruiting and pulling transcripts (a coach does this now)
  
• more early offers, especially to 4 and 5-star recruits
  
• utilize Spring Official Visits
  
• use all (or nearly all) 56 Official Visits allowed every year (we probably run 50 to 60% utilization rate)
  
• leverage available opportunities for in-home visits, use them with recruits and as program marketing initiatives (and go to kids' homes who have not already committed)
  
• develop better relationships with head coaches, Athletic Directors and counselors at feeder schools (particularly needed at head coach level)
  
• institute at least weekly staff routines of reviewing recruits and making offers 
  
• don't leave unused scholarships on the table
  
• no gap years at QB recruiting (evaluations are already spotty so numbers matter)