01-16-2019, 04:27 PM
Running down Outsider's list …
"Players leaving the program early with eligibility remaining, not going to NFL"
While there appear to be a high number of these for this next year, I am not convinced there is any trend here.
If it does become a trend it will hurt Stanford's competitiveness but there isn't a whole lot to do about it. Simply playing more true frosh has limited utility as most guys won't be as good as frosh year as they would be in a fifth year.
With this being a trend or not, guys who can significantly contribute as true frosh should usually play as true frosh.
"More early NFL departures"
On balance this is probably a good thing for the program because 1) it means we have players good enough to go to the NFL early, and 2) it is a sign to other top recruits that they can get to the NFL early at Stanford.
"Not taking early entries"
On this topic, perhaps I differ from most here (or not - I don't know).
My first allegiance is to Stanford the university and not Stanford football. I am not sure whether it is a good or bad thing to let frosh start in winter or spring quarter, but this is a decision that should be made by the university based upon what works best for the students' academic life. I would be unhappy if this decision was made either solely for the football team (which I think would not happen) or was driven by the needs of the football team.
"LDS players"
I am pretty sure that the LDS players we have had have been a strong net positive for the program, and our handling of their needs has been a positive towards attracting more such players. Outside of the potential of only getting three playing years out of some (which will exist anyway), I don't see any issues in handling a few players that enroll two years after they sign.
"Not using all scholarships, like Stanford is on NCAA sanctions for reduction in initial counters"
Of course this is important. Given certain lines that Shaw apparently will not cross (and I applaud him for), I don't think Stanford will usually be right at the limit. However, I think it should be reasonable that at the start of every fall Stanford has 80+ scholarship players.
"Not using Spring Official visits"
I have no particular comment on this, outside of the fact that of course Stanford has to adjust their recruiting pitch at every level to accommodate the earlier signing period. I don't know what they intend to do, or what might work best, but it is hard for me to believe that they aren't thinking about the issue.
"Limited offers"
What Outsider has described isn't really getting rid of limited offers, but rather scaling up to have slightly larger classes and thus end up with fewer unused scholarships. That's all well and good.
More broadly, my impression is that Shaw has been reacting against Harbaugh's practice of "offering" a large fraction of the high school football playing population, and then culling later as acceptances roll in. Or maybe I am projecting, as I found some of what happened distasteful. Maybe Shaw has over-reacted. I find it hard to feel competent having an opinion on this sort of detailed strategy question, but yes Stanford needs to get closer to the 85 scholarship limit.
"Players leaving the program early with eligibility remaining, not going to NFL"
While there appear to be a high number of these for this next year, I am not convinced there is any trend here.
If it does become a trend it will hurt Stanford's competitiveness but there isn't a whole lot to do about it. Simply playing more true frosh has limited utility as most guys won't be as good as frosh year as they would be in a fifth year.
With this being a trend or not, guys who can significantly contribute as true frosh should usually play as true frosh.
"More early NFL departures"
On balance this is probably a good thing for the program because 1) it means we have players good enough to go to the NFL early, and 2) it is a sign to other top recruits that they can get to the NFL early at Stanford.
"Not taking early entries"
On this topic, perhaps I differ from most here (or not - I don't know).
My first allegiance is to Stanford the university and not Stanford football. I am not sure whether it is a good or bad thing to let frosh start in winter or spring quarter, but this is a decision that should be made by the university based upon what works best for the students' academic life. I would be unhappy if this decision was made either solely for the football team (which I think would not happen) or was driven by the needs of the football team.
"LDS players"
I am pretty sure that the LDS players we have had have been a strong net positive for the program, and our handling of their needs has been a positive towards attracting more such players. Outside of the potential of only getting three playing years out of some (which will exist anyway), I don't see any issues in handling a few players that enroll two years after they sign.
"Not using all scholarships, like Stanford is on NCAA sanctions for reduction in initial counters"
Of course this is important. Given certain lines that Shaw apparently will not cross (and I applaud him for), I don't think Stanford will usually be right at the limit. However, I think it should be reasonable that at the start of every fall Stanford has 80+ scholarship players.
"Not using Spring Official visits"
I have no particular comment on this, outside of the fact that of course Stanford has to adjust their recruiting pitch at every level to accommodate the earlier signing period. I don't know what they intend to do, or what might work best, but it is hard for me to believe that they aren't thinking about the issue.
"Limited offers"
What Outsider has described isn't really getting rid of limited offers, but rather scaling up to have slightly larger classes and thus end up with fewer unused scholarships. That's all well and good.
More broadly, my impression is that Shaw has been reacting against Harbaugh's practice of "offering" a large fraction of the high school football playing population, and then culling later as acceptances roll in. Or maybe I am projecting, as I found some of what happened distasteful. Maybe Shaw has over-reacted. I find it hard to feel competent having an opinion on this sort of detailed strategy question, but yes Stanford needs to get closer to the 85 scholarship limit.