[Softball Fan]

 If Stanford WBB was a perpetual PAC-12 cellar dweller, Stanford fans could say "woe is me with these darn academic impediments".

The debate (which I think you started) has been over whether Stanford's academic requirements at least in part explain our lack of national championships for the past nearly 30 years. So now you have switched to arguing that if our academic standards were an impediment to success, we would be perpetual cellar dweller; therefore, since we are not perpetual cellar dwellers, our academic standards have no adverse effect. Those are very different arguments. The first is at least debatable. The second is a straw man: no one is arguing that high academic standards are an absolute barrier to conference success.

You can quote me if you like and respond to that quote, but please don't incorrectly paraphrase me.  I used national championships about another sport as an illustration to make a point. I never said anything about NCs for WBB as being the standard for WBB.

 No, I do not use national championships as the sole metric to determine a team's success; certainly not in WBB.  There are many strong programs that have never won a national championship.  It is a difficult thing to do that often results from a team getting hot at a specific time, staying free of injuries, and many other intangibles.

I will argue being a consistent contender for the PAC-12 title is an indication of success.  I do think Stanford WBB is a very successful program.  I bet Tara would make the same argument.


OK, upon reflection this argument is so unproductive and boring, I will not post any more on this topic.  You can have the last word and thereby claim yourself the winner.

[Softball Fan]

 If Stanford WBB was a perpetual PAC-12 cellar dweller, Stanford fans could say "woe is me with these darn academic impediments".

The debate (which I think you started) has been over whether Stanford's academic requirements at least in part explain our lack of national championships for the past nearly 30 years. So now you have switched to arguing that if our academic standards were an impediment to success, we would be perpetual cellar dweller; therefore, since we are not perpetual cellar dwellers, our academic standards have no adverse effect. Those are very different arguments. The first is at least debatable. The second is a straw man: no one is arguing that high academic standards are an absolute barrier to conference success.

You can quote me if you like and respond to that quote, but please don't incorrectly paraphrase me.  I used national championships about another sport as an illustration to make a point. I never said anything about NCs for WBB as being the standard for WBB.

 No, I do not use national championships as the sole metric to determine a team's success; certainly not in WBB.  There are many strong programs that have never won a national championship.  It is a difficult thing to do that often results from a team getting hot at a specific time, staying free of injuries, and many other intangibles.

I will argue being a consistent contender for the PAC-12 title is an indication of success.  I do think Stanford WBB is a very successful program.  I bet Tara would make the same argument.


OK, upon reflection this argument is so unproductive and boring, I will not post any more on this topic.  You can have the last word and thereby claim yourself the winner.