[msqueri]

Just asking. Is there a no cut policy at Stanford?

Ask the prospective fifth-years EVERY SINGLE SEASON that are not offered a spot to come back.

I think "cut" is a silly word to use in the context of college sports (this isn't high school) but even assuming the validity of the word, correct, there are and have always been decisions regarding whether somebody gets a fifth year. Even more to the point, there are also mid-career retirements for which we don't know all the circumstances (which may be medical or pseudo medical or partly medical). Marcus Graham is not on Stanford's roster anymore, for instance, despite being a recruited, scholarship player with three seasons of eligibility remaining. Moreover, if somebody really gets their rocks off on seeing players "cut" certainly Joshua Pakola being kicked off the team would qualify.

As a general matter, Stanford's 2022 roster appears to be as aggressively managed as any in Shaw's tenure. We are full up on scholarships, had multiple guys removed from the roster and/or converted to walk-on status to get to that limit, and don't have a lot of dead wood (Colby Bowman is probably the most obvious example and there's no more than a small handful). Our roster problems have more to do with the overall quality than a refusal to manage the roster because we coddle players.

Now, Stanford probably is more likely to honor four year scholarships than other programs in the sense that we try to attract/retain players with the Stanford-specific appeal of the degree than other programs and therefore has fewer pull and push factors to entice and/or push out players on the "cut line" out of the program. That's always been the case as far as I can tell, but Harbaugh may have had more non-seniors transfer or retire than Shaw has, so attitude/congeniality toward players on the cut line can make a difference, which is probably Phogge's point.

[msqueri]

Just asking. Is there a no cut policy at Stanford?

Ask the prospective fifth-years EVERY SINGLE SEASON that are not offered a spot to come back.

I think "cut" is a silly word to use in the context of college sports (this isn't high school) but even assuming the validity of the word, correct, there are and have always been decisions regarding whether somebody gets a fifth year. Even more to the point, there are also mid-career retirements for which we don't know all the circumstances (which may be medical or pseudo medical or partly medical). Marcus Graham is not on Stanford's roster anymore, for instance, despite being a recruited, scholarship player with three seasons of eligibility remaining. Moreover, if somebody really gets their rocks off on seeing players "cut" certainly Joshua Pakola being kicked off the team would qualify.

As a general matter, Stanford's 2022 roster appears to be as aggressively managed as any in Shaw's tenure. We are full up on scholarships, had multiple guys removed from the roster and/or converted to walk-on status to get to that limit, and don't have a lot of dead wood (Colby Bowman is probably the most obvious example and there's no more than a small handful). Our roster problems have more to do with the overall quality than a refusal to manage the roster because we coddle players.

Now, Stanford probably is more likely to honor four year scholarships than other programs in the sense that we try to attract/retain players with the Stanford-specific appeal of the degree than other programs and therefore has fewer pull and push factors to entice and/or push out players on the "cut line" out of the program. That's always been the case as far as I can tell, but Harbaugh may have had more non-seniors transfer or retire than Shaw has, so attitude/congeniality toward players on the cut line can make a difference, which is probably Phogge's point.