[82lsju]

1764698907[/url]']
the ESPN article has the claim about 30+ candidates.  I have a hard time believing that 30+ candidates either reached out about the job, had Stanford reach out to them, and/or were interviewed 

Why do you find that surprising?  The position has been opened for a long time, so plenty of people may have approached Stanford about the job, particularly because most coaches will have agents reaching out on their behalf.  I mean, wouldn’t you have your agent reach out if you were a college coordinator looking to jump to be a head coach, a college coach at the FCS or G5 level looking to go to an FBS school, or a recently laid off coach (of which there are plenty)?

If Matt Squeri can compile a list of 50 names to post on a message board, surely Andrew Luck and the AD can compile a list of candidates; from that they probably reached to to a dozen or so to test the waters.  Surely a bunch said no, and the result was a manageable list of a handful of names that were seriously considered and hopefully interviewed.

To be honest, since “a pool of more than 30 candidates” is vague to the point of meaninglessness, I am surprised that it wasn’t substantially more than that.  As mentioned, one poster assembled a “pool of 50 candidates” to post on a message board.

BC

I guess it depends on how you count candidates, I'm thinking viable candidates, people where there was some level of mutual interest and some more than cursory discussions.

1.  the job is not all that desirable in the grand scheme of FBS coaching jobs which would weed out many (likely part of #4)
2.  actually talking to 30+ candidates (or their agents) in any level of detail is a time sink and creates lots of opportunities for leaks.  If X number of candidates (or their agents) who reached out were told "thanks for your interest" and that was the end of their candidacy then I would not count them as a viable candidate.  Sure some agents would try and have a discussion so their client could go back to his current employer and ask for more money since "they are under consideration for a head coaching job".....
3.  if Stanford reached out to 30+ candidates (or their agents) and X number said "thanks but no thanks" then I would not count them as a viable candidate
4.  Matt's pool of 50+ candidates included more than a few who were highly unlikely to ever be an actual candidate

[82lsju]

1764698907[/url]']
the ESPN article has the claim about 30+ candidates.  I have a hard time believing that 30+ candidates either reached out about the job, had Stanford reach out to them, and/or were interviewed 

Why do you find that surprising?  The position has been opened for a long time, so plenty of people may have approached Stanford about the job, particularly because most coaches will have agents reaching out on their behalf.  I mean, wouldn’t you have your agent reach out if you were a college coordinator looking to jump to be a head coach, a college coach at the FCS or G5 level looking to go to an FBS school, or a recently laid off coach (of which there are plenty)?

If Matt Squeri can compile a list of 50 names to post on a message board, surely Andrew Luck and the AD can compile a list of candidates; from that they probably reached to to a dozen or so to test the waters.  Surely a bunch said no, and the result was a manageable list of a handful of names that were seriously considered and hopefully interviewed.

To be honest, since “a pool of more than 30 candidates” is vague to the point of meaninglessness, I am surprised that it wasn’t substantially more than that.  As mentioned, one poster assembled a “pool of 50 candidates” to post on a message board.

BC

I guess it depends on how you count candidates, I'm thinking viable candidates, people where there was some level of mutual interest and some more than cursory discussions.

1.  the job is not all that desirable in the grand scheme of FBS coaching jobs which would weed out many (likely part of #4)
2.  actually talking to 30+ candidates (or their agents) in any level of detail is a time sink and creates lots of opportunities for leaks.  If X number of candidates (or their agents) who reached out were told "thanks for your interest" and that was the end of their candidacy then I would not count them as a viable candidate.  Sure some agents would try and have a discussion so their client could go back to his current employer and ask for more money since "they are under consideration for a head coaching job".....
3.  if Stanford reached out to 30+ candidates (or their agents) and X number said "thanks but no thanks" then I would not count them as a viable candidate
4.  Matt's pool of 50+ candidates included more than a few who were highly unlikely to ever be an actual candidate