Pac-12 FB: Transfer portal

[Papa John]

There was much ado about Stanford's number of transfers in 2020: Costello to Mississippi State, Speights to Notre Dame, Stewart to Wake Forest, Hamilton to Duke, Hattis to ASU, Powell and Swann to Indiana, Williams to SMU, Peek to USF, Eboh to UCLA, Ricccitelli to Rice.

In 2021 the (final?) transfer total for Stanford is:
Dylan Boles to UNI
Stuart Head to Appalachian State
Joshua Pakola to ?

It's improbable, but still possible, that Stanford will have an incoming transfer in 2021.

Here's how other Pac-12 teams are faring, per 247sports:
ASU: 9 uncommitted outgoing, 2 committed outgoing, 4 incoming
UA: 3 uncommitted outgoing, 7 committed outgoing, 9 incoming
Cal: 6 uncommitted outgoing, 2 committed outgoing, 1 incoming
CU: 3 uncommitted outgoing, 5 committed outgoing, 3 incoming
Oregon: 5 uncommitted outgoing, 4 committed outgoing, 0 incoming
OSU: 3 uncommitted outgoing, 6 committed outgoing, 4 incoming
UCLA: 5 uncommitted outgoing, 3 committed outgoing, 6 incoming
USC: 2 uncommitted outgoing, 2 committed outgoing, 5 incoming
Utah: 5 uncommitted outgoing, 4 committed outgoing, 4 incoming
UW: 2 uncommitted outgoing, 3 committed outgoing, 3 incoming
WSU: 9 uncommitted outgoing, 8 committed outgoing, 3 incoming

Note that the above numbers include folks like Pakola, who have entered the transfer portal but are uncommitted, so some of them could return to their original team. Having said that, what's going on in Pullman?

In any case, it's a relief to me that we aren't wringing our hands over Stanford's transfer portal entries this year.

[SamuelMcF]

There was much ado about Stanford's number of transfers in 2020: Costello to Mississippi State, Speights to Notre Dame, Stewart to Wake Forest, Hamilton to Duke, Hattis to ASU, Powell and Swann to Indiana, Williams to SMU, Peek to USF, Eboh to UCLA, Ricccitelli to Rice.

In 2021 the (final?) transfer total for Stanford is:
Dylan Boles to UNI
Stuart Head to Appalachian State
Joshua Pakola to ?

It's improbable, but still possible, that Stanford will have an incoming transfer in 2021.

Here's how other Pac-12 teams are faring, per 247sports:
ASU: 9 uncommitted outgoing, 2 committed outgoing, 4 incoming
UA: 3 uncommitted outgoing, 7 committed outgoing, 9 incoming
Cal: 6 uncommitted outgoing, 2 committed outgoing, 1 incoming
CU: 3 uncommitted outgoing, 5 committed outgoing, 3 incoming
Oregon: 5 uncommitted outgoing, 4 committed outgoing, 0 incoming
OSU: 3 uncommitted outgoing, 6 committed outgoing, 4 incoming
UCLA: 5 uncommitted outgoing, 3 committed outgoing, 6 incoming
USC: 2 uncommitted outgoing, 2 committed outgoing, 5 incoming
Utah: 5 uncommitted outgoing, 4 committed outgoing, 4 incoming
UW: 2 uncommitted outgoing, 3 committed outgoing, 3 incoming
WSU: 9 uncommitted outgoing, 8 committed outgoing, 3 incoming

Note that the above numbers include folks like Pakola, who have entered the transfer portal but are uncommitted, so some of them could return to their original team. Having said that, what's going on in Pullman?

In any case, it's a relief to me that we aren't wringing our hands over Stanford's transfer portal entries this year.

You're missing Caleb Phillips to Hawaii and Kyle McCombs to tbh, but like Dylan Boles I don't count them as they were not on scholarship here. Neither was Collin Riccitelli. That said, we don't know how many of the above Pac-12 entries are walk-ons. I know of a couple, but likely the majority are not.

Wazzu is still reeling from Leach's departure and is totally overhauling their roster to fit the new coach's system.

Most of our "transfer portal entries" this year are guys "declaring for the draft" without much of a shot. Also not sure about Osiris St. Brown.

[donkey687]

That data shows what a disadvantage we have in our inability to take transfers. Everyone else is replenishing via transfers while we aren't.  We found a way to take early entries, to remain competitive we need to find a way to regularly take transfers. With the upcoming passage of a one time transfer without sitting out rule, transfers will become even more present.  We will lose more players to transfers.  If it is a one way valve for us, it doesn't bode well for Stanford football.

[SamuelMcF]

That data shows what a disadvantage we have in our inability to take transfers. Everyone else is replenishing via transfers while we aren't.  We found a way to take early entries, to remain competitive we need to find a way to regularly take transfers. With the upcoming passage of a one time transfer without sitting out rule, transfers will become even more present.  We will lose more players to transfers.  If it is a one way valve for us, it doesn't bode well for Stanford football.

It's even more stark in MBB. Every single Pac-12 team has at least 1 transfer (including JuCos) starting the majority of games except for us. 

Going by current standings:
USC: 3
UCLA: 1
Colorado: 1
Oregon: ALL 5 STARTERS
Stanford: 0
Arizona: 4
Oregon St: 3 
Utah: 1
ASU: 2
Wazzu: 1
UW: 2
Cal: 2

Not just a Pac-12 phenomenon either (same as with FB). This is happening all over the country. Transfers are everywhere.

[Phogge]

Football has never been vital to Stanford. Every now and then a Rose Bowl happens and people are shocked. Ted Cups are fine and a credit to the school and the support of you guys. There are probably millions of fans of the Olympics and thousands of fans of college Olympic sports.

So the school is saying in effect that we’d love to have Rose Bowl teams but you have to do it differently than the great majority of D1 programs. That is why it is so damn impressive when the staff and the players pull it off.

[donkey687]

Football has never been vital to Stanford. Every now and then a Rose Bowl happens and people are shocked. Ted Cups are fine and a credit to the school and the support of you guys. There are probably millions of fans of the Olympics and thousands of fans of college Olympic sports.

So the school is saying in effect that we’d love to have Rose Bowl teams but you have to do it differently than the great majority of D1 programs. That is why it is so damn impressive when the staff and the players pull it off.

Stanford does it differently than other schools but football is also treated differently than other sports at Stanford so let's not pretend that Stanford isn't playing the same game as major football schools in most areas so why not get into the transfer game as well.  I remember seeing published data a few years back that showed SAT/ACT averages for football recruits and compared them to school averages. Stanford led on both fronts. 1) Stanford had the highest standardized test scores of any Division 1 school for football players 2) Stanford had the biggest deviation in scores from average student compared to football players.  Thus, Stanford has the highest standards for football players but also bends their standards the most to get football players in.  In other words the Alabama football player's scores are closer to the typical Alabama student than a Stanford football player is to a typical Stanford student. Bernard Muir just cut 11 Olympic sports at Stanford to concentrate resources on football and major sports. Let's not pretend we are too different from other Power 5 schools. We have the highest paid coach in the Pac12. We built a new stadium and have shiny facilities and a vast amount of support resources behind the football program.  We are pretty much all in so why pretend that we are holier than thou and not accept transfers.

[BostonCard]

2) Stanford had the biggest deviation in scores from average student compared to football players.  Thus, Stanford has the highest standards for football players but also bends their standards the most to get football players in.

I don't want to dismiss this out of hand, but it doesn't strike me as correct, and I will tell you why.  The gap between the average Stanford student SAT score and the average SAT score of the better Div I universities (I am thinking of places like Notre Dame, USC, Cal and UCLA) is not very high, because there are many more students with perfect or near perfect SAT scores than there are spots for them at elite universities like Stanford.  On the other hand, the gap between Stanford athletes generally (and Stanford football players specifically) and that of other schools is gargantuan.

This link put the mean Stanford SAT score at 1500, compared to 1470 at Notre Dame, 1440 at USC, 1430 at Michigan, 1420 at Berkeley, 1400 at UCLA.  I would bet dollars to donuts that our football players average SAT scores are more than 30 points higher than the Domers, more than 60 points higher than SC's, more than 80 points higher than Cal's, and more than 100 points higher than those at UCLA (if someone has the data, please let me know where I can find it).  If my assumptions are true, then the gap between students and football players is higher at those schools than at Stanford, and the quoted statement is wrong.

BC

[Goose]

We are pretty much all in so why pretend that we are holier than thou and not accept transfers.

We do accept transfers. I also suspect that a student who wanted to transfer to Stanford and play football is given every consideration. However, they still have to get admitted, and while I do believe that a transfer who wants to play football would get about the same break a high school applicant does, I doubt there are many transfer students who could get in. Scarlett could and did. He qualified without us having to bend the rules. We would have to bend the curve a lot more for such applicants than we do for high school applicants in order to get many transfers, and even then I doubt people who are all about football would chose Stanford as a destination. We will see some, but not bunches.

[lex24]

That data shows what a disadvantage we have in our inability to take transfers. Everyone else is replenishing via transfers while we aren't.  We found a way to take early entries, to remain competitive we need to find a way to regularly take transfers. With the upcoming passage of a one time transfer without sitting out rule, transfers will become even more present.  We will lose more players to transfers.  If it is a one way valve for us, it doesn't bode well for Stanford football.

Agree.  But my understanding is that Stanford takes very few transfers under any circumstances. Am I correct?

[slide]

I don't want to dismiss this out of hand, but it doesn't strike me as correct, and I will tell you why.  The gap between the average Stanford student SAT score and the average SAT score of the better Div I universities (I am thinking of places like Notre Dame, USC, Cal and UCLA) is not very high, because there are many more students with perfect or near perfect SAT scores than there are spots for them at elite universities like Stanford.  On the other hand, the gap between Stanford athletes generally (and Stanford football players specifically) and that of other schools is gargantuan.

This link put the mean Stanford SAT score at 1500, compared to 1470 at Notre Dame, 1440 at USC, 1430 at Michigan, 1420 at Berkeley, 1400 at UCLA.  I would bet dollars to donuts that our football players average SAT scores are more than 30 points higher than the Domers, more than 60 points higher than SC's, more than 80 points higher than Cal's, and more than 100 points higher than those at UCLA (if someone has the data, please let me know where I can find it).  If my assumptions are true, then the gap between students and football players is higher at those schools than at Stanford, and the quoted statement is wrong.

BC

agree with you BC.  and to make a similar point, we've had a few scholarship offerees get dinged and end up playing in the Ivies.  it has been a few years, but still.

[donkey687]

2) Stanford had the biggest deviation in scores from average student compared to football players.  Thus, Stanford has the highest standards for football players but also bends their standards the most to get football players in.

I don't want to dismiss this out of hand, but it doesn't strike me as correct, and I will tell you why.  The gap between the average Stanford student SAT score and the average SAT score of the better Div I universities (I am thinking of places like Notre Dame, USC, Cal and UCLA) is not very high, because there are many more students with perfect or near perfect SAT scores than there are spots for them at elite universities like Stanford.  On the other hand, the gap between Stanford athletes generally (and Stanford football players specifically) and that of other schools is gargantuan.

This link put the mean Stanford SAT score at 1500, compared to 1470 at Notre Dame, 1440 at USC, 1430 at Michigan, 1420 at Berkeley, 1400 at UCLA.  I would bet dollars to donuts that our football players average SAT scores are more than 30 points higher than the Domers, more than 60 points higher than SC's, more than 80 points higher than Cal's, and more than 100 points higher than those at UCLA (if someone has the data, please let me know where I can find it).  If my assumptions are true, then the gap between students and football players is higher at those schools than at Stanford, and the quoted statement is wrong.

BC

My data was a number of years ago. It could have been more than 5 years ago so it probably no longer applies because there has been SAT grade inflation in recent years that has compressed the difference between Stanford and the Notre Dames of the world. I remember the data showed that Stanford football players had roughly 100 points higher on SAT at that time but the average Stanford student was something like 200 points higher than the average Notre Dame student.

[82lsju]

Agree.  But my understanding is that Stanford takes very few transfers under any circumstances. Am I correct?

You are 

In 2019-20 there were 2,466 transfer applicants, 24 accepted (so 1% admit rate), 20 enrolled

see page 17 here (page 17 of the document, page 19 of the PDF)

https://ucomm.stanford.edu/wp-content/up...s-2019.pdf

way back when I transferred in (1979) Stanford took on the order of 150 transfers (combined number of sophomores and juniors) a year and as I recall the transfer admit rate was ~10%.  At my last reunion we compiled a list of people we think were transfers and for our class (1982) it was ~180 people or ~10% or my class.

[Treebound]

[quote="donkey687" pid='307205' dateline='1613080169']
2)

This link put the mean Stanford SAT score at 1500, compared to 1470 at Notre Dame, 1440 at USC, 1430 at Michigan, 1420 at Berkeley, 1400 at UCLA.  I would bet dollars to donuts that our football players average SAT scores are more than 30 points higher than the Domers, more than 60 points higher than SC's, more than 80 points higher than Cal's, and more than 100 points higher than those at UCLA (if someone has the data, please let me know where I can find it).  If my assumptions are true, then the gap between students and football players is higher at those schools than at Stanford, and the quoted statement is wrong.

BC

One large correction here BC, 
$C plays games with their reported scores/grades and admits large groups of kids (many are legacy) after a one semester or one year deferment so that they don't count (read pull down) their reported SAT scores.   There is also a well known path here in the Bay Area, where kids not admitted to SC after high school go to schools like SMU or Colorado for a year and then they transfer into SC.  We know kids that even rushed a specific sorority in Boulder based on the house they wanted at $C.   Usc only reports their incoming freshman class scores/grades to try and help them look more competitive.  Yes, they have improved, but come on.  I can't speak to the other schools, but this doesn't surprise me regarding $C and their lack of institutional control....Cheat-on!

[Mick]

[quote="donkey687" pid='307205' dateline='1613080169']
2)

This link put the mean Stanford SAT score at 1500, compared to 1470 at Notre Dame, 1440 at USC, 1430 at Michigan, 1420 at Berkeley, 1400 at UCLA.  I would bet dollars to donuts that our football players average SAT scores are more than 30 points higher than the Domers, more than 60 points higher than SC's, more than 80 points higher than Cal's, and more than 100 points higher than those at UCLA (if someone has the data, please let me know where I can find it).  If my assumptions are true, then the gap between students and football players is higher at those schools than at Stanford, and the quoted statement is wrong.

BC

One large correction here BC, 
$C plays games with their reported scores/grades and admits large groups of kids (many are legacy) after a one semester or one year deferment so that they don't count (read pull down) their reported SAT scores.   There is also a well known path here in the Bay Area, where kids not admitted to SC after high school go to schools like SMU or Colorado for a year and then they transfer into SC.  We know kids that even rushed a specific sorority in Boulder based on the house they wanted at $C.   Usc only reports their incoming freshman class scores/grades to try and help them look more competitive.  Yes, they have improved, but come on.  I can't speak to the other schools, but this doesn't surprise me regarding $C and their lack of institutional control....Cheat-on!

Sounds familiar.  A student from my son's high school went that route.  Spring matriculant at USC, now an MBA student at UMichigan's Ross School.

On the other side of the spectrum, my cousin attended USC for one year.  Made Dean's List both years, couldn't stand it, transferred to Reed College.

[BobK]

Tyler S the Oregon starting QB just entered the portal

[JohnR34231]

Tyler S the Oregon starting QB just entered the portal

Ducks have a five star stud coming in.
Wonder if that had anything to do with it?

[SamuelMcF]

Tyler S the Oregon starting QB just entered the portal

Ducks have a five star stud coming in.
Wonder if that had anything to do with it?

They have a grad transfer (Anthony Brown from BC) that people say should've won the job last season. Maybe he did in the spring.

[Phogge]

They also have future Voldemort winner Butter II. I think Stanford is still pissed about the statue fiasco. I think the guy coming in is a dual QB.

[Papa John]

Shough wrote that he is a grad transfer (two degrees in three years from Oregon) and has three years of eligibility remaining. FWIW, ESPN rated Shough fifth amongst Pac-12 QBs in 2020. Those ahead of him: 

Daniels, ASU (returning, I think)
DTR, UCLA (returning)
Mills, Stanford (declared for NFL draft)
Slovis, USC (returning, I think)

[BobK]

Hmm wonder if Stanford is possible? Sounds like a high academic kid