[Bosco]

Fudd might well be in the Dook or South Carolina camp as her final 2.    For sure it's not Stanford, as Stanford is done.

I thought we could have 5 for the class of 2021?

2018: Lexie, Lacie and Jenna
2019: Jones, Prechtel, Belibi and Jump
2020: Brink, Gytenbeek, Nnopu
2021: Demetre, kiki, Harriel, Bosgana so far

Or if I missed anyone here?

[Bosco]

Fudd might well be in the Dook or South Carolina camp as her final 2.    For sure it's not Stanford, as Stanford is done.

I thought we could have 5 for the class of 2021?

2018: Lexie, Lacie and Jenna
2019: Jones, Prechtel, Belibi and Jump
2020: Brink, Gytenbeek, Nnopu
2021: Demetre, kiki, Harriel, Bosgana so far

Or if I missed anyone here?

[BobK]

You are correct however we will stop and it’s on to 2021. Where we will have 5 openings.

14 on the roster for this season then 14 as of now for next

[BobK]

You are correct however we will stop and it’s on to 2021. Where we will have 5 openings.

14 on the roster for this season then 14 as of now for next

[Bosco]

You are correct however we will stop and it’s on the 2021.    Where we will have 5 openings. 

14 on the roster for this season then 14 as of now for next

I see, thanks Bob!!!

[Bosco]

You are correct however we will stop and it’s on the 2021.    Where we will have 5 openings. 

14 on the roster for this season then 14 as of now for next

I see, thanks Bob!!!

[akiddoc]

Fudd might well be in the Dook or South Carolina camp as her final 2.    For sure it's not Stanford, as Stanford is done.

I thought we could have 5 for the class of 2021?

2018: Lexie, Lacie and Jenna
2019: Jones, Prechtel, Belibi and Jump
2020: Brink, Gytenbeek, Nnopu
2021: Demetre, kiki, Harriel, Bosgana so far

Or if I missed anyone here?

Remember that the pool of players Stanford can recruit is limited to those who have the grades.

[akiddoc]

Fudd might well be in the Dook or South Carolina camp as her final 2.    For sure it's not Stanford, as Stanford is done.

I thought we could have 5 for the class of 2021?

2018: Lexie, Lacie and Jenna
2019: Jones, Prechtel, Belibi and Jump
2020: Brink, Gytenbeek, Nnopu
2021: Demetre, kiki, Harriel, Bosgana so far

Or if I missed anyone here?

Remember that the pool of players Stanford can recruit is limited to those who have the grades.

[jonnyss]

Now official! 
https://twitter.com/kiki_iriafen/status/...61090?s=21
This is a GREAT class!

here is a thread from the boneyard about kiki's commitment. i'm struck how respectfully they speak about stanford. (seems more gracious than we speak about them).

[jonnyss]

Now official! 
https://twitter.com/kiki_iriafen/status/...61090?s=21
This is a GREAT class!

here is a thread from the boneyard about kiki's commitment. i'm struck how respectfully they speak about stanford. (seems more gracious than we speak about them).

[BACardinal]

I hate when other boards, like the posters on The Boneyard, say "Seems to me the admissions excuse is a thing of the past. It's time to be put to rest." Like that's why Stanford cant win a championship. They're saying Stanford is always a contender for top talent but what they don't understand is anyone can say they're considering Stanford or even put the Cardinal in their top five schools, however that doesn't mean they've been accepted. For all anyone knows they released Stanford as a top school hoping/waiting for admission and when they don't get accepted they chose another school. No player is going to say, "Stanford was actually my top school but I didn't get in so instead i settled for option two." That would be disrespectful to the institution they end up signing with. Admission plays a brobdingnagian part. I'm sure there are plenty of young women that Tara would love to recruit but simply doesn't want to expend energy because she knows their marks wont match the admission requirement. 

[BACardinal]

I hate when other boards, like the posters on The Boneyard, say "Seems to me the admissions excuse is a thing of the past. It's time to be put to rest." Like that's why Stanford cant win a championship. They're saying Stanford is always a contender for top talent but what they don't understand is anyone can say they're considering Stanford or even put the Cardinal in their top five schools, however that doesn't mean they've been accepted. For all anyone knows they released Stanford as a top school hoping/waiting for admission and when they don't get accepted they chose another school. No player is going to say, "Stanford was actually my top school but I didn't get in so instead i settled for option two." That would be disrespectful to the institution they end up signing with. Admission plays a brobdingnagian part. I'm sure there are plenty of young women that Tara would love to recruit but simply doesn't want to expend energy because she knows their marks wont match the admission requirement. 

[BobK]

Great post 707.

[BobK]

Great post 707.

[Lorcan]

I have a hard time with the admissions argument. While I respect that it is very difficult to get into Stanford, and that it severely limits our pool of recruits, I struggle with the fact that our soccer, volleyball, and tennis teams all consistently attract the top talent in their respective sports. Does anyone have insight to why it’s more challenging in basketball?

[Lorcan]

I have a hard time with the admissions argument. While I respect that it is very difficult to get into Stanford, and that it severely limits our pool of recruits, I struggle with the fact that our soccer, volleyball, and tennis teams all consistently attract the top talent in their respective sports. Does anyone have insight to why it’s more challenging in basketball?

[oldalum]

It's not a country club sport

[oldalum]

It's not a country club sport

[jonnyss]

I hate when other boards, like the posters on The Boneyard, say "Seems to me the admissions excuse is a thing of the past. It's time to be put to rest." Like that's why Stanford cant win a championship. They're saying Stanford is always a contender for top talent but what they don't understand is anyone can say they're considering Stanford or even put the Cardinal in their top five schools, however that doesn't mean they've been accepted. For all anyone knows they released Stanford as a top school hoping/waiting for admission and when they don't get accepted they chose another school. No player is going to say, "Stanford was actually my top school but I didn't get in so instead i settled for option two." That would be disrespectful to the institution they end up signing with. Admission plays a of immense proportions part. I'm sure there are plenty of young women that Tara would love to recruit but simply doesn't want to expend energy because she knows their marks wont match the admission requirement. 

as i read the thread,  that single dissenter on the boneyard was responding to half a dozen other posters congratulating and complimenting stanford, saying that of course kiki was going to choose stanford, it's a great academic school, so if you can get it, you go, etc.

[jonnyss]

I hate when other boards, like the posters on The Boneyard, say "Seems to me the admissions excuse is a thing of the past. It's time to be put to rest." Like that's why Stanford cant win a championship. They're saying Stanford is always a contender for top talent but what they don't understand is anyone can say they're considering Stanford or even put the Cardinal in their top five schools, however that doesn't mean they've been accepted. For all anyone knows they released Stanford as a top school hoping/waiting for admission and when they don't get accepted they chose another school. No player is going to say, "Stanford was actually my top school but I didn't get in so instead i settled for option two." That would be disrespectful to the institution they end up signing with. Admission plays a of immense proportions part. I'm sure there are plenty of young women that Tara would love to recruit but simply doesn't want to expend energy because she knows their marks wont match the admission requirement. 

as i read the thread,  that single dissenter on the boneyard was responding to half a dozen other posters congratulating and complimenting stanford, saying that of course kiki was going to choose stanford, it's a great academic school, so if you can get it, you go, etc.

[Softball Fan]

I've seen the admissions topic argued back and forth on message boards so many times through the years I have become immune to it.   I would actually prefer Stanford fans not bring it up on boards because it's not a productive topic to argue with other fans.   

I believe Stanford has won more NCAA championships than any other school in the country.  Pretty difficult to argue poor Stanford is at such a big recruiting disadvantage.

[Softball Fan]

I've seen the admissions topic argued back and forth on message boards so many times through the years I have become immune to it.   I would actually prefer Stanford fans not bring it up on boards because it's not a productive topic to argue with other fans.   

I believe Stanford has won more NCAA championships than any other school in the country.  Pretty difficult to argue poor Stanford is at such a big recruiting disadvantage.

[oldalum]

I believe Stanford has won more NCAA championships than any other school in the country.  Pretty difficult to argue poor Stanford is at such a big recruiting disadvantage.

Actually, it's sport specific, and the earlier poster was talking specifically about women's basketball. We clearly don't have a recruiting disadvantage for Country Club/Olympic sports; I'd argue we might even have a recruiting advantage for some of them. But out of all those nattys, men's football, basketball, and baseball together have won a grand total of three, none in the past 32 years. Similarly, women's basketball and softball together have won two, none in the past 28 years. That does not disprove the recruiting disadvantage argument for those sports.

[oldalum]

I believe Stanford has won more NCAA championships than any other school in the country.  Pretty difficult to argue poor Stanford is at such a big recruiting disadvantage.

Actually, it's sport specific, and the earlier poster was talking specifically about women's basketball. We clearly don't have a recruiting disadvantage for Country Club/Olympic sports; I'd argue we might even have a recruiting advantage for some of them. But out of all those nattys, men's football, basketball, and baseball together have won a grand total of three, none in the past 32 years. Similarly, women's basketball and softball together have won two, none in the past 28 years. That does not disprove the recruiting disadvantage argument for those sports.

[Softball Fan]

I believe Stanford has won more NCAA championships than any other school in the country.  Pretty difficult to argue poor Stanford is at such a big recruiting disadvantage.

Actually, it's sport specific, and the earlier poster was talking specifically about women's basketball. We clearly don't have a recruiting disadvantage for Country Club/Olympic sports; I'd argue we might even have a recruiting advantage for some of them. But out of all those nattys, men's football, basketball, and baseball together have won a grand total of three, none in the past 32 years. Similarly, women's basketball and softball together have won two, none in the past 28 years. That does not disprove the recruiting disadvantage argument for those sports.

Coach Harbaugh made Stanford football into a top twenty team.  In 2010 Harbaugh got the team to a #4 BCS ranking and went on to win their bowl game. I doubt admissions lowered its requirements for Harbaugh's recruits.  There is more to it than the admissions standards.


There are prep athletes in every single sport that can’t be recruited by Stanford because of grades or test scores. This has been repeated at least 1,000,000 times by Stanford fans on message boards. Now with your post it’s 1,000,001 times.

Here is my main point. If you want to take this argument to sports message boards the response three out of four times will be Stanford fans are making excuses and are crybabies.

[Softball Fan]

I believe Stanford has won more NCAA championships than any other school in the country.  Pretty difficult to argue poor Stanford is at such a big recruiting disadvantage.

Actually, it's sport specific, and the earlier poster was talking specifically about women's basketball. We clearly don't have a recruiting disadvantage for Country Club/Olympic sports; I'd argue we might even have a recruiting advantage for some of them. But out of all those nattys, men's football, basketball, and baseball together have won a grand total of three, none in the past 32 years. Similarly, women's basketball and softball together have won two, none in the past 28 years. That does not disprove the recruiting disadvantage argument for those sports.

Coach Harbaugh made Stanford football into a top twenty team.  In 2010 Harbaugh got the team to a #4 BCS ranking and went on to win their bowl game. I doubt admissions lowered its requirements for Harbaugh's recruits.  There is more to it than the admissions standards.


There are prep athletes in every single sport that can’t be recruited by Stanford because of grades or test scores. This has been repeated at least 1,000,000 times by Stanford fans on message boards. Now with your post it’s 1,000,001 times.

Here is my main point. If you want to take this argument to sports message boards the response three out of four times will be Stanford fans are making excuses and are crybabies.

[oldalum]

There is more to it than the admissions standards.

yep and it's called the pool of available players who can meet our standards. Differs by sport. Country club sports: big pool. Football: smaller pool. Out of that pool we have to get high quality players at all positions at the same time. Not all are always available. Happens sometimes, not in others. Being ranked fourth one year, and winning the bowl game, does not equal an NCAA championship. How do you explain, with the same admissions standards, that most country club/olympic sports have won multiple NCAA championships, football none? Bad coaching? Bad recruiting? Right. and no, I'm not crying over it. We are NEVER going to win a national championship in football. I've learned to live with it sans tears. :)

[oldalum]

There is more to it than the admissions standards.

yep and it's called the pool of available players who can meet our standards. Differs by sport. Country club sports: big pool. Football: smaller pool. Out of that pool we have to get high quality players at all positions at the same time. Not all are always available. Happens sometimes, not in others. Being ranked fourth one year, and winning the bowl game, does not equal an NCAA championship. How do you explain, with the same admissions standards, that most country club/olympic sports have won multiple NCAA championships, football none? Bad coaching? Bad recruiting? Right. and no, I'm not crying over it. We are NEVER going to win a national championship in football. I've learned to live with it sans tears. :)

[Treefence]

Not to keep going on this, but I always look at Stanford admission standards as an added filter.  Most other power 5 schools do not have this filter, so it's a disadvantage. To counter that, most other power 5 schools don't have the overall athletic budget we do, nor the history of success we do overall.  While many other schools might have a narrow and more successful focus, Stanford dominates the big picture, though some might say Stanford dominates the irrelevant sports.  In sports like football, having the academic standards is steep hurdle, but there are still enough athletes each year that you could potentially field a championship team, even with only elite educational standards, but the issue is that other schools also want those athletes, and that includes some very prestigious educational institutions.  While an school like Alabama can pursue almost any star athlete in football, Stanford can only pursue a few each year.

[Treefence]

Not to keep going on this, but I always look at Stanford admission standards as an added filter.  Most other power 5 schools do not have this filter, so it's a disadvantage. To counter that, most other power 5 schools don't have the overall athletic budget we do, nor the history of success we do overall.  While many other schools might have a narrow and more successful focus, Stanford dominates the big picture, though some might say Stanford dominates the irrelevant sports.  In sports like football, having the academic standards is steep hurdle, but there are still enough athletes each year that you could potentially field a championship team, even with only elite educational standards, but the issue is that other schools also want those athletes, and that includes some very prestigious educational institutions.  While an school like Alabama can pursue almost any star athlete in football, Stanford can only pursue a few each year.

[WBB fan]

To me, the admission standards are something to be proud of. Stanford is an academic university first, not a sports factory as some other places are. Sports are great, and part of the college experience, but going to college should be about getting an education first. As far as I'm concerned, Stanford has it's priorities right.

[WBB fan]

To me, the admission standards are something to be proud of. Stanford is an academic university first, not a sports factory as some other places are. Sports are great, and part of the college experience, but going to college should be about getting an education first. As far as I'm concerned, Stanford has it's priorities right.

[BobK]

Kiki I Story


https://www.dailynews.com/basketball-is-...d-olympics

[BobK]

Kiki I Story


https://www.dailynews.com/basketball-is-...d-olympics

[CardinalWBBFan]

#64 recruit Alyssa Durazo Frescas commits to Lindy and UNLV. AAU teammate of Iriafen and HS teammate of Demetre.

[CardinalWBBFan]

#64 recruit Alyssa Durazo Frescas commits to Lindy and UNLV. AAU teammate of Iriafen and HS teammate of Demetre.

[slide]

Coach Harbaugh made Stanford football into a top twenty team.  In 2010 Harbaugh got the team to a #4 BCS ranking and went on to win their bowl game.  I doubt admissions lowered its requirements for Harbaugh's recruits.  There is more to it than the admissions standards.

Harbs and staff made large efforts to expand the pool of possible recruits -- earlier identification, earlier discussion about what is needed to gain admissions, competitive Jr camps, addition of FNL, use of OVs, and was willing to go to bat with Admissions on certain recruits.  we are now largely back to a smaller pool of self-selectors.

[slide]

Coach Harbaugh made Stanford football into a top twenty team.  In 2010 Harbaugh got the team to a #4 BCS ranking and went on to win their bowl game.  I doubt admissions lowered its requirements for Harbaugh's recruits.  There is more to it than the admissions standards.

Harbs and staff made large efforts to expand the pool of possible recruits -- earlier identification, earlier discussion about what is needed to gain admissions, competitive Jr camps, addition of FNL, use of OVs, and was willing to go to bat with Admissions on certain recruits.  we are now largely back to a smaller pool of self-selectors.

[qwerty49]

Coach Harbaugh made Stanford football into a top twenty team.  In 2010 Harbaugh got the team to a #4 BCS ranking and went on to win their bowl game.  I doubt admissions lowered its requirements for Harbaugh's recruits.  There is more to it than the admissions standards.

Harbs and staff made large efforts to expand the pool of possible recruits -- earlier identification, earlier discussion about what is needed to gain admissions, competitive Jr camps, addition of FNL, use of OVs, and was willing to go to bat with Admissions on certain recruits.  we are now largely back to a smaller pool of self-selectors.

I think some credit for early identification and early discussions also goes to Mike Eubanks who IIRC joined the AD in Harbaugh's first year, 2007.

[qwerty49]

Coach Harbaugh made Stanford football into a top twenty team.  In 2010 Harbaugh got the team to a #4 BCS ranking and went on to win their bowl game.  I doubt admissions lowered its requirements for Harbaugh's recruits.  There is more to it than the admissions standards.

Harbs and staff made large efforts to expand the pool of possible recruits -- earlier identification, earlier discussion about what is needed to gain admissions, competitive Jr camps, addition of FNL, use of OVs, and was willing to go to bat with Admissions on certain recruits.  we are now largely back to a smaller pool of self-selectors.

I think some credit for early identification and early discussions also goes to Mike Eubanks who IIRC joined the AD in Harbaugh's first year, 2007.