[cardcrimson]

I missed this part of the late game banter, but apparently the announcers were commenting that a Stanford offer is something that you just don't turn down. They continued confiding that Shaw told them only a couple of players have turned down an offer during his entire time at Stanford. Could that be true? Sounds implausible to me.

Note: I didn't hear the commentary, my wife did and told me about it. She was skeptical as well.

[cardcrimson]

I missed this part of the late game banter, but apparently the announcers were commenting that a Stanford offer is something that you just don't turn down. They continued confiding that Shaw told them only a couple of players have turned down an offer during his entire time at Stanford. Could that be true? Sounds implausible to me.

Note: I didn't hear the commentary, my wife did and told me about it. She was skeptical as well.

[msqueri]

Yes they said it. I think they may have said seven or something. It’s a complete bullshit narrative given the high number of recruits turning us down the last several years.

[msqueri]

Yes they said it. I think they may have said seven or something. It’s a complete bullshit narrative given the high number of recruits turning us down the last several years.

[Goose]

Yes they said it. I think they may have said seven or something. It’s a complete bullshit narrative given the high number of recruits turning us down the last several years.

Just to be clear, in your third sentence you are referring to guys who told Stanford "Don't bother recruiting me, I'm not coming", as opposed to guys who went through admissions, got in, and then said "No Thanks"?

[Goose]

Yes they said it. I think they may have said seven or something. It’s a complete bullshit narrative given the high number of recruits turning us down the last several years.

Just to be clear, in your third sentence you are referring to guys who told Stanford "Don't bother recruiting me, I'm not coming", as opposed to guys who went through admissions, got in, and then said "No Thanks"?

[BobK]

The announcer said a number 5 or 6. Rumor on the other site thinks 4 this year. Of course seldom does an athlete announce “I have been rejected by Stanford”
I other sports I follow I can think of one such announcement and that was simply “wish I had the grades “

[BobK]

The announcer said a number 5 or 6. Rumor on the other site thinks 4 this year. Of course seldom does an athlete announce “I have been rejected by Stanford”
I other sports I follow I can think of one such announcement and that was simply “wish I had the grades “

[msqueri]

Yes they said it. I think they may have said seven or something. It’s a complete bullshit narrative given the high number of recruits turning us down the last several years.

Just to be clear, in your third sentence you are referring to guys who told Stanford "Don't bother recruiting me, I'm not coming", as opposed to guys who went through admissions, got in, and then said "No Thanks"?

No, I'm talking about guys who went through the entire recruiting process, applied, were accepted, and said "no thanks." The announcers were saying this just doesn't happen and if I heard them right (I only listened once) gave a figure for how many times Shaw has said it has ever happened. This is a dated narrative that was true prior to Shaw and in Shaw's early years, but it's a lie now (including the specific number the announcers said if that's something Shaw told them).

SamuelMcF is probably keeping a better list than me, but this is something that used to never happen and now happens quite a lot. We may reach the all-time number the announcers mentioned this year alone. I think it's possible we're nearing (if we haven't broken) the 20 person mark on number of players all time who've turned Shaw down despite being admitted to Stanford, which is to say nothing of players who could get admitted to Stanford but choose to go elsewhere without applying, which is in the many dozens and makes ludicrous the argument that "you just don't turn down Stanford."

[msqueri]

Yes they said it. I think they may have said seven or something. It’s a complete bullshit narrative given the high number of recruits turning us down the last several years.

Just to be clear, in your third sentence you are referring to guys who told Stanford "Don't bother recruiting me, I'm not coming", as opposed to guys who went through admissions, got in, and then said "No Thanks"?

No, I'm talking about guys who went through the entire recruiting process, applied, were accepted, and said "no thanks." The announcers were saying this just doesn't happen and if I heard them right (I only listened once) gave a figure for how many times Shaw has said it has ever happened. This is a dated narrative that was true prior to Shaw and in Shaw's early years, but it's a lie now (including the specific number the announcers said if that's something Shaw told them).

SamuelMcF is probably keeping a better list than me, but this is something that used to never happen and now happens quite a lot. We may reach the all-time number the announcers mentioned this year alone. I think it's possible we're nearing (if we haven't broken) the 20 person mark on number of players all time who've turned Shaw down despite being admitted to Stanford, which is to say nothing of players who could get admitted to Stanford but choose to go elsewhere without applying, which is in the many dozens and makes ludicrous the argument that "you just don't turn down Stanford."

[Softball Fan]

Recruits who got admitted and then refused the Stanford offer would have to put all other offers on hold until the last minute if the admissions process is the same as it is for student/athletes in other sports.  In WVB you don't have recruits tell other coaches to wait around until she hears from Stanford admissions before committing to them.

[Softball Fan]

Recruits who got admitted and then refused the Stanford offer would have to put all other offers on hold until the last minute if the admissions process is the same as it is for student/athletes in other sports.  In WVB you don't have recruits tell other coaches to wait around until she hears from Stanford admissions before committing to them.

[BobK]

Admissions for scholarship athletes is not the same as non athlete students
Not unusual to be accepted while still in their Jr year
My favorable I was accepted was a WBB player whose app wasn’t submitted

[BobK]

Admissions for scholarship athletes is not the same as non athlete students
Not unusual to be accepted while still in their Jr year
My favorable I was accepted was a WBB player whose app wasn’t submitted

[MV72018]

The announcer said a number 5 or 6.  Rumor on the other site thinks 4 this year.  Of course seldom does an athlete announce “I have been rejected by Stanford”
I other sports I follow I can think of one such announcement and that was simply “wish I had the grades “

The question is: how many that got admitted and were offered a full scholarship turned us down? I'm deeply skeptical it's only 5 or 6 in Shaw's tenure. However, there's probably a tendentious or misleading way of framing the question that will yield the desired answer ("5" or "6"). As for "1" or "2," LOL!

[MV72018]

The announcer said a number 5 or 6.  Rumor on the other site thinks 4 this year.  Of course seldom does an athlete announce “I have been rejected by Stanford”
I other sports I follow I can think of one such announcement and that was simply “wish I had the grades “

The question is: how many that got admitted and were offered a full scholarship turned us down? I'm deeply skeptical it's only 5 or 6 in Shaw's tenure. However, there's probably a tendentious or misleading way of framing the question that will yield the desired answer ("5" or "6"). As for "1" or "2," LOL!

[msqueri]

The announcer said a number 5 or 6.  Rumor on the other site thinks 4 this year.  Of course seldom does an athlete announce “I have been rejected by Stanford”
I other sports I follow I can think of one such announcement and that was simply “wish I had the grades “

The question is: how many that got admitted and were offered a full scholarship turned us down? I'm deeply skeptical it's only 5 or 6 in Shaw's tenure. However, there's probably a tendentious or misleading way of framing the question that will yield the desired answer ("5" or "6"). As for "1" or "2," LOL!

That's what I'm talking about. Hoping SamuelMcF can fill in details because I haven't kept good notes on this, but an incomplete list of just the last few years as I understand it (maybe not all info is accurate as I'm not tracking methodically and admissions info has become harder to come by for Stanford recruitniks) includes Ethan Thomason, Jordan Mathews, Jacobe Johnson, Ryan Brubaker, Ryan Otton, Joe Strickland, Chief Borders, Tyler Maro, Josh Moore, Andrew Gentry, Derek Wilkins, Owen Prentice, and Drew Kendall.

[msqueri]

The announcer said a number 5 or 6.  Rumor on the other site thinks 4 this year.  Of course seldom does an athlete announce “I have been rejected by Stanford”
I other sports I follow I can think of one such announcement and that was simply “wish I had the grades “

The question is: how many that got admitted and were offered a full scholarship turned us down? I'm deeply skeptical it's only 5 or 6 in Shaw's tenure. However, there's probably a tendentious or misleading way of framing the question that will yield the desired answer ("5" or "6"). As for "1" or "2," LOL!

That's what I'm talking about. Hoping SamuelMcF can fill in details because I haven't kept good notes on this, but an incomplete list of just the last few years as I understand it (maybe not all info is accurate as I'm not tracking methodically and admissions info has become harder to come by for Stanford recruitniks) includes Ethan Thomason, Jordan Mathews, Jacobe Johnson, Ryan Brubaker, Ryan Otton, Joe Strickland, Chief Borders, Tyler Maro, Josh Moore, Andrew Gentry, Derek Wilkins, Owen Prentice, and Drew Kendall.

[81alum]

The number given by the broadcasters was "6" and is entirely believable for this reason:  most recruits who "turn us down"
 do so before applying, or if they apply and then accept an offer elsewhere their application probably gets pulled before being acted on.  It would be a very rare recruit who was so genuinely undecided that they would stick it out all the way through the application process, get accepted to Stanford, and only then jump ship.

For a Stanford application to be complete will require multiple different documents, transcripts, test scores, letters of rec, personal statements, etc.  All a recruit has to do is to decline to send in one required document after they know they are going elsewhere, and they won't be accepted, and thus they won't count towards those "6".  And if they decide they want to go elsewhere, why the heck would they bother to complete the Stanford application?

[81alum]

The number given by the broadcasters was "6" and is entirely believable for this reason:  most recruits who "turn us down"
 do so before applying, or if they apply and then accept an offer elsewhere their application probably gets pulled before being acted on.  It would be a very rare recruit who was so genuinely undecided that they would stick it out all the way through the application process, get accepted to Stanford, and only then jump ship.

For a Stanford application to be complete will require multiple different documents, transcripts, test scores, letters of rec, personal statements, etc.  All a recruit has to do is to decline to send in one required document after they know they are going elsewhere, and they won't be accepted, and thus they won't count towards those "6".  And if they decide they want to go elsewhere, why the heck would they bother to complete the Stanford application?

[msqueri]

The number given by the broadcasters was "6" and is entirely believable for this reason:  most recruits who "turn us down"
 do so before applying, or if they apply and then accept an offer elsewhere their application probably gets pulled before being acted on.  It would be a very rare recruit who was so genuinely undecided that they would stick it out all the way through the application process, get accepted to Stanford, and only then jump ship.

I don’t know what to say, I just gave you quite a bit more than six names and those are just from the last few years. It was a bullshit lie of a talking point.

[msqueri]

The number given by the broadcasters was "6" and is entirely believable for this reason:  most recruits who "turn us down"
 do so before applying, or if they apply and then accept an offer elsewhere their application probably gets pulled before being acted on.  It would be a very rare recruit who was so genuinely undecided that they would stick it out all the way through the application process, get accepted to Stanford, and only then jump ship.

I don’t know what to say, I just gave you quite a bit more than six names and those are just from the last few years. It was a bullshit lie of a talking point.

[gailtate]

Something about the urban legend of "no one turns us down" smacks of Shaw's ludicrous (and harmful) notion of seeking out "Stanford men" as recruits. This is right there with MLB scouts of a generation ago who would make judgements on talent based on the physical appearance of a minor league prospect, as in, "He looks like a ballplayer to me. He's got that ballplayer jawline, etc. etc. "  Yes, a lot of grown men actually believed this horse****.

[gailtate]

Something about the urban legend of "no one turns us down" smacks of Shaw's ludicrous (and harmful) notion of seeking out "Stanford men" as recruits. This is right there with MLB scouts of a generation ago who would make judgements on talent based on the physical appearance of a minor league prospect, as in, "He looks like a ballplayer to me. He's got that ballplayer jawline, etc. etc. "  Yes, a lot of grown men actually believed this horse****.

[Treebound]

So what you're saying is we need Billy Beane to replace Shaw?!  He almost came to Stanford once!  Sabre metrics - at this point I'm open for some positive, data driven change.  The Win/Loss data seems pretty obvious at this point.

[Treebound]

So what you're saying is we need Billy Beane to replace Shaw?!  He almost came to Stanford once!  Sabre metrics - at this point I'm open for some positive, data driven change.  The Win/Loss data seems pretty obvious at this point.

[lex24]

Something about the urban legend of "no one turns us down" smacks of Shaw's ludicrous (and harmful) notion of seeking out "Stanford men" as recruits. This is right there with MLB scouts of a generation ago who would make judgements on talent based on the physical appearance of a minor league prospect, as in, "He looks like a ballplayer to me. He's got that ballplayer jawline, etc. etc. "  Yes, a lot of grown men actually believed this horse****.

Exhibit A - Todd Linden….

[lex24]

Something about the urban legend of "no one turns us down" smacks of Shaw's ludicrous (and harmful) notion of seeking out "Stanford men" as recruits. This is right there with MLB scouts of a generation ago who would make judgements on talent based on the physical appearance of a minor league prospect, as in, "He looks like a ballplayer to me. He's got that ballplayer jawline, etc. etc. "  Yes, a lot of grown men actually believed this horse****.

Exhibit A - Todd Linden….

[BostonCard]

Getting caught on semantics as to what constitutes a “turn down” obscures the bigger point, which is that there are players out there who could come to Stanford who we are not getting. It’s a little bit worse from a planning perspective when someone turns us down after getting admitted later in the process, but ultimately, the universe of high quality admittable players is finite, and every one we don’t get means we have to go further down the list.

BC

[BostonCard]

Getting caught on semantics as to what constitutes a “turn down” obscures the bigger point, which is that there are players out there who could come to Stanford who we are not getting. It’s a little bit worse from a planning perspective when someone turns us down after getting admitted later in the process, but ultimately, the universe of high quality admittable players is finite, and every one we don’t get means we have to go further down the list.

BC

[81alum]

The number given by the broadcasters was "6" and is entirely believable for this reason:  most recruits who "turn us down"
 do so before applying, or if they apply and then accept an offer elsewhere their application probably gets pulled before being acted on.  It would be a very rare recruit who was so genuinely undecided that they would stick it out all the way through the application process, get accepted to Stanford, and only then jump ship.

I don’t know what to say, I just gave you quite a bit more than six names and those are just from the last few years. It was a bullshit lie of a talking point.

It was a deceptive talking point, I agree, since very few people understand how admissions for athletes works.  There may have been many who have turned us down in the conventional sense.  And yet the number 6 could well be correct in a technical sense.  It might well be Shaw himself who "pulls" the application the minute he knows the recruit is going somewhere else, so the recruit is technically not admitted and technically does not "count."

We know of 3 WBB players who were admitted and decided to go elsewhere over the last decade or so.  But I also remember hearing/reading that a coach had "pulled" an application at one point, meaning that coaches have discretion over whether Admissions reviews an athletic recruit's application for early/preferred status.  (Presumably they can always apply normally like anyone else in which case a coach would not have such discretion.)  Since a coach can therefore "pull" an application at any point, I presume they always do so the minute they know a recruit is no longer interested.  This creates the fictional narrative referenced by the announcers.

[81alum]

The number given by the broadcasters was "6" and is entirely believable for this reason:  most recruits who "turn us down"
 do so before applying, or if they apply and then accept an offer elsewhere their application probably gets pulled before being acted on.  It would be a very rare recruit who was so genuinely undecided that they would stick it out all the way through the application process, get accepted to Stanford, and only then jump ship.

I don’t know what to say, I just gave you quite a bit more than six names and those are just from the last few years. It was a bullshit lie of a talking point.

It was a deceptive talking point, I agree, since very few people understand how admissions for athletes works.  There may have been many who have turned us down in the conventional sense.  And yet the number 6 could well be correct in a technical sense.  It might well be Shaw himself who "pulls" the application the minute he knows the recruit is going somewhere else, so the recruit is technically not admitted and technically does not "count."

We know of 3 WBB players who were admitted and decided to go elsewhere over the last decade or so.  But I also remember hearing/reading that a coach had "pulled" an application at one point, meaning that coaches have discretion over whether Admissions reviews an athletic recruit's application for early/preferred status.  (Presumably they can always apply normally like anyone else in which case a coach would not have such discretion.)  Since a coach can therefore "pull" an application at any point, I presume they always do so the minute they know a recruit is no longer interested.  This creates the fictional narrative referenced by the announcers.

[cardcrimson]

Agree with the point you perceive as bigger. To me, the real point is it's all about the BS narrative. We never have guys turn us down. I love our schemes. Once we get though the injuries, we'll be fine. The offense will be fully installed mid-season and it'll be great.

A young finance professor once told our class, "You can't polish a turd." Yet that's exactly what Shaw continually attempts to do, and he thinks the masses are blinded by his eloquence that we can't tell it's a turd.

[cardcrimson]

Agree with the point you perceive as bigger. To me, the real point is it's all about the BS narrative. We never have guys turn us down. I love our schemes. Once we get though the injuries, we'll be fine. The offense will be fully installed mid-season and it'll be great.

A young finance professor once told our class, "You can't polish a turd." Yet that's exactly what Shaw continually attempts to do, and he thinks the masses are blinded by his eloquence that we can't tell it's a turd.

[BobK]

81 with scholarship offers the application always goes to the coaching staff. Every Stanford sport.
A trip down memory lane on the three WBB.
I have to think
Pivic went to Oregon State
Diggins to ND.
I’m thinking if you want to add

[BobK]

81 with scholarship offers the application always goes to the coaching staff. Every Stanford sport.
A trip down memory lane on the three WBB.
I have to think
Pivic went to Oregon State
Diggins to ND.
I’m thinking if you want to add

[qwerty49]

81 with scholarship offers the application always goes to the coaching staff.  Every Stanford sport.
A trip down memory lane on the three WBB.
I have to think
Pivic went to Oregon State
Diggins to ND. 
I’m thinking if you want to add

Was Kiki Rice admitted? How about Katie Lou?

[qwerty49]

81 with scholarship offers the application always goes to the coaching staff.  Every Stanford sport.
A trip down memory lane on the three WBB.
I have to think
Pivic went to Oregon State
Diggins to ND. 
I’m thinking if you want to add

Was Kiki Rice admitted? How about Katie Lou?

[BobK]

Yes Rice and Katie lou so that’s up to 4

[BobK]

Yes Rice and Katie lou so that’s up to 4