04-15-2025, 08:22 AM
Interesting.
Thanks the link.
Thanks the link.
A letter to the athlete accepted to Stanford
Cringeworthy in light of everything that has been swirling with regards to Flacks. Sounds like he's organizing a PR campaign to try and rehabilitate his image. Neither writer played for Flacks at Stanford, only prior to Stanford.
ETA: Thanks to this post, it turns out there is a second investigation against Flacks that just opened. https://www.ocregister.com/2025/04/14/fo...an-flacks/
ETA: Thanks to this post, it turns out there is a second investigation against Flacks that just opened. https://www.ocregister.com/2025/04/14/fo...an-flacks/
Cringeworthy in light of everything that has been swirling with regards to Flacks. Sounds like he's organizing a PR campaign to try and rehabilitate his image. Neither writer played for Flacks at Stanford, only prior to Stanford.
ETA: Thanks to this post, it turns out there is a second investigation against Flacks that just opened. https://www.ocregister.com/2025/04/14/fo...an-flacks/
ETA: Thanks to this post, it turns out there is a second investigation against Flacks that just opened. https://www.ocregister.com/2025/04/14/fo...an-flacks/
04-15-2025, 03:36 PM
What a puff piece article. It’s shameful with all the successful coaches here, that the article mentions Nick Saban? How about do some research and mention, our own dominating Thom Glielmi for example. And out of 36 coaches, the writers had to pick the one with biggest target in the public. This article would have best served if it was the woman’s water polo team.
What a puff piece article. It’s shameful with all the successful coaches here, that the article mentions Nick Saban? How about do some research and mention, our own dominating Thom Glielmi for example. And out of 36 coaches, the writers had to pick the one with biggest target in the public. This article would have best served if it was the woman’s water polo team.
04-15-2025, 06:13 PM
(04-15-2025, 03:36 PM)AcesUp Wrote: What a puff piece article. It’s shameful with all the successful coaches here, that the article mentions Nick Saban? How about do some research and mention, our own dominating Thom Glielmi for example. And out of 36 coaches, the writers had to pick the one with biggest target in the public. This article would have best served if it was the woman’s water polo team.
I'm sure it's part of the PR campaign that Flacks' campaign manager (referenced in the OC Register article) is organizing.
(04-15-2025, 03:36 PM)AcesUp Wrote: What a puff piece article. It’s shameful with all the successful coaches here, that the article mentions Nick Saban? How about do some research and mention, our own dominating Thom Glielmi for example. And out of 36 coaches, the writers had to pick the one with biggest target in the public. This article would have best served if it was the woman’s water polo team.
I'm sure it's part of the PR campaign that Flacks' campaign manager (referenced in the OC Register article) is organizing.
AcesUp, did you get to the end of the article to see who (presumably) wrote the “puff piece”.
It sounded to me more like an article about what it takes to be among the best. I think the article would be relevant 20 or even 50 years in the future or past
Before people find a tall tree, let’s see what the investigations reveal or not find.
Is Stanford, and other schools, finding that some athletes that were big fish in high school believe they are entitled to be big fish in Division I or else it is the school/coach’s fault? The two authors give a different viewpoint than I had heard before, and it rings true. But one can always view evolution from the viewpoint of the surviving species or the extinct species.
It sounded to me more like an article about what it takes to be among the best. I think the article would be relevant 20 or even 50 years in the future or past
Before people find a tall tree, let’s see what the investigations reveal or not find.
Is Stanford, and other schools, finding that some athletes that were big fish in high school believe they are entitled to be big fish in Division I or else it is the school/coach’s fault? The two authors give a different viewpoint than I had heard before, and it rings true. But one can always view evolution from the viewpoint of the surviving species or the extinct species.
AcesUp, did you get to the end of the article to see who (presumably) wrote the “puff piece”.
It sounded to me more like an article about what it takes to be among the best. I think the article would be relevant 20 or even 50 years in the future or past
Before people find a tall tree, let’s see what the investigations reveal or not find.
Is Stanford, and other schools, finding that some athletes that were big fish in high school believe they are entitled to be big fish in Division I or else it is the school/coach’s fault? The two authors give a different viewpoint than I had heard before, and it rings true. But one can always view evolution from the viewpoint of the surviving species or the extinct species.
It sounded to me more like an article about what it takes to be among the best. I think the article would be relevant 20 or even 50 years in the future or past
Before people find a tall tree, let’s see what the investigations reveal or not find.
Is Stanford, and other schools, finding that some athletes that were big fish in high school believe they are entitled to be big fish in Division I or else it is the school/coach’s fault? The two authors give a different viewpoint than I had heard before, and it rings true. But one can always view evolution from the viewpoint of the surviving species or the extinct species.
https://stanforddaily.com/2025/04/14/fro...-stanford/
(04-15-2025, 09:59 PM)2006alum Wrote: https://stanforddaily.com/2025/04/14/fro...-stanford/Ok, I think this thread has been restored, minus the OP's post which they wished deleted, but restoring the link to the Stanford Daily story that prompted this discussion. Sorry for the clumsiness, but our board software makes it all but impossible to restore a thread where the original post has been deleted.
https://stanforddaily.com/2025/04/14/fro...-stanford/
(04-15-2025, 09:59 PM)2006alum Wrote: https://stanforddaily.com/2025/04/14/fro...-stanford/Ok, I think this thread has been restored, minus the OP's post which they wished deleted, but restoring the link to the Stanford Daily story that prompted this discussion. Sorry for the clumsiness, but our board software makes it all but impossible to restore a thread where the original post has been deleted.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »