• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Stanford Cardinal (official thread)

Shaw is just trying to prepare his boss for the future. Once USC is fully off probation programs such as Stanford and Oregon will get nothing but the scraps from the So Cal recruiting pool.

I wonder. Sanctions aside, the 3 ring circus that has been their post-Carrol coaching tree has done quite a bit of damage.
They haven't been to a big boy bowl since 2008. Texas has more recent success than USC at this point... and, for similar reasons to Texas, I don't think they're a lock to simply regain their recruiting ground when sanctions come off. Cali kids have options and it's not a terribly loyal state like Ohio. They'll have to hire a competent coach first, and even then they'll have a lot of work.
 
Upvote 0
I just want to make sure I'm understanding what is going on here.

Stanford coach says he really doesn't care about the satellite camps because they don't do them.

They don't do them because they have good attendance at the camps they run on campus. Implication being that kids showing up at their camps self select and are more likely to make it through their admissions process.

They also don't do them in SEC land (presumably) because the majority of the kids who they would see at those camps couldn't make the grade to get past admissions.

Stanford coach uses a bit of exaggeration to make a point that running a satellite camp would attract players they largely couldn't realistically bring in anyhow...

Exaggerated point is made at the expense of the (generally) stars and bars states by implication.

And some of us are put off by that?

Did I get that right?

Should we move this discussion to the pussification thread?

Y'all gone soft.
 
Upvote 0
If you're a Stanford grad punching down at the impoverished high school kids of anyfuckingwhere, you're a bitch and a bully and can go fuck yourself.

Frankly, I don't see this as anything about impoverished kids. They could run a satellite camp in Westerville or Bexley and I'd bet that they'd have a low chance of getting high quality players who they could get through admissions.

The point is, for them, anyone who isn't willing to come to them probably isn't a good match.

But the fact that any of this can be taken as a knock against the SEC land makes it funny to me.
 
Upvote 0
Maybe a point of interest. A girl on same waterpolo team as my daughter got invited to, and received a subsequent scholarship offer from Stanford. The only proviso was that she had to qualify academically at Stanford. She couldn't so went to USC and plays as a freshman. Stanford is different, and Kyle is right about the elitism there. They wouldn't soil their hands by having a camp in the San Joaquin valley, because 99.9% of the kids wouldn't qualify AND have the talent that Stanford expects to field. That proof is in the Director's Cup standings every year since inception. Not saying it's right, just saying it's the path they take. Also, the rest of the Pac12 doesn't really bend to help out the Humbolt States, the Cal State East Bays, the Bakersfield States either.
 
Upvote 0
Wow. They didn't play at all like Stanford this week.

Actually, maybe they did...

quote-you-are-what-your-record-says-you-are-bill-parcells-71-19-15.jpg
 
Upvote 0
"Washington is awesome! They beat Stanford 44-6!"

While the Huskies are obviously very good, it's also apparent that Stanford isn't Stanford Football™ this year after Wazzu thumped them 42-16 in Palo Alto. :pirate:
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top