|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Jul 23, 2023 21:56:38 GMT -5
I've chatted with someone who's daughter plays for the same club. They indicated Charlotte's interest was stronger than Kevin's. Several in this thread made it clear, Kevin is interested in Parks. FWIW a poster on a Stanford sports message board who IMO seems to have inside info says Hambly is recruiting hard for Parks. In this video Parks says that her top three college choices are Kentucky, Louisville, and Nebraska. That might have changed with Hambly showing interest. I also like Suli Davis and believe she has a high ceiling over time. I would be happy to see her commit to Stanford.
Kentucky already had a '25 setter commited. |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Jul 23, 2023 23:34:39 GMT -5
FWIW a poster on a Stanford sports message board who IMO seems to have inside info says Hambly is recruiting hard for Parks. In this video Parks says that her top three college choices are Kentucky, Louisville, and Nebraska. That might have changed with Hambly showing interest. I also like Suli Davis and believe she has a high ceiling over time. I would be happy to see her commit to Stanford.
Kentucky already had a '25 setter commited. who? |
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Jul 23, 2023 23:37:11 GMT -5
Kentucky already had a '25 setter commited. who? Kassie O'Brien from Houston Skyline |
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Jul 23, 2023 23:37:20 GMT -5
Kentucky already had a '25 setter commited. who? Kassidy O'Brien. Spreading yourself a bit too thin there with all your teams to follow? lol |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Jul 24, 2023 0:07:13 GMT -5
Kassidy O'Brien. Spreading yourself a bit too thin there with all your teams to follow? lol I rarely stay up to date on recruits unless they're a senior, this is the first year ive payed attention to players before they committed lol |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Jul 27, 2023 22:17:54 GMT -5
Anyone know who Stanford is actively recruiting? Lots of top tier talent still uncommitted and heard lots of names tied to Stanford (Mullen, Suli Davis, Logan Parks, Taylor Harvey, Zoe Gillen-Malveaux) from what ive heard... Stanford is interested in Mullen, parks, Harvey, and Demaria. im sure there are others too that are being recruited those are just the only ones ive heard from reliable sources. id like them to get everyone I named lol |
|
|
|
Post by sleepy on Jul 27, 2023 22:27:31 GMT -5
Anyone know who Stanford is actively recruiting? Lots of top tier talent still uncommitted and heard lots of names tied to Stanford (Mullen, Suli Davis, Logan Parks, Taylor Harvey, Zoe Gillen-Malveaux) from what ive heard... Stanford is interested in Mullen, parks, Harvey, and Demaria. im sure there are others too that are being recruited those are just the only ones ive heard from reliable sources. id like them to get everyone I named lol Thanks for the info! It just feels like there are so many top tier recruits still uncommitted at this stage compared to last year and Stanford tends to be one of the big reasons for “uncommitted” top talent |
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Jul 27, 2023 23:45:09 GMT -5
Anyone know who Stanford is actively recruiting? Lots of top tier talent still uncommitted and heard lots of names tied to Stanford (Mullen, Suli Davis, Logan Parks, Taylor Harvey, Zoe Gillen-Malveaux) from what ive heard... Stanford is interested in Mullen, parks, Harvey, and Demaria. im sure there are others too that are being recruited those are just the only ones ive heard from reliable sources. id like them to get everyone I named lol Davis and Gillen-Malveaux are heavily in the mix. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohn043 on Jul 28, 2023 7:28:27 GMT -5
from what ive heard... Stanford is interested in Mullen, parks, Harvey, and Demaria. im sure there are others too that are being recruited those are just the only ones ive heard from reliable sources. id like them to get everyone I named lol Davis and Gillen-Malveaux are heavily in the mix. It strikes me that we need a third MB a lot more than we need a third setter. To me, Harvey is the most important piece in this class. And I think Gillen-Malveaux has to be as well unless we have some other source of MBs. DeMaria feels like a lock. Top student from PV. Hard to believe she isn't coming. You take Mullen if you can get her. My guess is those 4. |
|
|
|
Post by StanfordFan on Jul 28, 2023 8:57:11 GMT -5
Any thoughts on what Stanford’s conference future is with the news about Colorado? I’ve read the other two threads, but curious what Stanford fans think (a) is likely; and (b) is ideal.
|
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Jul 28, 2023 9:03:13 GMT -5
Davis and Gillen-Malveaux are heavily in the mix. It strikes me that we need a third MB a lot more than we need a third setter. To me, Harvey is the most important piece in this class. And I think Gillen-Malveaux has to be as well unless we have some other source of MBs. DeMaria feels like a lock. Top student from PV. Hard to believe she isn't coming. You take Mullen if you can get her. My guess is those 4. I guess it'll also depend on the 2026 class and what ably thinks about them / who he think they'll be able to get. if there's a top MB in 2026 I could see him going with parks over an MB for '25 and vice versa. if he skips a setter this class that basically ensures yu will be the starter in 2025 which is something hell have to weigh the pros and cons of, even if it means having an extra MB on the bench |
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jul 28, 2023 9:22:51 GMT -5
Any thoughts on what Stanford’s conference future is with the news about Colorado? I’ve read the other two threads, but curious what Stanford fans think (a) is likely; and (b) is ideal. Not a Stanford fan, but to me a central question Stanford has to answer is, does Stanford really want to be an integral part of how college athletics is shaping up to be? Because I think the answer to that question is decidedly mixed. I've always had a tremendous admiration for the lack of compromises Stanford athletics makes towards its student athletes in order to field competitive teams. I don't know what the formula would be to maintain the same level of success moving forward. Eventually, Stanford would need to find a way to get into whatever the Big 10 turns into. I don't think anything else would be a good long term fit at this point. If not the Big 10, then some kind of non top tier competition that ends the current college athletics profile for Stanford. But I certainly don't think there's some kind of imminent emergency. If that ultimate decision is made 10 years from now, I think it's fine. Stanford is always going to be Stanford. It doesn't have the universal appeal of a huge football brand, but the appeal it has is extremely unique. There's no other university like it in college sports. Not in terms of a combination of athletics success across the board, funding, and academic prestige. Not to mention it is in a major market in terms of population and talent. |
|
|
|
Post by liberosetter101 on Jul 28, 2023 9:50:00 GMT -5
It strikes me that we need a third MB a lot more than we need a third setter. To me, Harvey is the most important piece in this class. And I think Gillen-Malveaux has to be as well unless we have some other source of MBs. DeMaria feels like a lock. Top student from PV. Hard to believe she isn't coming. You take Mullen if you can get her. My guess is those 4. I guess it'll also depend on the 2026 class and what ably thinks about them / who he think they'll be able to get. if there's a top MB in 2026 I could see him going with parks over an MB for '25 and vice versa. if he skips a setter this class that basically ensures yu will be the starter in 2025 which is something hell have to weigh the pros and cons of, even if it means having an extra MB on the bench We need Parks and Harvey more than anything tbh. We have more than enough pins |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohn043 on Jul 28, 2023 9:54:53 GMT -5
Any thoughts on what Stanford’s conference future is with the news about Colorado? I’ve read the other two threads, but curious what Stanford fans think (a) is likely; and (b) is ideal. I think Stanford will be fine in the end. We are an attractive candidate for a bunch of conferences so at the end of the day it probably works out. We also have a lot of money so the TV money is probably just a bit less important to us. My view of the options: Pac-12 - The Pac-12 could blow up, but as long as UW and UO stick around it will be viable. Pick up SDSU and maybe SMU and off we go. The problem is that UW, UO and Stanford are going to always be looking for a better deal and they are attractive enough to eventually get it. That makes the Pac unstable. And if they had a good TV contract you would think they would have announced it. We will see. ACC - The ACC is fine now due to the GOR agreement to 2036. But their best schools are going to get raided after that. If they were smart, they would bulk up with some of the best P-12 teams to prepare for that. Maybe something like UW, UO, Stanford and cal. This could be a reasonable outcome. B1G - obviously the best destination. The problem is the P-12 schools would decrease the revenue per school for the B1G. That being said, U$C & UCLA would love some combo of Stanford, UW, UO & cal to join. They are reasonable draws. Three of them are strong academic schools. And I think the CA schools would love to be together again. We will see. |
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Jul 28, 2023 10:23:03 GMT -5
Any thoughts on what Stanford’s conference future is with the news about Colorado? I’ve read the other two threads, but curious what Stanford fans think (a) is likely; and (b) is ideal. I think Stanford will be fine in the end. We are an attractive candidate for a bunch of conferences so at the end of the day it probably works out. We also have a lot of money so the TV money is probably just a bit less important to us. My view of the options: ACC - The ACC is fine now due to the GOR agreement to 2036. But their best schools are going to get raided after that. If they were smart, they would bulk up with some of the best P-12 teams to prepare for that. Maybe something like UW, UO, Stanford and cal. This could be a reasonable outcome. I thought the idea of piggybacking the Pac 12 onto the ACC deal - create a scheduling agreement and letting the Pac fill the later hours of the ACC network and other tv commitments - had a lot of merit but it didn't work and I think part of the problem was that ESPN wasn't willing to kick in the money. If they were to now bring 6-8 of them in as a 3rd division of the ACC I believe that would reopen the grant of rights, and A) Disney is cutting spending right now so there is no guarentee they'll kick in the $250-300 million per year to make the Pac 12 equal, and B) There is no guarantee that FSU and Clemson would sign another GOR that ties them to Boston College and some of the less viable teams. They might go to the SEC or something. |
|
