|
Post by WahineFan44 on Oct 6, 2023 19:47:23 GMT -5
Semi-concerned that Stanford's loss to Florida by end of season will be considered a 'bad loss'... but the committee does take into consideration injuries so... hopefully? Florida barring a collapse of epic proportions, wont be a bad loss.
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Oct 6, 2023 19:47:35 GMT -5
Semi-concerned that Stanford's loss to Florida by end of season will be considered a 'bad loss'... but the committee does take into consideration injuries so... hopefully? Our injuries are much more important True.
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Oct 6, 2023 19:50:05 GMT -5
Semi-concerned that Stanford's loss to Florida by end of season will be considered a 'bad loss'... but the committee does take into consideration injuries so... hopefully? Florida barring a collapse of epic proportions, wont be a bad loss. Losing to Auburn in 3 doesn't look good.
|
|
|
Post by blackiechan1999 on Oct 6, 2023 19:50:34 GMT -5
Florida barring a collapse of epic proportions, wont be a bad loss. Losing to Auburn in 3 doesn't look good. Ooof
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Oct 6, 2023 19:51:02 GMT -5
Florida barring a collapse of epic proportions, wont be a bad loss. Losing to Auburn in 3 doesn't look good. I dont know futures that well, but I dont think the commitee considers anything 50 or below a "bad" loss. And I dont see anyway florida goes below 50
|
|
|
Post by crando on Oct 6, 2023 19:55:42 GMT -5
Some good stuff on the last few pages. In general with the middles, Stanford is probably talking with a lot of recruits by freshman year, and certainly by the end of sophomore year. So they probably are pretty tied into recruits at least 3 years out. L. Smith played a touch as a frosh, and I don't feel like they realized she was done until the end of her frosh year (??) so it's conceivable that they might have been able to dump Harvey (super highly rated, and maybe a package deal for a middle), Blyashov (ranked as the no 1 recruit?), or Kurt (who's played at a higher level of competitive than even the other two) to course-correct and give another scholarship for another middle, but it might not have been possible (even if they wanted to).
I believe that Stanford undergrad tends to let transfers in only as people transfer out. Almost no one transfers out of Stanford, so I feel like each year the school only lets a couple dozen transfers in. With, of course, very very high standards. And someone else suggested that they probably can't come in any older than a sophomore.
And, as noted, Stanford athletics, and individual coaches, have developed great relationships with the undergrad admissions office over the decades. Great athletes with great grades still get turned down, but there's generally an understanding of who could probably get in, and who couldn't. That one office admits all undergrads; conversely, there are seven graduate-level schools (Business, Law, Med, Eng, H&S, Education, Sustainability/Earth Science), with seven different admissions offices, and seven different sets of personalities.
I'd assume that, along with hiring Troy Taylor as the football coach, the athletic department is trying to establish some connections with these grad-school admissions offices, and possibly trying to see if undergrad admissions might make some exceptions for juniors and seniors with outstanding academic records. But I think that trying to course-correct and find a middle to replace L Smith any time prior to next year might have been faster than the oil tanker that is Stanford's recruiting process could have turned around.
Bottom line -- get well soon, Sami!!!
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Oct 7, 2023 13:33:04 GMT -5
Losing to Auburn in 3 doesn't look good. I dont know futures that well, but I dont think the commitee considers anything 50 or below a "bad" loss. And I dont see anyway florida goes below 50 The metric which aligns nearest with the Selection Committee throughout the season...combining both future projections and current SOS/RPI...is figstats.net (which was the former RealTimeRPI.com). Right now, Stanford's is third (behind WIS and NEB). Florida is 7th as of 12:02 PM PDT today. Don't sweat it. The figstats rating includes bonuses and penalties that the NCAA Committee incorporates in November.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohn043 on Oct 7, 2023 13:53:47 GMT -5
I dont know futures that well, but I dont think the commitee considers anything 50 or below a "bad" loss. And I dont see anyway florida goes below 50 The metric which aligns nearest with the Selection Committee throughout the season...combining both future projections and current SOS/RPI...is figstats.net (which was the former RealTimeRPI.com). Right now, Stanford's is third (behind WIS and NEB). Florida is 6th as of 11:17AM PDT today. Don't sweat it. The figstats rating includes bonuses and penalties that the NCAA Committee incorporates in November. We are currently 3rd in RPI Futures and that assumes we lose 3 more matches. We played the toughest non-conference. We play in the top rated conference. I think if we win the P12 we should be a lock to host. I realize that isn't exactly the way it is determined but that is the likely result. BTW, the committee will know how strong FL started the season. They will also know we didn't have Baird. It isn't a problem.
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Oct 7, 2023 13:58:20 GMT -5
The metric which aligns nearest with the Selection Committee throughout the season...combining both future projections and current SOS/RPI...is figstats.net (which was the former RealTimeRPI.com). Right now, Stanford's is third (behind WIS and NEB). Florida is 6th as of 11:17AM PDT today. Don't sweat it. The figstats rating includes bonuses and penalties that the NCAA Committee incorporates in November. We are currently 3rd in RPI Futures and that assumes we lose 3 more matches. We played the toughest non-conference. We play in the top rated conference. I think if we win the P12 we should be a lock to host. I realize that isn't exactly the way it is determined but that is the likely result. BTW, the committee will know how strong FL started the season. They will also know we didn't have Baird. It isn't a problem. Agree. As I stated to WF44: "Don't sweat it".
|
|
|
Post by saywho on Oct 7, 2023 14:34:50 GMT -5
Florida barring a collapse of epic proportions, wont be a bad loss. Losing to Auburn in 3 doesn't look good. Auburn is a top 25 team. I don’t think that is so horrible. I think Minnesota losing to Maryland is more worrisome.
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Oct 7, 2023 15:02:52 GMT -5
Losing to Auburn in 3 doesn't look good. Auburn is a top 25 team. I don’t think that is so horrible. I think Minnesota losing to Maryland is more worrisome. But we beat Minnesota. Florida swept us and lost to a team 15 places below them.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Oct 7, 2023 15:55:03 GMT -5
Some good stuff on the last few pages. In general with the middles, Stanford is probably talking with a lot of recruits by freshman year, and certainly by the end of sophomore year. So they probably are pretty tied into recruits at least 3 years out. L. Smith played a touch as a frosh, and I don't feel like they realized she was done until the end of her frosh year (??) so it's conceivable that they might have been able to dump Harvey (super highly rated, and maybe a package deal for a middle), Blyashov (ranked as the no 1 recruit?), or Kurt (who's played at a higher level of competitive than even the other two) to course-correct and give another scholarship for another middle, but it might not have been possible (even if they wanted to). I believe that Stanford undergrad tends to let transfers in only as people transfer out. Almost no one transfers out of Stanford, so I feel like each year the school only lets a couple dozen transfers in. With, of course, very very high standards. And someone else suggested that they probably can't come in any older than a sophomore. And, as noted, Stanford athletics, and individual coaches, have developed great relationships with the undergrad admissions office over the decades. Great athletes with great grades still get turned down, but there's generally an understanding of who could probably get in, and who couldn't. That one office admits all undergrads; conversely, there are seven graduate-level schools (Business, Law, Med, Eng, H&S, Education, Sustainability/Earth Science), with seven different admissions offices, and seven different sets of personalities. I'd assume that, along with hiring Troy Taylor as the football coach, the athletic department is trying to establish some connections with these grad-school admissions offices, and possibly trying to see if undergrad admissions might make some exceptions for juniors and seniors with outstanding academic records. But I think that trying to course-correct and find a middle to replace L Smith any time prior to next year might have been faster than the oil tanker that is Stanford's recruiting process could have turned around. Bottom line -- get well soon, Sami!!! I don't think L Smith played at all her frosh year. She came in injured and wasn't able to play. I think she played one set her sophomore year and not at all in her other years.
I agree that it's the whole Stanford AD that seems reluctant to admit grad students. I don't think football has had more than a few and many schools add grad students to their FB team every year. That's a good point. But why? AFAIK every university has similar arrangements for admitting grad students. Unlike undergrads, which are admitted by the university's admissions office (w whom every team will have a working relationship), grad students are admitted by the relevant school (e.g., Business) or the department. I doubt that, e.g., Wisconsin's grad school programs are going to give extra points to someone that Shef wants to play vb. OTOH, I'm sure that the WI coaches have a relationship with undergrad admissions and will have a good idea about their undergrad recruits.
It probably doesn't matter much for vb going forward bc there probably will be few grad transfers once those who got an extra COVID year exhaust their eligibility. But it could affect football and that will affect how much money there is for vb. Does anyone know what changes Stanford is considering/has implemented in that regard? I hope that the PAC-12 implosion leads to changes that make it easier for Stanford to get more transfers.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Oct 7, 2023 15:57:24 GMT -5
Auburn is a top 25 team. I don’t think that is so horrible. I think Minnesota losing to Maryland is more worrisome. But we beat Minnesota. Florida swept us and lost to a team 15 places below them. But as WahineFan said, only teams below 50 in RPI are considered bad losses. OTOH, they consider top 10 wins.
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Oct 7, 2023 16:20:31 GMT -5
But we beat Minnesota. Florida swept us and lost to a team 15 places below them. But as WahineFan said, only teams below 50 in RPI are considered bad losses. OTOH, they consider top 10 wins. Yeah, the Selection Committee will go over the entire body of work for UF. Also, there IS some recency bias, in my experience following RealTimeRPI.com/figstats.net in recent seasons. Not a whole lot, but..
|
|
|
Post by saywho on Oct 7, 2023 16:22:26 GMT -5
Auburn is a top 25 team. I don’t think that is so horrible. I think Minnesota losing to Maryland is more worrisome. But we beat Minnesota. Florida swept us and lost to a team 15 places below them. True, but I don’t think Florida will fall out of the top 50. Minnesota is and has been going that direction. So, in my opinion, we are more likely to lose Minnesota as being a good win (top 50) vs having a bad loss from Florida (they’d need to fall out of the top 50). But even then, the selection committee knows why Florida is falling — an injury. That is taken into consideration.
|
|