Stanford - We don't have Room For You

[easttexastrash]

Omg, where do I begin? There is so much misinformation and over reaction in this thread.....

1) Y'all know student athletes have 5 years to play 4, and each year the scholarship is renewed, right? NCAA does not guarantee 4 years, let alone 5. This is basic 101 stuff.

2) Stanford athletes and some coaches are endowed, which is separate endowment money from the school (that they cannot touch). Their athletic dept. has had to make major cuts over the last few years. Stanford coaches, including Tara earn A LOT less than other top coaches, so where would the for Ruef come from??? One story here. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=4314195.

3) So what if Tara has 19 players? Stanford has seen their fair of injuries over the years, so why not have more? Four players choose to walk on to play for her and get a degree at Stanford. Having walk-ons is very common, but only 15 travel. Tara also believes in developing her players and only uses 2 male practice players, so we use the players.

4) Ruef got her undergraduate engineering degree at the 2nd ranked engineering school in the country for free, a bill that would be about $190k.Ruef is a brilliant student, she had a perfect score on her SAT.

5) Ruef JUST got accepted to Stanford Master's engineering program, so the comments about Tara over recruiting is another example of lack of understanding how scholarships and recruiting, especially recruiting at Stanford work. They must get admitted (with all others students who apply) before they can be offered a scholie. So, it is a timely process.

6) Ruef WANTS to come back and play, while getting a master's degree which are all positives. Paying $28k is a deal for a masters at Stanford. She KNEW all of this. None of it is a shock.

Way too much fact and logic. I would rather we stick to emotions and holier-than-thou statements.

 

[True Colors]

There is a legitimate chance that this situation at Stanford could be a friendly arrangement between the player and the coaching staff.

There have been other instances in the past at other schools where a senior has voluntarily offered to pay their own way for a year so that an additional freshman will have an opportunity to get in school.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that this was not a friendly agreement on the part of Ruef?

TC

 

[Sakibomb25]

Here's the thing. If Mikaela Ruef didn't want to play a fifth year, she would finish her time with a Stanford undergraduate degree. It's not like Stanford is making her pay to finish out her undergraduate degree - she'll already have it at the end of this year.

It's a different situation with UNC because the players, from what I can recall, are no where near obtaining an undergraduate degree from UNC. So if Mikaela was a year short of finishing her degree at Stanford AND Vanderveer still decided to kick her out to make room for other players, then yes, I would agree it is not the right thing to do.

But as a fifth-year student already with her undergraduate degree, her only options to remain with the team is to go the masters route. The scholarship agreement is mainly for the undergraduate degree, not a masters as well. I also think at the time that Vanderveer was recruiting next year's incoming class, it wasn't clear as to whether Mikaela had gotten into any of the masters programs at Stanford. In order for a fifth-year Stanford player to return who already has an undergraduate degree, he or she must apply and be accepted into the graduate programs. If she didn't get into the graduate program, it would be a moot point. I believe she recently found out that she was accepted. Unfortunately, the allotted scholarships were already used up months ago. What was Vanderveer going to do - hedge her bets that Ruef was to be accepted? There are plenty of fifth-year students who don't come back because they aren't accepted into Stanford masters programs.

Again, the situations are very different from UNC. At the end of this year, Ruef will have had her undergraduate degree from Stanford. The others at UNC who were told there was no more room do not. Big different.

 

[Sakibomb25]

The surprising thing to me is that this kid is a starter, not some end-of-the-bench warmer. And the school had to have asked her to redshirt as it is the school that must apply for it with the applicable conference authorities. So now, heading into her fifth year to be told, 'Sorry, our 15 scholarships are spoken for next season' is beyond the pale.

She was not asked to redshirt. She was injured I believe her sophomore year and had to redshirt. She had no choice in the matter because of her injuries.

 

[easttexastrash]

There is a legitimate chance that this situation at Stanford could be a friendly arrangement between the player and the coaching staff.

There have been other instances in the past at other schools where a senior has voluntarily offered to pay their own way for a year so that an additional freshman will have an opportunity to get in school.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that this was not a friendly agreement on the part of Ruef?

TC

Some people would rather assume the worst and vilify someone without knowing the details. Some of them have event posted those sentiments in this thread.

 

[Waquoit]

3) So what if Tara has 19 players?

It's embarrassing.

 

[UcMiami]

I really don't have a problem with a player being told that there is no scholarship for her after the first 4 years. While the LOI is specifically a 1 year deal, the expectation is that as long as the player fulfills their side, it will be renewed through their undergraduate degree. But ... after 4 yrs. I think all bets are off. I would have no problem if Geno had 15 scholarship players this year if he had gone to either CD or Heather and said, sorry, I don't have a scholarship available for you - you are welcome to enroll in grad school here and be a walk-on. Athletic scholarships to me really mean 'undergraduate scholarships' - it is nice to be able to give a player a free year of grad school, but not 'required' by the commitment made to that 18 yr. old and her family.
That being said - I do have a problem with 19 scholarship commitments for 15 spots. The other unnamed three players are being treated really poorly!

 

[Icebear]

This thread is about Ruef not being provided a scholly during her graduate studies. Maybe you should re-read the thread.

It is not about Ruef. It is about her and the totality of 19 for 15. Both things.

 

[True Colors]

A few examples to support my last post.....

washington state - Taylor Rochestie
oklahoma state - Nick sidorakis
arizona state - dustin pedroia
washington - jake locker

Those guys were all on scholarship and they all gave up the scholarships to pay their own way.
And there are others out there who did the same thing.

Just because a scholarship athlete goes off scholarship for a year does not necessarily mean that they were bullied into doing so.

TC

 

[easttexastrash]

Cardfan has clarified that four will be walk-ons, right?

 

[cardfan]

The surprising thing to me is that this kid is a starter, not some end-of-the-bench warmer. And the school had to have asked her to redshirt as it is the school that must apply for it with the applicable conference authorities. So now, heading into her fifth year to be told, 'Sorry, our 15 scholarships are spoken for next season' is beyond the pale.

See my other post. If she wasn't excepted to Stanford graduate school (just now), she may not have stayed. It's unrealistic for Stanford to plan that far ahead - to not offer a scholie to an incoming frosh in the previous fall while waiting for Ruef to be healthy to play, do well and get into Stanford grad school in the spring. She just started this year, and not all games. We've had injuries to Kokenis and Beebe, so Ruef may not have played as much

Notably, on the men's side, they held scholies for Lopez twins even though there was a good chance they were going to leave early for pros. Since they held them, it didn't allow room for Okafor, who of course went to UConn.

.

 

[cardfan]

It's embarrassing.

most schools have 19 or 20, but they include 5 male practice players.

 

[Icebear]

Cardfan has clarified that four will be walk-ons, right?

You can not be a walk on and receive any type of scholarship other than very limited speciailized scholarships. If you get money for need while playing on a team it is designated as a scholarship and counts towards the 15.

 

[cardfan]

Cardfan has clarified that four will be walk-ons, right?

right.

 

[Icebear]

most schools have 19 or 20, but they include 5 male practice players.

Male practice players are irrelevant and are not walk-ons. They are not even allowed any type of assistance to follow the team to away games.

 

[cardfan]

Male practice players are irrelevant and are not walk-ons.

completely relevant. Many schools use 5 male practice players that add to the number of players on the court and used at practice.

 

[Wbbfan1]

My post didn't say its written anywhere. However, you can bet all coaches make that promise otherwise why would a recruit go to a school if the coach said, I'll only give you a scholarship on a yearly basis and I might pull it, if I can sign a better recruit.

Where does it state in an LOI that it is agreed upon that a player will be provided a scholarship as long as they have eligibility left? I'd like to know where that is written since you are presenting that as a fact.

 

[True Colors]

By the way, who really cares if stanford has 5, or 10, or even 50 extra walkon players? I dont.

If that many girls are willing to pay their own money to be a walkon at stanford then so be it. It doesnt hurt Uconn or anybody else.

TC

 

[Sakibomb25]

My post didn't say its written anywhere. However, you can bet all coaches make that promise otherwise why would a recruit go to a school if the coach said, I'll only give you a scholarship on a yearly basis and I might pull it, if I can sign a better recruit.

Wait a minute. Let's example what example was promised during the recruiting trip:
1) Four-year basketball scholarship from Stanford? Check
2) A degree from Stanford? Check

So where exactly did Vanderveer break her promise?

 

[stamfordhusky]

completely relevant. Many schools use 5 male practice players that add to the number of players on the court and used at practice.

That's irrelevant to the number of women players on a team. Schools use practice players to provide a better and more physical level of competition. Having 15 players is more than enough, in terms of numbers, for practices. Whether or not Stanford chooses to use male practice players is a different issue.

 

[Icebear]

completely relevant. Many schools use 5 male practice players that add to the number of players on the court and used at practice.

They are irrelevant because they are not potential players for the team to use on the court nor can they in any manner qualify against scholarships.

 

[pinotbear]

completely relevant. Many schools use 5 male practice players that add to the number of players on the court and used at practice.

oh, please: you know better. Male practice players cannot play in WCBB games. They are not recruited. They receive no scholarships. Next thing you know, you'll be saying that cheerleaders count towards football team numbers.

 

[Sakibomb25]

That being said - I do have a problem with 19 scholarship commitments for 15 spots. The other unnamed three players are being treated really poorly!

How are those four players being treated unfairly? Vanderveer did not recruit them as scholarship players. She recruited them as walk-ons.

For a good, but not great basketball player, it is still an advantage to be considered a walk-on for the basketball team because it helps you get into Stanford since there isn't so much competition (you are applying super early, as opposed to when the rest of the United States is applying). They knew they weren't going on scholarship. So tell me again how they are being treated poorly?

 

[Icebear]

By the way, who really cares if stanford has 5, or 10, or even 50 extra walkon players? I dont.

If that many girls are willing to pay their own money to be a walkon at stanford then so be it. It doesnt hurt Uconn or anybody else.

TC

If they are true walk-ons and clear of all scholarship issues then there are no problems whatsoever. If they are manipulations that is not fair. I fully expect Stanford is in full compliance. They would be foolish to do otherwise.

 

[Icebear]

33-20 UConn 1:51