Stanford - We don't have Room For You | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Stanford - We don't have Room For You

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fishy, besides Ruef, there are three other players that will lose their scholarships because of the # of incoming recruits. That's the problem. I know Scholarships are awarded on a year by year basis but I'm sure the other players were led to believe that Stanford would honor the scholarship for 4 years or as long as they are eligible.
 
That's a bus that almost every young girl should be so lucky to get hit by.

She got a four year degree paid for on Stanford's dime. Poor girl!

Sure. That is so.

It is also accurate, IMO, that she was "defunded" becuse someone esle was/is coinsideded more valuable...a lesson all future recruits should take to the bank. Many programs fund for 5 years. Check out UCONN WBB for validation.
 
I love manufactured outrage. This is an agreement between Stanford and one of their players and nobody knows all the details other than those directly involved.
 
It is my understanding that this would be Reuf's 5th year. During one of her first four years she got injured and they redshirted her. So now she is finishing a graduate degree and wants to use her 4th year of eligibility. I don't see a problem with Stanford paying for four years and making her pay her own way for a fifth.
 
It is my understanding that this would be Reuf's 5th year. During one of her first four years she got injured and they redshirted her. So now she is finishing a graduate degree and wants to use her 4th year of eligibility. I don't see a problem with Stanford paying for four years and making her pay her own way for a fifth.

Apparently Stanford doesn't either.
 
I would say that the issue is less about Ruef and more about the numbers 19 and 15.

Right, it's the overrecruiting. Who's the coach there? Nikki Sabin?
 
So if this was Texas or Texas Tech that was doing this, you would be okay with it. I suspect you would defend Kim if she did this as well. :) BTW, if this was Geno, I'd be upset that he was doing it.

I love manufactured outrage. This is an agreement between Stanford and one of their players and nobody knows all the details other than those directly involved.
 
There's always the option of getting a job with an engineering degree from Stanford and paying for her masters degree courses on her own dime. It's not as if she hasn't been equipped with the tools to make a nice living.
 
I'm glad to see that Mikaela has a positive attitude. What is Stanford going to do with nineteen players, start a football team.
 
So if this was Texas or Texas Tech that was doing this, you would be okay with it. I suspect you would defend Kim if she did this as well. :) BTW, if this was Geno, I'd be upset that he was doing it.

I would be ok with this no matter which university it was.
 
There's always the option of getting a job with an engineering degree from Stanford and paying for her masters degree courses on her own dime. It's not as if she hasn't been equipped with the tools to make a nice living.

You are excellent at missing the point. Reread this thread.
 
So its okay for coaches to make promises to recruits, we want give you a scholarship for as long as you're eligible as long as you keep in good academic standings and follow all rules and then not honor that commitment. BTW, I'm not naive and realize that coaches do encourage players to leave because they won't get playing time or other reasons, but usually its not because the school doesn't have enough scholarships for the player. There will be three other Stanford players that will lose their scholarships.

I would be ok with this no matter which university it was.
 
BTW, if this was Geno, I'd be upset that he was doing it.

I'm pretty sure that would never be an issue. I've heard him say that 15 is too many.
 
The only D1 sports where they can't be split are football (1-A only), basketball, women's volleyball, women's tennis, and women's gymnastics.
That's why I thought they could be split I didn't there were specific sports where they could not be split.
 
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.
 
It's a mystery to me why VanDerveer has to have a roster of 19 to find 7 or 8 who can play. I thought she was a better judge of talent than that.
 
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.


Schools routinely submit the paperwork to get a player a medical hardship waiver - often long before the player knows if she wants to play a 5th year and long before the school knows if they want to give the player a scholarship.
 
So its okay for coaches to make promises to recruits, we want give you a scholarship for as long as you're eligible as long as you keep in good academic standings and follow all rules and then not honor that commitment. BTW, I'm not naive and realize that coaches do encourage players to leave because they won't get playing time or other reasons, but usually its not because the school doesn't have enough scholarships for the player. There will be three other Stanford players that will lose their scholarships.

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

Nowhere at Stanford, we now know. As I said before, check UCONN for 5 year support, a Heather in Their Cap.
 
We need cardfan to explain all of this for us peons :rolleyes:

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.
 
Nowhere at Stanford, we now know. As I said before, check UCONN for 5 year support, a Heather in Their Cap.

That wasn't my question. UCONN may do that but this is not a known agreement with any university.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
212
Guests online
2,106
Total visitors
2,318

Forum statistics

Threads
164,072
Messages
4,381,096
Members
10,177
Latest member
silver fox


.
..
Top Bottom