Hauck to be announced as new Stanford coach?

Cledus · Post by **Cledus** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:18 pm

CTOWM wrote:I guess we'll finally see how good Bobby can indeed recruit now that he's a place where no one really cares to play. We'll also find out whether his teams can win at a place where no one really cares about football. Welcome to the Weber State of the Pac-10.

So who exactly gave a rip about Cal football before Tedford arrived? Californians? Hardly.

I remember some damn good Stanford teams and players in the early and mid-90's. Tommy Vardell?

Before some joes named Palmer and Leinert started wrecking chit, there was some guy named Steve Stenstrom.

If you think people in the bay area don't care about football, or Stanford football, then you are ignorant. No smack intended.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 10:53 pm

I hate that when I'm mis-quoted.

quote from above

Bleedinbluengold

grizzh8r · Post by **grizzh8r** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:18 pm

Cledus wrote:So who exactly gave a rip about Cal football before Tedford arrived? Californians? Hardly.

I remember some damn good Stanford teams and players in the early and mid-90's. Tommy Vardell?

Before some joes named Palmer and Leinert started wrecking chit, there was some guy named Steve Stenstrom.

If you think people in the bay area don't care about football, or Stanford football, then you are ignorant. No smack intended.

No kidding - anyone heard of John Lynch, or John Elway? I know, I'm a Broncos fan and therefore I am biased, but you can't deny both of these players are HOF'ers. Hell, Elway already is, and if Lynch doesn't make it there, I'll eat my hat!

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:53 am

The Bay Area cares so much about Stanford football that they pack the stadium to the tune of almost 50% of full capacity. These are the ones that suffer the team just to watch the band.

You are right, I shouldn't have said that "nobody" cares. Some of the people who actually go to Stanford University and don't play football, care. Plus, you guys.

Meanwhile, in Corvallis and Pullman, their stadiums are running at 95% capacity and more.

GRZZ · Post by **GRZZ** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:08 am

GOKATS wrote:
GRZZ wrote:Hauck didn't get it, Harbaugh did. Probably because of the name more than anything, I don't really think either of them are the right fit for Stanford, but time will tell. Coaching at San Diego State and Stanford will be two different worlds.
Not that it matters now, but there's a big difference in San Diego St. and the U of San Diego (where Harbaugh coached).

whitetrashgriz · Post by **whitetrashgriz** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:22 am

Bleedinbluengold wrote:The Bay Area cares so much about Stanford football that they pack the stadium to the tune of almost 50% of full capacity. These are the ones that suffer the team just to watch the band.

You are right, I shouldn't have said that "nobody" cares. Some of the people who actually go to Stanford University and don't play football, care. Plus, you guys.

Meanwhile, in Corvallis and Pullman, their stadiums are running at 95% capacity and more.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:43 am

Bleedinbluengold wrote:The Bay Area cares so much about Stanford football that they pack the stadium to the tune of almost 50% of full capacity. These are the ones that suffer the team just to watch the band.

You are right, I shouldn't have said that "nobody" cares. Some of the people who actually go to Stanford University and don't play football, care. Plus, you guys.

Meanwhile, in Corvallis and Pullman, their stadiums are running at 95% capacity and more.

Interesting use of percentages ... so ... you're pointing out that Stanford's stadium has roughly double the capactity of either OSU or WSU?

If Stanford starting winning games, the attendance would spike up. The Bay Area is a place where people do have lots of options of things to do with their time, and Stanford grads make up maybe .05% of the population, so if the team sucks, not many people are going to show up for games (as a % of stadium capacity).

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:55 pm

I'm pointing out that Stanford is averaging about 41,000/home game in a stadium that used to seat 85,500. Football was such a big deal that the Board of Trustees approved spending $90MM to reduce the seating capacity to 50,000. I don't know if they got the renovation done before this season, as planned, or not. This is not a sign that Stanford has a vibrant Division I football program.

OSU's stadium holds about 43,000 and WSU's holds about 30,000. Both stadiums basically sell out every home game. These programs are not exactly the elite of the Pac-10, and yet, they have incredibly loyal fans and a huge committment by the respective universities, regardless of win/loss records. The Seattle area population is about 2.5 million, and the Huskies average 17,000 more than Stanford at their home games and the Huskies football program can not get much worse.

My point was not to denigrate Stanford football, but that's probably how it sounded.

In a geographical area of 7 million people, Stanford football is barely on the sports radar let alone anywhere else. I did not even point out that the stringent academic requirements at Stanford generally work against the recruitment process because, let's face it, academics is king at Stanford, not sports, let alone football in particular. And, seriously, the Stanford band does more toward promoting Stanford University than the football program does...that's fine...it's just the way it is.

That was my point in saying what I said. Bobby, and now Harbaugh, will have to overcome two challenges: 1) Academic standards limit your recruiting ability, and 2) You have a hard time selling Stanford football, because Stanford football is WAYYYYY down on the list for the other 6.5 million people in the Bay Area.

Saying, "no one cares to play there, and no one cares at all about Stanford football" was too harsh, perhaps. But, you have to admit, when I say, "Stanford", you don't first think, "Football." Heck, you might not even think, "Football" until after thinking of 5 or 6 other things first.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:06 pm

The stadium renovation is complete (although I haven't seen it yet), and it was much needed. The old stadium was a piece of crap, and was comparable to the current Oakland A's stadium -- the best seat in the house was still a long ways from the field. The new stadium in much more intimate and, at 50,000, they are hoping for sell-outs. Last season was a bad one for them to roll out a new facility.

http://stanfordstadium.com/

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:12 pm

Hey, cross country is king at Stanford

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:14 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:The stadium renovation is complete (although I haven't seen it yet), and it was much needed. The old stadium was a piece of crap, and was comparable to the current Oakland A's stadium -- the best seat in the house was still a long ways from the field. The new stadium in much more intimate and, at 50,000, they are hoping for sell-outs. Last season was a bad one for them to roll out a new facility.

http://stanfordstadium.com/

I don't think this season will be any better.

Did Stanford set some sort of record as the first team not to win a game in a new stadium?