Tennis Forum banner

21 - 32 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,143 Posts
Claire Liu has got UCLA and STAN, you think she's headed pros?
She has a solid game, but I think she might need some bigger results to justify her turning pro. I could see her doing what Nicole Gibbs did and do a few years in college before turning pro. Also, I see her going to Stanford if she gets in. Let's hope she doesn't academically qualify. :grin2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,779 Posts
Today Janice Shin gives her verbal shout out that she will be playing for Stanford.
But it's more like Stanford coaches, most likely Frankie Brennan calling Janice, while at practice to tell her "you are in like flynn".

It sounds all too familiar to when Caroline Lampl, not knowing really if Stanford was going to accept her.
Of course, Stanford has high academic standards, so admissions must play into it somewhat, before they flash the green light.
Not sounding like I would want to contradict myself, but I doubt Cici Bellis needed to wait and wonder if Frankie was going to call her.

Is there higher standards for Asians, as they must qualify admission wise amongst other Asians? In the school district in my neck of the woods, there are predominantly Asians, who drive up the benchmark of being ranked in the top percentile. Realtors suggest to clients about moving closer to neighboring schools and buying homes in those neighborhoods, so their kids can transfer and rise to top of the class, because it is not so competitive. Perhaps I drifted off-topic here.

Back to signing on with Stanford. I can’t help but wonder that there’s a special recruiting requirement at Stanford, like you don’t sign-up and ditch us to turn pro (Zhao, Gibbs, Burdette, Granville). Yes, most recently is the case, so given the last 4 years, beginning with their senior class (Davidson, Doyle), which has been ranked closer to the Top 50 and not Top 10. There seems to be a push towards mediocracy.

As Slickshoes510 pointed out, the problem with Stanford is they play all at the same level and there’s no one, who is really dominant (not in those exact words, my memory sometimes fail me). Perhaps that is Stanford’s recruiting strategy. That works in getting a deep line-up, stronger in the back courts (#4 through #6), but less reliable in the front courts. At last year’s NCAA, both Lampl and Lord went undefeated at #5 and #6, while Hardebeck as solid as they come at #4. There were at least a few 4-3 wins on the way to winning the title.

Then there's the other thing that Stanford coaches do is put the new recruits at the back of the line-up (#4 through #6). Maybe their junior year, they get a taste of playing at #1 or #2, but by that time, their development is only as good as their competition. Hence, Doyle lost her last 3 of 5 matches, playing at #1 & #2, before her unlikely win today. Gibbs or Ahn would lose 2 matches perhaps the entire year. Thoughts?


Meanwhile, teams like Duke, North Carolina, and now Ohio seem to have strong players at the top 3 positions, but until they win a title or 2, it is advantage Stanford with their system.

Final thoughts: The other thing about Stanford, not playing Indoors or the least number of matches for that matter, hence their ranking is more like #8 thru #16, instead of Top 5. It's like Lele has got it all figured out. Let the other schools build up their confidence with their higher rankings (Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina), but falling to the ground from way up high, hurts a lot more, especially come May at NCAA's and losing in the QF's or SF's, which has been the norm and the big disappointment of failing with all those expectations. It sets a pattern of failure, which again is Advantage: Stanford. Am I in lala land or does anybody catch my drift...

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,167 Posts
Just noticed Megan McCray has returned to college tennis, at her original school no less (Okla St), after a 2-year hiatus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,779 Posts
I'm confused about Arconada. I thought she was coming to LSU this spring, but she keeps just playing pro tournaments, even this weekend when they could have used her for the ITA kick-off.

Also, what happened to Kingsley going to LSU?
Not even sure why Kingsley gave a verbal to go to LSU, this isn't football!

Supposedly the #1 recruiting class of Kingsley, Lewis, and Weissmann only had the latter 2 sign-up and both are not on the team this year.

Verbals don't mean a whole lot, until they sign their LOI, making it a 2-way.

There's lot of folks turning pro and maybe they should have stayed in college and get that degree!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
I'm confused about Arconada. I thought she was coming to LSU this spring, but she keeps just playing pro tournaments, even this weekend when they could have used her for the ITA kick-off.
I'm confused about Arconada too. She isn't on LSU's roster yet which is strange because classes have already begun for the spring semester. However, she was listed in LSU's master lineup for ITA kick-off weekend but is off playing in Midland? It makes no sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
I'm confused about Arconada too. She isn't on LSU's roster yet which is strange because classes have already begun for the spring semester. However, she was listed in LSU's master lineup for ITA kick-off weekend but is off playing in Midland? It makes no sense.
Looks like Arconada is at LSU from ZooTennis: "Arconada, who is currently enrolled at LSU and trained there last week, but is taking her classes online, needed over three hours to get past Michelle Larcher de Brito of Portugal in Sunday's first round."

Does anyone know the NCAA rules for being a student-athlete and taking online classes? For example, could Arconada just take her classes online, play a normal tour schedule, and just show up for big matches?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,843 Posts
Looks like Arconada is at LSU from ZooTennis: "Arconada, who is currently enrolled at LSU and trained there last week, but is taking her classes online, needed over three hours to get past Michelle Larcher de Brito of Portugal in Sunday's first round."

Does anyone know the NCAA rules for being a student-athlete and taking online classes? For example, could Arconada just take her classes online, play a normal tour schedule, and just show up for big matches?
This is bogus to me. Either come to college and play on the team or don't. I understand taking the fall off to play pro tournaments, but if you're on this team, you should be playing in the dual matches. With Arconada in the line-up, LSU would have likely beaten Washington and would have had a real shot against Duke in the second round, to qualify for ITA Indoors, where they would have been able to get at least three matches against great teams. Instead, they lose in the first round (as did she, in singles and doubles, for that matter).

I think it's fantastic that so many college coaches are recognizing that players want to weigh their options and are giving them the flexibility to play in pro tournaments, often at the expense of potential strong results for the program, and every player and coach has to find that balance, but where does it stop? For me, taking online classes and continuing to play pro tournaments into the dual season is a step too far. What's the point of even being in college? It reminds me of when Zhao came back for that one last quarter at Stanford, rejoining the team in March. I don't think it's fair for anyone involved, including opposing teams, some of whom never get the chance to play against this team at full strength and then are facing a totally different opponent at NCAAs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
This is bogus to me. Either come to college and play on the team or don't. I understand taking the fall off to play pro tournaments, but if you're on this team, you should be playing in the dual matches. With Arconada in the line-up, LSU would have likely beaten Washington and would have had a real shot against Duke in the second round, to qualify for ITA Indoors, where they would have been able to get at least three matches against great teams. Instead, they lose in the first round (as did she, in singles and doubles, for that matter).

I think it's fantastic that so many college coaches are recognizing that players want to weigh their options and are giving them the flexibility to play in pro tournaments, often at the expense of potential strong results for the program, and every player and coach has to find that balance, but where does it stop? For me, taking online classes and continuing to play pro tournaments into the dual season is a step too far. What's the point of even being in college? It reminds me of when Zhao came back for that one last quarter at Stanford, rejoining the team in March. I don't think it's fair for anyone involved, including opposing teams, some of whom never get the chance to play against this team at full strength and then are facing a totally different opponent at NCAAs.
I totally agree with everything you said. Well put! :worship: I'm surprised the NCAA has such lenient rules allowing a player to take online classes exclusively and playing matches when they want, essentially acting like a pinch hitter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,779 Posts
and I was wondering why everyone was going to LSU, recruited #1 class out of nowhere...lol

I think Lele opened the doors for Gibbs, then Zhao followed.

Although, I thought Zhao was a non-factor, when she got backed, it did allow Stanford players to add a little depth and experience of playing one slot higher.
 
21 - 32 of 32 Posts
Top