Stanford softball

Not sure there's anything new here, or any way to determine where the truth lies, but the whole story on one page is worth a read.

Once-proud Stanford softball program brought to its knees - San Jose Mercury News

I assume that since Stanford is a private school that the internal investigation is not subject to open records request.

I certainly can't judge the former coach and whether the decision was justified. But I am finding no sympathy for the current group of malcontents. You either stay at Stanford and do everything you can to make the program better, or you leave. If the program is now a laughing stock, they are partly to blame, IMHO.

I remember everyone was saying "why in the world would anyone leave Stanford for Oklahoma?" when Stevens left. I guess she may have seen the writing on the wall and took off before it got out of hand. Maybe was a little smarter than she was given credit for.

my understanding was that stevens was unhappy to hear that stanford was bringing in more pitchers. she expected to be the lead; just really wanted to play. you can look at what happened at oklahoma once paige parker came on board. but at least stevens didn't get caught in the mess at stanford.

I ran across this article, interesting take on both the current professor-student dynamic and the larger cultural issues driving it. I think the author nails what I see as one of the biggest issues plaguing softball and society in general and a dynamic that I strongly feel leads to situations like the Stanford softball implosion.

I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me - Vox

There's a new book coming out on Tuesday called "How to Raise an Adult" How to Raise an Adult: Break Free of the Overparenting Trap and Prepare Your Kid for Success: Julie Lythcott-Haims: 9781627791779: Amazon.com: Books

The interesting bit is that the book is written by the former freshman dean of students at Stanford. She contends that there has been a shift in the quality of the freshman class at Stanford in recent years; a shift that she blames on a lack of resiliency due to over-parenting. While I do agree with her on some points, I also wonder what role Stanford, and other top-25 schools, have played in this trend? Stanford demands perfection in GPA and test scores, and then wants something special on top of all of that. The happy, well-rounded kid who gets good grades and rides his/her bike to the local ball field for practice would never, ever get into Stanford. Anyway it's an interesting, thought provoking discussion.

Indiana and JJ, thank you both for those pieces that now have to go on my reading list. both issues raise questions that are absolutely intrical for a student athlete to be not only successful but more importantly happy with their collegiate experience.

So many times kids, parents, and coaches get caught up in the fervor of the recruiting process that they forget to honestly assess whether a school is the right fit for their child. it becomes this great big game of musical chairs and no one wants to be left standing - so the focus is get a school rather than get the right school.

The unfair part is that often times, especially with pitchers, you're asking a kid (13-15) to start making choices that a 20 yr old might have trouble navigating.


Anyway, very thought-provoking I hope
good stuff.
L

Out in Left Field said:

Look, the situation was really about sexual harassment of players by a trainer. It was found to have happened. The coach had to go because as the leader he was not watching close enough. That is where the focus should be; that the situation was corrected, and those that did not shake the hands of the opposing coach are gone. It has nothing to do with Stanford, society, politics in society, or one or more classes of players or students as a whole.

Now can we get back to softball.

Click to expand...

Wrong again OLIF! Once again your assumptions are divorced from reality and the truth. He was not a "trainer".

riseball said:

Wrong again OLIF! Once again your assumptions are divorced from reality and the truth. He was not a "trainer".

Click to expand...

The article describes Brandon Marcello as a "trainer".

Out in Left Field said:

Look, the situation was really about sexual harassment of players by a trainer. It was found to have happened. The coach had to go because as the leader he was not watching close enough. That is where the focus should be; that the situation was corrected, and those that did not shake the hands of the opposing coach are gone. It has nothing to do with Stanford, society, politics in society, or one or more classes of players or students as a whole.

Now can we get back to softball.

Click to expand...

It was the accusations of a few and their parents led to his "resignation". Which later came out that the school decided to make a change. As many, if not more, supported Rittman. None of the 9 accusers have spoken on the record. Then 3 players "heard" coach White had something to do with the problems with Rittman. I find that funny because White 's dd Leah was a Rittman supporter. But regardless, you don't throw the baby out with the bath water. In 18 years of coaching if he was the kind of coach that loomed the other way you would think it would have came out earlier. This is not a Paterno case. No scared little boys but young ladies that confide in one another, tell each other their problems and secrets. If Marcello was proven to make a "sexually hostile environment" then boot him. But make damn sure when you make those types of accusations that they are true not "I heard that she said that he did".