Shaw fingerprints---List the positives

Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives (/thread-14718.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - Mick - 10-30-2017

(10-30-2017, 10:27 AM)teejers1 link Wrote:I agree with Mick's list of positives for Shaw.Â And that multi-faceted list outweighs his one negative, regardless of how glaring that negative can appear on game-day.Â

I disagree with Mick on NFL takes.Â The 'Niners will be fine once they get a QB next season.

I don't think they're going to get Cousins Teejers.Â And that's the level of QB talent they need...

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - teejers1 - 10-30-2017

I like Jimmy G for the remainder of this season.Â If you like what you see, then use early picks for other positions of need.Â If he is just okay or pretty good; then draft a stud QB prospect with top pick.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - lex24 - 10-30-2017

The Niners could have a QB that combined the best aspects of Montana, Elway and Brady. And an HC that is a combo of Bellichek and Walsh. And they would still stink. The offensive line stinks. The receivers are poor. The linebackers stink. The DBs are awful, with the exception of Reid. And they moved him to LB. Because that unit is abysmal. The only position group even approaching average is the defensive line.

If Im Lynch I trade my No 1 for more picks. They need a lot. As for Garafalo, if he can look decent with this mess it will speak volumes.

BTW Mick, the dubious record Shanahan broke belonged to ... Bill Walsh. I dont care how brilliant of a coach you are. You need talent. They have none. And unfortunately with the salary cap its a little harder to dig out today.

(10-30-2017, 07:10 PM)teejers1 link Wrote:I like Jimmy G for the remainder of this season.Â If you like what you see, then use early picks for other positions of need.Â If he is just okay or pretty good; then draft a stud QB prospect with top pick.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - 81alum - 10-30-2017

I said my part earlier, but I don't think this thread has focused sufficiently on the most important of Shaw's advantages.Â He is right for Stanford.Â

Comparing him to other elite coaches is pointless, because none of those coaches could import their achievements from elsewhere to our school; plunk them down here and watch them fail, since they would not be right for Stanford.

Being a football coach at Stanford is so unique that there is simply no reason to believe that the qualities of being a good football coach generically would translate to being a good football coach here.Â To be a good football coach at a corrupt powerhouse school demands expertise in corruption.Â Being a good football coach at Stanford demands the ability to turn the academic reputation and demands of the school from a football liability to a recruiting advantage.Â Very, very few coaches have that capability.

To me, that dwarfs my complaints about Shaw's conservative approach or my disagreements with his playcalling.Â Those complaints are for arguing about on this message board where friends debate football abstractions.Â But the day Shaw leaves Stanford will be the most devastating day in the history of Stanford athletics.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - lex24 - 10-30-2017

Frankly I think this sums it up best.Â I will also flip it- I think Stanford is perfect for Shaw. Its a great partnership.Â

(10-30-2017, 07:41 PM)81alum link Wrote:I said my part earlier, but I don't think this thread has focused sufficiently on the most important of Shaw's advantages.Â He is right for Stanford.Â

Comparing him to other elite coaches is pointless, because none of those coaches could import their achievements from elsewhere to our school; plunk them down here and watch them fail, since they would not be right for Stanford.

Being a football coach at Stanford is so unique that there is simply no reason to believe that the qualities of being a good football coach generically would translate to being a good football coach here.Â To be a good football coach at a corrupt powerhouse school demands expertise in corruption.Â Being a good football coach at Stanford demands the ability to turn the academic reputation and demands of the school from a football liability to a recruiting advantage.Â Very, very few coaches have that capability.

To me, that dwarfs my complaints about Shaw's conservative approach or my disagreements with his playcalling.Â Those complaints are for arguing about on this message board where friends debate football abstractions.Â But the day Shaw leaves Stanford will be the most devastating day in the history of Stanford athletics.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - cardcrimson - 10-30-2017

(10-30-2017, 10:37 AM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=17830.msg209308#msg209308 date=1509383644] At the same point in Tomsula's season, they had scored 109 and given up 2017...

That's some BAD defense!
[/quote]
+1

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - Mick - 10-31-2017

(10-30-2017, 07:26 PM)lex24 link Wrote:The Niners could have a QB that combined the best aspects of Montana, Elway and Brady. And an HC that is a combo of Bellichek and Walsh. And they would still stink. The offensive line stinks. The receivers are poor. The linebackers stink. The DBs are awful, with the exception of Reid. And they moved him to LB. Because that unit is abysmal. The only position group even approaching average is the defensive line.

If Im Lynch I trade my No 1 for more picks. They need a lot. As for Garafalo, if he can look decent with this mess it will speak volumes.

BTW Mick, the dubious record Shanahan broke belonged to ... Bill Walsh. I dont care how brilliant of a coach you are. You need talent. They have none. And unfortunately with the salary cap its a little harder to dig out today.

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=17830.msg209427#msg209427 date=1509415824]
I like Jimmy G for the remainder of this season.Â If you like what you see, then use early picks for other positions of need.Â If he is just okay or pretty good; then draft a stud QB prospect with top pick.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - cardcrimson - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 08:09 AM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=lex24 link=topic=17830.msg209429#msg209429 date=1509416818]
The Niners could have a QB that combined the best aspects of Montana, Elway and Brady. And an HC that is a combo of Bellichek and Walsh. And they would still stink. The offensive line stinks. The receivers are poor. The linebackers stink. The DBs are awful, with the exception of Reid. And they moved him to LB. Because that unit is abysmal. The only position group even approaching average is the defensive line.

If Im Lynch I trade my No 1 for more picks. They need a lot. As for Garafalo, if he can look decent with this mess it will speak volumes.

BTW Mick, the dubious record Shanahan broke belonged to ... Bill Walsh. I dont care how brilliant of a coach you are. You need talent. They have none. And unfortunately with the salary cap its a little harder to dig out today.

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=17830.msg209427#msg209427 date=1509415824]
I like Jimmy G for the remainder of this season.Â If you like what you see, then use early picks for other positions of need.Â If he is just okay or pretty good; then draft a stud QB prospect with top pick.

[/quote]

So if they're so godawful, why are the 49ers sitting on all that cap space?Â They have $50.7 million in cap space for next year, which they could roll over.Â If they release all the duds whose contracts expire, they'll have $115 million to play with.Â

Why wouldn't they get some (much) better players with that cap space?Â Is it their long term plan to be the worst team in the NFL, going 0-32, then creating a turnaround team like Dallas did in 1988 (Landry's last year, 3-13) and 1989 (Jimmy Johnson's 1-15 year)?
[/quote]

While we're way off topic, I think they were quite prudent this year. With Lynch and Shanahan both in new roles, the temptation would have been to behave like kids in a candy store. I like the approach, use the season to get the feet wet, evaluate game situations with the Shanahan's program, then look to be aggressive in years 2 and 3. Get the right players to fill the most pressing needs, don't just spend money.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - martyup - 10-31-2017

Another consideration when assessing coach Shaw is the low probability, presumably, that he will bolt for the NFL or another college coaching job.Â As great as Harbaugh was for Stanford football, he bolted after only four years.Â Almost any top tier college football coach that was successful at Stanford would use it as a stepping stone.Â For Shaw, Stanford is the final destination (knock on wood).

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - CTcard - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 10:16 AM)martyup link Wrote:Another consideration when accessing coach Shaw ...

I hope that doesn't hurt.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - teejers1 - 10-31-2017

Shaw may have some O coaching deficiencies, but he is not stupid.

$5M/year; coaching at idyllic Stanford - where the most "heat" he feels is generated from a small group of yahoos posting opinions after frustrating games.Â

Oh yeah, and if remains coach at Stanford (and barring some egregious off-field misconduct, he's basically got lifetime tenure) his kids are much more likely to be admitted to the best university in the world.Â Would you leave that job for the NFL (even if a head spot were offered)?

C'mon now . . .

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - martyup - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 10:17 AM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=martyup link=topic=17830.msg209508#msg209508 date=1509470182]
Another consideration when accessing coach Shaw ...

I hope that doesn't hurt.
[/quote]

It just tingles a little bit.Â

[Image: b4681c10b542efcc21286aa30853dbedc961c5b1...2e435d.gif]

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - teejers1 - 10-31-2017

Martyup, that is outstanding Star Trek knowledge/application!

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - martyup - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 10:31 AM)teejers1 link Wrote:Martyup, that is outstanding Star Trek knowledge/application!

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - CrazedZooChimp - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 10:01 AM)cardcrimson link Wrote:While we're way off topic, I think they were quite prudent this year. With Lynch and Shanahan both in new roles, the temptation would have been to behave like kids in a candy store. I like the approach, use the season to get the feet wet, evaluate game situations with the Shanahan's program, then look to be aggressive in years 2 and 3. Get the right players to fill the most pressing needs, don't just spend money.

I think that's accurate. Better to know how draft picks and young players pan out and then use the money to fill the holes. I'd also point out they've been hit by god knows how many injuries. As I watched players drop like flies on Sunday I couldn't help thinking, "man, the Niners need Turley..."

Back on topic, I think maybe one of the most underrated aspect of Shaw has been the ability to find and retain quality assistants. I mean, how the hell did we get Duane Akina, maybe the best DB coach in football, and keep him for this long? Shaw pretty intelligently, it seems, promoted Mason when Fangio left with Harbaugh, and later promoted Anderson when Mason left. Both of those seemed to pan out about as fantastically as possible. And more recently, getting Gould might be one of the best assistant hires I've seen at Stanford ever. I'm sure resources from the University have helped hiring and retaining these guys, but I'm guessing Shaw fought to get the resources needed to get them and keep them, after having the talent to identify which guys he needed. Have we lots any assistants to something that wasn't a promotion (ie. assistant to head coach)?

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - washingtonismoney - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 11:58 AM)CrazedZooChimp link Wrote:Back on topic, I think maybe one of the most underrated aspect of Shaw has been the ability to find and retain quality assistants. I mean, how the hell did we get Duane Akina, maybe the best DB coach in football, and keep him for this long? Shaw pretty intelligently, it seems, promoted Mason when Fangio left with Harbaugh, and later promoted Anderson when Mason left. Both of those seemed to pan out about as fantastically as possible. And more recently, getting Gould might be one of the best assistant hires I've seen at Stanford ever. I'm sure resources from the University have helped hiring and retaining these guys, but I'm guessing Shaw fought to get the resources needed to get them and keep them, after having the talent to identify which guys he needed. Have we lots any assistants to something that wasn't a promotion (ie. assistant to head coach)?

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - CrazedZooChimp - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 12:04 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=CrazedZooChimp link=topic=17830.msg209539#msg209539 date=1509476288]
Back on topic, I think maybe one of the most underrated aspect of Shaw has been the ability to find and retain quality assistants. I mean, how the hell did we get Duane Akina, maybe the best DB coach in football, and keep him for this long? Shaw pretty intelligently, it seems, promoted Mason when Fangio left with Harbaugh, and later promoted Anderson when Mason left. Both of those seemed to pan out about as fantastically as possible. And more recently, getting Gould might be one of the best assistant hires I've seen at Stanford ever. I'm sure resources from the University have helped hiring and retaining these guys, but I'm guessing Shaw fought to get the resources needed to get them and keep them, after having the talent to identify which guys he needed. Have we lots any assistants to something that wasn't a promotion (ie. assistant to head coach)?

Brian Polian, Shaw's first special teams coach, went to Texas A&M for the same position. I'd heard some rumors that Polian was encouraged to find a new job. (Of course, Alamar, his replacement, has turned out pretty good. Many 59ers fans were mirthful at the time of hiring and...well, they haven't repented of their position.)

Ron Crook, who originally split o-line duties with Bloomgren, went on to West Virginia for the same position. He just moved to Cincinnati this season; he's still an o-line coach.
[/quote]

Ahh right, I think I had remembered Polian going to Nevada to be HC, but that was a year later. And Crook I just forgot about. Well, Shaw was still new back then. How 'bout, in the last five years Shaw hasn't lost an AC to a lateral move :)

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - yvonne - 10-31-2017

I don't know who said, "When the team wins, it's because of the players; when the team loses, it's because of the coach." I had always thought it was about coaches needing to be humble, but I see that fans interpret this as instructional.

Re: Shaw fingerprints---List the positives - jacketree - 10-31-2017

(10-31-2017, 10:31 AM)teejers1 link Wrote:Martyup, that is outstanding Star Trek knowledge/application!

Martyup's game-thread giffing is off the charts.Â I have no idea how he does it.

Made up verb alert!!