Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - 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: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread (/thread-22663.html)
+- 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: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread (/thread-22663.html)
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - thatboy - 11-29-2021
Regarding the woke thing, I lived on campus during 2019 / 2020 and now live a mile away. I may nevertheless be out of touch, but I didn't see many signs of "woke" things. Not too many BLM signs, for example. I don't get that impression from faculty, but then again I'm not hanging out with students. In any case, my suspicion is that the woke thing is blown up in the media far more than it actually exists. I'm guessing whatever impression of Stanford people have in Texas is disconnected from reality to some significant degree.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - BostonCard - 11-29-2021
(11-28-2021, 10:40 PM)McKenwood Wrote: Over the course of the past couple of weeks I went to my reunion and met with some of my late father's colleagues (he was a long-time professor at Stanford). Based on these conversations Stanford is in a remarkably bad spot from a leadership standpoint. So as much as we think Muir/Shaw are big problems, President Tessier-Lavigne and Provost Drell are the worst leadership combination that Stanford has ever had. Gerhard Caspar was over his head but he had Provost Rice to keep him anchored in reality.
Based on this information I wouldn't expect any change at the AD level even though any objective review would have Muir gone by the end of the year. Without any accountability at the AD level the only (vain) hope is that Shaw does the right thing by resigning (the Chris Peterson model) or fires the bulk of his staff and replaces himself as the offensive guru. My take is that Shaw is too proud to do the right thing so Stanford football will be in the toilet for the forseeable future.
I agree with your position regarding the MTL/Drell combo as it pertains to athletics. I haven’t heard anything one way or another regarding the rest of the university, and I wasn’t sure if your comment was confined to the athletics regimen or was meant to signify leadership issues more broadly.
BC
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - JohnR34231 - 11-29-2021
(11-28-2021, 10:40 PM)McKenwood Wrote:(11-28-2021, 08:55 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(11-28-2021, 05:03 PM)teejers1 Wrote: But to put it most fundamentally, without a change at the head coaching position, Stanford football will never regain what is the first ingredient for a rebuild: hope.
Teejers, I'll slightly amend your statement to say that without a change at the AD position, . . . .
I have no confidence in Bernard or his bosses to force any meaningful change.
Over the course of the past couple of weeks I went to my reunion and met with some of my late father's colleagues (he was a long-time professor at Stanford). Based on these conversations Stanford is in a remarkably bad spot from a leadership standpoint. So as much as we think Muir/Shaw are big problems, President Tessier-Lavigne and Provost Drell are the worst leadership combination that Stanford has ever had. Gerhard Caspar was over his head but he had Provost Rice to keep him anchored in reality.
Based on this information I wouldn't expect any change at the AD level even though any objective review would have Muir gone by the end of the year. Without any accountability at the AD level the only (vain) hope is that Shaw does the right thing by resigning (the Chris Peterson model) or fires the bulk of his staff and replaces himself as the offensive guru. My take is that Shaw is too proud to do the right thing so Stanford football will be in the toilet for the forseeable future.
I can't believe with continued 3-8, 4-7 type seasons the big donors aren't going to say enough is enough at some point. It may take a couple more years though.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - Austroturf - 11-29-2021
(11-28-2021, 05:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I will go on this like a broken record. Shaw Might or might not do anything after the season; I don’t have any particular insight into the staff any more. For a lot of reasons, I hope he does. But even if he has already decided to let go of all of his assistants, I would never expect him to hint at it at a press conference. It’s just not what he does. It’s not what he will ever do.
BC
I agree that Shaw would never divulge staffing changes or moves during a press conference: that's not the right place, and no one should expect it. That said, I found myself bothered by his entire demeanor during the press conference. He was very defiant, almost arrogant, as if all the know-nothings in the press and among the fans just don't get how good the team really is. I mean, in practice, everything works, the players execute well, etc. "Look at the ten best plays in every game, and you can see that this team is a really good football team." Then the same tired reference to potentially being up 21-0 on Cal. I have never heard a head coach in a presser say anything that defensive before. Yes, he formally took ownership for the bad season and the bad game, but it didn't feel like it in tone and substance. I would have welcomed something along the lines of:
"The results this season are not where this program should be. It's on me and the staff; and you can be sure that we are going to do everything necessary to get back to the excellence that Stanford football is known for. The players, the fans, the entire community around this program deserve better, and no one can be satisfied with where we are right now -- I, for one, am not. While there were some positive moments in today's game and during the season and some excellent individual efforts, we need to be more consistent, work better as a team and ensure that we get back to our winning ways. Notre Dame played a solid game and is overall a very good team. We could not measure up today; and we have work to do to get back to the level where we can go toe-to-toe with a team like that. The work begins right after this press conference. Questions?"
No arrogance, no defiance, no reference to plays working in practice but not in the game, etc. Just own it, commit to getting better and get to work.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - JohnR34231 - 11-29-2021
All I can say is it is pretty hard to convince people you have a really good football team when you have lost the last four games by a combined total of 173-46.
All it does is make them think you are in denial.
Also, I realize you wouldn't expect him to say so at a press conference, but you sure do get the impression that he doesn't think the program needs a major overhaul.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - OutsiderFan - 11-29-2021
Did any feckless reporter ask Shaw what a bad team might look like, if the 2021 version of Stanford Football isn't actually bad?
It's almost like Shaw is telling the world to not believe what their eyes tell them.
Maybe Stanford really went undefeated this season, and us mortals are too blinded by negativity to have seen it?
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - Phogge - 11-29-2021
Just the facts ma’am...
1959 Cactus Jack included:
Oregon loss 28-27
Wisconsin loss 16-14
UDub loss 10-0
USC #5 loss 30-28
Cal loss 20-17
Also included the most exciting offense in college football with Dick Norman leading the country in passing and 34-39 for 401 in Big Game.
The eye test: What I remember was the O moving the ball and a defense giving up yards but not many points except for a UCLA blowout.
100% more entertaining than 2021.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - McKenwood - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 12:49 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(11-28-2021, 10:40 PM)McKenwood Wrote: Over the course of the past couple of weeks I went to my reunion and met with some of my late father's colleagues (he was a long-time professor at Stanford). Based on these conversations Stanford is in a remarkably bad spot from a leadership standpoint. So as much as we think Muir/Shaw are big problems, President Tessier-Lavigne and Provost Drell are the worst leadership combination that Stanford has ever had. Gerhard Caspar was over his head but he had Provost Rice to keep him anchored in reality.
Based on this information I wouldn't expect any change at the AD level even though any objective review would have Muir gone by the end of the year. Without any accountability at the AD level the only (vain) hope is that Shaw does the right thing by resigning (the Chris Peterson model) or fires the bulk of his staff and replaces himself as the offensive guru. My take is that Shaw is too proud to do the right thing so Stanford football will be in the toilet for the forseeable future.
I agree with your position regarding the MTL/Drell combo as it pertains to athletics. I haven’t heard anything one way or another regarding the rest of the university, and I wasn’t sure if your comment was confined to the athletics regimen or was meant to signify leadership issues more broadly.
BC
My comment pertained to the University as a whole. Given that they have significant challenges elsewhere they probably don't have the bandwidth or capability to deal with Muir/Shaw.
My next set of inquiries is to the BofT where two friends from my Stanford days serve.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - Austroturf - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 08:28 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Did any feckless reporter ask Shaw what a bad team might look like, if the 2021 version of Stanford Football isn't actually bad?
It's almost like Shaw is telling the world to not believe what their eyes tell them.
Maybe Stanford really went undefeated this season, and us mortals are too blinded by negativity to have seen it?
That's the part I don't get: we were so monumentally bad in the last four games of the season (173-46) that there is virtually zero credibility in arguing about inches and individual plays being the difference. Scott Frost (also 3-9) could probably use that line of argument, because the Cornhuskers were often close to winning against quality opponents. If you try to argue that you were inches away from being up 21-0 against mediocre Cal, then lose by 30 and only score 11 points, you are only dissimulating. And of course, the obsequious press did not try to call him out on it.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - Phogge - 11-29-2021
This debating society can go on for months or years unless something happens.
Bottom line for me is that Stanford football is unwatchable. That's why I switched to the Bedlam game. Even Cal/UCLA was preferable.
Back to trivia. Hope your school has the balls to act.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - teejers1 - 11-29-2021
(11-28-2021, 08:49 PM)BostonCard Wrote: You only need to go back to 2004 to 2006 for a worse three year stretch.
10-24 (.294), 7-18 (.280) in conference, 0-3 against Cal.
But, as mentioned, if you are trying to find our historic nadir, then 58-60 was worse than the Buddy/Wlat years.
BC
Tell me, BC, in your 2004 to 2006 "worse three-year stretch," did Stanford ever have four games where:
in the first halves of the games, Stanford averaged 77.5 yards of offense and was outscored 90-3?
That was the last 4 games of THIS season. That is getting BLOWN OUT in embarrassing, ridiculous "we don't even belong on the same field" fashion. That is what Coach Shaw has wrought with his stewardship of the program.
I was a STH for the Dark Times you highlight above. It was bad. But I don't recall anything as bad as what we've seen this season.
Do you?
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - JohnR34231 - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 11:02 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(11-28-2021, 08:49 PM)BostonCard Wrote: You only need to go back to 2004 to 2006 for a worse three year stretch.
10-24 (.294), 7-18 (.280) in conference, 0-3 against Cal.
But, as mentioned, if you are trying to find our historic nadir, then 58-60 was worse than the Buddy/Wlat years.
BC
Tell me, BC, in your 2004 to 2006 "worse three-year stretch," did Stanford ever have four games where:
in the first halves of the games, Stanford averaged 77.5 yards of offense and was outscored 90-3?
That was the last 4 games of THIS season. That is getting BLOWN OUT in embarrassing, ridiculous "we don't even belong on the same field" fashion. That is what Coach Shaw has wrought with his stewardship of the program.
I was a STH for the Dark Times you highlight above. It was bad. But I don't recall anything as bad as what we've seen this season.
Do you?
Well, in Wlat's last year (2006) we had a five game stretch where we were outscored 162-20.
I'd say that was at least as bad as what we have seen this season.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - gailtate - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 10:35 AM)Austroturf Wrote:(11-29-2021, 08:28 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Did any feckless reporter ask Shaw what a bad team might look like, if the 2021 version of Stanford Football isn't actually bad?
It's almost like Shaw is telling the world to not believe what their eyes tell them.
Maybe Stanford really went undefeated this season, and us mortals are too blinded by negativity to have seen it?
That's the part I don't get: we were so monumentally bad in the last four games of the season (173-46) that there is virtually zero credibility in arguing about inches and individual plays being the difference. Scott Frost (also 3-9) could probably use that line of argument, because the Cornhuskers were often close to winning against quality opponents. If you try to argue that you were inches away from being up 21-0 against mediocre Cal, then lose by 30 and only score 11 points, you are only dissimulating. And of course, the obsequious press did not try to call him out on it.
...the obsequious press did not try to call him out on it.
I remember Woody Hayes answering reporters' questions after the 1971 Rose Bowl where he dismissed Stanford's shocking victory by citing what he described as the "mad-dog pass" as the reason for his team's 27-17 loss. Reason? Hardly. At least for anyone not named Hayes. Shaw's revised realities are created by the same denial. Until I see evidence that he knows what problems look like, I remain doubtful that he can solve any he has today.
The first time I read a candid appraisal of this year's team was far too little far too late: Wilner's comment about the sorry-ass OL and DL, followed by Josh DuBrow's piece on the ND game. It was straightforward reportage no one cared about. Shaw's insistence on insulting the few supporters he has left, trying to sell nonsense and fantasy, is reminiscent of the Kevin "All is well!" Bacon character during the chaotic parade in Animal House.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - 82lsju - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 11:02 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(11-28-2021, 08:49 PM)BostonCard Wrote: You only need to go back to 2004 to 2006 for a worse three year stretch.
10-24 (.294), 7-18 (.280) in conference, 0-3 against Cal.
But, as mentioned, if you are trying to find our historic nadir, then 58-60 was worse than the Buddy/Wlat years.
BC
Tell me, BC, in your 2004 to 2006 "worse three-year stretch," did Stanford ever have four games where:
in the first halves of the games, Stanford averaged 77.5 yards of offense and was outscored 90-3?
That was the last 4 games of THIS season. That is getting BLOWN OUT in embarrassing, ridiculous "we don't even belong on the same field" fashion. That is what Coach Shaw has wrought with his stewardship of the program.
I was a STH for the Dark Times you highlight above. It was bad. But I don't recall anything as bad as what we've seen this season.
Do you?
I sat through Walt/Buddy as well.
The end of this season was pretty reminiscent to me of 2006 when we scored 10 or fewer points in 9 games, and 20 or fewer in 11 of 12 games (our high point was 34 in the loss to SJSU). I think trying to figure out which era was "worse" is a waste of time, the last half of this year, 2006, and 1983 are all the "worst" Stanford teams I have watched (I've only been watching closely since 1979 so can't comment on 1958-60), not sure I can rank any of them as worse than the other as they all were horrible and moving up the whatever pecking order one might have in years like that will not be fixing anything.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - terry - 11-29-2021
In general, I think it's not very useful to spend much time analyzing Shaw's press conferences because I don't think he reveals much about what he's really thinking.
In Shaw's post-ND press conference, he indicated that he is turning his focus to recruiting. I got the impression that Shaw was trying to be as positive as circumstances would allow in an attempt to support his recruiting efforts. I think maybe he wanted to avoid scaring recruits away by being too negative about the program. I would view his comments in that context.
That said, I thought Shaw made a couple of brief comments that I found interesting:
"A lot of things we have to do, a lot of discussions we have to have, some difficult discussions. . . ."
"Some things coaching-wise, which I won't go into detail, that we need to look at. . . ."
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - Mick - 11-29-2021
(11-28-2021, 06:27 AM)Austroturf Wrote: While watching UM vs. Ohio State yesterday, the announcers also commented on the sweeping changes Harbaugh made to his staff following the 2020 season when they finished 2-4 in the Covid-shortened campaign. I had not been aware of these changes, but thought there was an interesting parallel to Stanford's current situation. Here is a summary of the changes Harbaugh made (from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Michigan_Wolverines_football_team):
Coaching changes
On December 22, 2020, Michigan fired defensive coordinator Don Brown after five seasons. Brown was then hired by former Michigan assistant Jedd Fisch as the new defensive coordinator at the University of Arizona on January 6, 2021.
On January 13, 2021, Michigan named former running back Mike Hart as its new running backs coach.
On January 17, 2021, Michigan also announced the hiring of Mike Macdonald as its new defensive coordinator.
Michigan added to their defensive staff on January 20, 2021, announcing the addition of Maurice Linguist as the defensive backs coach and co-defensive coordinator as well as George Helow as the safeties coach.
On January 25, 2021, Michigan finalized their staff by announcing the addition of former player and West Bloomfield High School head coach Ron Bellamy as the wide receivers coach. With this move, Jay Harbaugh moves from running backs coach to tight ends coach and Sherrone Moore shifts from tight ends to offensive line coach replacing Ed Warinner, and adds the title of co-offensive coordinator.
However, more changes came on February 19, 2021, as Brian Jean-Mary left Michigan to become the linebackers coach at Tennessee. On February 22, 2021, Michigan announced the hiring of Baltimore Ravens running backs coach Matt Weiss as the new quarterbacks coach. With the changes, George Helow will move from safeties to replace Jean-Mary as the linebackers coach, and Ron Bellamy will move to safeties coach from the wide receivers position.
An unexpected shakeup came on May 7, 2021 as newly hired cornerbacks coach and co-defensive coordinator Mo Linguist was hired as the head coach at Buffalo to replace Lance Leipold. Michigan moved quickly to replace Linguist, hiring Kentucky assistant coach Steve Clinkscale to become the defensive backs coach and passing game coordinator on May 11.
Michigan is now reaping the rewards, climbing to #2 in the AP Top 25 poll.
https://www.si.com/college/2021/11/28/michigan-climbs-ap-top-25-poll-oklahoma-state-alabama?fbclid=IwAR1U3I198sO8jumtCoKoygU_PEfFwK6Gq2OP1LCyp-E-rFMb1DLpmBu6-TM
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - Austroturf - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 12:05 PM)terry Wrote: In general, I think it's not very useful to spend much time analyzing Shaw's press conferences because I don't think he reveals much about what he's really thinking.
In Shaw's post-ND press conference, he indicated that he is turning his focus to recruiting. I got the impression that Shaw was trying to be as positive as circumstances would allow in an attempt to support his recruiting efforts. I think maybe he wanted to avoid scaring recruits away by being too negative about the program. I would view his comments in that context.
That said, I thought Shaw made a couple of brief comments that I found interesting:
"A lot of things we have to do, a lot of discussions we have to have, some difficult discussions. . . ."
"Some things coaching-wise, which I won't go into detail, that we need to look at. . . ."
I agree that press conferences are low on useful information. But if Shaw was just trying to put a positive spin on the results to give potential recruits confidence in the program, he is also running the risk of insulting their intelligence (as he did with fans and the press). When a team is really bad, and the eye test, the stats and the results show it, any whitewashing of that situation by the coach can only be viewed with mistrust.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - gailtate - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 12:05 PM)terry Wrote: In general, I think it's not very useful to spend much time analyzing Shaw's press conferences because I don't think he reveals much about what he's really thinking.
In Shaw's post-ND press conference, he indicated that he is turning his focus to recruiting. I got the impression that Shaw was trying to be as positive as circumstances would allow in an attempt to support his recruiting efforts. I think maybe he wanted to avoid scaring recruits away by being too negative about the program. I would view his comments in that context.
That said, I thought Shaw made a couple of brief comments that I found interesting:
"A lot of things we have to do, a lot of discussions we have to have, some difficult discussions. . . ."
"Some things coaching-wise, which I won't go into detail, that we need to look at. . . ."
It's been his disingenuous, dismissive, at times petulant remarks that have put-off and antagonized many of us. He should be street-smart enough to know this and other things. That he doesn't show it is another piece of evidence that the air is just too thick for him right now, after living La Dolce Vita for so long. I wish him well, of course, but his multi-year job performance skid caught up with him. He owns his fate, whatever it is.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - qwerty49 - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 01:47 PM)Austroturf Wrote:(11-29-2021, 12:05 PM)terry Wrote: In general, I think it's not very useful to spend much time analyzing Shaw's press conferences because I don't think he reveals much about what he's really thinking.
In Shaw's post-ND press conference, he indicated that he is turning his focus to recruiting. I got the impression that Shaw was trying to be as positive as circumstances would allow in an attempt to support his recruiting efforts. I think maybe he wanted to avoid scaring recruits away by being too negative about the program. I would view his comments in that context.
That said, I thought Shaw made a couple of brief comments that I found interesting:
"A lot of things we have to do, a lot of discussions we have to have, some difficult discussions. . . ."
"Some things coaching-wise, which I won't go into detail, that we need to look at. . . ."
I agree that press conferences are low on useful information. But if Shaw was just trying to put a positive spin on the results to give potential recruits confidence in the program, he is also running the risk of insulting their intelligence (as he did with fans and the press). When a team is really bad, and the eye test, the stats and the results show it, any whitewashing of that situation by the coach can only be viewed with mistrust.
He thinks he’s putting a positive spin on things by talking about consistency and that our top 10 plays in any game are as good as anyone else’s. For those of us with a smattering of stat training: Since when do you measure the overall value of a data set by the tail of the bell curve?
He also implies we execute well in practice, less so in games. Well duh — don’t the 1’s still mainly practice against the 2’s? ie our starting OL against our 2nd string DL, and vice-versa? Jeez a lot of high school OLs might do well against our 2nd string D. And ditto for their DLs against our 2nd string O.
Nice try, and we know he has to try, but after the lipstick goes on the pig there are still tough decisions to make. And Coach seems unwilling to accept a CEO role which would go a long way to getting us to better days. That is his flaw, and is squarely on him.
RE: Stanford Football 2021 Post-Mortem Thread - winflop - 11-29-2021
(11-29-2021, 12:05 PM)terry Wrote: In general, I think it's not very useful to spend much time analyzing Shaw's press conferences because I don't think he reveals much about what he's really thinking.
In Shaw's post-ND press conference, he indicated that he is turning his focus to recruiting. I got the impression that Shaw was trying to be as positive as circumstances would allow in an attempt to support his recruiting efforts. I think maybe he wanted to avoid scaring recruits away by being too negative about the program. I would view his comments in that context.
That said, I thought Shaw made a couple of brief comments that I found interesting:
"A lot of things we have to do, a lot of discussions we have to have, some difficult discussions. . . ."
"Some things coaching-wise, which I won't go into detail, that we need to look at. . . ."
I think my frustration with Shaw's press conferences comes down to issues with style. I would prefer that he be more explicitly accountable and not just drone on with platitudes about execution and opportunities. Even if it's just stating the obvious, the margin between success and where this team is at is NOT a couple of plays here and there. and I think not being honest about that and not owning it at the mic is detrimental to him.
I would also prefer that he not get so defiant & defensive in those rare occasions where the media who cover him come anywhere close to questioning him. I'd prefer that he acknowledge the validity of the question and not be so defensive in his answers. It's OK to admit that you don't have the answers and that you'll look into it. But to just flat out deny the issues and make the questioner feel like they've crossed a line isn't OK with me.