Shaw at Sea Level - Printable Version

Shaw at Sea Level - 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 at Sea Level (/thread-22218.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Shaw at Sea Level - teejers1 - 09-04-2021

That's what we saw today, folks.

Impotent and dull offense;
burned timeouts to avoid delay of game penalties;
delay of game penalties (despite burning TOs); and
about 200 yards of total offense well into Q4 (may have finished around 240 or 250).

Folks, that is Buddy/Wlat performance. Only difference is, our current coach makes $6.7 million/ year, base salary.

If you're not both outraged and disgusted by what you saw today and the current state of affairs with the football program, well, I don't know what to say to you.

P.S. Hey CowbodyIndian: are we laughing now? "Laughable" - think that was your retort when I said KSU would beat Stanford way back when. Yeah, yeah, you were directing that at me personally and not at the prediction; still, there is nothing funny about the state of affairs that both Bernard Shaw and David Shaw are responsible for with the football program.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - OutsiderFan - 09-04-2021

I'm so glad I don't care as much as I used to care. My anticipation level for this game was 0 today and only watched it period out of habit or tradition. So DVR'd the game and started watching it about 1:30 after it started so I cold skip through what bored me.

It's just not a well-coached team.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - Bampa - 09-04-2021

Give me Shaw's salary and I GUARANTEE a hell of a lot more than 41 yards rushing.

You can take that to the bank!

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - gailtate - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 12:49 PM)teejers1 Wrote: That's what we saw today, folks.

Impotent and dull offense;
burned timeouts to avoid delay of game penalties;
delay of game penalties (despite burning TOs); and
about 200 yards of total offense well into Q4 (may have finished around 240 or 250).

Folks, that is Buddy/Wlat performance. Only difference is, our current coach makes $6.7 million/ year, base salary.

If you're not both outraged and disgusted by what you saw today and the current state of affairs with the football program, well, I don't know what to say to you.

P.S. Hey CowbodyIndian: are we laughing now? "Laughable" - think that was your retort when I said KSU would beat Stanford way back when. Yeah, yeah, you were directing that at me personally and not at the prediction; still, there is nothing funny about the state of affairs that both Bernard Shaw and David Shaw are responsible for with the football program.

Sea level? Right now he's at Inyo County, as in "Death Valley".

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - BostonCard - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 12:49 PM)teejers1 Wrote: That's what we saw today, folks.

Impotent and dull offense;
burned timeouts to avoid delay of game penalties;
delay of game penalties (despite burning TOs); and
about 200 yards of total offense well into Q4 (may have finished around 240 or 250).

Folks, that is Buddy/Wlat performance. Only difference is, our current coach makes $6.7 million/ year, base salary.

If you're not both outraged and disgusted by what you saw today and the current state of affairs with the football program, well, I don't know what to say to you.

P.S. Hey CowbodyIndian: are we laughing now? "Laughable" - think that was your retort when I said KSU would beat Stanford way back when. Yeah, yeah, you were directing that at me personally and not at the prediction; still, there is nothing funny about the state of affairs that both Bernard Shaw and David Shaw are responsible for with the football program.

At this rate, Shaw will have earned $80,000 per point scored, or about $2,400 per yard of offense.

BC

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - Mick - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 01:49 PM)Bampa Wrote: Give me Shaw's salary and I GUARANTEE a hell of a lot more than 41 yards rushing.

You can take that to the bank!

39 yards rushing. On 22 carries.

Putrescence. Boo! Boo! Rubbish! Filth! Slime! Muck! Boo! Boo!

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - Phogge - 09-04-2021

How do you calculate dollars per win if you don't win any?

After getting shellacked by SC and possibly losing to Vandy how do you calculate the frowns at Chuck Taylor Grove? By blood alcohol level?

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - Brickcity - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 03:17 PM)Phogge Wrote: How do you calculate dollars per win if you don't win any?

After getting shellacked by SC and possibly losing to Vandy how do you calculate the frowns at Chuck Taylor Grove? By blood alcohol level?

One thing that might speed along Shaw's firing is if fans completely stopped showing up for games. I for one don't plan to attend a game until he's gone.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - 76lsjumb - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 03:17 PM)Phogge Wrote: How do you calculate dollars per win if you don't win any?

After getting shellacked by SC and possibly losing to Vandy how do you calculate the frowns at Chuck Taylor Grove? By blood alcohol level?

Speaking of Chuck Taylor Grove, it should be noted that one team came into this game on a five game losing streak and one on a four game winning streak. The one on the losing streak had tens of thousands of enthusiastic fans, a large number of whom had presumably traveled several hundred miles to get there. The one on the winning streak had (maybe) a couple thousand fans.

If you’re drawing up a list of things about the program that stink, you have to add “fan base” to that list.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - teejers1 - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 03:49 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:
(09-04-2021, 03:17 PM)Phogge Wrote: How do you calculate dollars per win if you don't win any?

After getting shellacked by SC and possibly losing to Vandy how do you calculate the frowns at Chuck Taylor Grove? By blood alcohol level?

Speaking of Chuck Taylor Grove, it should be noted that one team came into this game on a five game losing streak and one on a four game winning streak. The one on the losing streak had tens of thousands of enthusiastic fans, a large number of whom had presumably traveled several hundred miles to get there. The one on the winning streak had (maybe) a couple thousand fans.

If you’re drawing up a list of things about the program that stink, you have to add “fan base” to that list.

Hey, I'm pretty sure I'm in a group of fans you can count on two hands (max) that attended all 4 Sun Bowls.
But whose fault is it that the "base" is dwindling to nothingness? I'd say (a) the coach who instills ZERO excitement/pizzaz/interest into anything related to Stanford football [oh, that's right, that's not his job], and (b) the Athletic Director who fiddles while the embers have been smoldering for years and years.

On the bright side: the university will not have any game day concerns when it comes to "social distancing" in the stadium or in the tailgating areas. If Stanford doesn't improve dramatically in next two games, then it could get really embarrassing when it comes to televised games at Stanford.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - norcard - 09-04-2021

really no need for opponents to come on here when we have fans like this

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - gailtate - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 04:23 PM)norcard Wrote: really no need for opponents to come on here when we have fans like this

And why do you think we HAVE fans like this"????

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - teejers1 - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 04:23 PM)norcard Wrote: really no need for opponents to come on here when we have fans like this

Out of curiosity, norcard, how long have you been a Stanford football fan? I've been attending games at Stanford and elsewhere for close to 50 years - and gailtate perhaps even longer. We've seen a lot over the years and have first-hand experience in seeing what a vibrant, healthy program looks like - at least from a fan's perspective, which arguably is the most important perspective. The point is that we care, and have cared, for decades. And what we're seeing now - and I'd argue have been seeing for many, many years - is alarming . . . as in existentially so.

And if you believe this, and if you care, then the question becomes: what to do?    Literally since the Fiesta Bowl, I've asked, pleaded, begged, for Shaw to hire a real OC to institute a real college offense. When that proved futile, then it was asking Muir to force Shaw's hand on this. Again, to no avail. Not only does the AD not see this problem, he instead gives the head coach a multi-year (some say lifetime) contract at $6.7 million/year base. Mind boggling.

Shaw and Muir are now part of the problem.

I agree with Lex that Stanford as an institution needs to decide if it wants to compete in D1 football in the Brave New World of Collegiate Athletics. (I don't know how Stanford will answer this question . . . it could well bow out). But if the answer is yes, then both Shaw and Muir must go. It sucks to say that because Shaw has many fine qualities that would make him a great coach at Stanford. But he has only himself - and particularly his myopia, stubborness and pride - to blame for where things are.

And no one should shed a tear if this unlikely change were to occur. Shaw has been richly compensated for his time at Stanford. Some might say over-compensated, and he and his kids are set for life. We all should be so fortunate.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - 81alum - 09-04-2021

The game was dreadful. Recruiting seems down. I never used to turn games off--for decades. But I have done it several times in the last few years. Hope springs eternal each season but the game has a grim way of encouraging reality to intrude.

Despite the awful results, Shaw remains the winning-est coach in Stanford football history, he is an ethical man, a wonderful role model, and an alum who truly understands academics at Stanford as no outsider ever will. It is hard to give up on such a man.

I wonder, as an honest question, if there is an alternative hypothesis to the decline of Stanford football other than the coaching of David Shaw?

Hypothesis: Stanford historically has always been at a disadvantage in this game. In fact, half our coaches have been failures or mediocre while here at Stanford. Think of the illustrious names of Harris, Teevens, Wiggin, and Curtis. Even Denny Green was 16-18 and never won a bowl. Jack Elway had a losing record. Jack Christianson had a winning record and pro credentials, but was fired after a quarterback controversy. Many of these "losers" were smart, experienced coaches who flopped at Stanford. I offer it as a theory only: success at Stanford is far more difficult to attain and even more difficult to sustain than at schools that lack all of our profound differences. And as college sports become increasingly professionalized (corrupt, in my view) these differences will grow ever larger.

So perhaps the reason for our profound disappointment is that Stanford, for a number of years, greatly overachieved its historical trajectory, and we fans were utterly deluded to think this could be sustained, given the modern, corrupt, professionalized college football environment. I'd like to believe otherwise--that it is all Shaw's incompetence--since that would mean things could be easily turned around with a coaching change. But, "the game has a grim way of encouraging reality to intrude."

Here is my prediction: if Shaw is fired, we will run through several coaches as bad as our historical stable of losers before we find--if we ever do--someone with the EUTM to turn things around. We might be in Div III by then.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - 76lsjumb - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 04:30 PM)gailtate Wrote:
(09-04-2021, 04:23 PM)norcard Wrote: really no need for opponents to come on here when we have fans like this

And why do you think we HAVE fans like this"????

Maybe my point was too obscure. The team on the five-game LOSING streak was the team with loads of enthusiastic fans at today’s game. The team with the four-game WINNING streak was the one with no fans.

I believe, from personal experience/ observation, that we had a better fan base back when Cactus Jack was coach than we have now.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - Phogge - 09-04-2021

Kansas State took advantage of green quarterbacks and had Stanford schemed out. They also had faster and better defensive players. Shaw had no chance and I think he knew it. He is in a comfortable situation in a position where people are too afraid to dismiss him.

He doesn't have the personnel to run an uptempo offense and without a guy like Mills and without swift receivers who can separate his attack is easily defended. K State had a QB who didn't run much because he didn't need to but when he did he was effective.

Obviously Shaw is stubborn. He won't delegate play calling so instead of being a CEO like Saban or Dabo he tries to be Charles Foster Kane. So you can live with it or live without it. I chose to stop attending for various reasons. If the product continuous to be boring I will stop watching and find some exciting football on another channel.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - Snorlax94 - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 04:56 PM)81alum Wrote: The game was dreadful. Recruiting seems down. I never used to turn games off--for decades. But I have done it several times in the last few years. Hope springs eternal each season but the game has a grim way of encouraging reality to intrude.

Despite the awful results, Shaw remains the winning-est coach in Stanford football history, he is an ethical man, a wonderful role model, and an alum who truly understands academics at Stanford as no outsider ever will. It is hard to give up on such a man.

I wonder, as an honest question, if there is an alternative hypothesis to the decline of Stanford football other than the coaching of David Shaw?
...
Here is my prediction: if Shaw is fired, we will run through several coaches as bad as our historical stable of losers before we find--if we ever do--someone with the EUTM to turn things around. We might be in Div III by then.

I agree that Shaw has done incredible things for Stanford. I also care deeply about Stanford as an institution beyond sports wins and losses, and appreciate and respect that Coach Shaw has been an outstanding role model and representative of the university, and that these things matter a lot.

I'm also a bit slower to just fire a head coach. First, in general, I think fans on online fan boards would cycle through coaches too quickly. You might be able to get away with rapid churn at a place like USC, but at Stanford it could make things worse.

However, I'm a bit more optimistic than you on how Stanford *might* do in the post-Shaw era, whenever that may come.

For one, Stanford changed how it recruits and operates in a fundamental way, and to my knowledge, this happened under Coach Harbaugh. There was too much uncertainty in admissions, leading to a lot of lost candidates. Student athletes still need to earn admission, and they still don't know they're admitted until they're admitted, but to my understanding the process has been streamlined.

Also, Stanford, due to its success in 2009-2016, now has much more name recognition. A lot of athletes grew up watching great Stanford teams. EJ Smith looks up to CMac, and wanted to go to Christian's alma mater. The success also sparked many dreams and a wide appreciation that it's possible to play top-tier football and get a world-class education.

Now, if things continue to slide, Stanford will lose some of its luster.

But given Stanford's higher profile, I could see us having some good options if we ever find ourselves in a post-Shaw era and continue to be a dream school for a lot of young student athletes.

For example, it did seem like Chris Petersen admired the university. He understood there were restrictions in recruiting, but also opportunities, especially when Stanford scooped Weddington and Sarell right out of his home state. Petersen may be permanently retired, or past his prime, but there are others.

As for the question, why is Shaw doing worse, and is it due to factors outside of his control. I personally don't believe that.

For one, I think of pop music musicians. Why was Prince's best album Purple Rain? I think it's actually common that people have their best, most innovative ideas relatively early in their career. Football is such a dynamic field, a genius may peak at one point and may be unable to reproduce their "Purple Rain." (which is one of my favorite albums)

Also, being a Power 5 football coach is a grueling, grueling lifestyle. Look at Jim Harbaugh, flying out and having sleepovers with recruits and sleeping on the floor in a sleeping bag. Back in the Walsh II era, Coach Walsh commented how demanding the recruiting side was, and how it wasn't appealing to him. He could play the chess game at the highest levels, but he found the recruiting side exhausting and unappealing. Shaw has now been doing this over a decade, making substantial millions each year. If he has saved $20-$30M (more if he invested in tech stocks), does he want to continue working the insane and unhealthy hours his opposing coaches are willing to work? If a hungry coach will work 100 hours a week to prepare for a game, and demand the same of his staff, what would Shaw do? And at his age, with his family commitments, with his healthy worldview, if there were a top recruit, would he write them a letter every day?

There may come a time when Shaw isn't the best option for Stanford. I think it'd be a knee-jerk reaction to say that time is now. I have read in newspapers that when other programs have some bad years, the AD puts pressure on the coaches to make changes in the staff and coordinators to bring in fresh changes to help correct the course. If the whole season ends up like 2019, I could see that kind of pressure becoming appropriate.

Week 1 was a total disaster. It was one of the most hideous outings in the past 12 years. But it's week 1, and it's 1 game, and we shouldn't over-react. Let's see how the next few weeks go, although I admit, I think we're going to lose many of those games.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - BigJohn043 - 09-04-2021

I have only been a Stanford fan for 30+ years so I am a newcomer. I have seen a lot of mediocre football over the years. I lived through the Teavens and Harris years. Before the last ten years we were never that good but we had some players and could pull of the occasional upset. Maybe once every ten years we had a team that could really compete at the top of the conference.

This is just the most depressing I have ever seen it. Many of us saw Shaw's flaws early in his tenure when he was winning. There was a reason that Harbaugh fired him as OC. For the last 5 years we have all seen the decline happening with no one doing anything about it. Check that, we gave Shaw a brobdingnagian fat raise.

An now we all see the next five years playing out. Shaw is not going to be fired quickly. He is going to really drive this program into the ground first. Teavans and Harris were depressing, but at least they got fired and we had hope.

Right now I think I speak for many Stanford fans in saying we literally have no hope.......

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - oman - 09-04-2021

Purple Rain wasn't Prince's best album. Therefore your post is worthless.

RE: Shaw at Sea Level - norcard - 09-04-2021

(09-04-2021, 04:54 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(09-04-2021, 04:23 PM)norcard Wrote: really no need for opponents to come on here when we have fans like this

Out of curiosity, norcard, how long have you been a Stanford football fan? I've been attending games at Stanford and elsewhere for close to 50 years - and gailtate perhaps even longer. We've seen a lot over the years and have first-hand experience in seeing what a vibrant, healthy program looks like - at least from a fan's perspective, which arguably is the most important perspective. The point is that we care, and have cared, for decades. And what we're seeing now - and I'd argue have been seeing for many, many years - is alarming . . . as in existentially so.

And if you believe this, and if you care, then the question becomes: what to do?    Literally since the Fiesta Bowl, I've asked, pleaded, begged, for Shaw to hire a real OC to institute a real college offense. When that proved futile, then it was asking Muir to force Shaw's hand on this. Again, to no avail. Not only does the AD not see this problem, he instead gives the head coach a multi-year (some say lifetime) contract at $6.7 million/year base. Mind boggling.

Shaw and Muir are now part of the problem.

I agree with Lex that Stanford as an institution needs to decide if it wants to compete in D1 football in the Brave New World of Collegiate Athletics. (I don't know how Stanford will answer this question . . . it could well bow out). But if the answer is yes, then both Shaw and Muir must go. It sucks to say that because Shaw has many fine qualities that would make him a great coach at Stanford. But he has only himself - and particularly his myopia, stubborness and pride - to blame for where things are.

And no one should shed a tear if this unlikely change were to occur. Shaw has been richly compensated for his time at Stanford. Some might say over-compensated, and he and his kids are set for life. We all should be so fortunate.

Since 2005. I've seen plenty of ugly games. With the academic requirements of the university, some people on here need to lower their expectations. Stanford will never be Alabama on the field, (reloading every year) and that's fine.

What we don't need is an overly acerbic fan base when in-person attendance was already bad during some of the better years these past 5 seasons.

In terms of what I would change, I would get a new offensive assistant along with better Defensive and OL coaching plus better strength and conditioning coaching. Since Turley left, things haven't been the same injuries or performance wise.

For those clamoring for Shaw to leave. Who do you think of quality would actually come in? Stanford has trouble getting fans and apparently admin support (as seen with transfers). Another Wlat is not out of the question. Another Harbaugh likely isn't walking through the door.