03-31-2025, 12:15 PM
Welcome coach.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(03-31-2025, 11:00 AM)2006alum Wrote:(03-31-2025, 10:51 AM)BostonCard Wrote: I won’t know how I feel about this hire until I read Matt Squeri’s missive dissecting it in five dimensions (seriously, though, I’m looking forward to his analysis).Same. This is not my lane. But one thing Nneka said when she made her guest appearance at Tara's class really stuck with me: unlike her college experience, in the pros you never know how long your coach will be your coach, so it's a very different kind of relationship (and note that six of twelve head coaches were fired in the W at the end of last season).
BC
In that sense, perhaps part of Luck's pitch is this: to be pro ready means not expecting you'll always have the same coaching staff, so what you get coming to Stanford is a very experience pro coach, a very experience pro GM, and a world class education. And whoever the head coach is next season, he'll be at least as good as Reich (either he succeeds and is retained, or we find a better replacement by this time next year).
(03-31-2025, 11:00 AM)2006alum Wrote:(03-31-2025, 10:51 AM)BostonCard Wrote: I won’t know how I feel about this hire until I read Matt Squeri’s missive dissecting it in five dimensions (seriously, though, I’m looking forward to his analysis).Same. This is not my lane. But one thing Nneka said when she made her guest appearance at Tara's class really stuck with me: unlike her college experience, in the pros you never know how long your coach will be your coach, so it's a very different kind of relationship (and note that six of twelve head coaches were fired in the W at the end of last season).
BC
In that sense, perhaps part of Luck's pitch is this: to be pro ready means not expecting you'll always have the same coaching staff, so what you get coming to Stanford is a very experience pro coach, a very experience pro GM, and a world class education. And whoever the head coach is next season, he'll be at least as good as Reich (either he succeeds and is retained, or we find a better replacement by this time next year).
jacket3ree dateline='[url=tel:1743458706' Wrote: 1743458706[/url]']
Fair point on the talent. This does have all the appearances of tearing the program completely apart and starting over, (this season is probably a lost cause) with Reich doing his friend a solid, probably without a lot of personal downside. If Stanford wins fewer than 3 games, no one is surprised. I'm sure the reaction to Reich is that he is a stand-up guy who knows offense and someone has to run practice starting tomorrow, for whomever has no other place to go. Not too many people are going to tune in this fall to see what Frank Reich can do (as opposed to say a splash Sanders hire in Boulder). But I like it. Pragmatic and patient over style and splash. I don't know if anything can move Stanford's fanbase needle, so why not go for something more foundational without being rushed. What's one more crappy season (marginally more crappy than if Luck kept Taylor another year), with the promise, not guarantee, of getting it right 6-9 months from now?
I am somewhat surprised they did not go the internal route, but that might say more about who was there internally and what Luck thinks of them.
NFL coaching can be hard to assess. So much is on the GM. Why did Pete Carroll suck with the Jets but win a Super Bowl with the Seahawks? Why did Belichick suck with the Browns but win eight Super Bowls with the Patriots? Sure, they grew over time, but the organizations have a lot to do with it too. Why did Taylor win so many games so quickly at Sac State and suck at Stanford? Can't just be Skattebo, can it?
Still, I'm curious if Taylor was fired for cause.
jacket3ree dateline='[url=tel:1743458706' Wrote: 1743458706[/url]']
Fair point on the talent. This does have all the appearances of tearing the program completely apart and starting over, (this season is probably a lost cause) with Reich doing his friend a solid, probably without a lot of personal downside. If Stanford wins fewer than 3 games, no one is surprised. I'm sure the reaction to Reich is that he is a stand-up guy who knows offense and someone has to run practice starting tomorrow, for whomever has no other place to go. Not too many people are going to tune in this fall to see what Frank Reich can do (as opposed to say a splash Sanders hire in Boulder). But I like it. Pragmatic and patient over style and splash. I don't know if anything can move Stanford's fanbase needle, so why not go for something more foundational without being rushed. What's one more crappy season (marginally more crappy than if Luck kept Taylor another year), with the promise, not guarantee, of getting it right 6-9 months from now?
I am somewhat surprised they did not go the internal route, but that might say more about who was there internally and what Luck thinks of them.
NFL coaching can be hard to assess. So much is on the GM. Why did Pete Carroll suck with the Jets but win a Super Bowl with the Seahawks? Why did Belichick suck with the Browns but win eight Super Bowls with the Patriots? Sure, they grew over time, but the organizations have a lot to do with it too. Why did Taylor win so many games so quickly at Sac State and suck at Stanford? Can't just be Skattebo, can it?
Still, I'm curious if Taylor was fired for cause.
(03-31-2025, 03:05 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: Why did Taylor win so many games so quickly at Sac State and suck at Stanford? Can't just be Skattebo, can it?Sure it can :-).
Quote:Still, I'm curious if Taylor was fired for cause.I am "curious" also, but I am virtually certain he was not, at least in the sense of walking away with no "package". I frankly expect he is getting his full "buyout", although maybe he settled for something less to avoid possible litigation that would make an even bigger mess. When Stanford didn't fire him immediately they put themselves in a bad situation to argue "for cause" based on those events. They would need something both more recent and "adequately" serious, which AFAIK they don't have.
(03-31-2025, 03:05 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: Why did Taylor win so many games so quickly at Sac State and suck at Stanford? Can't just be Skattebo, can it?Sure it can :-).
Quote:Still, I'm curious if Taylor was fired for cause.I am "curious" also, but I am virtually certain he was not, at least in the sense of walking away with no "package". I frankly expect he is getting his full "buyout", although maybe he settled for something less to avoid possible litigation that would make an even bigger mess. When Stanford didn't fire him immediately they put themselves in a bad situation to argue "for cause" based on those events. They would need something both more recent and "adequately" serious, which AFAIK they don't have.
(03-31-2025, 04:33 PM)Goose Wrote:(03-31-2025, 03:05 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: Why did Taylor win so many games so quickly at Sac State and suck at Stanford? Can't just be Skattebo, can it?Sure it can :-).
Quote:Still, I'm curious if Taylor was fired for cause.I am "curious" also, but I am virtually certain he was not, at least in the sense of walking away with no "package". I frankly expect he is getting his full "buyout", although maybe he settled for something less to avoid possible litigation that would make an even bigger mess. When Stanford didn't fire him immediately they put themselves in a bad situation to argue "for cause" based on those events. They would need something both more recent and "adequately" serious, which AFAIK they don't have.
(03-31-2025, 04:33 PM)Goose Wrote:(03-31-2025, 03:05 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: Why did Taylor win so many games so quickly at Sac State and suck at Stanford? Can't just be Skattebo, can it?Sure it can :-).
Quote:Still, I'm curious if Taylor was fired for cause.I am "curious" also, but I am virtually certain he was not, at least in the sense of walking away with no "package". I frankly expect he is getting his full "buyout", although maybe he settled for something less to avoid possible litigation that would make an even bigger mess. When Stanford didn't fire him immediately they put themselves in a bad situation to argue "for cause" based on those events. They would need something both more recent and "adequately" serious, which AFAIK they don't have.
(03-31-2025, 04:14 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote: Reich has experience coaching quarterbacks which I am not sure anyone else has done on the current staff. I like the hire on that part, plus assuming Reich is a good fit coaching the current set of qb's on the team it may prevent loosing the better ones to the portal.
Of course I hope for the upcoming season to be full of positive surprises on the field, but I also think Reich will help Luck in his GM roll.
(03-31-2025, 04:14 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote: Reich has experience coaching quarterbacks which I am not sure anyone else has done on the current staff. I like the hire on that part, plus assuming Reich is a good fit coaching the current set of qb's on the team it may prevent loosing the better ones to the portal.
Of course I hope for the upcoming season to be full of positive surprises on the field, but I also think Reich will help Luck in his GM roll.
(03-31-2025, 04:55 PM)msqueri Wrote: It occurs to me that “interim” could also be a political move by Luck to circumvent the Stanford bureaucracy. Interim avoids the time and gate keepers of the “committee” process Stanford always insists on. If Reich has some success and looks like he’s turning us around it is simpler to remove the interim tag than to hope he’s the one the committee settles on in the first place.It is entirely possible this is the case. An additional political reason for an "interim" tag is that Stanford is also looking for an AD, at least ostensibly. It may be "important" to many AD candidates that they get to participate in selecting the head football coach. There may also be other more concrete considerations. Reich has never been a college coach. He may want to "try it out" and see if he wants to continue doing it. He may also want to determine if Stanford is a place he wants to work "permanently". The "interim" tag gives him the flexibility to do that. At the end of the year, the answer to one or both may be "no". We have to be prepared for that to be the case. It is also possible that by next December we have another candidate that we prefer. The "interim" tag would make that simpler as well. It is also entirely possible Reich fully intends to return to the NFL in 2026. He is willing to do this for a year to keep his name "out there" and as a favor to Andrew Luck but has no intention of remaining beyond a year. It wouldn't be public if that is the case because Reich doesn't want to be a "lame duck" from day 1.
Quote:I hope that is the case and that he gets to operate like a real coach and not just a caretaker. In particular I do not want to see too much staff continuity. Our staff has not covered itself in glory and, even more importantly/fundamentally, if we are going to have a coach the caliber of Reich I really don’t want him saddled with coaches the caliber of what we attracted in MTL/Muir/Taylor times. I hope Reich and Luck swaps out a healthy number of our assistants for what they view to be upgrades. It doesn't all need to happen now but, ideally, Reich becomes a permanent coach and by January has his stamp on the program.Ideally, that would happen. Stanford has to be prepared in case it doesn't.
(03-31-2025, 04:55 PM)msqueri Wrote: It occurs to me that “interim” could also be a political move by Luck to circumvent the Stanford bureaucracy. Interim avoids the time and gate keepers of the “committee” process Stanford always insists on. If Reich has some success and looks like he’s turning us around it is simpler to remove the interim tag than to hope he’s the one the committee settles on in the first place.It is entirely possible this is the case. An additional political reason for an "interim" tag is that Stanford is also looking for an AD, at least ostensibly. It may be "important" to many AD candidates that they get to participate in selecting the head football coach. There may also be other more concrete considerations. Reich has never been a college coach. He may want to "try it out" and see if he wants to continue doing it. He may also want to determine if Stanford is a place he wants to work "permanently". The "interim" tag gives him the flexibility to do that. At the end of the year, the answer to one or both may be "no". We have to be prepared for that to be the case. It is also possible that by next December we have another candidate that we prefer. The "interim" tag would make that simpler as well. It is also entirely possible Reich fully intends to return to the NFL in 2026. He is willing to do this for a year to keep his name "out there" and as a favor to Andrew Luck but has no intention of remaining beyond a year. It wouldn't be public if that is the case because Reich doesn't want to be a "lame duck" from day 1.
Quote:I hope that is the case and that he gets to operate like a real coach and not just a caretaker. In particular I do not want to see too much staff continuity. Our staff has not covered itself in glory and, even more importantly/fundamentally, if we are going to have a coach the caliber of Reich I really don’t want him saddled with coaches the caliber of what we attracted in MTL/Muir/Taylor times. I hope Reich and Luck swaps out a healthy number of our assistants for what they view to be upgrades. It doesn't all need to happen now but, ideally, Reich becomes a permanent coach and by January has his stamp on the program.Ideally, that would happen. Stanford has to be prepared in case it doesn't.
(03-31-2025, 02:30 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Absolutely love this hire. While I remember being puzzled by his results after the Colts, if Luck likes him, so do I.
(03-31-2025, 02:30 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Absolutely love this hire. While I remember being puzzled by his results after the Colts, if Luck likes him, so do I.