[Goose]

We may disagree with Shaw's decisions, but my big takeaway from this podcast is that Shaw owns his decisions and doesn't deflect responsibility to others. And he's right that sometimes he has made controversial decisions that worked out well (he cited starting Hogan, but there are others).

However, what continues to bother me is that Shaw doesn't seem willing to admit that sometimes he isn't right. I'd love for him to admit that he does & has made mistakes, but that he stands by his overall record on those decisions and also that there are decisions he makes that outsiders don't have visibility to.

Winflop, perhaps Shaw figures he doesn't need to state the obvious. Anyone who makes difficult decisions is going to be wrong some of the time. The problem is that, in football and in governance, it is sometimes hard to know, even in retrospect, if a decision was wrong. The "good decision, bad outcome" problem exists, as well as "bad decision, the players bailed me out" cases. Coaches get judged only by results, not whether they were "right". The two are correlated, but not identical. So, if you don't get fired, you are "right enough". Another way to look at it is "If the play works, the coach is right. If it doesn't, he's is wrong". Probably we would all agree that isn't necessarily true. But if the play working isn't an adequate metric, what is? A vote? What Winflop says? What BC says?

[Goose]

We may disagree with Shaw's decisions, but my big takeaway from this podcast is that Shaw owns his decisions and doesn't deflect responsibility to others. And he's right that sometimes he has made controversial decisions that worked out well (he cited starting Hogan, but there are others).

However, what continues to bother me is that Shaw doesn't seem willing to admit that sometimes he isn't right. I'd love for him to admit that he does & has made mistakes, but that he stands by his overall record on those decisions and also that there are decisions he makes that outsiders don't have visibility to.

Winflop, perhaps Shaw figures he doesn't need to state the obvious. Anyone who makes difficult decisions is going to be wrong some of the time. The problem is that, in football and in governance, it is sometimes hard to know, even in retrospect, if a decision was wrong. The "good decision, bad outcome" problem exists, as well as "bad decision, the players bailed me out" cases. Coaches get judged only by results, not whether they were "right". The two are correlated, but not identical. So, if you don't get fired, you are "right enough". Another way to look at it is "If the play works, the coach is right. If it doesn't, he's is wrong". Probably we would all agree that isn't necessarily true. But if the play working isn't an adequate metric, what is? A vote? What Winflop says? What BC says?