[Goose]

The issue is that Shawgren didn't try ANYTHING different - reverse, screen, flare, slant, putting Love in the slot, putting Love and Speights in the backfield together, etc. etc. If we'd run a half dozen of these types of plays and still lost, you couldn't point to a conservative, pedestrian game plan as the reason we lost. Of course, if we'd done that we might not have lost.

Or, we still might have lost, and then people on this board would be saying "Shaw is an idiot! He went away from the tried and true strengths of the team and look what happened!". If we are reasonably intellectually honest, we will admit this will be what happens. In fact, we might have lost worse, due to picks because of bad choices by the QB. But, we wouldn't know it was worse because there is no known "control" result.
There have been tons of alternative "recommendations" for things that need to be changed in the program. Some of them probably have significant merit, but which ones?
The real truth is that players play. Coaches coach. The coaching can help, but it will not, and cannot, win by itself. The last two years, IMHO, Stanford's offense has suffered from three things: First, CMAC and BLOVE, great as they are, are not the "ideal" backs for the offense Stanford has run in previous years. That has forced the offense to adapt, and in some cases that has been harder to do than we realize. We are built behind the idea we can get 1 yard anytime we need to. The last two years, we couldn't. Second, our OL has not played well, period. Many here conjecture it is the coaches. I think it is the players. The TWU has just lacked the idea that we will do what it takes to dominate. Yes, everybody has bad games, but in the past the TWU would get it together and recover. WSU shouldn't be able to give us fits the whole game long. The players themselves have to step up and say "enough of this ****".  We should not fail on 4th down because a lineman is just standing there, blocking no one. If it isn't clear who to block on a running play, hit SOMEBODY. Lead downfield. Do something! No way have the coaches failed to instruct in the fundamentals. We are just not aggressive on the OL anymore, and I put that on the players more than the coaches. Yes, there is talent. But they need to use it! Now, many of you may feel I am being a bit unfair, and that's OK, I could be wrong. However, the players are the ones that play. The coaches can't do it for them. Third, our QB play has been poor. It isn't the 10,000 play playbook. It is executing the play that was called. Burns and Chryst both were streaky at best. We can talk about this for hours, but the fact is that neither played well reliably against quality opposition. That isn't just coaching. Coaching can help, but guys that have "it" show that in losing efforts as well as winning ones. I never have been able to say "valiant try" about any of our QB's the last two years, with the possible exception of Burns against UCLA (which was a win). That game might very well have ended with a loss (just like WSU and SDSU) if the D hadn't got a strip (and a TD) at the end.
It is true that Shaw has been playing very conservative football. However, that may be because he knows the limitations of his people. It also may because he doesn't know what he is going to get at game time. Guys look great in practice and then just don't do it on the field. I hope that this Friday the OL comes out and plays like men possessed. If the do, we are in great shape, even with our other issues. If they don't, we will have to "back in" to a win, which won't be likely against UW.

[Goose]

The issue is that Shawgren didn't try ANYTHING different - reverse, screen, flare, slant, putting Love in the slot, putting Love and Speights in the backfield together, etc. etc. If we'd run a half dozen of these types of plays and still lost, you couldn't point to a conservative, pedestrian game plan as the reason we lost. Of course, if we'd done that we might not have lost.

Or, we still might have lost, and then people on this board would be saying "Shaw is an idiot! He went away from the tried and true strengths of the team and look what happened!". If we are reasonably intellectually honest, we will admit this will be what happens. In fact, we might have lost worse, due to picks because of bad choices by the QB. But, we wouldn't know it was worse because there is no known "control" result.
There have been tons of alternative "recommendations" for things that need to be changed in the program. Some of them probably have significant merit, but which ones?
The real truth is that players play. Coaches coach. The coaching can help, but it will not, and cannot, win by itself. The last two years, IMHO, Stanford's offense has suffered from three things: First, CMAC and BLOVE, great as they are, are not the "ideal" backs for the offense Stanford has run in previous years. That has forced the offense to adapt, and in some cases that has been harder to do than we realize. We are built behind the idea we can get 1 yard anytime we need to. The last two years, we couldn't. Second, our OL has not played well, period. Many here conjecture it is the coaches. I think it is the players. The TWU has just lacked the idea that we will do what it takes to dominate. Yes, everybody has bad games, but in the past the TWU would get it together and recover. WSU shouldn't be able to give us fits the whole game long. The players themselves have to step up and say "enough of this ****".  We should not fail on 4th down because a lineman is just standing there, blocking no one. If it isn't clear who to block on a running play, hit SOMEBODY. Lead downfield. Do something! No way have the coaches failed to instruct in the fundamentals. We are just not aggressive on the OL anymore, and I put that on the players more than the coaches. Yes, there is talent. But they need to use it! Now, many of you may feel I am being a bit unfair, and that's OK, I could be wrong. However, the players are the ones that play. The coaches can't do it for them. Third, our QB play has been poor. It isn't the 10,000 play playbook. It is executing the play that was called. Burns and Chryst both were streaky at best. We can talk about this for hours, but the fact is that neither played well reliably against quality opposition. That isn't just coaching. Coaching can help, but guys that have "it" show that in losing efforts as well as winning ones. I never have been able to say "valiant try" about any of our QB's the last two years, with the possible exception of Burns against UCLA (which was a win). That game might very well have ended with a loss (just like WSU and SDSU) if the D hadn't got a strip (and a TD) at the end.
It is true that Shaw has been playing very conservative football. However, that may be because he knows the limitations of his people. It also may because he doesn't know what he is going to get at game time. Guys look great in practice and then just don't do it on the field. I hope that this Friday the OL comes out and plays like men possessed. If the do, we are in great shape, even with our other issues. If they don't, we will have to "back in" to a win, which won't be likely against UW.