[winflop]

There's a few different counterarguments here.

The first and most important is confirmation bias. The times that fit the narrative (Shaw "stubbornly" doing whatever and it failing) are more salient than the ones that don't (in either direction, breaking the pattern or being stubborn and it working), and no one ever brings those ones up. So we hear about that MSU 4th down ad nauseam, but people rarely bring up the times we go into that look and then throw a surprise pass, or do something unexpected out of it. But we do those things! Off the top of my head I can think of a couple. Maybe you'd prefer they were in higher-leverage situations, but we still break trend sometimes.

The second is that when things aren't going it's not clear what you'd actually want to do. It depends on why things aren't working. Is the other team doing something specific to counter what we want? Are they just really good? Are our players failing to execute in some specific way? Are we just failing to get the bounces to go our way?

I'm sure you can come up with more, but the important thing is that each of those is going to have separate remedies. Changing the gameplan might work, but it also might make things worse. It also pays to keep in mind that the players aren't professionals and there's pretty limited practice/film time during the season, and some guys might not be practicing at all due to injury but still playing. We talk about our enormous playsheet, but there's only so many of those plays that are actually going to be heavily practiced, and when things are tough you probably don't want to be wandering into areas where guys might not really know what they're doing.

Now, maybe you argue that that is a separate problem with coaching, not really having a plan B available, but I'm not sure it's something that can be avoided.

Also, one thing that I keep thinking whenever this is discussed is that every team has those days. What do you think Clemson fans were saying after they lost to Syracuse? Or OSU fans when they got boatraced by Iowa? Oaklahoma derped away a game against ISU. It happens to basically every team every year, the best team in the country is rarely undefeated. Do we derp away games more or less than other programs with our talent level? (Meaning, not Alabama/OSU but whatever the next tier down is.) It's not clear to me that we do.

Should we strive for a higher standard? Sure, but at some point you have to face reality and admit that stuff happens and it's not necessarily anyone's fault in particular.

I get much of what you're saying. When it comes to what fans of other schools think, I don't see Clemson pulling a Syracuse twice a year every year. It's about frequency and repetition. I think Stanford makes this kind of mistake at least once and most often twice a season, year in and year out. That's too often IMnsHO.

Not having a Plan B (or Plan C) is inexcusable at this level of competition. When my older son was planning his Eagle Scout project, I asked him what his Plan B was at every major step of the project. He didn't get what I meant until he went to do the project and needed to go to that Plan B twice. Gameplanning includes game theory and contingency planning. I have no doubt that there is a Plan B and probably a Plan C. My concern is that they don't go to it often enough.

I'm sure there are times where sticking with Plan A has worked. I have no empirical data but I doubt it's substantially over 50% of the time and might be less. Getting this half-right was good enough in the 80s when a .500 record was acceptable. Not any more.

Back to the original premise of my argument - I think that bringing in an OC from outside the program would have been a good thing because I think a different voice in Shaw's ear about making adjustments in the gameplan when it isn't working. I think it's one of two things that need to improve on offense.

[winflop]

There's a few different counterarguments here.

The first and most important is confirmation bias. The times that fit the narrative (Shaw "stubbornly" doing whatever and it failing) are more salient than the ones that don't (in either direction, breaking the pattern or being stubborn and it working), and no one ever brings those ones up. So we hear about that MSU 4th down ad nauseam, but people rarely bring up the times we go into that look and then throw a surprise pass, or do something unexpected out of it. But we do those things! Off the top of my head I can think of a couple. Maybe you'd prefer they were in higher-leverage situations, but we still break trend sometimes.

The second is that when things aren't going it's not clear what you'd actually want to do. It depends on why things aren't working. Is the other team doing something specific to counter what we want? Are they just really good? Are our players failing to execute in some specific way? Are we just failing to get the bounces to go our way?

I'm sure you can come up with more, but the important thing is that each of those is going to have separate remedies. Changing the gameplan might work, but it also might make things worse. It also pays to keep in mind that the players aren't professionals and there's pretty limited practice/film time during the season, and some guys might not be practicing at all due to injury but still playing. We talk about our enormous playsheet, but there's only so many of those plays that are actually going to be heavily practiced, and when things are tough you probably don't want to be wandering into areas where guys might not really know what they're doing.

Now, maybe you argue that that is a separate problem with coaching, not really having a plan B available, but I'm not sure it's something that can be avoided.

Also, one thing that I keep thinking whenever this is discussed is that every team has those days. What do you think Clemson fans were saying after they lost to Syracuse? Or OSU fans when they got boatraced by Iowa? Oaklahoma derped away a game against ISU. It happens to basically every team every year, the best team in the country is rarely undefeated. Do we derp away games more or less than other programs with our talent level? (Meaning, not Alabama/OSU but whatever the next tier down is.) It's not clear to me that we do.

Should we strive for a higher standard? Sure, but at some point you have to face reality and admit that stuff happens and it's not necessarily anyone's fault in particular.

I get much of what you're saying. When it comes to what fans of other schools think, I don't see Clemson pulling a Syracuse twice a year every year. It's about frequency and repetition. I think Stanford makes this kind of mistake at least once and most often twice a season, year in and year out. That's too often IMnsHO.

Not having a Plan B (or Plan C) is inexcusable at this level of competition. When my older son was planning his Eagle Scout project, I asked him what his Plan B was at every major step of the project. He didn't get what I meant until he went to do the project and needed to go to that Plan B twice. Gameplanning includes game theory and contingency planning. I have no doubt that there is a Plan B and probably a Plan C. My concern is that they don't go to it often enough.

I'm sure there are times where sticking with Plan A has worked. I have no empirical data but I doubt it's substantially over 50% of the time and might be less. Getting this half-right was good enough in the 80s when a .500 record was acceptable. Not any more.

Back to the original premise of my argument - I think that bringing in an OC from outside the program would have been a good thing because I think a different voice in Shaw's ear about making adjustments in the gameplan when it isn't working. I think it's one of two things that need to improve on offense.