(12-13-2020, 03:52 PM)pefloresjr Wrote: I agree with you Lex but you will never get the Shawtagonists to agree. They have planted their flag and intend to stand by it.
The criticism regarding injuries has also been something that many take as gospel but is absolute foolishness. When Harbaugh brought in the new regime, the number of starts missed due to injury dropped noticeably and that seems to have made people believe that the coaches have some control over injuries. However, those decreases were mostly due to the fact that before Harbaugh, many players were not fully committed to their training and the team. Getting that commitment from the team and having them enforce it among the players was the thing that really reduced the lost starts due to injury. After that, it is pure chance and there isn't a damn thing the coaches can do about it. See the Niners and other well run pro teams that sometimes suffer critical injuries that take them from great teams to sub standard teams. I've actually spoken to several former Stanford and NFL pro players about this and they confirm it. Once you have good training and commitment, the rest is luck. Stanford was down one trainer for a year but that simply wouldn't explain the injuries because they weren't the kind of injuries you can control for, they were simply bad luck.
You are also right that the Harbaugh/Shaw run foundation, clock burning offensive strategy is the path to success at Stanford. That is also the scheme that has given our defense a leg up for many years by limiting the time they have to log on the field. The "overly" complex schemes are simply formations and plays that have several options based on the things the defense is showing. When it is operating, it is next level football that works. Stanford gets smart players and should have a scheme that tries to take advantage of those smarts. I recall the color guy during Big Game noting when Mills audibled to a run play to the short side based on the defense. The play gained around 5 yards and wasn't anything that a regular fan would really notice but the announcer noted that the change to a successful modest gain was next level performance by Mills and Stanford. Shaw should get credit for that and he does from me. However, some people want to focus on "the Denny's menu" that Shaw uses while at the same time noting that Shanahan is a brilliant offensive mind despite the fact that he also has a big plastic play chart. Ridiculous. The same goes for his conservative play tendencies at the end of games. That has won Stanford more games than any of the Shawtagonists can count but they focus on the few games where that approach arguably cost us the game. You can't argue against that because it is based on speculation about what might have happened. I know we have to take the good outcomes with the bad and no team has a coach that magically always makes the winning decision.
I do criticize Shaw during games like everyone else at times but I don't think he doesn't know what he is doing or can't change to improve as some seem to. He has been slow to adjust to the new signing deadlines and lower get rate on offers but that has clearly caused a big change in the number of offers we have out for 2022. Shaw also needs to focus more recruiting on filling holes in our lineup but that is sometimes easier said than done given our limited recruiting pool. One thing I think is ridiculous in some critique of Shaw regarding recruiting is the idea that he isn't committed to it or is lazy. One example is the fact that we haven't used all of our official visits in the last few years. The reason for that was that Shaw loved the Big Visit and wanted to save those visits for that event. It was extremely successful for many years to have recruits on that visit get the news of their admission to Stanford and was a great recruiting and team bonding event. Shaw tried for too long to hang on to that success but the early signing dates have doomed it. I know our virtual visits stand out as special according to many recruits and I expect we will have adjusted the in person visits once those begin again. Yes the responsibility is Shaw's but the problems we have had in recruiting are not because the coaching staff lack commitment to it.
Shaw deserves great credit for getting this young team to perform well in very, very tough circumstances. This isn't a great team, but I love these guys and the way Shaw has them playing and improving. I do not "expect" that we will be great every year and know that there will be ups and downs. I believe Shaw has earned the right to see us through those ups and downs. If we end up staying down for too long, I will say it's time for him to go, but until then, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Looking forward to rooting on our guys and coaches next week in So Cal. Go Road Dogs!
Cheers,
Pete F.
The problem with Lex's position - and evidently yours, as you fully embrace him - is that Stanford should always be a "take-the-air-out and grind clock" kind of offense. Lex has maintained that position throughout all highs and lows, regardless of caliber of O or D, during the Shaw Era. It's poppycock.
The other problem is the fundamental misapprehension that the only way you can have a good running game is by grind-it-out, time consuming drives. That is also poppycock. I don't know why anyone buys into that false assumption. Stanford has had plenty of good, balanced, strong-running offenses that weren't grind-it-outers/bore everyone to death style of play. And btw, I agree that the plays called yesterday were better than Historic Shaw - but again, that bar is so low that people cling to improvements like its manna from heaven.
But hey, I guess we all should be ecstatic that Stanford is 3-2 . . . I get it, especially after the 0-2 start.
I just think you guys have lost all sense of perspective and what Stanford could be with better defensive recruiting (and if you think clinging onto Big Visit is anything other than recruiting malpractice, then you're not paying attention to what's going on in the real world) and an O that better plays to the team's considerable abilities.
But the horse is dead as can be.
Go Stanford. Beat the Bruins (assuming a game) and call it a good season.
P.S. When watching the game real time yesterday, did anyone else think Stanford had to run the ball on second down on its last possession of the 1H? It's a medium thing, but clock management was pretty bad there.