[Goose]

Unless and until Shaw gives up the headsets and menu, it doesn't matter who is hired as OC.  Honestly, I'd take letting Tavita call the plays . . . if for no other reason than to see if that guy has any ability as an OC.  We're all making a bunch of assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC, and I don't think that's warranted.

While I agree with the concept that as long as Shaw is directly involved in the offense, the role of the OC will not be front and center, I do think the OC still matters. It is just that we have much less visibility as to how much and in what areas. Obviously, in the current system the OC and Shaw have to be very much in lockstep, not merely on the same page. I do agree that many are making assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC that are difficult to justify by known facts. FWIW, this is often true about assistant coaches in general. For all we know, Tavita may in fact be calling the plays over the headset and Shaw is simply occasionally editing those calls. Granted, I don't think that is the case but in theory it could be.

The benefit of hiring an outside OC (again, assuming Shaw relinquishes his grip on the O) is that we'll have a completely different scheme/approach installed.  I view the chances of that being an upgrade/improvement to status quo as greater than 50%.

I do not agree with you here if we are talking about a "generic" new OC. Most available hires are available for a reason. Most available hires probably don't want to work under Stanford's constraints. To expect an improvement, you must believe the particular hire brings something that is better than we have. Different does not in general mean better. If it did, Helton would still be the U$C coach as he got an entire new offense installed by administrative fiat.

[Goose]

Unless and until Shaw gives up the headsets and menu, it doesn't matter who is hired as OC.  Honestly, I'd take letting Tavita call the plays . . . if for no other reason than to see if that guy has any ability as an OC.  We're all making a bunch of assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC, and I don't think that's warranted.

While I agree with the concept that as long as Shaw is directly involved in the offense, the role of the OC will not be front and center, I do think the OC still matters. It is just that we have much less visibility as to how much and in what areas. Obviously, in the current system the OC and Shaw have to be very much in lockstep, not merely on the same page. I do agree that many are making assumptions about Tavita's ability as an OC that are difficult to justify by known facts. FWIW, this is often true about assistant coaches in general. For all we know, Tavita may in fact be calling the plays over the headset and Shaw is simply occasionally editing those calls. Granted, I don't think that is the case but in theory it could be.

The benefit of hiring an outside OC (again, assuming Shaw relinquishes his grip on the O) is that we'll have a completely different scheme/approach installed.  I view the chances of that being an upgrade/improvement to status quo as greater than 50%.

I do not agree with you here if we are talking about a "generic" new OC. Most available hires are available for a reason. Most available hires probably don't want to work under Stanford's constraints. To expect an improvement, you must believe the particular hire brings something that is better than we have. Different does not in general mean better. If it did, Helton would still be the U$C coach as he got an entire new offense installed by administrative fiat.