[Farm93]

NOT ARGUING THE POINT. BUT GIVING HIM CREDIT FOR MASON'S ACTUAL BRILLIANCE ON THE JOB MEANS I'VE GOT TO ALSO BLAME HIM (SHAW) FOR HIS ABJECTLY MISERABLE PERFORMANCE AS AN OC, QB COACH, PLAY SELECTOR, GAME MANAGER, AND INTERVIEWEE.

Kind of a bundle deal though.  Give him some blame if you must for Nunes and the offense struggles, but then as the HC he has to get some credit for the D.  He could have hired a bend until you break type DC, but he didn't.  Who knows how much the current D philosophy reflects his views of the game, but it does look and feel a lot like Willie Shaw's D.  As a student at the time I loved that the defense found a way to get its best players to really make plays.  I had no real understanding that Stanford's D history was so bleak and would return to those terrible days for most of the next 20 years.  So some how, some way, the family beliefs about D playmakers have found their way to this team.  In any event, the bundle deal means that Coach Shaw is 17-4 and 6-2 without Luck.  Both numbers are very, very good by Stanford Football standards.

How much is/was Luck, Skov, the new stadium, the new AD, the move to the shady side, the gift from donors, etc.  is up for debate.  The reality is that Coach Shaw's Stanford Football team (and it is a team game) is 17-4.  Not 21-0, but definitely better than most on this board would have predicted when JH left for the 49ers.

I remember last year most that thought 8-4 or 9-3 were above the 2011 mean.  This year the mean was down around 8-4 or 7-5 for 2012.  So Shaw is exceeding expectations of some of the most loyal fans but oddly at the same time apparently not meeting the undefined standards expected of a coach by some in that same group.  ::)

[Farm93]

NOT ARGUING THE POINT. BUT GIVING HIM CREDIT FOR MASON'S ACTUAL BRILLIANCE ON THE JOB MEANS I'VE GOT TO ALSO BLAME HIM (SHAW) FOR HIS ABJECTLY MISERABLE PERFORMANCE AS AN OC, QB COACH, PLAY SELECTOR, GAME MANAGER, AND INTERVIEWEE.

Kind of a bundle deal though.  Give him some blame if you must for Nunes and the offense struggles, but then as the HC he has to get some credit for the D.  He could have hired a bend until you break type DC, but he didn't.  Who knows how much the current D philosophy reflects his views of the game, but it does look and feel a lot like Willie Shaw's D.  As a student at the time I loved that the defense found a way to get its best players to really make plays.  I had no real understanding that Stanford's D history was so bleak and would return to those terrible days for most of the next 20 years.  So some how, some way, the family beliefs about D playmakers have found their way to this team.  In any event, the bundle deal means that Coach Shaw is 17-4 and 6-2 without Luck.  Both numbers are very, very good by Stanford Football standards.

How much is/was Luck, Skov, the new stadium, the new AD, the move to the shady side, the gift from donors, etc.  is up for debate.  The reality is that Coach Shaw's Stanford Football team (and it is a team game) is 17-4.  Not 21-0, but definitely better than most on this board would have predicted when JH left for the 49ers.

I remember last year most that thought 8-4 or 9-3 were above the 2011 mean.  This year the mean was down around 8-4 or 7-5 for 2012.  So Shaw is exceeding expectations of some of the most loyal fans but oddly at the same time apparently not meeting the undefined standards expected of a coach by some in that same group.  ::)