01-10-2026, 05:31 PM
(01-10-2026, 04:18 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(01-10-2026, 12:55 PM)Goose Wrote:According to sources on the On3 site, Tavita passed on PK for DC, because of a cultural fit. In other words, he isn't a "Stanford Man". That was my point. PK was a fit at Boise and Washington, then Texas. Why not here? Sheesh.(01-10-2026, 11:14 AM)cardcrimson Wrote: What is a true Stanford man?
We need players and coaches with a serious edge to them. We had them with Harbaugh and his players and coaches, some of whom didn't quite fit the mole of a traditional Stanford man. Shaw filled our team with Stanford men, and look where that got us.
I think the question of what defines "a true Stanford man" is relevant. For some reason it appears that many people define a "Stanford Man" as someone who is somewhat smart, socially adept, and who "goes along to get along". While I do think that the increasing selectivity of Stanford admissions has led to more of of this phenotype, IMO the "Stanford Man" has always been more diverse than that. Granted, it has been 54 years since I was there, but in general Stanford men were competitive to a fault. Many of them did have a serious edge about them. Others were the "quiet assassin" type. Virtually all of them had serious talent in some area, and many of them were actually pretty good at lots of things. Some were in-your-face about it, most were not. Even back then some of the football players didn't fit the mold of a stay-in-your lane traditional so-called "Stanford Man", but there were equally many "regular" students that also did not. OTOH there were plenty of guys that were football players that didn't "stick out" socially in any obvious way. These people were all "Stanford Men". They were definitely not all alike.
(01-10-2026, 11:14 AM)cardcrimson Wrote: Shaw filled our team with Stanford men, and look where that got us.(01-10-2026, 11:18 AM)BobK Wrote: Rose bowls. That’s where it got usGuys like Stepfan Taylor might want to discuss that statement with you, as probably would Remound Wright and CMC. There are a host of other "Stanford Men" on both sides of the ball who played for Shaw that also probably would like a word. Later in Shaw's tenure he was no longer able to attract the total package that could play the run-heavy offense that previously had been his bread and butter, not that he didn't try. He had to adapt. CMC was certainly a different kind of back, and Bryce Love even more so. However, they too were "Stanford Men".
do you have a link? the irony. i specifically do not like the tavita hire because he was a stanford man from one of the worst periods of stanford football. people were openly opining why he was being retained. outside talent with new perspectives is a good thing over stubborn ways that did not work
