[stupac2]

So, the larger picture, while we focus on players, is:  How many components can one remove from a very high-functioning football staff before its functioning drops off?  And, if we do well,  anyone think Mason won't be gone, either to a higher-paying college DC gig or an NFL post after this season?

Do other schools not have this problem? I don't really follow anything down to that level, but I'd expect that few coaching staffs, even successful ones, stay together all that long. I recall reading last year that only two schools had had HC, OC, and DC stay together for some number of years, and it was Oregon and Navy (sorry for the vagueness, this was a while ago). I think that part of being a successful coach is the ability to identify talent and put it to good use on the coaching staff as well as on the field.

I'm also not really sold on losing Pep being a disadvantaged. Weren't fans constantly complaining about playcalling last year? The idea that Stanford only really got creative for the first two (scripted) series and in the 4th quarter when the game was on the line has been pretty pervasive. If a coaching change can shake that up I'd think it would be a good thing.

Finally, Mason's comments on Stanford vs other jobs seem very similar to Shaw's (working with special kids, it's a special place, etc etc). I fully expect him to leave at some point, since this is the highest post he'll have here for a while, but I wouldn't be surprised if he stuck around for a few more years. Who knows, maybe he likes it here enough to stay for a long time. He's here for this year, so I'm not going to worry about it.

[stupac2]

So, the larger picture, while we focus on players, is:  How many components can one remove from a very high-functioning football staff before its functioning drops off?  And, if we do well,  anyone think Mason won't be gone, either to a higher-paying college DC gig or an NFL post after this season?

Do other schools not have this problem? I don't really follow anything down to that level, but I'd expect that few coaching staffs, even successful ones, stay together all that long. I recall reading last year that only two schools had had HC, OC, and DC stay together for some number of years, and it was Oregon and Navy (sorry for the vagueness, this was a while ago). I think that part of being a successful coach is the ability to identify talent and put it to good use on the coaching staff as well as on the field.

I'm also not really sold on losing Pep being a disadvantaged. Weren't fans constantly complaining about playcalling last year? The idea that Stanford only really got creative for the first two (scripted) series and in the 4th quarter when the game was on the line has been pretty pervasive. If a coaching change can shake that up I'd think it would be a good thing.

Finally, Mason's comments on Stanford vs other jobs seem very similar to Shaw's (working with special kids, it's a special place, etc etc). I fully expect him to leave at some point, since this is the highest post he'll have here for a while, but I wouldn't be surprised if he stuck around for a few more years. Who knows, maybe he likes it here enough to stay for a long time. He's here for this year, so I'm not going to worry about it.