[gailtate]

...Is Still On The Table.

This team stinks. Really

[gailtate]

...Is Still On The Table.

This team stinks. Really

[BostonCard]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

[BostonCard]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

[Brickcity]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

While I hate to see the program continue its steady decline under Shaw, a complete meltdown this season might speed up his departure. Which would be a good thing.

[Brickcity]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

While I hate to see the program continue its steady decline under Shaw, a complete meltdown this season might speed up his departure. Which would be a good thing.

[BostonCard]

Sorry, a complete meltdown will not speed his demise, and it most likely would mean another lost decade if it happened.

BC

[BostonCard]

Sorry, a complete meltdown will not speed his demise, and it most likely would mean another lost decade if it happened.

BC

[JohnR34231]

Sorry, a complete meltdown will not speed his demise, and it most likely would mean another lost decade if it happened.

BC

Yeah, Shaw isn't going anywhere for at least another couple of years, so let's see if he can get the program back to where it was in 2016-2018. Any more than that is probably too much to ask.
I haven't really soured on him yet, but business as usual clearly isn't going to get the job done.

[JohnR34231]

Sorry, a complete meltdown will not speed his demise, and it most likely would mean another lost decade if it happened.

BC

Yeah, Shaw isn't going anywhere for at least another couple of years, so let's see if he can get the program back to where it was in 2016-2018. Any more than that is probably too much to ask.
I haven't really soured on him yet, but business as usual clearly isn't going to get the job done.

[lex24]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

While I hate to see the program continue its steady decline under Shaw, a complete meltdown this season might speed up his departure. Which would be a good thing.

One, he’s not going anywhere anytime soon.  Not gonna happen.  Two if he does, the program will sink further. So, careful what you wish for.

[lex24]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

While I hate to see the program continue its steady decline under Shaw, a complete meltdown this season might speed up his departure. Which would be a good thing.

One, he’s not going anywhere anytime soon.  Not gonna happen.  Two if he does, the program will sink further. So, careful what you wish for.

[Goose]

Unfortunately, this team is actually bad. The defense was never expected to be great, and I honestly think they have played better than expected by me at least. Several times the D has stopped the other team and turned the ball over to the offense with little time remaining. Two first downs and the game is over. One first down and the opponent would have a really tough time scoring. Offense couldn't do it, mostly because the OL stinks. That is unexpected and that is what makes this team bad instead of average.

The injuries to the WR core is a problem, but injuries happen in football. They happen more often if the receivers run lots of patterns into the middle of the field, and if the receivers are going to get hit hard a lot because the opposing defense can concentrate on short pass defense. I am not saying we shouldn't throw those passes. We have to because we face lots of 3rd and 5+. With no run game, it just concentrates the offense into fewer bodies. If things went just about as well as possible this year, 8-4 was indeed possible. With no running game, 3-9 is indeed possible, perhaps probable. The team that was out there yesterday won't beat OSU, Utah, or ND. It also wouldn't beat Kal.

I am hoping that the team will actually play a bit better than they did Saturday. This game it seemed that nobody showed up. Not UW, not Stanford, and not the crowd. It was a non-event. That is really the only reason for hope ATM. And maybe our punter will remember how to punt too.

[Goose]

Unfortunately, this team is actually bad. The defense was never expected to be great, and I honestly think they have played better than expected by me at least. Several times the D has stopped the other team and turned the ball over to the offense with little time remaining. Two first downs and the game is over. One first down and the opponent would have a really tough time scoring. Offense couldn't do it, mostly because the OL stinks. That is unexpected and that is what makes this team bad instead of average.

The injuries to the WR core is a problem, but injuries happen in football. They happen more often if the receivers run lots of patterns into the middle of the field, and if the receivers are going to get hit hard a lot because the opposing defense can concentrate on short pass defense. I am not saying we shouldn't throw those passes. We have to because we face lots of 3rd and 5+. With no run game, it just concentrates the offense into fewer bodies. If things went just about as well as possible this year, 8-4 was indeed possible. With no running game, 3-9 is indeed possible, perhaps probable. The team that was out there yesterday won't beat OSU, Utah, or ND. It also wouldn't beat Kal.

I am hoping that the team will actually play a bit better than they did Saturday. This game it seemed that nobody showed up. Not UW, not Stanford, and not the crowd. It was a non-event. That is really the only reason for hope ATM. And maybe our punter will remember how to punt too.

[JohnR34231]

Unfortunately, this team is actually bad. The defense was never expected to be great, and I honestly think they have played better than expected by me at least. Several times the D has stopped the other team and turned the ball over to the offense with little time remaining. Two first downs and the game is over. One first down and the opponent would have a really tough time scoring. Offense couldn't do it, mostly because the OL stinks. That is unexpected and that is what makes this team bad instead of average.

The injuries to the WR core is a problem, but injuries happen in football. They happen more often if the receivers run lots of patterns into the middle of the field, and if the receivers are going to get hit hard a lot because the opposing defense can concentrate on short pass defense. I am not saying we shouldn't throw those passes. We have to because we face lots of 3rd and 5+. With no run game, it just concentrates the offense into fewer bodies. If things went just about as well as possible this year, 8-4 was indeed possible. With no running game, 3-9 is indeed possible, perhaps probable. The team that was out there yesterday won't beat OSU, Utah, or ND. It also wouldn't beat Kal.

I am hoping that the team will actually play a bit better than they did Saturday. This game it seemed that nobody showed up. Not UW, not Stanford, and not the crowd. It was a non-event. That is really the only reason for hope ATM. And maybe our punter will remember how to punt too.

Yeah, if the O gets a couple of first downs and closes out the games against Wazzu and Washington we are 5-3, still in the running for the North championship and people are fairly happy with how the season is going. The defense got stops and gave them the opportunity to do so. Why couldn't they close them out? You can blame the lack of a running game. Last year we beat the Huskies by holding on to the ball using our running attack. Not this year.

[JohnR34231]

Unfortunately, this team is actually bad. The defense was never expected to be great, and I honestly think they have played better than expected by me at least. Several times the D has stopped the other team and turned the ball over to the offense with little time remaining. Two first downs and the game is over. One first down and the opponent would have a really tough time scoring. Offense couldn't do it, mostly because the OL stinks. That is unexpected and that is what makes this team bad instead of average.

The injuries to the WR core is a problem, but injuries happen in football. They happen more often if the receivers run lots of patterns into the middle of the field, and if the receivers are going to get hit hard a lot because the opposing defense can concentrate on short pass defense. I am not saying we shouldn't throw those passes. We have to because we face lots of 3rd and 5+. With no run game, it just concentrates the offense into fewer bodies. If things went just about as well as possible this year, 8-4 was indeed possible. With no running game, 3-9 is indeed possible, perhaps probable. The team that was out there yesterday won't beat OSU, Utah, or ND. It also wouldn't beat Kal.

I am hoping that the team will actually play a bit better than they did Saturday. This game it seemed that nobody showed up. Not UW, not Stanford, and not the crowd. It was a non-event. That is really the only reason for hope ATM. And maybe our punter will remember how to punt too.

Yeah, if the O gets a couple of first downs and closes out the games against Wazzu and Washington we are 5-3, still in the running for the North championship and people are fairly happy with how the season is going. The defense got stops and gave them the opportunity to do so. Why couldn't they close them out? You can blame the lack of a running game. Last year we beat the Huskies by holding on to the ball using our running attack. Not this year.

[gailtate]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

Methinks YOU are projecting.

[gailtate]

You are right, of course, but I have to say, you sound almost gleeful.

BC

Methinks YOU are projecting.

[gailtate]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

[gailtate]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

[lex24]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

Great.  Pick your next coach.  Be specific.  And by all means tell us why we should expect success when there is essentially no fan base, the Admin doesn’t seem to care, the student body doesn’t care etc.

You think there are people lining  up for the job?  Choices would be a so called up and comer. Like Scott Frost was. But apparently he shot his wad prior to Nebraska.  Or Wilcox.  Who looked promising for a couple years. 

Maybe Brennan.  Course it’s a big difference coaching at a lower level.  Some make the leap.  Others bomb out. Your guess is as good as mine.

Or you can get some coordinator from somewhere. In which  one of two things happens, he has success for a couple years and then bolts for greener pastures; or he bombs out.

You’ve wanted a new HC for years. Fine. Name him.

[lex24]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

Great.  Pick your next coach.  Be specific.  And by all means tell us why we should expect success when there is essentially no fan base, the Admin doesn’t seem to care, the student body doesn’t care etc.

You think there are people lining  up for the job?  Choices would be a so called up and comer. Like Scott Frost was. But apparently he shot his wad prior to Nebraska.  Or Wilcox.  Who looked promising for a couple years. 

Maybe Brennan.  Course it’s a big difference coaching at a lower level.  Some make the leap.  Others bomb out. Your guess is as good as mine.

Or you can get some coordinator from somewhere. In which  one of two things happens, he has success for a couple years and then bolts for greener pastures; or he bombs out.

You’ve wanted a new HC for years. Fine. Name him.

[teejers1]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

Great.  Pick your next coach.  Be specific.  And by all means tell us why we should expect success when there is essentially no fan base, the Admin doesn’t seem to care, the student body doesn’t care etc.

You think there are people lining  up for the job?  Choices would be a so called up and comer. Like Scott Frost was. But apparently he shot his wad prior to Nebraska.  Or Wilcox.  Who looked promising for a couple years. 

Maybe Brennan.  Course it’s a big difference coaching at a lower level.  Some make the leap.  Others bomb out. Your guess is as good as mine.

Or you can get some coordinator from somewhere. In which  one of two things happens, he has success for a couple years and then bolts for greener pastures; or he bombs out.

You’ve wanted a new HC for years. Fine. Name him.

The Shawpologists have now changed strategy, abandoning the first, second, and third lines of defense (i.e., "he really is a great coach; he really is a good coach; he's a good enough coach for Stanford"). And now it's: "Okay Mr. Longtime Fan, name the next guy who will be better. Be specific."

First of all, that's the AD's job - to have a short list of good coaching candidates at the ready for all sports, especially the majors.  But good on you for asking Joe Fan, because why would anyone expect Bernard Muir to have a clue.

Second, $2-$3M will get an awful lot of candidates to sign.  Maybe all of the up and comers (just find the Top 10 lower division coaches and find the best candidate).  

Third, do you really think THIS coach can institute THE PROGRAM OVERHAUL/CULTURAL CHANGE that needs to happen to right the ship?  Shaw's only chance at that is to clean house, transform into full CEO mode, and bring in some great, strong-willed coaches and give them the reigns to run their parts of the team.  But do you see that happening, particularly on O where Shaw's hands are all over the Denny's Menu and headsets?  If your answer is "No, I don't see that kind of change happening," then you have to go find the next coach.  Or, you can putter along in this morass as sub .500 records rack up and the folks checking for vaccine shots are the only ones in the vicinity of the stadium when the games are being played.

It is a cold, harsh reality.  But that's where things stand.

[teejers1]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

Great.  Pick your next coach.  Be specific.  And by all means tell us why we should expect success when there is essentially no fan base, the Admin doesn’t seem to care, the student body doesn’t care etc.

You think there are people lining  up for the job?  Choices would be a so called up and comer. Like Scott Frost was. But apparently he shot his wad prior to Nebraska.  Or Wilcox.  Who looked promising for a couple years. 

Maybe Brennan.  Course it’s a big difference coaching at a lower level.  Some make the leap.  Others bomb out. Your guess is as good as mine.

Or you can get some coordinator from somewhere. In which  one of two things happens, he has success for a couple years and then bolts for greener pastures; or he bombs out.

You’ve wanted a new HC for years. Fine. Name him.

The Shawpologists have now changed strategy, abandoning the first, second, and third lines of defense (i.e., "he really is a great coach; he really is a good coach; he's a good enough coach for Stanford"). And now it's: "Okay Mr. Longtime Fan, name the next guy who will be better. Be specific."

First of all, that's the AD's job - to have a short list of good coaching candidates at the ready for all sports, especially the majors.  But good on you for asking Joe Fan, because why would anyone expect Bernard Muir to have a clue.

Second, $2-$3M will get an awful lot of candidates to sign.  Maybe all of the up and comers (just find the Top 10 lower division coaches and find the best candidate).  

Third, do you really think THIS coach can institute THE PROGRAM OVERHAUL/CULTURAL CHANGE that needs to happen to right the ship?  Shaw's only chance at that is to clean house, transform into full CEO mode, and bring in some great, strong-willed coaches and give them the reigns to run their parts of the team.  But do you see that happening, particularly on O where Shaw's hands are all over the Denny's Menu and headsets?  If your answer is "No, I don't see that kind of change happening," then you have to go find the next coach.  Or, you can putter along in this morass as sub .500 records rack up and the folks checking for vaccine shots are the only ones in the vicinity of the stadium when the games are being played.

It is a cold, harsh reality.  But that's where things stand.

[gailtate]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

Great.  Pick your next coach.  Be specific.  And by all means tell us why we should expect success when there is essentially no fan base, the Admin doesn’t seem to care, the student body doesn’t care etc.

You think there are people lining  up for the job?  Choices would be a so called up and comer. Like Scott Frost was. But apparently he shot his wad prior to Nebraska.  Or Wilcox.  Who looked promising for a couple years. 

Maybe Brennan.  Course it’s a big difference coaching at a lower level.  Some make the leap.  Others bomb out. Your guess is as good as mine.

Or you can get some coordinator from somewhere. In which  one of two things happens, he has success for a couple years and then bolts for greener pastures; or he bombs out.

You’ve wanted a new HC for years. Fine. Name him.

The Shawpologists have now changed strategy, abandoning the first, second, and third lines of defense (i.e., "he really is a great coach; he really is a good coach; he's a good enough coach for Stanford").  And now it's: "Okay Mr. Longtime Fan, name the next guy who will be better.  Be specific."

First of all, that's the AD's job - to have a short list of good coaching candidates at the ready for all sports, especially the majors.  But good on you for asking Joe Fan, because why would anyone expect Bernard Muir to have a clue.

Second, $2-$3M will get an awful lot of candidates to sign.  Maybe all of the up and comers (just find the Top 10 lower division coaches and find the best candidate).  

Third, do you really think THIS coach can institute THE PROGRAM OVERHAUL/CULTURAL CHANGE that needs to happen to right the ship?  Shaw's only chance at that is to clean house, transform into full CEO mode, and bring in some great, strong-willed coaches and give them the reigns to run their parts of the team.  But do you see that happening, particularly on O where Shaw's hands are all over the Denny's Menu and headsets?  If your answer is "No, I don't see that kind of change happening," then you have to go find the next coach.  Or, you can putter along in this morass as sub .500 records rack up and the folks checking for vaccine shots are the only ones in the vicinity of the stadium when the games are being played.

It is a cold, harsh reality.  But that's where things stand.

I tell anybody who listens that there is a "Harbaugh" out there who would jump at the chance for the job. Brent Brennan could be the guy for all I know. He knows the Pac12, he "gets" Stanford and is exceptionally well regarded by peers and former players. But that's not the point. David Shaw, for all his many accomplishments (in the wake of the Harbaugh era) and his exemplary character, is simply not temperamentally suited to mount a re-start. He is a diligent manager not a leader into a new wilderness. He is Ross Perot Jr, not Ross Perot.

[gailtate]

If, if, if, only if...Woulda, shoulda coulda...blah, blah, BLECCHH.
David Shaw's time came, went and now it's gone, man, GONE. It is shrinking in the rear-view mirror. How much more unwatchable, exasperating, embarrassment can some of you guys absorb, for cryin' out loud?! 

How far into the TANK must the program sink before you see the buck-naked emperor? How much longer are you going to listen to post-mortems about inadequacy of fricking EXECUTION? Hint: there will be no "execution" if you cannot (or WILL NOT) recruit enough studs athletically capable of it. And you sure as shiddt never will if you continue trying to force-fit players and staff competitively challenged at the FBS level.

Times change. Stanford Football, where the status quo has now calcified into a religious issue, has not. The now years-long record screams with evidence -- numerical, visual and "aromatic".  Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive. You detect any paranoia inside the hallowed halls of Arrillaga? All I see and hear is smug complacency. And, boy, is it on full display.

Great.  Pick your next coach.  Be specific.  And by all means tell us why we should expect success when there is essentially no fan base, the Admin doesn’t seem to care, the student body doesn’t care etc.

You think there are people lining  up for the job?  Choices would be a so called up and comer. Like Scott Frost was. But apparently he shot his wad prior to Nebraska.  Or Wilcox.  Who looked promising for a couple years. 

Maybe Brennan.  Course it’s a big difference coaching at a lower level.  Some make the leap.  Others bomb out. Your guess is as good as mine.

Or you can get some coordinator from somewhere. In which  one of two things happens, he has success for a couple years and then bolts for greener pastures; or he bombs out.

You’ve wanted a new HC for years. Fine. Name him.

The Shawpologists have now changed strategy, abandoning the first, second, and third lines of defense (i.e., "he really is a great coach; he really is a good coach; he's a good enough coach for Stanford").  And now it's: "Okay Mr. Longtime Fan, name the next guy who will be better.  Be specific."

First of all, that's the AD's job - to have a short list of good coaching candidates at the ready for all sports, especially the majors.  But good on you for asking Joe Fan, because why would anyone expect Bernard Muir to have a clue.

Second, $2-$3M will get an awful lot of candidates to sign.  Maybe all of the up and comers (just find the Top 10 lower division coaches and find the best candidate).  

Third, do you really think THIS coach can institute THE PROGRAM OVERHAUL/CULTURAL CHANGE that needs to happen to right the ship?  Shaw's only chance at that is to clean house, transform into full CEO mode, and bring in some great, strong-willed coaches and give them the reigns to run their parts of the team.  But do you see that happening, particularly on O where Shaw's hands are all over the Denny's Menu and headsets?  If your answer is "No, I don't see that kind of change happening," then you have to go find the next coach.  Or, you can putter along in this morass as sub .500 records rack up and the folks checking for vaccine shots are the only ones in the vicinity of the stadium when the games are being played.

It is a cold, harsh reality.  But that's where things stand.

I tell anybody who listens that there is a "Harbaugh" out there who would jump at the chance for the job. Brent Brennan could be the guy for all I know. He knows the Pac12, he "gets" Stanford and is exceptionally well regarded by peers and former players. But that's not the point. David Shaw, for all his many accomplishments (in the wake of the Harbaugh era) and his exemplary character, is simply not temperamentally suited to mount a re-start. He is a diligent manager not a leader into a new wilderness. He is Ross Perot Jr, not Ross Perot.

[ADPinWDC]

Several Coaches could be evaluated. 
But bring in Robert Anae as OffCo first -- now the OffCo at Univ of Virginia, averaging more than 520 yards a game, #2 in the country behind only OHST.
Need an upgrade on the O-Line?  Anae played C/G at BYU in the early 80s when they won the Natl Championship in 1984. 
Muir will never fire Shaw.  
Bring in Anae with a healthy step up in salary. 
Juice the Offense, improve recruiting and development at O-Line.  

Or, take a shot at Chris Petersen.  
There -- some specific names with strong track records.

[ADPinWDC]

Several Coaches could be evaluated. 
But bring in Robert Anae as OffCo first -- now the OffCo at Univ of Virginia, averaging more than 520 yards a game, #2 in the country behind only OHST.
Need an upgrade on the O-Line?  Anae played C/G at BYU in the early 80s when they won the Natl Championship in 1984. 
Muir will never fire Shaw.  
Bring in Anae with a healthy step up in salary. 
Juice the Offense, improve recruiting and development at O-Line.  

Or, take a shot at Chris Petersen.  
There -- some specific names with strong track records.

[Goose]

Several Coaches could be evaluated. 
But bring in Robert Anae as OffCo first -- now the OffCo at Univ of Virginia, averaging more than 520 yards a game, #2 in the country behind only OHST.
Need an upgrade on the O-Line?  Anae played C/G at BYU in the early 80s when they won the Natl Championship in 1984. 
Muir will never fire Shaw.  
Bring in Anae with a healthy step up in salary. 
Juice the Offense, improve recruiting and development at O-Line.  

Or, take a shot at Chris Petersen.  
There -- some specific names with strong track records.

I think it probable Chris Petersen is done, at least in the near term. I think he was thoroughly turned off by the Washington program culture. You don't step away from a job like that unless you really don't like the situation and think you can't fix it. He may be willing to go back into coaching in the "right" situation in a couple of years, but I don't expect him to do so sooner.

[Goose]

Several Coaches could be evaluated. 
But bring in Robert Anae as OffCo first -- now the OffCo at Univ of Virginia, averaging more than 520 yards a game, #2 in the country behind only OHST.
Need an upgrade on the O-Line?  Anae played C/G at BYU in the early 80s when they won the Natl Championship in 1984. 
Muir will never fire Shaw.  
Bring in Anae with a healthy step up in salary. 
Juice the Offense, improve recruiting and development at O-Line.  

Or, take a shot at Chris Petersen.  
There -- some specific names with strong track records.

I think it probable Chris Petersen is done, at least in the near term. I think he was thoroughly turned off by the Washington program culture. You don't step away from a job like that unless you really don't like the situation and think you can't fix it. He may be willing to go back into coaching in the "right" situation in a couple of years, but I don't expect him to do so sooner.

[Spiny_Norman]

I'll quote former IBM exec Nick Donofrio (I heard him say this often) - "If nothing changes, nothing changes."

And I am not talking about the football head coach. Turnaround in the football program has to start with the AD. Things started to look up for the football program in 2006 when Bob Bowlsby replaced Ted Leland.

But the difference between then and now is up at the top. John Hennessy was a football fan. Marc Tessier-Lavigne is not.

[Spiny_Norman]

I'll quote former IBM exec Nick Donofrio (I heard him say this often) - "If nothing changes, nothing changes."

And I am not talking about the football head coach. Turnaround in the football program has to start with the AD. Things started to look up for the football program in 2006 when Bob Bowlsby replaced Ted Leland.

But the difference between then and now is up at the top. John Hennessy was a football fan. Marc Tessier-Lavigne is not.

[Austroturf]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

[Austroturf]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

[gailtate]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

Good summary. And you sledge-hammered the nail re McKee.  Shaw is convinced that he and Pritchard are QB Whisperers (Gawd, what a joke) but look at what's happened since then, most conspicously with Costello and now McKee. Shaw basically rode Luck, CMac and Bryce Love. These guys masked the rot. Now its exposed. Oversimplification, of course, but it tells the story.  Shaw's time came and went. It's as plain as the empty seats in the stadium.

[gailtate]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

Good summary. And you sledge-hammered the nail re McKee.  Shaw is convinced that he and Pritchard are QB Whisperers (Gawd, what a joke) but look at what's happened since then, most conspicously with Costello and now McKee. Shaw basically rode Luck, CMac and Bryce Love. These guys masked the rot. Now its exposed. Oversimplification, of course, but it tells the story.  Shaw's time came and went. It's as plain as the empty seats in the stadium.

[Austroturf]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

Good summary. And you sledge-hammered the nail re McKee.  Shaw is convinced that he and Pritchard are QB Whisperers (Gawd, what a joke) but look at what's happened since then, most conspicously with Costello and now McKee. Shaw basically rode Luck, CMac and Bryce Love. These guys masked the rot. Now its exposed. Oversimplification, of course, but it tells the story.  Shaw's time came and went. It's as plain as the empty seats in the stadium.

Unfortunately, regression seems to have become a common occurrence in Cardinal football, and not just at QB.  A few prominent examples come to mind (I am sure there are others). Quenton Meeks was a stalwart in his freshman year (2015) and never really could build on that.  Nate Herbig also peaked early and sort of fizzled out, but has found life with the Eagles and is in the rotation on 2nd team.  Foster Sarrell never really lived up to his billing, so it is hard to talk about regression, but here is an article about his underwhelming tenure at Stanford: https://scorebooklive.com/washington/202...ruit-ever/   

At QB, both Chryst and Costello had injuries to contend with, so their respective declines in performance involved other factors.  Mills did not regress; but with only 13 actual games played, there is not much of a performance record to look at.  It actually feels as if we missed the Mills "era".  He was recruited and signed with great fanfare, struggled with injuries early, traded starts with Costello in 2019, won four out of five games as a starter in the pandemic-shortened 2020 and then disappeared.  That was the Mills era.  Wishing him all the best in the NFL, but somehow my high expectations for what he could do for Cardinal football were never met.  Hopefully, McKee is not the next to start out strong, then fade.

[Austroturf]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

Good summary. And you sledge-hammered the nail re McKee.  Shaw is convinced that he and Pritchard are QB Whisperers (Gawd, what a joke) but look at what's happened since then, most conspicously with Costello and now McKee. Shaw basically rode Luck, CMac and Bryce Love. These guys masked the rot. Now its exposed. Oversimplification, of course, but it tells the story.  Shaw's time came and went. It's as plain as the empty seats in the stadium.

Unfortunately, regression seems to have become a common occurrence in Cardinal football, and not just at QB.  A few prominent examples come to mind (I am sure there are others). Quenton Meeks was a stalwart in his freshman year (2015) and never really could build on that.  Nate Herbig also peaked early and sort of fizzled out, but has found life with the Eagles and is in the rotation on 2nd team.  Foster Sarrell never really lived up to his billing, so it is hard to talk about regression, but here is an article about his underwhelming tenure at Stanford: https://scorebooklive.com/washington/202...ruit-ever/   

At QB, both Chryst and Costello had injuries to contend with, so their respective declines in performance involved other factors.  Mills did not regress; but with only 13 actual games played, there is not much of a performance record to look at.  It actually feels as if we missed the Mills "era".  He was recruited and signed with great fanfare, struggled with injuries early, traded starts with Costello in 2019, won four out of five games as a starter in the pandemic-shortened 2020 and then disappeared.  That was the Mills era.  Wishing him all the best in the NFL, but somehow my high expectations for what he could do for Cardinal football were never met.  Hopefully, McKee is not the next to start out strong, then fade.

[gailtate]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

Good summary. And you sledge-hammered the nail re McKee.  Shaw is convinced that he and Pritchard are QB Whisperers (Gawd, what a joke) but look at what's happened since then, most conspicously with Costello and now McKee. Shaw basically rode Luck, CMac and Bryce Love. These guys masked the rot. Now its exposed. Oversimplification, of course, but it tells the story.  Shaw's time came and went. It's as plain as the empty seats in the stadium.

Unfortunately, regression seems to have become a common occurrence in Cardinal football, and not just at QB.  A few prominent examples come to mind (I am sure there are others). Quenton Meeks was a stalwart in his freshman year (2015) and never really could build on that.  Nate Herbig also peaked early and sort of fizzled out, but has found life with the Eagles and is in the rotation on 2nd team.  Foster Sarrell never really lived up to his billing, so it is hard to talk about regression, but here is an article about his underwhelming tenure at Stanford: https://scorebooklive.com/washington/202...ruit-ever/   

At QB, both Chryst and Costello had injuries to contend with, so their respective declines in performance involved other factors.  Mills did not regress; but with only 13 actual games played, there is not much of a performance record to look at.  It actually feels as if we missed the Mills "era".  He was recruited and signed with great fanfare, struggled with injuries early, traded starts with Costello in 2019, won four out of five games as a starter in the pandemic-shortened 2020 and then disappeared.  That was the Mills era.  Wishing him all the best in the NFL, but somehow my high expectations for what he could do for Cardinal football were never met.  Hopefully, McKee is not the next to start out strong, then fade.

Points well taken. Still, the number of injuries is statistically significant, as is the under-performance of above-par athletes. One after another after another. Begs the question: where's the depth?

[gailtate]

Just a few additional thoughts on the current malaise in Cardinal football:

1) There's no denying the program is trending downward.  The math is clear on this.  If we look at Shaw's win percentage on a 4-year rolling average (i.e., 2011-2014, then 2012-2015, etc.), these are the numbers:

2011-2014: 77.6%
2012-2015: 77.9%
2013-2016: 75.7%
2014-2017: 72.1%
2015-2018: 74.0%
2016-2019: 60.9%
2017-2020: 58.4%
2018-2021: 51.7%

And when the 9-4 2018 season drops out of this rolling average next year, the percentage will dip well below 50% (unless there is some unexpected rebound from current trends).  

2) As others have pointed out (including me in other posts), Shaw is not temperamentally suited for turnaround work.  He is not the entrepreneur, but the professional manager who eventually takes over and runs the going concern when the start-up work is done. 

3) Shaw isn't going anywhere.  At $8M+ per year and an AD who puts no pressure on him, Shaw would be a fool to go anywhere else.  And even though he certainly could pull the plug and become a TV commentator in the event the rigors of coaching become too much (like Petersen did), he is very unlikely to do that.  So he will be the coach of this team for some years to come.  Of course, I could be wrong on this.  There was the assumption that Gary Patterson had tenure for life at TCU, but after 20 years at the helm and a 3-5 start in 2021, he is out. Still, I don't think we have an AD and administration at Stanford that are predisposed to making that move right now.    

4) Assuming Shaw remains, I see only one hope for positive change in the current program: new coordinators and new assistants.  If Shaw cannot be the change, then he needs to hire the change and let his staff have free rein. He needs to become full CEO and let the others be full COOs.  

5) If this doesn't happen, then I think all of us need to get accustomed to mediocre to bad teams in the future, with now and then a lower tier bowl, but most often no post-season.  The Shaw-Pritchard-Anderson triumvirate is on an undeniable downward slope.  It may appear to be a harsh assessment, but I currently see this coaching staff as incapable of maximizing the talent we have.  In short, the team is less than the sum of the parts, which is a clear sign of poor player development and poor coaching. And the trend towards more injuries is just one integral part of the overall malaise.  Donofrio (quoted above by Spiny_Norman) was correct: "If nothing changes, nothing changes".  

On a related matter, I am concerned about McKee's progress.  After some break-out games early in the season, he appears to be regressing.  We have seen this picture before (Chryst, Costello).  McKee was one of the few bright spots this season; and if his star begins to dim, then it's truly dark for the current offense (where it is already dark enough).

Good summary. And you sledge-hammered the nail re McKee.  Shaw is convinced that he and Pritchard are QB Whisperers (Gawd, what a joke) but look at what's happened since then, most conspicously with Costello and now McKee. Shaw basically rode Luck, CMac and Bryce Love. These guys masked the rot. Now its exposed. Oversimplification, of course, but it tells the story.  Shaw's time came and went. It's as plain as the empty seats in the stadium.

Unfortunately, regression seems to have become a common occurrence in Cardinal football, and not just at QB.  A few prominent examples come to mind (I am sure there are others). Quenton Meeks was a stalwart in his freshman year (2015) and never really could build on that.  Nate Herbig also peaked early and sort of fizzled out, but has found life with the Eagles and is in the rotation on 2nd team.  Foster Sarrell never really lived up to his billing, so it is hard to talk about regression, but here is an article about his underwhelming tenure at Stanford: https://scorebooklive.com/washington/202...ruit-ever/   

At QB, both Chryst and Costello had injuries to contend with, so their respective declines in performance involved other factors.  Mills did not regress; but with only 13 actual games played, there is not much of a performance record to look at.  It actually feels as if we missed the Mills "era".  He was recruited and signed with great fanfare, struggled with injuries early, traded starts with Costello in 2019, won four out of five games as a starter in the pandemic-shortened 2020 and then disappeared.  That was the Mills era.  Wishing him all the best in the NFL, but somehow my high expectations for what he could do for Cardinal football were never met.  Hopefully, McKee is not the next to start out strong, then fade.

Points well taken. Still, the number of injuries is statistically significant, as is the under-performance of above-par athletes. One after another after another. Begs the question: where's the depth?