[washingtonismoney]

Asked "who would you like to play in a playoff?", one coach answers:

2. David Shaw, Stanford

Shaw’s 34-7 record since taking over for Jim Harbaugh is pretty difficult to argue against. If you’re nit-picking, the Cardinal have lost two of their three BCS bowl appearances since Shaw was promoted. All three were one-score games, though, so how critical can you be?

But this specific exercise is about the playoff, not necessarily getting to it. So we’ll hear this coach out on Shaw.

“He’s stubborn,” he said. “He will go with something until it hurts him. They want to play their style no matter what, even if it isn’t working or it has stopped working. You’ve got to adapt. Harbaugh adapted. David hasn’t shown he will do that.”

Shaw is 41 years old and has won Pac-12 titles in two of his three seasons. He’s doing OK and still has time to learn.

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-h...fresh=true

[washingtonismoney]

Asked "who would you like to play in a playoff?", one coach answers:

2. David Shaw, Stanford

Shaw’s 34-7 record since taking over for Jim Harbaugh is pretty difficult to argue against. If you’re nit-picking, the Cardinal have lost two of their three BCS bowl appearances since Shaw was promoted. All three were one-score games, though, so how critical can you be?

But this specific exercise is about the playoff, not necessarily getting to it. So we’ll hear this coach out on Shaw.

“He’s stubborn,” he said. “He will go with something until it hurts him. They want to play their style no matter what, even if it isn’t working or it has stopped working. You’ve got to adapt. Harbaugh adapted. David hasn’t shown he will do that.”

Shaw is 41 years old and has won Pac-12 titles in two of his three seasons. He’s doing OK and still has time to learn.

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-h...fresh=true

[yvonne]

Harbaugh tries to get cute at the end of games. That's why he lost the 2007 Big Game, the 2013 Super Bowl, and the 2014 NFC Championship.

[yvonne]

Harbaugh tries to get cute at the end of games. That's why he lost the 2007 Big Game, the 2013 Super Bowl, and the 2014 NFC Championship.

[OutsiderFan]

Stubbornness is certainly an issue for Shaw, but I'm open to the possibility that this trait has been instrumental to him winning 11+ games each year.  Who knows how many ways it manifests itself to the good for Stanford football.  You don't win 11+ games a year by being clueless.

[OutsiderFan]

Stubbornness is certainly an issue for Shaw, but I'm open to the possibility that this trait has been instrumental to him winning 11+ games each year.  Who knows how many ways it manifests itself to the good for Stanford football.  You don't win 11+ games a year by being clueless.

[washingtonismoney]

Well, there's a ton of recency bias built into the list. One of the "wouldn't want to face" coaches is Bob Stoops, which I find amusing.

[washingtonismoney]

Well, there's a ton of recency bias built into the list. One of the "wouldn't want to face" coaches is Bob Stoops, which I find amusing.

[stupac2]

Well, there's a ton of recency bias built into the list. One of the "wouldn't want to face" coaches is Bob Stoops, which I find amusing.

Yeah that was interesting to me. I mean, they're commonly called "Chokelahoma" for a reason...

[stupac2]

Well, there's a ton of recency bias built into the list. One of the "wouldn't want to face" coaches is Bob Stoops, which I find amusing.

Yeah that was interesting to me. I mean, they're commonly called "Chokelahoma" for a reason...

[71Bear]

Yvonne - I think you meant the 2009 Big Game.  There is no question that after Tedford's gaffe (going for an FG), LSJU could have won the game by simply running Gerhart until he scored.  Thankfully, JH didn't and UC won.

[71Bear]

Yvonne - I think you meant the 2009 Big Game.  There is no question that after Tedford's gaffe (going for an FG), LSJU could have won the game by simply running Gerhart until he scored.  Thankfully, JH didn't and UC won.

[yvonne]

You're right.

[yvonne]

You're right.

[washingtonismoney]

Well, if we're listing "great Harbaugh in-game gaffes," 2008 UCLA was a very poorly coached game, particularly toward the end.

But Harbaugh's greatest gaffes were on the hiring side of the job -- Buh, Lynn, and Polian.

[washingtonismoney]

Well, if we're listing "great Harbaugh in-game gaffes," 2008 UCLA was a very poorly coached game, particularly toward the end.

But Harbaugh's greatest gaffes were on the hiring side of the job -- Buh, Lynn, and Polian.

[yvonne]

Harbaugh hired Buh? Wow!

Did Buh precede Fangio? If so, maybe there's hope for those other guys this year.

[yvonne]

Harbaugh hired Buh? Wow!

Did Buh precede Fangio? If so, maybe there's hope for those other guys this year.

[71Bear]

Did Buh precede Fangio? If so, maybe there's hope for those other guys this year.

Not unless Fangio replaced him (and he didn't, ergo.........)

[71Bear]

Did Buh precede Fangio? If so, maybe there's hope for those other guys this year.

Not unless Fangio replaced him (and he didn't, ergo.........)

[teejers1]

Yvonne, I'll give you the 2009 Big Game, but I don't think Harbs was "being cute," I just don't think he thought out all the "what ifs."

The Super Bowl was blown when they had to take a TO for fear of Kap not getting his bootleg play off in time (it would have been a TD, btw, but the 'Niners showed it while taking the TO . . . doh!).  I don't think that's being cute.

And last year, the play was there if the ball was thrown even a touch longer.  Some also say a secondary receiver was wide open over the middle, and Kap just failed to find him as he never looked off his primary receiver (I don't know).  That is not being "too cute."  That is imperfect (not even bad) execution by the players.

You all are missing the biggest gaffe in Harbaugh era: not taking a knee (or two) against ND late when game was tied and Stanford had first and goal at the 3 (and ND had only one TO left).  People tend to forgive/forget because Stanford managed to hold on for the W, but it was ridiculous that ND even had a chance for the game tying (or winning!) TD at the end of the game.  Absolutely inexcusable.

Still, Shaw beats out Harbs handily in the "brain locks" (or AYFKM calls) at Stanford.  Utah was terrible; as was USC was dubious, at best (at a couple different junctures in that game, both leading to picks by Hogan).  And that doesn't even include the Fiesta Bowl or the Rose Bowl.  Somebody posted elsewhere that Shaw is "perfect for Stanford."  Shaw is close.  If he cleans up the AYFKM calls then he will be damn near perfect for Stanford, and that's saying something because nobody is perfect.

[teejers1]

Yvonne, I'll give you the 2009 Big Game, but I don't think Harbs was "being cute," I just don't think he thought out all the "what ifs."

The Super Bowl was blown when they had to take a TO for fear of Kap not getting his bootleg play off in time (it would have been a TD, btw, but the 'Niners showed it while taking the TO . . . doh!).  I don't think that's being cute.

And last year, the play was there if the ball was thrown even a touch longer.  Some also say a secondary receiver was wide open over the middle, and Kap just failed to find him as he never looked off his primary receiver (I don't know).  That is not being "too cute."  That is imperfect (not even bad) execution by the players.

You all are missing the biggest gaffe in Harbaugh era: not taking a knee (or two) against ND late when game was tied and Stanford had first and goal at the 3 (and ND had only one TO left).  People tend to forgive/forget because Stanford managed to hold on for the W, but it was ridiculous that ND even had a chance for the game tying (or winning!) TD at the end of the game.  Absolutely inexcusable.

Still, Shaw beats out Harbs handily in the "brain locks" (or AYFKM calls) at Stanford.  Utah was terrible; as was USC was dubious, at best (at a couple different junctures in that game, both leading to picks by Hogan).  And that doesn't even include the Fiesta Bowl or the Rose Bowl.  Somebody posted elsewhere that Shaw is "perfect for Stanford."  Shaw is close.  If he cleans up the AYFKM calls then he will be damn near perfect for Stanford, and that's saying something because nobody is perfect.

[yvonne]

Did Buh precede Fangio? If so, maybe there's hope for those other guys this year.

Not unless Fangio replaced him (and he didn't, ergo.........)

The question was whether Buh preceded Fangio at Stanford. I.e., Fangio wasn't Harbaugh's first DC. Was Buh the person he replaced? If not, who was the previous DC under Harbaugh?

[yvonne]

Did Buh precede Fangio? If so, maybe there's hope for those other guys this year.

Not unless Fangio replaced him (and he didn't, ergo.........)

The question was whether Buh preceded Fangio at Stanford. I.e., Fangio wasn't Harbaugh's first DC. Was Buh the person he replaced? If not, who was the previous DC under Harbaugh?

[washingtonismoney]

I.e., Fangio wasn't Harbaugh's first DC. Was Buh the person he replaced? If not, who was the previous DC under Harbaugh?

It went:

Shafer (who's now HC at Syracuse) Buh/Lynn Fangio

[washingtonismoney]

I.e., Fangio wasn't Harbaugh's first DC. Was Buh the person he replaced? If not, who was the previous DC under Harbaugh?

It went:

Shafer (who's now HC at Syracuse) Buh/Lynn Fangio

[doublespiral]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=10029.msg89938#msg89938 date=1400776034]
Well, there's a ton of recency bias built into the list. One of the "wouldn't want to face" coaches is Bob Stoops, which I find amusing.

Yeah that was interesting to me. I mean, they're commonly called "Chokelahoma" for a reason...
[/quote]

Not by Alabama....

[doublespiral]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=10029.msg89938#msg89938 date=1400776034]
Well, there's a ton of recency bias built into the list. One of the "wouldn't want to face" coaches is Bob Stoops, which I find amusing.

Yeah that was interesting to me. I mean, they're commonly called "Chokelahoma" for a reason...
[/quote]

Not by Alabama....