[Hey]

• We had a great run of four straight years in a BCS bowl.  A drop-off was inevitable.
• Anybody else remember how bad Stanford has been in the recent past?  Even during Elway’s years, I’ve always seen Stanford as the team that was usually overmatched on the field (except for that freakish Denny Green defense, coordinated by Willie Shaw), but would regularly get at least one big upset a year.  Stanford hasn’t been overmatched on the field for a while now.  Cherish this. 
• Stanford is not a football factory.  Successful graduates is the goal.  Shaw is fervent in his devotion to the school and the students.  (This also applies to Johnny Dawkins.  And Dawkins is not going anywhere any time soon, the athletic dept. LOVES him.) 

I’ve been down on Shaw the OC since the Fiesta Bowl, but these points keep me calm.

[Hey]

• We had a great run of four straight years in a BCS bowl.  A drop-off was inevitable.
• Anybody else remember how bad Stanford has been in the recent past?  Even during Elway’s years, I’ve always seen Stanford as the team that was usually overmatched on the field (except for that freakish Denny Green defense, coordinated by Willie Shaw), but would regularly get at least one big upset a year.  Stanford hasn’t been overmatched on the field for a while now.  Cherish this. 
• Stanford is not a football factory.  Successful graduates is the goal.  Shaw is fervent in his devotion to the school and the students.  (This also applies to Johnny Dawkins.  And Dawkins is not going anywhere any time soon, the athletic dept. LOVES him.) 

I’ve been down on Shaw the OC since the Fiesta Bowl, but these points keep me calm.

[JohnR34231]

• We had a great run of four straight years in a BCS bowl.  A drop-off was inevitable.
• Anybody else remember how bad Stanford has been in the recent past?  Even during Elway’s years, I’ve always seen Stanford as the team that was usually overmatched on the field (except for that freakish Denny Green defense, coordinated by Willie Shaw), but would regularly get at least one big upset a year.  Stanford hasn’t been overmatched on the field for a while now.  Cherish this. 
• Stanford is not a football factory.  Successful graduates is the goal.  Shaw is fervent in his devotion to the school and the students.  (This also applies to Johnny Dawkins.  And Dawkins is not going anywhere any time soon, the athletic dept. LOVES him.) 

I’ve been down on Shaw the OC since the Fiesta Bowl, but these points keep me calm.

You don't think we were overmatched by Oregon this year?
Otherwise, good post.

[JohnR34231]

• We had a great run of four straight years in a BCS bowl.  A drop-off was inevitable.
• Anybody else remember how bad Stanford has been in the recent past?  Even during Elway’s years, I’ve always seen Stanford as the team that was usually overmatched on the field (except for that freakish Denny Green defense, coordinated by Willie Shaw), but would regularly get at least one big upset a year.  Stanford hasn’t been overmatched on the field for a while now.  Cherish this. 
• Stanford is not a football factory.  Successful graduates is the goal.  Shaw is fervent in his devotion to the school and the students.  (This also applies to Johnny Dawkins.  And Dawkins is not going anywhere any time soon, the athletic dept. LOVES him.) 

I’ve been down on Shaw the OC since the Fiesta Bowl, but these points keep me calm.

You don't think we were overmatched by Oregon this year?
Otherwise, good post.

[OutsiderFan]

Oh come on.  Does anyone really think Shaw agrees with these sentiments?  He has arguably the best roster any Stanford coach has ever had in terms of depth of legit players, particularly on defense. 

At most this team should have two losses, and I'm really only conceding the Oregon game as one Stanford had no shot, though that said, Stanford did move the ball well in that game.  Every other game to date was winnable.  Stanford lost games in which it allowed 13, 17, and 7 points in regulation. More telling is the fact Stanford has scored more than 30 points four times this year, against Sac State, Army, WSU, and OSU.  The team has given up over 30 just one time, and is 5-5?

This "yeah, but we're Stanford, we're better than everyone else anyway" mindset when losses pile up is such a turnoff, and isn't one that will help Stanford football win more games.  Show me a fan base OK with losing and I'll show you a losing program.

If the Stanford fan base wants to win, now is the time to make clear this year was unacceptable because Stanford has raised the bar on what it expects from its football program.  If everyone just shrugs their shoulders, and says it's OK to lose football games because we're above the fray, seasons like this can quickly become the norm.  Just look across the Bay for proof.  It's not possible to win at the highest level of college football unless the admin, AD, head coach, alumni, and fans prioritize it and hold each other accountable.  David Shaw won't be forced to do the uncomfortable things required to grow unless he knows the bar has been raised.

[OutsiderFan]

Oh come on.  Does anyone really think Shaw agrees with these sentiments?  He has arguably the best roster any Stanford coach has ever had in terms of depth of legit players, particularly on defense. 

At most this team should have two losses, and I'm really only conceding the Oregon game as one Stanford had no shot, though that said, Stanford did move the ball well in that game.  Every other game to date was winnable.  Stanford lost games in which it allowed 13, 17, and 7 points in regulation. More telling is the fact Stanford has scored more than 30 points four times this year, against Sac State, Army, WSU, and OSU.  The team has given up over 30 just one time, and is 5-5?

This "yeah, but we're Stanford, we're better than everyone else anyway" mindset when losses pile up is such a turnoff, and isn't one that will help Stanford football win more games.  Show me a fan base OK with losing and I'll show you a losing program.

If the Stanford fan base wants to win, now is the time to make clear this year was unacceptable because Stanford has raised the bar on what it expects from its football program.  If everyone just shrugs their shoulders, and says it's OK to lose football games because we're above the fray, seasons like this can quickly become the norm.  Just look across the Bay for proof.  It's not possible to win at the highest level of college football unless the admin, AD, head coach, alumni, and fans prioritize it and hold each other accountable.  David Shaw won't be forced to do the uncomfortable things required to grow unless he knows the bar has been raised.

[Hey]

Left side of the brain says:
• This isn’t being snobby, or ok with losing.  It’s very difficult to sustain that kind of success.
• I don’t understand the reference to K.a.l., I think the situation going on over there with taxpayer money has been shameful.
• Shaw has been to three straight BCS bowl games. 
• The team is at 5-5, and competitive in all but one of those losses.
• Shaw will be here for another fifteen years.  With Shannon Turley around, and with the great recruiting program put in place, we will always have a competitive team on the field.   

Right side of the brain says:
• Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario and could have phoned it in and still been to three BCS games.  Harbaugh probably would have won those other BCS games as well.
• Our players are fine, our coaching staff hasn’t put the players in a position to win games.  And I believe it’s more than just an offensive coordinator.  I often get the impression that the team looks “un-practiced.”  As a former coach myself, seeing a delay of game penalty after time-outs is the definition of bad coaching, and I’ve seen that at least twice.  I remember seeing a delay of game penalty on the very first play of the game.  This is a reflection of a greater problem.   

I didn’t catch the Duck game, the first two losses were too disheartening.

[Hey]

Left side of the brain says:
• This isn’t being snobby, or ok with losing.  It’s very difficult to sustain that kind of success.
• I don’t understand the reference to K.a.l., I think the situation going on over there with taxpayer money has been shameful.
• Shaw has been to three straight BCS bowl games. 
• The team is at 5-5, and competitive in all but one of those losses.
• Shaw will be here for another fifteen years.  With Shannon Turley around, and with the great recruiting program put in place, we will always have a competitive team on the field.   

Right side of the brain says:
• Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario and could have phoned it in and still been to three BCS games.  Harbaugh probably would have won those other BCS games as well.
• Our players are fine, our coaching staff hasn’t put the players in a position to win games.  And I believe it’s more than just an offensive coordinator.  I often get the impression that the team looks “un-practiced.”  As a former coach myself, seeing a delay of game penalty after time-outs is the definition of bad coaching, and I’ve seen that at least twice.  I remember seeing a delay of game penalty on the very first play of the game.  This is a reflection of a greater problem.   

I didn’t catch the Duck game, the first two losses were too disheartening.

[Cardinal96]

I didn’t catch the Duck game, the first two losses were too disheartening.

I get what you are trying to say.  I think your last sentence undercuts the main point you are trying to convey though.  You acknowledge that the product on the field was bad enough that you weren't going to bother watching us (potentially) fight for the Pac 12 North title against the Ducks.

So, yeah, I am thrilled with the success we had the last 4 years.  I told my buddies at the Orange Bowl that this could be the first and only BCS win for the foreseeable future.  I loved being wrong on that.  We are reverting to a more steady state this year.  The last few years our team has been so much fun to watch that I would try to make my Saturday plans around Stanford football so I could watch the game.  Not this year.

[Cardinal96]

I didn’t catch the Duck game, the first two losses were too disheartening.

I get what you are trying to say.  I think your last sentence undercuts the main point you are trying to convey though.  You acknowledge that the product on the field was bad enough that you weren't going to bother watching us (potentially) fight for the Pac 12 North title against the Ducks.

So, yeah, I am thrilled with the success we had the last 4 years.  I told my buddies at the Orange Bowl that this could be the first and only BCS win for the foreseeable future.  I loved being wrong on that.  We are reverting to a more steady state this year.  The last few years our team has been so much fun to watch that I would try to make my Saturday plans around Stanford football so I could watch the game.  Not this year.

[StanFan88]

• We had a great run of four straight years in a BCS bowl.  A drop-off was inevitable.
• Anybody else remember how bad Stanford has been in the recent past?  Even during Elway’s years, I’ve always seen Stanford as the team that was usually overmatched on the field (except for that freakish Denny Green defense, coordinated by Willie Shaw), but would regularly get at least one big upset a year.  Stanford hasn’t been overmatched on the field for a while now.  Cherish this. 
• Stanford is not a football factory.  Successful graduates is the goal.  Shaw is fervent in his devotion to the school and the students.  (This also applies to Johnny Dawkins.  And Dawkins is not going anywhere any time soon, the athletic dept. LOVES him.) 

I’ve been down on Shaw the OC since the Fiesta Bowl, but these points keep me calm.

All true, but the talent on this roster is better than a .500 team.  Therein lies my frustration/disappointment/exasperation/resignation.  I expected a dropoff to 8-4 or 9-3 but not 6-6 give or take a game.

[StanFan88]

• We had a great run of four straight years in a BCS bowl.  A drop-off was inevitable.
• Anybody else remember how bad Stanford has been in the recent past?  Even during Elway’s years, I’ve always seen Stanford as the team that was usually overmatched on the field (except for that freakish Denny Green defense, coordinated by Willie Shaw), but would regularly get at least one big upset a year.  Stanford hasn’t been overmatched on the field for a while now.  Cherish this. 
• Stanford is not a football factory.  Successful graduates is the goal.  Shaw is fervent in his devotion to the school and the students.  (This also applies to Johnny Dawkins.  And Dawkins is not going anywhere any time soon, the athletic dept. LOVES him.) 

I’ve been down on Shaw the OC since the Fiesta Bowl, but these points keep me calm.

All true, but the talent on this roster is better than a .500 team.  Therein lies my frustration/disappointment/exasperation/resignation.  I expected a dropoff to 8-4 or 9-3 but not 6-6 give or take a game.

[shinsengumi]

• The team is at 5-5, and competitive in all but one of those losses.

Don't disagree much with what you have to say, but my count, we have been thoroughly outplayed by ND (despite the close score), ASU and Oregon.

[shinsengumi]

• The team is at 5-5, and competitive in all but one of those losses.

Don't disagree much with what you have to say, but my count, we have been thoroughly outplayed by ND (despite the close score), ASU and Oregon.

[Trevmiesterj]

All true, but the talent on this roster is better than a .500 team.  Therein lies my frustration/disappointment/exasperation/resignation.  I expected a dropoff to 8-4 or 9-3 but not 6-6 give or take a game.

This right here is the single most important point as to why I am experiencing these four emotions (and some anger too) and am at a loss to explain the 2014 LSJ Football squad.

It's the entire drop off of consistent Quarterback play, inability of the Offensive Line to dominate as they have had in the past, a lack of emergence of a talented chain mover and the ineffectual RB by committee mandate (and that's just a start).

All this talent and promise and yet game after game the same dull, mind numbing result.  I actually wonder what the effect might be on recruiting now.

[Trevmiesterj]

All true, but the talent on this roster is better than a .500 team.  Therein lies my frustration/disappointment/exasperation/resignation.  I expected a dropoff to 8-4 or 9-3 but not 6-6 give or take a game.

This right here is the single most important point as to why I am experiencing these four emotions (and some anger too) and am at a loss to explain the 2014 LSJ Football squad.

It's the entire drop off of consistent Quarterback play, inability of the Offensive Line to dominate as they have had in the past, a lack of emergence of a talented chain mover and the ineffectual RB by committee mandate (and that's just a start).

All this talent and promise and yet game after game the same dull, mind numbing result.  I actually wonder what the effect might be on recruiting now.

[stupac2]

• Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario and could have phoned it in and still been to three BCS games.  Harbaugh probably would have won those other BCS games as well.

I'm sorry but this is just flat-out crazy. Yes, in 2011 Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario, but that graduating classes gutted us. We lost the most talent Stanford has probably ever lost in a single class, and then we improved the next year. A lot of that improvement was getting really lucky in 1-score games, but it still happened. A big part of the reason we're 5-5 right now instead of 7-3 is bad luck in one-score games, so if we're going to blame Shaw for this year then you have to give him crazy credit for 2012.

[stupac2]

• Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario and could have phoned it in and still been to three BCS games.  Harbaugh probably would have won those other BCS games as well.

I'm sorry but this is just flat-out crazy. Yes, in 2011 Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario, but that graduating classes gutted us. We lost the most talent Stanford has probably ever lost in a single class, and then we improved the next year. A lot of that improvement was getting really lucky in 1-score games, but it still happened. A big part of the reason we're 5-5 right now instead of 7-3 is bad luck in one-score games, so if we're going to blame Shaw for this year then you have to give him crazy credit for 2012.

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=Big Brother link=topic=11121.msg105308#msg105308 date=1416147274]• Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario and could have phoned it in and still been to three BCS games.  Harbaugh probably would have won those other BCS games as well.

I'm sorry but this is just flat-out crazy. Yes, in 2011 Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario, but that graduating classes gutted us. We lost the most talent Stanford has probably ever lost in a single class, and then we improved the next year. A lot of that improvement was getting really lucky in 1-score games, but it still happened. A big part of the reason we're 5-5 right now instead of 7-3 is bad luck in one-score games, so if we're going to blame Shaw for this year then you have to give him crazy credit for 2012.
[/quote]

Agree, and it's actually 8-2 rather than 7-3. The U$C, ND, and Utah games all came down to us not making the plays we had to in crunch time, both on offense and on defense. We used to be able to do it. Now our opponents are.

[JohnR34231]

[quote author=Big Brother link=topic=11121.msg105308#msg105308 date=1416147274]• Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario and could have phoned it in and still been to three BCS games.  Harbaugh probably would have won those other BCS games as well.

I'm sorry but this is just flat-out crazy. Yes, in 2011 Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario, but that graduating classes gutted us. We lost the most talent Stanford has probably ever lost in a single class, and then we improved the next year. A lot of that improvement was getting really lucky in 1-score games, but it still happened. A big part of the reason we're 5-5 right now instead of 7-3 is bad luck in one-score games, so if we're going to blame Shaw for this year then you have to give him crazy credit for 2012.
[/quote]

Agree, and it's actually 8-2 rather than 7-3. The U$C, ND, and Utah games all came down to us not making the plays we had to in crunch time, both on offense and on defense. We used to be able to do it. Now our opponents are.

[Hey]

My biggest point is that I want Shaw to stay here for 20 years... as long as he puts away the headset and lets someone else run the offense, during the games and in practice.  I am very grateful when Harbaugh quietly let much of defensive staff go after 2009 and brought in Vic Fangio, Derek Mason, and Randy Hart. 

[quote author=Big Brother link=topic=11121.msg105308#msg105308 date=1416147274] I didn’t catch the Duck game, the first two losses were too disheartening.

I get what you are trying to say.  I think your last sentence undercuts the main point you are trying to convey though.  You acknowledge that the product on the field was bad enough that you weren't going to bother watching us (potentially) fight for the Pac 12 North title against the Ducks.
[/quote]

Yeah, that wasn't well thought out.  I just hate watching the same mistakes being repeated yearly, even when we win. 

Don't disagree much with what you have to say, but my count, we have been thoroughly outplayed by ND (despite the close score), ASU and Oregon.

I don't disagree with Shinsengumi's comment.

I'm sorry but this is just flat-out crazy. Yes, in 2011 Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario, but that graduating classes gutted us. We lost the most talent Stanford has probably ever lost in a single class, and then we improved the next year. A lot of that improvement was getting really lucky in 1-score games, but it still happened. A big part of the reason we're 5-5 right now instead of 7-3 is bad luck in one-score games, so if we're going to blame Shaw for this year then you have to give him crazy credit for 2012.

I agree with much of what Stupac2 says, after the ND something magical happened that season.  Some of the stuff that occurred up to and during the ND game gave me pause. 

[Hey]

My biggest point is that I want Shaw to stay here for 20 years... as long as he puts away the headset and lets someone else run the offense, during the games and in practice.  I am very grateful when Harbaugh quietly let much of defensive staff go after 2009 and brought in Vic Fangio, Derek Mason, and Randy Hart. 

[quote author=Big Brother link=topic=11121.msg105308#msg105308 date=1416147274] I didn’t catch the Duck game, the first two losses were too disheartening.

I get what you are trying to say.  I think your last sentence undercuts the main point you are trying to convey though.  You acknowledge that the product on the field was bad enough that you weren't going to bother watching us (potentially) fight for the Pac 12 North title against the Ducks.
[/quote]

Yeah, that wasn't well thought out.  I just hate watching the same mistakes being repeated yearly, even when we win. 

Don't disagree much with what you have to say, but my count, we have been thoroughly outplayed by ND (despite the close score), ASU and Oregon.

I don't disagree with Shinsengumi's comment.

I'm sorry but this is just flat-out crazy. Yes, in 2011 Shaw inherited a fantastic scenario, but that graduating classes gutted us. We lost the most talent Stanford has probably ever lost in a single class, and then we improved the next year. A lot of that improvement was getting really lucky in 1-score games, but it still happened. A big part of the reason we're 5-5 right now instead of 7-3 is bad luck in one-score games, so if we're going to blame Shaw for this year then you have to give him crazy credit for 2012.

I agree with much of what Stupac2 says, after the ND something magical happened that season.  Some of the stuff that occurred up to and during the ND game gave me pause. 

[needle]

Among pre-season top 25 teams, only North Carolina (pre-season No. 23), Stanford (pre-season No. 11) and South Carolina (pre-season No. 9) don't have winning records. Each of these teams is 5-5.

My point is that--even attempting to look at things from a neutral perspective--Stanford's season should feel really, really painful. Don't let anybody tell you anything different.

[needle]

Among pre-season top 25 teams, only North Carolina (pre-season No. 23), Stanford (pre-season No. 11) and South Carolina (pre-season No. 9) don't have winning records. Each of these teams is 5-5.

My point is that--even attempting to look at things from a neutral perspective--Stanford's season should feel really, really painful. Don't let anybody tell you anything different.

[stupac2]

Among pre-season top 25 teams, only North Carolina (pre-season No. 23), Stanford (pre-season No. 11) and South Carolina (pre-season No. 9) don't have winning records. Each of these teams is 5-5.

My point is that--even attempting to look at things from a neutral perspective--Stanford's season should feel really, really painful. Don't let anybody tell you anything different.

Right, this season should feel painful. The point that I'm trying to get across to people (and I think I'm failing) is that painful seasons are inevitable. Even if the coaching staff is top-notch, even if they're developing talent well, even if they're recruiting well, there are going to be seasons where things don't totally click, where you don't get lucky, and where you end up not doing well. We're like 5 plays away from being 8-2 and everyone's talking about how great everything is. I think that being that outcome-oriented and not looking at the big picture of "we weren't going to win 80% of our close games forever" is the wrong way to look at it.

If we lose to Cal then we can panic.

[stupac2]

Among pre-season top 25 teams, only North Carolina (pre-season No. 23), Stanford (pre-season No. 11) and South Carolina (pre-season No. 9) don't have winning records. Each of these teams is 5-5.

My point is that--even attempting to look at things from a neutral perspective--Stanford's season should feel really, really painful. Don't let anybody tell you anything different.

Right, this season should feel painful. The point that I'm trying to get across to people (and I think I'm failing) is that painful seasons are inevitable. Even if the coaching staff is top-notch, even if they're developing talent well, even if they're recruiting well, there are going to be seasons where things don't totally click, where you don't get lucky, and where you end up not doing well. We're like 5 plays away from being 8-2 and everyone's talking about how great everything is. I think that being that outcome-oriented and not looking at the big picture of "we weren't going to win 80% of our close games forever" is the wrong way to look at it.

If we lose to Cal then we can panic.