(11-21-2021, 04:15 PM)Giants Wrote: (11-21-2021, 03:58 PM)lex24 Wrote: Do you all enjoy beating your heads against a wall? Because I guarantee you, Shaw is not going to be fired.
Nor should he be…
You, Giants, and anyone else who shares that view are part of the problem.
I know everyone here discredits my takes on Shaw because I'm viewed as a hater. Whatever. One of the most fact-based posters on TOS came up with another post-game analysis of where the program stands, copied below. I don't know how you can read the below and can still say, with a straight face, that Shaw should not be relieved of his duties:
+++++++++
1. This is a new low. The early 1960s were awful but they were in the context of a gradual upward improvement year-to-year. Aside from that we've never had a time when this program was so thoroughly established as this horrible. 1983 and 2006 were heinous but everybody knew those kind of results spelled doom for the coaches that allowed things to get to that point. We don't have that kind of confidence now. But any sense that Shaw's job is safe should have evaporated last night. Big Game should be the coup de grace. The last two times Stanford football has played in Stanford Stadium are very strong contenders for the two worst games in Stanford history.
2. After the Utah game, I pointed out that the yard per play differential (5.4) was not only the worst I was able to find in our history but 23 percent worse than the next worst (4.4 against Notre Dame in 2003). Last night the team was significantly more dominated than even that, a whopping 6.1 yard per differential. This is what I mean when I say possibly the two worst games in Stanford history. I don't know if I can emphasize enough how astounding a 6.1 yard per play differential is. A lot of folks watched Ohio State's 56-7 annihilation of Michigan State yesterday, right? 3.8 yard differential. When Stanford beat Rice 62-7 in Australia that was a 5.1 yard differential. You can't belong on a football field less than Stanford last night. AND THAT WAS AGAINST A FOUR WIN TEAM!
3. The biggest story is the incredible incompetence of the Stanford defense against an offense that came into the game with the #105 scoring offense in the nation. We gave up 10.1 yards per play allowed. Let me say that again: an average of a first down per play. 636 yards is the eighth most we've ever given up in a game (1981 Arizona State, 1999 Washington, 1998 Oregon, 2003 Oregon State, 2005 Notre Dame, 1982 UCLA, 1973 UCLA) but (as coaches of yesteryear didn't intentionally suck the energy out of the game and guarantee there would be so few plays by either team) I suspect it may be the case we've never given up so many yards on so few plays. The all-time worst performances for which stats are available weren't even close: the 1999 Washington game had 7.8 yards per play allowed, 2003 Oregon State was 7.4, and 2005 Notre Dame was 7.5. Hard to put into words how historic a first down allowed per play is. 41 points is a lot to give up too but it could have been much, much worse. The Wade-Perry forced fumble was an awesome, momentum-reversing individual play in which everybody else's failures and how many home runs Cal hit subsequently would have made that another likely Cal house call were it not for that play (and even if he made the tackle a touchdown drive would have of course been likely). And then McGill's interception in the end zone also took points off the board. Those are two of the biggest plays of the season for the Stanford defense and we still gave up 41 points. I just need to say again this was against Cal.
4. As usual, the nightmare mostly had to do with run defense. 10.4 yards per carry allowed is a new low point even for our run defense, even worse than the Utah performance (and Cal doesn't have a run game like Utah). The next best Cal has done against any non-Stanford FBS team in the last three seasons is 5.7 yards per carry against Nevada (the #92 run defense in the nation) earlier this year. That's another differential to just let sink in. I mentioned after Utah that I didn't have data sets robust enough to see if there have been worse performances historically and this one was even worse. I looked at the teams competing with Stanford for worst run defense in America (Kansas, Akron, Arkansas State) and none of them have broken the 10 yard barrier. Last year's North Texas team is the only team I can find that has in the last two years. Congratulations Cardinal defense! The pass defense was not the historic failure the run defense was but it was a bad game in that respect too: 161.32 passer rating and 9.8 yards per attempt allowed are the third and fourth worst of our season, respectively, and Cal's third best of the year on both counts.
5. The offense was also really bad but more just typically bad than historically bad. 4.0 yards per play is the second worst of the season and second worst anybody has done against Cal. It's even worse than Arizona did when half Cal's team had COVID. And we laid that egg despite having every starter and key reserve available except for Tremayne and Bragg. 43 yards rushing and 1.7 yards per carry is better than we did against Arizona State but in the same ballpark as against Kansas State. It is the seventh time in 11 games we've been held under 100 yards rushing. Only Colorado has done worse among Cal opponents. Most disappointing, though, was that it was a comprehensively bad game for the offense. Having McKee throwing to a pretty full complement of receivers for the first time now that Wilson is back was exciting, on paper, but in reality a 95.63 passer rating and 5.4 yards per attempt were both by far the worst we've had in any game McKee has played. His Total QBR was #94 of 123 QBs nationally. He's experiencing a very alarming trend, as his last two games have been his worst and his three worst games all came in the last four he's played. On the season he is #6 of 12 Pac-12 QBs in Total QBR - still quite good for a freshman but he's crashed to earth following the Oregon game.
6. [Paragraph giving props to Wilson and Yurosek].
7. [Paragraph praising McGill, Reid, Damuni (relatively speaking).]
8. [Paragraph praising Sanborn and noting rather meaningless]
9. There will be other posts to pile on when it comes to just how much Shaw needs to go but I'll say this for now: at this point of the spiral I think Shaw's brain is broken. [Examples of brainlocks in Big Game]. I think the vibes add up to a situation where losing the team is sadly on the table.
