[82lsju]

Looks like the Sac State WR and RB coaches are coming to Stanford

so Tyler Osborne

https://hornetsports.com/staff-directory...sborne/253

and Malcom Agnew

https://hornetsports.com/staff-directory...-agnew/250

neither is currently listed on the Sac St coaching staff page 

https://hornetsports.com/sports/football/coaches

but their bios above are still accessible from their AD staff directory

[82lsju]

Looks like the Sac State WR and RB coaches are coming to Stanford

so Tyler Osborne

https://hornetsports.com/staff-directory...sborne/253

and Malcom Agnew

https://hornetsports.com/staff-directory...-agnew/250

neither is currently listed on the Sac St coaching staff page 

https://hornetsports.com/sports/football/coaches

but their bios above are still accessible from their AD staff directory

[cardcrimson]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

[cardcrimson]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

[Goose]

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Shaw also "handled" the offense to a large extent. I expect Taylor will just be more open about that. You may have hit the nail on the head when you pointed out the OC is an "endowed chair". Depending on how things were written, that may save Tavita because they don't want to give up the money :-). Presumably it could also be redirected to anybody else carrying the title of OC.  What the OC actually does is of course up to the head coach. Frankly, once he figures out how much non-football work and time being the "head coach" at Stanford entails, Taylor may actually delegate more than he currently plans to.

[Goose]

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Shaw also "handled" the offense to a large extent. I expect Taylor will just be more open about that. You may have hit the nail on the head when you pointed out the OC is an "endowed chair". Depending on how things were written, that may save Tavita because they don't want to give up the money :-). Presumably it could also be redirected to anybody else carrying the title of OC.  What the OC actually does is of course up to the head coach. Frankly, once he figures out how much non-football work and time being the "head coach" at Stanford entails, Taylor may actually delegate more than he currently plans to.

[msqueri]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

[msqueri]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

[winflop]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Maybe, maybe no. Shaw was in charge of the offense and still had an OC, or at least someone with that title

[winflop]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Maybe, maybe no. Shaw was in charge of the offense and still had an OC, or at least someone with that title

[82lsju]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

looks like more than one "named" title can he held by a person as Pritchard today is 

Andrew Luck Director of Offense • Kevin M. Hogan Quarterbacks Coach

[82lsju]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

looks like more than one "named" title can he held by a person as Pritchard today is 

Andrew Luck Director of Offense • Kevin M. Hogan Quarterbacks Coach

[msqueri]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

looks like more than one "named" title can he held by a person as Pritchard today is 

Andrew Luck Director of Offense • Kevin M. Hogan Quarterbacks Coach

Right, but what happens if there's zero? Troy Taylor doesn't do offensive coordinators. He's the offensive coordinator. This is a matter of functionality and clarity in chains of command as much as anything. Even Kris Richardson, who Taylor was co-head coach with for years for Pete's sake, was not "offensive coordinator." IMHO we've already hired our top offensive assistant, Klayton Adams.

[msqueri]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

looks like more than one "named" title can he held by a person as Pritchard today is 

Andrew Luck Director of Offense • Kevin M. Hogan Quarterbacks Coach

Right, but what happens if there's zero? Troy Taylor doesn't do offensive coordinators. He's the offensive coordinator. This is a matter of functionality and clarity in chains of command as much as anything. Even Kris Richardson, who Taylor was co-head coach with for years for Pete's sake, was not "offensive coordinator." IMHO we've already hired our top offensive assistant, Klayton Adams.

[StanfordMatt]

The NCAA currently allows FBS programs to have a maximum of 10 on-field assistants. These are also the same individuals who are allowed to go on the road to recruit. There are other assistants on staff but they're not allowed to go on the road to recruit (they can send letters and make phone calls) and not supposed to do any on-field coaching in practice (wink, wink, SEC).

The NCAA Division I Council is considering a proposal to remove the cap and allow FBS programs to hire an unlimited number of on-field assistants but the vote has been pushed back multiple times and probably won't go into effect until next summer at the earliest. G5 programs have resisted the change, concerned that it will further exacerbate the disparity between the have's and the have-not's.

In any event, TT's staff will have 10 full-time assistants intially. If no one on staff has the OC title, then that just frees up one more slot for a different position. For example, he could split up the secondary and have separate coaches for corners and safeties, or inside and outside receivers, etc. It's one more position than he had at Sac State (FCS allows a max of 9 on-field assistants) so it'll be interesting to see how he utilizes it.

[StanfordMatt]

The NCAA currently allows FBS programs to have a maximum of 10 on-field assistants. These are also the same individuals who are allowed to go on the road to recruit. There are other assistants on staff but they're not allowed to go on the road to recruit (they can send letters and make phone calls) and not supposed to do any on-field coaching in practice (wink, wink, SEC).

The NCAA Division I Council is considering a proposal to remove the cap and allow FBS programs to hire an unlimited number of on-field assistants but the vote has been pushed back multiple times and probably won't go into effect until next summer at the earliest. G5 programs have resisted the change, concerned that it will further exacerbate the disparity between the have's and the have-not's.

In any event, TT's staff will have 10 full-time assistants intially. If no one on staff has the OC title, then that just frees up one more slot for a different position. For example, he could split up the secondary and have separate coaches for corners and safeties, or inside and outside receivers, etc. It's one more position than he had at Sac State (FCS allows a max of 9 on-field assistants) so it'll be interesting to see how he utilizes it.

[82lsju]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

looks like more than one "named" title can he held by a person as Pritchard today is 

Andrew Luck Director of Offense • Kevin M. Hogan Quarterbacks Coach

Right, but what happens if there's zero? Troy Taylor doesn't do offensive coordinators. He's the offensive coordinator. This is a matter of functionality and clarity in chains of command as much as anything. Even Kris Richardson, who Taylor was co-head coach with for years for Pete's sake, was not "offensive coordinator." IMHO we've already hired our top offensive assistant, Klayton Adams.

so maybe he's the Bradford M. Freeman Director of Football and Andrew Luck Director of Offense

[82lsju]

My guess is no assistants come back. I think Pritchard has the best shot followed by Alamar.

Hasn't Taylor said that he will be handling the offense? I assumed that he will not have a coordinator and that Pritchard's position would be eliminated, and with it away goes the Andrew Luck Director of Offense. . . .

Correct, Taylor doesn't plan to hire an offensive coordinator. I don't know whether that means the money reserved for that position can be plowed elsewhere on staff but I hope so.

For what it's worth, my thought on Pritchard is that he is a candidate not for an OC position but for whichever position between QB, WR, and RB that Osbourne and Agnew don't take, with QB being most likely and WR being next most likely. A clear demotion from Pritchard's prior role. To be clear, I am not predicting this will happen nor advocating for it to happen. But I'll consider him in play until it's confirmed he's not. Same goes for Turner and Alamar for their respective roles.

looks like more than one "named" title can he held by a person as Pritchard today is 

Andrew Luck Director of Offense • Kevin M. Hogan Quarterbacks Coach

Right, but what happens if there's zero? Troy Taylor doesn't do offensive coordinators. He's the offensive coordinator. This is a matter of functionality and clarity in chains of command as much as anything. Even Kris Richardson, who Taylor was co-head coach with for years for Pete's sake, was not "offensive coordinator." IMHO we've already hired our top offensive assistant, Klayton Adams.

so maybe he's the Bradford M. Freeman Director of Football and Andrew Luck Director of Offense

[msqueri]

The NCAA currently allows FBS programs to have a maximum of 10 on-field assistants. These are also the same individuals who are allowed to go on the road to recruit. There are other assistants on staff but they're not allowed to go on the road to recruit (they can send letters and make phone calls) and not supposed to do any on-field coaching in practice (wink, wink, SEC).

The NCAA Division I Council is considering a proposal to remove the cap and allow FBS programs to hire an unlimited number of on-field assistants but the vote has been pushed back multiple times and probably won't go into effect until next summer at the earliest. G5 programs have resisted the change, concerned that it will further exacerbate the disparity between the have's and the have-not's.

In any event, TT's staff will have 10 full-time assistants intially. If no one on staff has the OC title, then that just frees up one more slot for a different position. For example, he could split up the secondary and have separate coaches for corners and safeties, or inside and outside receivers, etc. It's one more position than he had at Sac State (FCS allows a max of 9 on-field assistants) so it'll be interesting to see how he utilizes it.

For what it's worth, I don't think it's debatable whether Stanford will/should have two DB coaches (if not three!) among the ten allowed assistants. This is an area in which Shaw, Anderson, and Akina were deeply and damagingly anachronistic. In modern college football you absolutely need separate corner and safety coaches. On every play we have 3-4 different positions in the secondary when you account for field, boundary, and slot corners and the safety positions. "DB" as Stanford has treated the position room (both in terms of coaching responsibility and, often, in terms of the recruiting and coaching of personnel pursuant to Akina's fetishization of "versatility") is a quite poor way to think about 45.45 percent of the defense. Other programs recognize this.

Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Clemson, TCU, Utah, Penn State, Texas (very notable as this is the single team in the country most connected to the Chris Petersen defensive coaching tree), Kansas State, Oregon, Washington, USC, Oregon State, Notre Dame, LSU, Oklahoma, Baylor, Mississippi State, Minnesota, Ole Miss all have explicitly different corners and safeties coaches. That's 20 of the top 25 Sagarin teams in the country having two DB coaches. There are roughly as many teams with THREE DB coaches (yes, at least four teams have three different of the ten allowed coaches handle corners, safeties, and nickels) as there are with one. Among the coaches who don't explicitly separate safeties, Kirby Smart hardly seems to count as he was an NFL and Alabama safeties coach and I'm sure helps mentor that group.

This isn't a close call. Troy Taylor himself seems to recognize this as he separated corners and safeties into two positions even when he only had nine assistants allowed.

Good riddance to the idiocy of letting Duane Akina coach almost half of the defense. God we were so stupid under Shaw.

[msqueri]

The NCAA currently allows FBS programs to have a maximum of 10 on-field assistants. These are also the same individuals who are allowed to go on the road to recruit. There are other assistants on staff but they're not allowed to go on the road to recruit (they can send letters and make phone calls) and not supposed to do any on-field coaching in practice (wink, wink, SEC).

The NCAA Division I Council is considering a proposal to remove the cap and allow FBS programs to hire an unlimited number of on-field assistants but the vote has been pushed back multiple times and probably won't go into effect until next summer at the earliest. G5 programs have resisted the change, concerned that it will further exacerbate the disparity between the have's and the have-not's.

In any event, TT's staff will have 10 full-time assistants intially. If no one on staff has the OC title, then that just frees up one more slot for a different position. For example, he could split up the secondary and have separate coaches for corners and safeties, or inside and outside receivers, etc. It's one more position than he had at Sac State (FCS allows a max of 9 on-field assistants) so it'll be interesting to see how he utilizes it.

For what it's worth, I don't think it's debatable whether Stanford will/should have two DB coaches (if not three!) among the ten allowed assistants. This is an area in which Shaw, Anderson, and Akina were deeply and damagingly anachronistic. In modern college football you absolutely need separate corner and safety coaches. On every play we have 3-4 different positions in the secondary when you account for field, boundary, and slot corners and the safety positions. "DB" as Stanford has treated the position room (both in terms of coaching responsibility and, often, in terms of the recruiting and coaching of personnel pursuant to Akina's fetishization of "versatility") is a quite poor way to think about 45.45 percent of the defense. Other programs recognize this.

Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Clemson, TCU, Utah, Penn State, Texas (very notable as this is the single team in the country most connected to the Chris Petersen defensive coaching tree), Kansas State, Oregon, Washington, USC, Oregon State, Notre Dame, LSU, Oklahoma, Baylor, Mississippi State, Minnesota, Ole Miss all have explicitly different corners and safeties coaches. That's 20 of the top 25 Sagarin teams in the country having two DB coaches. There are roughly as many teams with THREE DB coaches (yes, at least four teams have three different of the ten allowed coaches handle corners, safeties, and nickels) as there are with one. Among the coaches who don't explicitly separate safeties, Kirby Smart hardly seems to count as he was an NFL and Alabama safeties coach and I'm sure helps mentor that group.

This isn't a close call. Troy Taylor himself seems to recognize this as he separated corners and safeties into two positions even when he only had nine assistants allowed.

Good riddance to the idiocy of letting Duane Akina coach almost half of the defense. God we were so stupid under Shaw.

[Canalejas]

You really don't like David Shaw.

[Canalejas]

You really don't like David Shaw.

[winflop]

The NCAA currently allows FBS programs to have a maximum of 10 on-field assistants. These are also the same individuals who are allowed to go on the road to recruit. There are other assistants on staff but they're not allowed to go on the road to recruit (they can send letters and make phone calls) and not supposed to do any on-field coaching in practice (wink, wink, SEC).

The NCAA Division I Council is considering a proposal to remove the cap and allow FBS programs to hire an unlimited number of on-field assistants but the vote has been pushed back multiple times and probably won't go into effect until next summer at the earliest. G5 programs have resisted the change, concerned that it will further exacerbate the disparity between the have's and the have-not's.

In any event, TT's staff will have 10 full-time assistants intially. If no one on staff has the OC title, then that just frees up one more slot for a different position. For example, he could split up the secondary and have separate coaches for corners and safeties, or inside and outside receivers, etc. It's one more position than he had at Sac State (FCS allows a max of 9 on-field assistants) so it'll be interesting to see how he utilizes it.

For what it's worth, I don't think it's debatable whether Stanford will/should have two DB coaches (if not three!) among the ten allowed assistants. This is an area in which Shaw, Anderson, and Akina were deeply and damagingly anachronistic. In modern college football you absolutely need separate corner and safety coaches. On every play we have 3-4 different positions in the secondary when you account for field, boundary, and slot corners and the safety positions. "DB" as Stanford has treated the position room (both in terms of coaching responsibility and, often, in terms of the recruiting and coaching of personnel pursuant to Akina's fetishization of "versatility") is a quite poor way to think about 45.45 percent of the defense. Other programs recognize this.

Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Clemson, TCU, Utah, Penn State, Texas (very notable as this is the single team in the country most connected to the Chris Petersen defensive coaching tree), Kansas State, Oregon, Washington, USC, Oregon State, Notre Dame, LSU, Oklahoma, Baylor, Mississippi State, Minnesota, Ole Miss all have explicitly different corners and safeties coaches. That's 20 of the top 25 Sagarin teams in the country having two DB coaches. There are roughly as many teams with THREE DB coaches (yes, at least four teams have three different of the ten allowed coaches handle corners, safeties, and nickels) as there are with one. Among the coaches who don't explicitly separate safeties, Kirby Smart hardly seems to count as he was an NFL and Alabama safeties coach and I'm sure helps mentor that group.

This isn't a close call. Troy Taylor himself seems to recognize this as he separated corners and safeties into two positions even when he only had nine assistants allowed.

Good riddance to the idiocy of letting Duane Akina coach almost half of the defense. God we were so stupid under Shaw.

I'd stay with one DB coach if it meant we would have quality coaches for the front seven. Best DBs in the world can't stop a QB if there's no pressure

[winflop]

The NCAA currently allows FBS programs to have a maximum of 10 on-field assistants. These are also the same individuals who are allowed to go on the road to recruit. There are other assistants on staff but they're not allowed to go on the road to recruit (they can send letters and make phone calls) and not supposed to do any on-field coaching in practice (wink, wink, SEC).

The NCAA Division I Council is considering a proposal to remove the cap and allow FBS programs to hire an unlimited number of on-field assistants but the vote has been pushed back multiple times and probably won't go into effect until next summer at the earliest. G5 programs have resisted the change, concerned that it will further exacerbate the disparity between the have's and the have-not's.

In any event, TT's staff will have 10 full-time assistants intially. If no one on staff has the OC title, then that just frees up one more slot for a different position. For example, he could split up the secondary and have separate coaches for corners and safeties, or inside and outside receivers, etc. It's one more position than he had at Sac State (FCS allows a max of 9 on-field assistants) so it'll be interesting to see how he utilizes it.

For what it's worth, I don't think it's debatable whether Stanford will/should have two DB coaches (if not three!) among the ten allowed assistants. This is an area in which Shaw, Anderson, and Akina were deeply and damagingly anachronistic. In modern college football you absolutely need separate corner and safety coaches. On every play we have 3-4 different positions in the secondary when you account for field, boundary, and slot corners and the safety positions. "DB" as Stanford has treated the position room (both in terms of coaching responsibility and, often, in terms of the recruiting and coaching of personnel pursuant to Akina's fetishization of "versatility") is a quite poor way to think about 45.45 percent of the defense. Other programs recognize this.

Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Clemson, TCU, Utah, Penn State, Texas (very notable as this is the single team in the country most connected to the Chris Petersen defensive coaching tree), Kansas State, Oregon, Washington, USC, Oregon State, Notre Dame, LSU, Oklahoma, Baylor, Mississippi State, Minnesota, Ole Miss all have explicitly different corners and safeties coaches. That's 20 of the top 25 Sagarin teams in the country having two DB coaches. There are roughly as many teams with THREE DB coaches (yes, at least four teams have three different of the ten allowed coaches handle corners, safeties, and nickels) as there are with one. Among the coaches who don't explicitly separate safeties, Kirby Smart hardly seems to count as he was an NFL and Alabama safeties coach and I'm sure helps mentor that group.

This isn't a close call. Troy Taylor himself seems to recognize this as he separated corners and safeties into two positions even when he only had nine assistants allowed.

Good riddance to the idiocy of letting Duane Akina coach almost half of the defense. God we were so stupid under Shaw.

I'd stay with one DB coach if it meant we would have quality coaches for the front seven. Best DBs in the world can't stop a QB if there's no pressure

[SamuelMcF]

I'd stay with one DB coach if it meant we would have quality coaches for the front seven. Best DBs in the world can't stop a QB if there's no pressure

We can have both.

[SamuelMcF]

I'd stay with one DB coach if it meant we would have quality coaches for the front seven. Best DBs in the world can't stop a QB if there's no pressure

We can have both.

[Beeg_Dawg]

You really don't like David Shaw.

You really don't like David Shaw as a coach.

Fixed that for you.

[Beeg_Dawg]

You really don't like David Shaw.

You really don't like David Shaw as a coach.

Fixed that for you.

[PVTree]

You really don't like David Shaw.

You really don't like David Shaw as the Stanford football 
head  coach.

Fixed that for you.

Fixed the fix for you. :)

[PVTree]

You really don't like David Shaw.

You really don't like David Shaw as the Stanford football 
head  coach.

Fixed that for you.

Fixed the fix for you. :)

[BostonCard]

You have 10 coaches include the HC to divide as you see fit.  There are, broadly speaking, 

Up to three coordinator roles:
Offensive coordinator
Defensive coordinator
Special teams coordinator

Up to a dozen position coaches:
Interior OL
Tackles
Tight Ends
Wide Receivers
Running Backs
Quarterbacks
Interior DL
DE/EDGE
Inside linebackers
Outside linebackers
Safeties
Cornerbacks
(and, apparently, nickel backs)

Since there are more roles than there are allowed coaches, some coaches by definition have to do double duty.  For example, generally coordinators will also be position coaches (eg OC/QB, as Pritchard was or Anderson, who was DC/OLB).  Even so, there are more position groups than there are coaches, so you have to pick whether, for example, you have one coach for both ILBs and OLBs or one coach for both safeties and cornerbacks.

I think Matt's point, which is well-taken, is that with the base defense for most teams shifting to be nickel, on most plays, a team will have five defensive backs on the field on most plays, and if you allocate 4 defensive position coaches proportionally, you would probably have two DB coaches, one LB coach, and one DL coach.

BC

---

You really don't like David Shaw.

You really don't like David Shaw as a coach.

Fixed that for you.

I know Matt feels like you said, but I really get the sense that for a substantial number of people here, there is a visceral and very personal reaction to Shaw that is beyond proportion to "he was a bad football coach".  

BC

[BostonCard]

You have 10 coaches include the HC to divide as you see fit.  There are, broadly speaking, 

Up to three coordinator roles:
Offensive coordinator
Defensive coordinator
Special teams coordinator

Up to a dozen position coaches:
Interior OL
Tackles
Tight Ends
Wide Receivers
Running Backs
Quarterbacks
Interior DL
DE/EDGE
Inside linebackers
Outside linebackers
Safeties
Cornerbacks
(and, apparently, nickel backs)

Since there are more roles than there are allowed coaches, some coaches by definition have to do double duty.  For example, generally coordinators will also be position coaches (eg OC/QB, as Pritchard was or Anderson, who was DC/OLB).  Even so, there are more position groups than there are coaches, so you have to pick whether, for example, you have one coach for both ILBs and OLBs or one coach for both safeties and cornerbacks.

I think Matt's point, which is well-taken, is that with the base defense for most teams shifting to be nickel, on most plays, a team will have five defensive backs on the field on most plays, and if you allocate 4 defensive position coaches proportionally, you would probably have two DB coaches, one LB coach, and one DL coach.

BC

---

You really don't like David Shaw.

You really don't like David Shaw as a coach.

Fixed that for you.

I know Matt feels like you said, but I really get the sense that for a substantial number of people here, there is a visceral and very personal reaction to Shaw that is beyond proportion to "he was a bad football coach".  

BC

[msqueri]

"I think Matt's point, which is well-taken, is that with the base defense for most teams shifting to be nickel, on most plays, a team will have five defensive backs on the field on most plays, and if you allocate 4 defensive position coaches proportionally, you would probably have two DB coaches, one LB coach, and one DL coach."

Yes BUT......

It's even worse than that. Nothing says you only need four defensive position coaches. That was a Shaw thing, and one of myriad ways in which he disrespected the defense. Defensive backs are so much more in need of coaching and nuanced supervision than most other positions (obviously OL also super important and also a brobdingnagian part of the roster) it's not even funny. That's because "DB" is a misnomer. They're different positions in a way X and Z receivers are not. If you have one coach you box yourself into generic, unnuanced, lowest common denominator coaching. We saw that every time Akina or his charges opened their mouth with all the talk of versatility. Fortunately, teams have a solution with the tenth spot - just break the secondary up into two groups and make sure you can have dedicated coaching and scheme. Shaw chose to have, in essence, six offensive coaches (including himself, which I think you have to do as he was essentially the coordinator), four defensive coaches, and a special teams coach. Very unbalanced. He didn't have to do that. But he's not a defense guy, plus on top of that he showed more love to special teams than defense.

By the way, I think Akina's results in both recruiting and performance were solid. I bet it would be hard to find too many better DB coaches in the nickel age who performed as competently coaching 45 percent of the defense themself. It's just that as a management practice I think it's clear the best practice of good college football teams is to have at least two secondary coaches. One is a real outlier. Again, just as prominent among good teams to have THREE as it is to have one.

[msqueri]

"I think Matt's point, which is well-taken, is that with the base defense for most teams shifting to be nickel, on most plays, a team will have five defensive backs on the field on most plays, and if you allocate 4 defensive position coaches proportionally, you would probably have two DB coaches, one LB coach, and one DL coach."

Yes BUT......

It's even worse than that. Nothing says you only need four defensive position coaches. That was a Shaw thing, and one of myriad ways in which he disrespected the defense. Defensive backs are so much more in need of coaching and nuanced supervision than most other positions (obviously OL also super important and also a brobdingnagian part of the roster) it's not even funny. That's because "DB" is a misnomer. They're different positions in a way X and Z receivers are not. If you have one coach you box yourself into generic, unnuanced, lowest common denominator coaching. We saw that every time Akina or his charges opened their mouth with all the talk of versatility. Fortunately, teams have a solution with the tenth spot - just break the secondary up into two groups and make sure you can have dedicated coaching and scheme. Shaw chose to have, in essence, six offensive coaches (including himself, which I think you have to do as he was essentially the coordinator), four defensive coaches, and a special teams coach. Very unbalanced. He didn't have to do that. But he's not a defense guy, plus on top of that he showed more love to special teams than defense.

By the way, I think Akina's results in both recruiting and performance were solid. I bet it would be hard to find too many better DB coaches in the nickel age who performed as competently coaching 45 percent of the defense themself. It's just that as a management practice I think it's clear the best practice of good college football teams is to have at least two secondary coaches. One is a real outlier. Again, just as prominent among good teams to have THREE as it is to have one.

[BostonCard]

It is hard to have fewer than five offensive coaches, because, despite each taking 1 spot on the field, running back and quarterback are such unique positions (and so important) that you have to use one coach for each.  That leaves three coaches for wide receivers, tight ends, and offensive linemen, which can be divided into WR, TE/tackles, interior linemen or WR, TE, OL (which leaves you with one coach for five positions).  If you want a fifth defensive coach, then your ST coordinator has to do double duty (sometimes as a TE coach in the offense), or your head coach has to also be a position coach, which I wouldn't recommend.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that we should be paying more attention to the defense.  It's just that these things involve tradeoffs, and I can see the logic of having more coaches on offense, where the positions are more specialized.

BC

[BostonCard]

It is hard to have fewer than five offensive coaches, because, despite each taking 1 spot on the field, running back and quarterback are such unique positions (and so important) that you have to use one coach for each.  That leaves three coaches for wide receivers, tight ends, and offensive linemen, which can be divided into WR, TE/tackles, interior linemen or WR, TE, OL (which leaves you with one coach for five positions).  If you want a fifth defensive coach, then your ST coordinator has to do double duty (sometimes as a TE coach in the offense), or your head coach has to also be a position coach, which I wouldn't recommend.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that we should be paying more attention to the defense.  It's just that these things involve tradeoffs, and I can see the logic of having more coaches on offense, where the positions are more specialized.

BC

[cardcrimson]

So only one for special teams? How do those responsibilities get covered for protection, punting, field goals, coverage, on side kicks, etc?

[cardcrimson]

So only one for special teams? How do those responsibilities get covered for protection, punting, field goals, coverage, on side kicks, etc?

[SamuelMcF]

So only one for special teams? How do those responsibilities get covered for protection, punting, field goals, coverage, on side kicks, etc?

You're asking what a special teams coach (yes, there's always only one) does. I don't know the answer to that, but thought Alamar was generally quite good at it when he was working with P5-caliber football players.

---

https://gostanford.com/news/2022/12/14/f...staff.aspx

Osborne and Agnew are official, as is new head of S&C Ryan Deatrick. Very happy about Deatrick. S&C is a critical part of team culture, so it makes perfect sense for Taylor to bring him along to instill his culture. Deatrick also has 4 years directing football S&C at Houston before Sac State.

[SamuelMcF]

So only one for special teams? How do those responsibilities get covered for protection, punting, field goals, coverage, on side kicks, etc?

You're asking what a special teams coach (yes, there's always only one) does. I don't know the answer to that, but thought Alamar was generally quite good at it when he was working with P5-caliber football players.

---

https://gostanford.com/news/2022/12/14/f...staff.aspx

Osborne and Agnew are official, as is new head of S&C Ryan Deatrick. Very happy about Deatrick. S&C is a critical part of team culture, so it makes perfect sense for Taylor to bring him along to instill his culture. Deatrick also has 4 years directing football S&C at Houston before Sac State.