[PalmTree]

At least Buddy Teevens was a decent human being.

BC

+EUTM - before it was a thing!

[PalmTree]

At least Buddy Teevens was a decent human being.

BC

+EUTM - before it was a thing!

[crackpot]

...and other things that make me go hmm... Taylor discontinued the Set the Expectation trainings, as well as the Women's Clinic.

[crackpot]

...and other things that make me go hmm... Taylor discontinued the Set the Expectation trainings, as well as the Women's Clinic.

[needle]

Ben Parker over at Cardinal Report describes with more nuance how the investigation went down (per his sources) and other aspects of TT's leadership style:

 
First of all, it needs to be understood that these allegations against Taylor came before his first year started. At least the allegations that sparked the first investigation. So like the spring and summer of 2023. From what has been learned, it sounds like Taylor sent an apology to people a year later in the summer of 2024 and that some people did feel like his behavior had improved. At least a little bit. Taylor was put on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) because his behavior violated university standards.

Second, the genesis of the complaint that triggered the first investigation is Taylor was working to have a leadership change at a certain position and he got advice from a mentor to force the leadership change to get what he wanted. The leader who he sought to have removed was a female leader in the athletics department. She got removed and then she subsequently filed for an investigation into Taylor.

Third, from what has been learned, these complaints were really within the walls of the athletic department and staffers. So, none of this had anything to do with how Taylor was treating players per se. That said, sources have made it clear that there has been some frustration among a certain group of players about how Taylor has treated them. Specifically, with his overall tone and way of communicating. Just in terms of being too direct and maybe not being sensitive enough to how others might take his style of communication.   

At the risk of losing my status as a certified TT hater, it is worth a read, imo:

https://stanford.rivals.com/news/making-...roy-taylor

[needle]

Ben Parker over at Cardinal Report describes with more nuance how the investigation went down (per his sources) and other aspects of TT's leadership style:

 
First of all, it needs to be understood that these allegations against Taylor came before his first year started. At least the allegations that sparked the first investigation. So like the spring and summer of 2023. From what has been learned, it sounds like Taylor sent an apology to people a year later in the summer of 2024 and that some people did feel like his behavior had improved. At least a little bit. Taylor was put on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) because his behavior violated university standards.

Second, the genesis of the complaint that triggered the first investigation is Taylor was working to have a leadership change at a certain position and he got advice from a mentor to force the leadership change to get what he wanted. The leader who he sought to have removed was a female leader in the athletics department. She got removed and then she subsequently filed for an investigation into Taylor.

Third, from what has been learned, these complaints were really within the walls of the athletic department and staffers. So, none of this had anything to do with how Taylor was treating players per se. That said, sources have made it clear that there has been some frustration among a certain group of players about how Taylor has treated them. Specifically, with his overall tone and way of communicating. Just in terms of being too direct and maybe not being sensitive enough to how others might take his style of communication.   

At the risk of losing my status as a certified TT hater, it is worth a read, imo:

https://stanford.rivals.com/news/making-...roy-taylor

[StanfordMatt]

At least Buddy Teevens was a decent human being.

BC

Hearing announcement at 11 am tomorrow
It’s a short drive from Sacramento

Could well be true, BobK. After all, his bowl game is only 2.5 hours from now.

I think Troy has a lot going for him. He strikes me as someone whom Stanford
players would love and play hard for, as a clever offensive play caller, and as
an energetic and charismatic man who would make a great impression on recruits
and infuse them with his enthusiasm. Even though Jason Garrett was OC for my New
York Giants for a few years, he struck me as somewhat of a stolid fellow. Although
they both went to excellent universities, I'd prefer TT over JG.

He’s a jerk who failed miserably and was fired in his only stint at the P5 level. Horrible hire.

And yes, he has told his staff (at least some of them) that he’s accepted the job. We’d be better off bringing back Buddy Ball. At least Buddy was a nice guy.

Yes indeed, BC. And RIP Buddy.

[StanfordMatt]

At least Buddy Teevens was a decent human being.

BC

Hearing announcement at 11 am tomorrow
It’s a short drive from Sacramento

Could well be true, BobK. After all, his bowl game is only 2.5 hours from now.

I think Troy has a lot going for him. He strikes me as someone whom Stanford
players would love and play hard for, as a clever offensive play caller, and as
an energetic and charismatic man who would make a great impression on recruits
and infuse them with his enthusiasm. Even though Jason Garrett was OC for my New
York Giants for a few years, he struck me as somewhat of a stolid fellow. Although
they both went to excellent universities, I'd prefer TT over JG.

He’s a jerk who failed miserably and was fired in his only stint at the P5 level. Horrible hire.

And yes, he has told his staff (at least some of them) that he’s accepted the job. We’d be better off bringing back Buddy Ball. At least Buddy was a nice guy.

Yes indeed, BC. And RIP Buddy.

[82lsju]

Taylor is gone from the Stanford Directory. . . .Apparently still in the AD directory.

I spoke with someone loosely connected to the AD and he said the AD directory can often be out of sync with the Stanford Directory and that the later should be seen as more accurate....

[82lsju]

Taylor is gone from the Stanford Directory. . . .Apparently still in the AD directory.

I spoke with someone loosely connected to the AD and he said the AD directory can often be out of sync with the Stanford Directory and that the later should be seen as more accurate....

[old spanish trail]

I've never forgotten what Stanford Matt said about TT's tenure at other schools, and it colored my opinion of him from the beginning. So, I'm not surprised. I agree with those who say the reaction might be different if he was 10-3, but he sounds like a jerk to me, and he wears that hat with a brim so deep you can't see his face, which hides any charisma he might have, and he isn't 10-3, so ....

[old spanish trail]

I've never forgotten what Stanford Matt said about TT's tenure at other schools, and it colored my opinion of him from the beginning. So, I'm not surprised. I agree with those who say the reaction might be different if he was 10-3, but he sounds like a jerk to me, and he wears that hat with a brim so deep you can't see his face, which hides any charisma he might have, and he isn't 10-3, so ....

[Goose]

Taylor is gone from the Stanford Directory. . . .Apparently still in the AD directory.

I spoke with someone loosely connected to the AD and he said the AD directory can often be out of sync with the Stanford Directory and that the later should be seen as more accurate....

Interesting. If he is really "gone" I would really hope the University will have something to say about about it, hopefully tomorrow at the latest. I any case, it is pretty clear that some statement regarding "the situation" needs to be issued, even if it is a "We are studying ...". I would guess the statement will have to come "from the top". Muir is a lame duck, so he has no credibility. I suppose it could come from Andrew Luck, but his position in the hierarchy and short time on the job IMO argues against that.

[Goose]

Taylor is gone from the Stanford Directory. . . .Apparently still in the AD directory.

I spoke with someone loosely connected to the AD and he said the AD directory can often be out of sync with the Stanford Directory and that the later should be seen as more accurate....

Interesting. If he is really "gone" I would really hope the University will have something to say about about it, hopefully tomorrow at the latest. I any case, it is pretty clear that some statement regarding "the situation" needs to be issued, even if it is a "We are studying ...". I would guess the statement will have to come "from the top". Muir is a lame duck, so he has no credibility. I suppose it could come from Andrew Luck, but his position in the hierarchy and short time on the job IMO argues against that.

[gailtate]

The longer this loser hangs around, the fouler the stench on campus.

[gailtate]

The longer this loser hangs around, the fouler the stench on campus.

[82lsju]

Taylor is gone from the Stanford Directory. . . .Apparently still in the AD directory.

I spoke with someone loosely connected to the AD and he said the AD directory can often be out of sync with the Stanford Directory and that the later should be seen as more accurate....

Interesting. If he is really "gone" I would really hope the University will have something to say about about it, hopefully tomorrow at the latest. I any case, it is pretty clear that some statement regarding "the situation" needs to be issued, even if it is a "We are studying ...". I would guess the statement will have to come "from the top". Muir is a lame duck, so he has no credibility. I suppose it could come from Andrew Luck, but his position in the hierarchy and short time on the job IMO argues against that.

agreed if he's gone, but maybe he's not, I'm sure on-line directories sometimes have errors

and the University did make some sort of statement on Wed, I could not find it, but from the original article

In a statement released by Stanford on Wednesday, Taylor said he was using the investigations to improve "how I interact with others."


"I willingly complied with the investigations, accepted the recommendations that came out of them, and used them as a learning opportunity to grow in leadership and how I interact with others," Taylor said in the statement. "I look forward to continuing to work collaboratively and collegially with my colleagues so that we can achieve success for our football program together."

In a separate statement, a university spokesperson said, "Stanford believes in upholding the highest standards of behavior in the workplace."

"The University received complaints regarding Coach Taylor and a third party investigated the matter thoroughly. Last summer, the University took appropriate measures, Coach Taylor received coaching, and he has committed to nurturing the respectful working environment that is essential to the success of all our athletics programs."

[82lsju]

Taylor is gone from the Stanford Directory. . . .Apparently still in the AD directory.

I spoke with someone loosely connected to the AD and he said the AD directory can often be out of sync with the Stanford Directory and that the later should be seen as more accurate....

Interesting. If he is really "gone" I would really hope the University will have something to say about about it, hopefully tomorrow at the latest. I any case, it is pretty clear that some statement regarding "the situation" needs to be issued, even if it is a "We are studying ...". I would guess the statement will have to come "from the top". Muir is a lame duck, so he has no credibility. I suppose it could come from Andrew Luck, but his position in the hierarchy and short time on the job IMO argues against that.

agreed if he's gone, but maybe he's not, I'm sure on-line directories sometimes have errors

and the University did make some sort of statement on Wed, I could not find it, but from the original article

In a statement released by Stanford on Wednesday, Taylor said he was using the investigations to improve "how I interact with others."


"I willingly complied with the investigations, accepted the recommendations that came out of them, and used them as a learning opportunity to grow in leadership and how I interact with others," Taylor said in the statement. "I look forward to continuing to work collaboratively and collegially with my colleagues so that we can achieve success for our football program together."

In a separate statement, a university spokesperson said, "Stanford believes in upholding the highest standards of behavior in the workplace."

"The University received complaints regarding Coach Taylor and a third party investigated the matter thoroughly. Last summer, the University took appropriate measures, Coach Taylor received coaching, and he has committed to nurturing the respectful working environment that is essential to the success of all our athletics programs."

[fullmetal]

I'm open to new information that may sway my opinion away from "Fire TT & Muir," but I'm not seeing anything new.  Stanford is not a place where we should tolerate NCAA violations.  We shouldn't tolerate anger issues and other behavior unbecoming of leadership from people whose job is to coach and mentor Stanford athletes.  (Professors do not do the same for undergrads, though I guess they do for graduate students...I wouldn't be opposed to eliminating toxic professors.)  Two investigations were commissioned...that doesn't happen randomly or capriciously.

Anyway, I don't think the win-loss record is going to improve itself with More Yelling or More Anger.  Doesn't sound like a leader to me.

[fullmetal]

I'm open to new information that may sway my opinion away from "Fire TT & Muir," but I'm not seeing anything new.  Stanford is not a place where we should tolerate NCAA violations.  We shouldn't tolerate anger issues and other behavior unbecoming of leadership from people whose job is to coach and mentor Stanford athletes.  (Professors do not do the same for undergrads, though I guess they do for graduate students...I wouldn't be opposed to eliminating toxic professors.)  Two investigations were commissioned...that doesn't happen randomly or capriciously.

Anyway, I don't think the win-loss record is going to improve itself with More Yelling or More Anger.  Doesn't sound like a leader to me.

[Jamesy]

He's listed in the Stanford only directory view.

[Jamesy]

He's listed in the Stanford only directory view.

[Goose]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal...roy-taylor
This article is dated yesterday. It may be a bit unfair to Andrew Luck, but the following quote seems to illustrate two things:

Luck didn’t respond to a request for comment from ESPN.com, even though Luck is Taylor’s immediate supervisor. Luck also served on the committee that hired Taylor in 2022.
Making sure Taylor complies with the school’s expectations becomes one of the most important things Luck will be doing during his first year on the job. And if Taylor in any way fails to act the way the school expects, Luck needs to be ready to initiate immediately the effort to dismiss Taylor.

This quote demonstrates that Andrew Luck is starting to be "held responsible" (Fairly or not) for the football program. Taylor's conduct is now viewed by some as Luck's responsibility. I hope Luck was prepared for this. The fact the head coach reports to the GM inevitably leads to that situation. So far, it has been a honeymoon period. It appears that is over.
 
The article also indicates FWIW that TT is still expected, at a minimum, to coach the 2025 season at Stanford.

[Goose]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal...roy-taylor
This article is dated yesterday. It may be a bit unfair to Andrew Luck, but the following quote seems to illustrate two things:

Luck didn’t respond to a request for comment from ESPN.com, even though Luck is Taylor’s immediate supervisor. Luck also served on the committee that hired Taylor in 2022.
Making sure Taylor complies with the school’s expectations becomes one of the most important things Luck will be doing during his first year on the job. And if Taylor in any way fails to act the way the school expects, Luck needs to be ready to initiate immediately the effort to dismiss Taylor.

This quote demonstrates that Andrew Luck is starting to be "held responsible" (Fairly or not) for the football program. Taylor's conduct is now viewed by some as Luck's responsibility. I hope Luck was prepared for this. The fact the head coach reports to the GM inevitably leads to that situation. So far, it has been a honeymoon period. It appears that is over.
 
The article also indicates FWIW that TT is still expected, at a minimum, to coach the 2025 season at Stanford.

[gailtate]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal...roy-taylor
This article is dated yesterday. It may be a bit unfair to Andrew Luck, but the following quote seems to illustrate two things:

Luck didn’t respond to a request for comment from ESPN.com, even though Luck is Taylor’s immediate supervisor. Luck also served on the committee that hired Taylor in 2022.
Making sure Taylor complies with the school’s expectations becomes one of the most important things Luck will be doing during his first year on the job. And if Taylor in any way fails to act the way the school expects, Luck needs to be ready to initiate immediately the effort to dismiss Taylor.

This quote demonstrates that Andrew Luck is starting to be "held responsible" (Fairly or not) for the football program. Taylor's conduct is now viewed by some as Luck's responsibility. I hope Luck was prepared for this. The fact the head coach reports to the GM inevitably leads to that situation. So far, it has been a honeymoon period. It appears that is over.
 
The article also indicates FWIW that TT is still expected, at a minimum, to coach the 2025 season at Stanford.

In other words whatever happens we're headed for yet another lose-lose season. If short-fuse Taylor fails to purge his inner demons then Luck gives him the boot post haste but if he behaves himself his team is still likely to show only marginal improvement at best. Either way, we're most likely looking at a new program in '26. Oh, and there will again be plenty of empty seats   sections this season. Go Cardinal.

[gailtate]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal...roy-taylor
This article is dated yesterday. It may be a bit unfair to Andrew Luck, but the following quote seems to illustrate two things:

Luck didn’t respond to a request for comment from ESPN.com, even though Luck is Taylor’s immediate supervisor. Luck also served on the committee that hired Taylor in 2022.
Making sure Taylor complies with the school’s expectations becomes one of the most important things Luck will be doing during his first year on the job. And if Taylor in any way fails to act the way the school expects, Luck needs to be ready to initiate immediately the effort to dismiss Taylor.

This quote demonstrates that Andrew Luck is starting to be "held responsible" (Fairly or not) for the football program. Taylor's conduct is now viewed by some as Luck's responsibility. I hope Luck was prepared for this. The fact the head coach reports to the GM inevitably leads to that situation. So far, it has been a honeymoon period. It appears that is over.
 
The article also indicates FWIW that TT is still expected, at a minimum, to coach the 2025 season at Stanford.

In other words whatever happens we're headed for yet another lose-lose season. If short-fuse Taylor fails to purge his inner demons then Luck gives him the boot post haste but if he behaves himself his team is still likely to show only marginal improvement at best. Either way, we're most likely looking at a new program in '26. Oh, and there will again be plenty of empty seats   sections this season. Go Cardinal.

[Goose]

Either way, we're most likely looking at a new program in '26. Oh, and there will again be plenty of empty seats   sections this season. Go Cardinal.

Given the evolution of college sports and university budgets, by '26 the question may well be "Do we have a program in '26?". It is unfortunately very easy to be pessimistic. I am hoping to see a better football team in '25 than in '24, even if it doesn't lead to more success record-wise. If we don't see that, TT's ability to improve the team will be at best very, very doubtful. Unfortunately that will in some circles call into question whether anybody can improve the team given whatever constraints exist in '26. I hope we don't have to go there.

[Goose]

Either way, we're most likely looking at a new program in '26. Oh, and there will again be plenty of empty seats   sections this season. Go Cardinal.

Given the evolution of college sports and university budgets, by '26 the question may well be "Do we have a program in '26?". It is unfortunately very easy to be pessimistic. I am hoping to see a better football team in '25 than in '24, even if it doesn't lead to more success record-wise. If we don't see that, TT's ability to improve the team will be at best very, very doubtful. Unfortunately that will in some circles call into question whether anybody can improve the team given whatever constraints exist in '26. I hope we don't have to go there.

[Mick]

Either way, we're most likely looking at a new program in '26. Oh, and there will again be plenty of empty seats sections this season. Go Cardinal.

Maybe the Sacramento A's can give us a good deal on their used tarp which covered the entire upper deck...

[Mick]

Either way, we're most likely looking at a new program in '26. Oh, and there will again be plenty of empty seats sections this season. Go Cardinal.

Maybe the Sacramento A's can give us a good deal on their used tarp which covered the entire upper deck...

[cardcrimson]

Eight hours since someone commented on this fiasco? This is a massive stain on the University, and no Cardboarders care enough to comment? To quote Slim Pickens, "I am depressed".

[cardcrimson]

Eight hours since someone commented on this fiasco? This is a massive stain on the University, and no Cardboarders care enough to comment? To quote Slim Pickens, "I am depressed".

[Griffins78]

This is the first big decision for AL to make and it is massive. Really hope he finds and recruits a really great coach

[Griffins78]

This is the first big decision for AL to make and it is massive. Really hope he finds and recruits a really great coach

[triangle2]

This is the first big decision for AL to make and it is massive. Really hope he finds and recruits a really great coach

Did I miss something? Is Taylor gone?

[triangle2]

This is the first big decision for AL to make and it is massive. Really hope he finds and recruits a really great coach

Did I miss something? Is Taylor gone?

[JohnR34231]

This is the first big decision for AL to make and it is massive. Really hope he finds and recruits a really great coach

Did I miss something? Is Taylor gone?

Not yet anyway (at least to my knowledge or I believe the knowledge of anyone on the Cardboard), but people are assuming he will be.
In threads like this someone can be accused in the first post and by the last post he will be tried, convicted, sentenced and executed.

[JohnR34231]

This is the first big decision for AL to make and it is massive. Really hope he finds and recruits a really great coach

Did I miss something? Is Taylor gone?

Not yet anyway (at least to my knowledge or I believe the knowledge of anyone on the Cardboard), but people are assuming he will be.
In threads like this someone can be accused in the first post and by the last post he will be tried, convicted, sentenced and executed.

[Mick]

I was going to turn this into a trivia question, but I'll just leave it here. Stanford has had 32 head football coaches, including three who performed the roles with an interruption (Walter Camp, Harry Cross, Bill Walsh).

What's the worst record a Stanford head football coach had over his first two years? And did he retain his job? As follows:

Jack Curtice, 5-15, .250, went 0-10, 4-6 and 5-5, giving way to Ralston
Troy Taylor, 6-18, .250, ?????
Walt Harris, 6-17, .261, lost his job
Buddy Teevens, 6-16, .273, kept his job one more 4-7 season.
Denny Green, 8-14, .364, went 8-4, gave way to Walsh

[Mick]

I was going to turn this into a trivia question, but I'll just leave it here. Stanford has had 32 head football coaches, including three who performed the roles with an interruption (Walter Camp, Harry Cross, Bill Walsh).

What's the worst record a Stanford head football coach had over his first two years? And did he retain his job? As follows:

Jack Curtice, 5-15, .250, went 0-10, 4-6 and 5-5, giving way to Ralston
Troy Taylor, 6-18, .250, ?????
Walt Harris, 6-17, .261, lost his job
Buddy Teevens, 6-16, .273, kept his job one more 4-7 season.
Denny Green, 8-14, .364, went 8-4, gave way to Walsh