Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor!

Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! (/thread-23865.html)

Pages: 1 2

Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

1. Hope. We have hope. That's the bottom line for me. After a joyless and enervating stretch that lasted far too long (opinions differ on how many years but most of the last half decade certainly), Stanford football fans, players, and parents finally get to look forward to something. It may take some time for wins to return but the first steps are joy (or at least making Stanford football something that is fun to participate in and watch), energy, and optimism. This hire gives us all three.

2. Troy Taylor will transform Stanford football, for good or for ill. Given how far the program has fallen, the possibility the transformation is for the worse strikes me as vanishingly small. The program had become so uncompetitive, joyless, and hopeless under Shaw that the bar to clear is set very low. The chance remains that Taylor is a dud or the damage is too great or the systems and culture Taylor brings can't graft on to the Stanford patient. But the hire gives us a chance to find out if salvaging the patient is possible, which we wouldn't have had with Shaw. Where I don't have much uncertainty is that Taylor will transform Stanford football one way or another. This is a clean break from Shaw and even from Harbaugh. Stanford declined to opt for continuity with prior regimes or even styles and went in a different direction. I think that's prudent. There are multiple ways to skin a cat and competence and culture need to be the areas of focus over any particular approach.

3. While stylistic differences abound, Taylor does represent a clear attempt to replicate the Harbaugh magic in terms of reaching way down to FCS to find an uber-competent offensive wizard (and even a former quarterback who played high school football in Northern California and made it to the NFL before becoming a QB/offensive specialist coach). The obvious similarities create both promise and peril in my mind. While FCS to Power Five success stories are few and far between, one of the most spectacular being at Stanford with a similar resume coach inspires some confidence. I also like that Taylor offers similarities not just to Harbaugh but to Art Briles. Looking at the sweep of FCS to Power Five hires, what Stanford aims to do with Taylor and Colorado aims to do with Coach Prime follows Kansas State (Klieman), Stanford (Harbaugh), Virginia (London), Washington State (Wulff), and Vanderbilt (Johnson) making similar gambits. It's failed slightly more often than not (obligatory small sample size caveat) as far as I can tell, but Harbaugh and Klieman are encouraging cases, and it's further encouraging to peel back the history to understand that the spectacular and immediate nature of Taylor's success stands apart from the FCS to Power Five failures. Wulff wasn't even close to as successful at Eastern Washington. Johnson took much longer to excel at Furman, inherited a prouder program than Sacramento State, and didn't reach the heights Taylor did. London inherited a powerhouse at Richmond from Dave Clawson and parlayed an even smaller sample size than Taylor (two years, compared to Taylor's three seasons over four years) into the Power Five job. I think when you look at the details of what Taylor did compared to other FCS to Power Five jumps it starts to get super exciting. He feels a lot like Harbaugh and Klieman.

4. By now folks are probably very familiar with how impressive those details are but it bears emphasizing, as "FCS coach" doesn't come close to doing him justice. Miracle worker nonpareil is more like it. Taylor finished his Sacramento State career with a .789 winning percentage. For context, among the other ten coaches in school history only one ever won more than half his games (.535 win percentage). The Hornets in all their history had never been to the FCS playoffs and had only made playoffs at all once, in 1988 in Division II. Taylor took them to the playoffs in each of his three seasons. All three Hornets teams he coached were top ten in the nation. This would be like taking Kansas or Vanderbilt to multiple New Year's Six bowls. It's extraordinary.

5. That track record is the reason to be excited. All the talk of offensive wizardry misses the forest for the trees in my view. Whether a team excels because of offense, defense, balance, or whatever may be important in speaking to fan biases/preferences, but it's not what's fundamental: a head coach bringing the requisite overall culture, structure, management to lead a winning program. The reason to be excited about Troy Taylor is that he wins with overwhelming frequency in an environment that had never been conducive to winning before him. That's the story. That's the appeal. We need somebody who can create and sustain a healthy culture out of a bombed out crater. Taylor's track record provides reason to believe he can do it. There are no guarantees as a coach moves to a new level with new people around him and new challenges to confront. No man ever steps into the same river twice for he's not the same man and it's not the same river. All of that. But the best way to have confidence in his ability to do what we need is he's done something like it before.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

6. Nonetheless, fans will want some insight into how he's done it. The picture is more complex (and encouraging) than the tale of offensive wizardry some tell. Sacramento State's rocket ship trajectory has been fueled by galactic improvements on both sides of the ball. On offense, in the eight years prior to Taylor Sacramento State averaged 28.35 points per game and the median season scoring offense averages were 24.3 and 27.2; in his three years his scoring offense average has been 36.3 and his median has been 35.7. On defense, in the eight years prior to Taylor Sacramento State averaged giving up 32.5 points per game and the median scoring defense averages were 33.2 and 33.5; in his three years both his scoring defense average and his median has been 22.5. In other words, he's been good for about a 20 point swing in median outcomes and, crucially, the improvement is about evenly divided between offense and defense. Relative to other teams in FCS, his median ranks have been #15 on offense and #27 on defense. In other words, defense has been a bigger part of the story than many understand. He really made the whole team much better.

7. PFF grades provide another way to assess what he's accomplished. The year before he arrived the Hornets had major weaknesses across the board (passing, pass blocking, receiving, run blocking, tackling, and pass rush all sub-60) and zero major strengths (nothing above 80). In his very first year he narrowed the number of weaknesses considerably (just coverage) and added some signature strengths (pass blocking and run defense). In his second season (post pandemic, so third year) he had removed weaknesses entirely from the equation and spread the strengths even further (passing, running, run defense, coverage). This past season running, run defense, and coverage all remained signature strengths and the Hornets continued to have no glaring weaknesses. The things that jump out are the quickness and totality of the turnaround and the consistent excellence of the running (last two years) and run defense (every year) grades. As I am especially desperate to see Stanford achieve better run defense than we've seen in recent years, that insight from PFF especially interests me. In 2022, Sacramento State is #45 in rush defense and #43 in yards per carry allowed. In 2021 they were #25 and #38 in those categories respectively. In 2019 it was #29 and #19. In other words, conventional stats back PFF up that run defense was a consistent strength.

8. Others have posted about style of play based on more extensive film analysis of Sacramento State than I've been able to do, so I don't have much to add on the way he runs a two quarterback offense (the last two years, with his first season being a sole superstar QB), schemes players open, etc. I'll just make some observations about balance and tempo. Over the three seasons, the run/pass balance went from 47.3/52.7 in 2019 to 50.5/49.5 in 2021 to 57.5/42.5 in 2022. A few things stand out here. First, he achieved remarkable balance in two of the three years. Second, the progression has been continuously toward more of an emphasis on run plays. This is definitely not an air raid offense in the sense many fans think about it. They run a lot. In fact, they run a lot more than Stanford does. Stanford just completed its fifth straight season of running 47.5 percent of the time or less. Sacramento State clearly runs a lot more than Stanford. Of course, a lot of that owes to Hornet dominance and Cardinal haplessness. Winning teams almost always get to run more given the scoring margins. The Hornets had six games this year they won by 20+ points. That's a lot of garbage time. If you compare the Hornets' balance to Stanford in the McCaffrey/Love days, Sacramento State passes more than we did (65.7 percent run in 2015, 63.1 percent in 2016, and 56.9 percent in 2017). My takeaway is that Taylor's inclination probably is more pass happy than Stanford in our glory years but less than Stanford 2018-2022 (potentially much less but want to recognize comparison is fraught because the Stanford teams have been so much worse).

9. The difference between Shaw and Taylor when it comes to tempo is night and day. In Taylor's three seasons he had more than 73.9 plays per game every year and 76.5 was the median. By comparison, Stanford this past season was 68.7 and Shaw's median over 12 years was 66. The slowest tempo offense Taylor has ever coached would be the fastest Shaw has ever coached. This coaching change amounts to Stanford fans being able to see approximately ten more plays of offense every game. This night and day disparity is all the more remarkable when you consider Sacramento State's dominance, which means garbage time and run plays that drain clock. Quite clear we aren't going to see the torpid pace of Shawfense any more. Praise the lord. I don't need to see no huddle offense every play, but I do want players to get rhythm and fans to be able to see football. All things being equal (and I don't think they are), I'd rather watch 77 plays than 66.

10. In important respects, this change in tempo is merely symptomatic of a larger issue: Taylor reportedly (even explicitly according to some quotes) disdains playbooks and complexity. He achieves his offensive greatness not by trying to out-complexify opponents. That should mean a lot less of the Shawfense signature larded up playcalls, comical Denny's menu playsheet, molasses-like sequences from the huddle to snap, and so forth. Just aesthetically this will be quite welcome, but this also appeals to me as somebody who has criticized needless, self-important, overly intellectual complexity in Stanford football. The proof will be in the pudding, but Taylor's pudding has been tastier than Shaw's too. Excited for this change.

11. In terms of defensive scheme, the participation reports in the 2022 box scores indicate a 4-2-5 base defense. There was one game that started in a 3-3-5 defense. 4-2-5 is a popular defense in college football and in many respects what Stanford shifted to in 2022, so I don't see this being a discontinuity for Stanford's scheme/personnel. But the big question with regard to defensive scheme, of course, is who actually coaches the 2023 Stanford defense. More on that later.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

12. What most interests me about Troy Taylor by far is his last three years. Next up is his time as the legendary Folsom head coach (or co-head coach for several years, as it were). We're hiring a head coach and that's what I want from him and why he got the job. The offensive coordinator stints mean a lot less to me. But he did not formally have an offensive coordinator at Sacramento State and presumably will keep his hands firmly on the offense's wheel at Stanford, so it is relevant to dissect the coordinator gigs. Much has been made about his one coordinator foray in Power Five football, the short-lived and ill-fitted role working for Whittingham at Utah. I couldn't care less about the debates on whether he was "fired" from Utah. It's obvious he did not mesh with Whittingham and they parted. It's effectively a firing. The question is what we should make of it. As others have noted, Whittingham has a long history of not meshing with coordinators. That is an important contextual factor. On the other hand, the data show Utah's offense was better off without Taylor and Whittingham made the right call. Whittingham has been head coach so long there's a brobdingnagian amount of data points on how his coordinators fare (he's been there since before FEI even existed as an advanced metric, giving us all 16 years of FEI to analyze). The median Ute offense is #60 in FEI. That reveals Taylor (#85 and #59 in FEI his two years there) was mediocre. Notably, replacing Taylor with Andy Ludwig unlocked the Ute offense. Three of the last four years have been the best offensive years in Whittingham's tenure. Ultimately, the Utah tenure is a mark against Taylor's reputation as an offensive wizard. Nonetheless, the fact he did it increases my confidence in the hire, as he's game planned against Pac-12 defenses and been mediocre at it, which is more than we can say for the man he's replacing. Moreover, people can learn and it is a very reasonable hope that Taylor will take lessons from that experience and be more poised to succeed in the Pac-12 this time around. For what it's worth, at Eastern Washington Taylor's offense averaged 42.36 points per game the year he was there compared to 34.64 the year before him and 34.45 the year after him, so that experience bolsters the narrative he was an outstanding FCS coordinator. Overall, there is extremely strong (I'd say ironclad) evidence Stanford is improving its offensive coaching.

13. The thing to worry about is whether Taylor's FCS alchemy translates up two big levels in competition (leap frogging Group of Five entirely). We can be confident he knows how to build a culture (again, the most important attribute bar none), organize a football program, manage a staff, and so forth. What we don't know is whether he can recruit nationally and build a Power Five level staff. His success and anecdotal reputation support the idea he can recruit, but it was overwhelmingly reliant on regional, junior college, and transfer portal recruiting. Additionally, he wasn't at Sacramento State long enough to build up a recruiting track record worth judging and the immediacy of his success strongly suggests it had more to do with culture, organization, scheme, and other factors as opposed to recruiting (not a bad thing). By PFF's lights, this year he had one sublime mega star (RB Cameron Skattebo) and seven superstars (TE Marshel Martin, QB Asher O'Hara, RB Marcus Fulcher, LB Armon Bailey, CB Caleb Nelson, DL Jett Stanley, and S/nickel Marte Mapu) [By national reputation outside PFF Skattebo and Mapu were the studs]. Much of that was inherited rather than brought in by Taylor, though Skattebo was a Taylor recruit, O'Hara and Nelson came in as transfers, and Fulcher came in the same year as Taylor so there may or may not have been a role there. Taylor has enough of an imprint on the superstar echelon of the roster not to dismiss his role not only in managing the roster but in shaping it in a way instrumental to the team's success.

14. Stanford fans will want to know if we can plunder the Sacramento State roster and/or transfer portal. To my eyes the Sacramento State roster does not look hospitable. Most of the guys I mentioned as superstars don't have any evidence of being good students (REALLY wish that weren't the case with Skattebo and hope I'm wrong/he was too young to be properly honored last year, as that would be brobdingnagian for us to get him). Stanley strikes me as the best option. I'd guess we'd get zero, one, or two Hornets transfers. Not going to reshape our roster. The transfer portal more broadly will be more interesting for two reasons. First, the joy/fun, energy, and optimism reflected by the Taylor hire could interact with normal opportunism and the pull of the Stanford degree to make us attractive to good transfers generally. Second, Taylor is a Northern California legend. While the area isn't a particularly fertile one for high-level high school football, there are players, as he showed at Sacramento State. He aggressively went after former Folsom players and Sacramento area guys in the transfer portal (like Nelson) and I'd be surprised if he didn't going forward. But I'd predict the first factor may end up being more significant for us, as the Venn diagram of Sacramento guys with admissible academics and football talent isn't large (but maybe keep an eye on guys like Justin Eklund from San Jose State or Kaleb Higgins from Cal). The real question on the transfer portal as an avenue for Stanford comes down to support from the administration. We've heard rumblings but it's still really unclear what that looks like and how significant it is.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

15. The most important short term thing to watch is how Taylor fills out his staff. My bottom line remains the same: when a program brings in a coach on the basis of that coach's prior success at lower levels, it's important not to micro-manage the new coach or hamstring his ability to form the staff he thinks puts him in the best position. Taylor succeeded spectacularly at Sacramento State and dancing with who brung ya isn't just a matter of loyalty but also pragmatism. The vast majority of his staff was with him all three years. The more he messes with the mix of his prior staff (or we force him to) the more variables that changes in the equation. Risky. That being said, nobody will have a better sense than Taylor of the crucial ingredients, relative laggards, and differences in how he wants to operate at Stanford as opposed to Sacramento State. I don't know whether he'll want the staff intact, mostly intact, partly intact, or drastically different. I would bet on mostly intact or partly intact but I don't know. Everything I say about coaching from here on out comes with the caveat that it needs to be up to Taylor and all observations/judgments I make are made provisionally with humility.

16. At Sacramento State he was allowed nine full assistants compared to the ten he'll get at Stanford. The move up gives him more flexibility and ability to be ambitious with his stuff. Notably, even with just nine spots he still was a man after my heart with two full defensive back coaches. As I've posted at length previously, this is a trend in college football among good coaches. Nickel is the base defense now and it arguably gives too much responsibility to one coach to lump safeties and corners together, not to mention the lack of specialization implied by the Stanford/Akina approach. At my last check, Saban, Day, Riley, Kelly, Swinney, Cristobal, Fisher, and Gundy all separate corners and safeties. This is a best practice I've been calling on Stanford to adopt for the last few years. That Taylor did it even with one less assistant overall really warms my heart. Hopefully better days ahead for the division of responsibilities on Stanford's staff. Here is how Taylor divided it this year: Kris Richardson (assistant head coach/offensive line), Andy Thompson (defensive coordinator/linebackers), Malcolm Agnew (running backs), Bobby Fresques (quarterbacks), Jeremy LaPan (special teams/tight ends), Tyler Osborne (wide receivers), Kraig Paulson (defensive line), Cherokee Valeria (defensive passing game coordinator/cornerbacks/pro liaison), Kodi Whitfield (safeties).

17. The first question for staff formation will be if anybody stays behind at Sacramento State. Taylor seems genuinely enamored with and loyal to Sacramento State and if there's an opportunity for one of his assistants to take over the program and any of the staff to rise into coordinator roles, I wouldn't be surprised if he welcomes that. From Sacramento State's perspective continuity with by far the best thing they've ever had going would seem to be attractive. There are several candidates, though they also have deep Taylor ties and Stanford would be more prestigious and higher paying. Richardson could step out of Taylor's shadows, but they were co-head coaches at Folsom and presumably pretty tight. Thompson has much less long-standing Taylor ties and is reportedly popular. Fresques is a Sacramento State legend as a former star QB, but also a Taylor loyalist as a former Folsom assistant.

18. Occam's Razor to me seems to be Thompson staying in Sacramento as he's got less Taylor tie and is in good standing there, while Taylor may face pressure to keep Lance Anderson on staff and/or bring in a defensive coordinator who answers a perceived relative weakness in Taylor's resume (though as I said above the Taylor/Thompson/et al partnership's defensive performance has been heavily instrumental in Sacramento State's success. For what it's worth, Thompson was previously the defensive coordinator at Northern Arizona for a decade. In that span his median scoring defenses were #60 and #69, though with a disturbing fall-off in his last four years. After he left the Lumberjack scoring defense medians have been #71 and #81. Coupling that experience with his much more impressive Sacramento State resume I think it is reasonable to think he's a competent coordinator. But he doesn't knock your socks off, and has never done it at the FBS level. Considering Taylor has been a Utah coordinator, the defensive coordinator situation is a much bigger question mark. It may make sense for Taylor to try to upgrade this position now that he's moving up.

19. Taylor does not list an offensive coordinator. He runs the offense. His top offensive assistant is right hand man Richardson, who spent 24 years at Folsom. Considering how closely intertwined the Folsom and Sacramento State careers of these men have been, presumably Heffernan should be looking for new work and Pritchard would only stay in a demotion. I continue to hope Pritchard gets a lower level head coaching opportunity elsewhere, but he is a candidate to stay for continuity and recruiting if Taylor wants that. I would be inclined toward complete house cleaning of the assistants.

20. Running back coach is a place where I see intrigue. Taylor and Gould were extremely close colleagues for four years on staff together as QB/RB coaches respectively for two years and TE/RB coaches the other two. USC RB coach Kiel McDonald is a very close Taylor associate from Eastern Washington and Utah days. RB coach is a logical place to put Pritchard if he stays. And Sacramento State's current RB coach, Agnew, has been spectacularly successful with his charges and has a nice pedigree having apprenticed under Mike Riley at Oregon State and Nebraska. Lots of directions Taylor could go. I badly hope it is McDonald or Agnew and not Gould. Please don't be Gould. We need more energy in recruiting (Agnew's youth/getting his first break makes him attractive to me) and whatever Gould has been doing in our RB room in recent years is toxic.

21. Alamar should probably be packing up as LaPan spent seven years at Utah largely working with special teams (though LaPan offers TE/OL versatility as well). Power Five experience will be at a premium for this new staff and the Whittingham coaching tree is attractive as we build out this staff. The big decision I see for Taylor is whether to keep LaPan's duties the same and use the extra assistant slot for something else (like a third front seven coach), or to use the extra spot for a dedicated special teams coach as Shaw has.

22. Osborne is one of the more intriguing coaches for Sacramento State. I know we're all fond of Kennedy, but Sacramento State's passing game is, obviously, core to Taylor's identity and operation and the guy he's tagged for WRs is impressive. Osborne has done coaching apprenticeships under Chip Kelly, Mark Helfrich, and Chris Petersen and has deep Pacific Northwest football ties. Like Agnew there's something appealing about getting some youth combined with Pac-12 experience.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

23. Paulson is a long-time FCS and low-level FBS defensive coordinator. Based on his trajectory it seems his best days are behind him and/or water has found its level. On the one hand, the run defense has been good so the Thompson/Paulson duo brings something to the table. On the other hand, this seems a fairly obvious slot for us to keep Anderson if we're continuity-inclined in any respect.

24. Valeria has evidently done a very nice job with Hornets DBs and also has seven years at Eastern Washington, mostly under Beau Baldwin. It would be a big rise in level for him but maybe this is a guy whose competence will be rewarded. For the last year, our own Whitfield has been Robin to Valeria's Batman. As the newest member of the Sacramento State staff Whitfield may have less of a claim on being key to the secret sauce. Coverage grades were great in 2022 but they took a step back compared to last according to both PFF and pass efficiency defense (ticked down to #21 from #16). But he's a Stanford Man and that very well may be attractive to Taylor. Personally I think Terrence Brown (now at Cal) has a much more solid coaching resume, but Whitfield is certainly a plausible candidate and it would be kind of mean to leave the Stanford guy behind.

25. Speaking of which (kind of....not an alum, but a recent football office staffer), Garrett Wolfe gives us some palace intrigue. Our former assistant director of recruiting operations is a former Folsom player under Taylor who has spent the last four years under his mentor, first as the director of football operations and more recently as assistant athletic director for football administration. There seems to be a decent likelihood the apprentice will become the master (or outright replacement) for either Matt Doyle or Mike Eubanks.

26. The other aspect of the staff that bears mentioning is strength and conditioning. As one would expect, the training staff largely comes from UC Davis/Humboldt State type of pedigrees. However, quite notably the top dog, Ryan Deatrick, spent four years at Houston training the football and baseball programs, which means significant experience under Tom Herman and Major Applewhite. That's reassuringly big-time compared to what I was expecting from the S&C operation.

27. Everything in 15-26 is just musing/idle observations. A million permutations exist for how the staff gets fleshed out. It will be very interesting to watch how Taylor navigates this considering the dearth of Power Five experience and gravitas but the strong track record of a staff excelling together.

28. Many have and will continue to comment on Taylor coming to us as a Cal legend. It's obviously a notable and attention-drawing element of the story. Cal fans are going to be big mad for a long time. But this aspect of the story bores me. The Stanford football I love should aspire to much more than rivalry with Cal. Frankly, they are beneath the program we should be. They can be mad, embarrassed, jealous, whatever. I don't really care. I just want the best football coach possible. I don't think Taylor is the best coach Stanford should aspire to, but he's an awfully good one. He should bring more fun, energy, and hope to the program. That's what I wanted. If his Cal ties make him more likely to leave in a few years (I doubt it as any successes Taylor has will reinforce that Stanford is a stronger program), so be it. What I really want is a turnaround from the depths Shaw plunged us to. If Taylor can get us to 8+ wins and leaves us for greener pastures, either at home or at a bigger program, it's fine by me if that happens quickly. I want us to attract coaches who want even bigger things. Hopefully he succeeds such that he has those options.

29. While I really like the hire, it is very aggravating to me that Stanford reportedly (and evidently, judging by the finalists for the job) prioritized offensive coaches, as it has done for decades. As I've posted at length previously I think it reflects a crimped, un-strategic perspective to limit a candidate field to offensive coaches and may even be counterproductive in terms of de-emphasizing the side of the ball that historically holds Stanford back more and is often crucial to a winning ethos in college football. I'm thrilled by the Taylor hire but there are other candidates who would have been even better and I'm not sure we even took them seriously as possibilities (Dan Quinn, Dave Aranda, Chris Klieman), not to mention guys who would have been equally plausible as Taylor even if not as exciting as those three (Mike Elko, Jim Leonhard, etc.). That bums me out. The larger point is that Stanford's process of evidently prioritizing offensive coaches, candidates who proactively came to us, and candidates who fit within a smaller than Power Five standard budget narrowed the pool. I believe that when you fish in a smaller pool your odds of getting a great catch go down. Where we stand now, I'm happy with the Taylor catch but don't want to lose sight of the problems in process.

30. Although the bottom line is fun, energy, and hope, attention will turn to wins and losses soon enough. In the next few months we'll get a sense of the early returns on how this turning of the page revitalizes the program and, eventually, we'll get a sense of the baseline talent-wise he gets to operate from. Shaw left a ruined program and the 2023 roster will likely be horrifying, though Taylor now gets to go to work on whatever player retention, recruiting, and transfer portal machinations he can muster. We'll know more in the spring what we have to work with and what the expectations should be. But I feel confident in saying the expectations should not be immediate winning. Harbaugh went 4-8 his first year. PJ Fleck went 5-7. Matt Campbell went 3-9. Dave Clawson went 3-9. Art Briles went 4-8. Hopefully we can win 4+ games and take steady steps to build the kind of culture and organization that will be getting us to consistent winning seasons and regular top 25 seasons. But it won't happen overnight. In the meantime, I'm excited to see who Taylor hires, recruits, and retains. Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose!

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - BobK - 12-11-2022

Wow, thanks Matt. I expect Richardson to be named the Sac State Head Coach.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - threepointer - 12-11-2022

Misqueri: Who are you and how did you get so good at this. Your writing and analysis is superb.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - martyup - 12-11-2022

Excellent! I'll take 4 win season in 2023 if we see the roadmap for Stanford's return to elite football status.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Farm93 - 12-11-2022

(12-11-2022, 01:08 PM)threepointer Wrote: Misqueri: Who are you and how did you get so good at this. Your writing and analysis is superb.

If Taylor is as good as these 30 points imply, he will be coaching in the BigTen or SEC in 4 years or less.

Stanford almost needs someone not quite as good as this level of hype.
I am not sure with Muir, but historically too far below 500 would mean getting fired in 3-4 years.
Too far above 500 would mean leaving for a better FBS or an NFL post in 3-4 years.

Ultimately I am just not so sure that 4 and 5 star players (or their parents) from GA, TX, FL or Louisiana will be dazzled by our new west coach guy. Guess we will see.

The inevitable drop in recruiting for the next 2 years will not all be on him as the Pac-12 is far from stable, but I hope his staff has someone that can credibly go into The South and get families to take the 40 year leap of faith.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Austroturf - 12-11-2022

(12-11-2022, 12:54 PM)msqueri Wrote: 12. ...Ultimately, the Utah tenure is a mark against Taylor's reputation as an offensive wizard. Nonetheless, the fact he did it increases my confidence in the hire, as he's game planned against Pac-12 offenses and been mediocre at it, which is more than we can say for the man he's replacing. Moreover, people can learn and it is a very reasonable hope that Taylor will take lessons from that experience and be more poised to succeed in the Pac-12 this time around. For what it's worth, at Eastern Washington Taylor's offense averaged 42.36 points per game the year he was there compared to 34.64 the year before him and 34.45 the year after him, so that experience bolsters the narrative he was an outstanding FCS coordinator. Overall, there is extremely strong (I'd say ironclad) evidence Stanford is improving its offensive coaching.

Very insightful analysis of the Troy Taylor hiring. In point 12, I think you meant to write that Taylor has game-planned against Pac-12 defenses (see above).

I hope he doesn't retain any of the current staff. If he does, he should pick one or two of the better ones to ensure some semblance of continuity and put them in non-critical roles. Not sure why you think Pritchard would be good as an RB position coach. Nothing in his background and in Stanford's run game during his OC days indicate that he has any skills in this area. And if Taylor is the acting OC, then he needs to bring in some top-notch position coaches to develop the pieces he will be orchestrating. Pritchard wasn't even a top-notch QB coach, so I doubt his value in the new regime. The sclerotic home-grown culture that Shaw cultivated needs to be purged.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

(12-11-2022, 01:08 PM)threepointer Wrote: Misqueri: Who are you and how did you get so good at this. Your writing and analysis is superb.

Thank you! Makes me happy to hear people enjoy the thoughts.

Who I am: son of a Ralston era Rose Bowl backup DB/much better rugby player who has been a diehard all my life and didn't let coming onto campus concurrently with the Teevens years dampen my enthusiasm at all. I used to be the football editor for The Bootleg in the Harbaugh years. The amount of time I spend thinking about/researching Stanford football did not decrease when I stopped accepting paychecks for it, I just shifted my time from things that were laborious (like interviews) to things that spark joy for me (like the rabbit holes you can see in my posts in this thread).

Really appreciate the kind words.

(12-11-2022, 01:28 PM)Farm93 Wrote:
(12-11-2022, 01:08 PM)threepointer Wrote: Misqueri: Who are you and how did you get so good at this. Your writing and analysis is superb.
If Taylor is as good as these 30 points imply, he will be coaching in the BigTen or SEC in 4 years or less.

Stanford almost needs someone not quite as good as this level of hype.
I am not sure with Muir, but historically too far below 500 would mean getting fired in 3-4 years.
Too far above 500 would mean leaving for a better FBS or an NFL post in 3-4 years.

Ultimately I am just not so sure that 4 and 5 star players (or their parents) from GA, TX, FL or Louisiana will be dazzled by our new west coach guy. Guess we will see.

The inevitable drop in recruiting for the next 2 years will not all be on him as the Pac-12 is far from stable, but I hope his staff has someone that can credibly go into The South and get families to take the 40 year leap of faith.

On how good Taylor is, I think he's an extraordinary FCS coach and has a better than even chance of success, but you never know and there are legitimate questions about how much will translate. I think I'd put him at about a 60 percent chance of what I'd view as successful (at least one but hopefully multiple 8+ win seasons before he leaves). If he does bolt for a better job after succeeding with Stanford, I won't care. I just want to get back to relevance. If he gets us to relevance and then leverages that for himself, we'll be in a better position to build on the success. All of our best coaches before Shaw left us once they succeeded and I'm ok with that.

I don't think big recruits far afield will be dazzled initially, but the whole enterprise becomes more appealing if he starts winning and builds a fun, competitive culture. That's what we have to hope, that he makes us healthy again. A healthy Stanford football program will always be attractive to a lot of people, and then it becomes a matter of developing the recruiting operation/elbow grease to bring home as many of those guys as possible.

Recruiting very well may drop off, in the near term and even more generally. Shaw was empirically the most successful recruiter in Stanford history. But he badly under-performed his recruiting rankings. If we recruited like the #25 team in the country and played like the #75 team in the country under Shaw and then end up recruiting like the #40 team in the country and play like the #25 team in the country under Taylor, Taylor will be a big improvement. (Even if Taylor has us playing like #40 that's a big improvement) I view recruiting as the lifeblood and will be watching it closely, but the fact is the rot in Shaw's program was so bad that talent can decline at Stanford quite a bit without necessarily hurting us on the field because a less rotten coaching staff should be able to get more out of the talent they do have.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - msqueri - 12-11-2022

(12-11-2022, 03:26 PM)Austroturf Wrote:
(12-11-2022, 12:54 PM)msqueri Wrote: 12. ...Ultimately, the Utah tenure is a mark against Taylor's reputation as an offensive wizard. Nonetheless, the fact he did it increases my confidence in the hire, as he's game planned against Pac-12 offenses and been mediocre at it, which is more than we can say for the man he's replacing. Moreover, people can learn and it is a very reasonable hope that Taylor will take lessons from that experience and be more poised to succeed in the Pac-12 this time around. For what it's worth, at Eastern Washington Taylor's offense averaged 42.36 points per game the year he was there compared to 34.64 the year before him and 34.45 the year after him, so that experience bolsters the narrative he was an outstanding FCS coordinator. Overall, there is extremely strong (I'd say ironclad) evidence Stanford is improving its offensive coaching.

Very insightful analysis of the Troy Taylor hiring. In point 12, I think you meant to write that Taylor has game-planned against Pac-12 defenses (see above).

I hope he doesn't retain any of the current staff. If he does, he should pick one or two of the better ones to ensure some semblance of continuity and put them in non-critical roles. Not sure why you think Pritchard would be good as an RB position coach. Nothing in his background and in Stanford's run game during his OC days indicate that he has any skills in this area. And if Taylor is the acting OC, then he needs to bring in some top-notch position coaches to develop the pieces he will be orchestrating. Pritchard wasn't even a top-notch QB coach, so I doubt his value in the new regime. The sclerotic home-grown culture that Shaw cultivated needs to be purged.

I will be happy if he retains none of the current staff. I want a clean break in terms of culture. I trust his Sacramento State staff much more than i trust Shaw's staff. No argument from me there. But it's just realistic to acknowledge that oftentimes programs will have a program guy who lasts across coaching staffs, and Pritchard is a classic example of the kind of coach who can fall into that role, like Dave Tipton did for many years. It's also just realistic to acknowledge that Stanford's administration will make a big deal of recruiting Stanford Men and navigating our admissions landscape, and Anderson is a uniquely qualified individual to provide continuity on those matters even if Pritchard doesn't stay. There's also Gould, who Taylor has known for a quarter century and spent four years in a foxhole with as extremely close colleagues. And then we have assistants who might be able to sell their resumes. The point is there may be some continuity. That's not to say I want it. I'd rather have a clean break. I agree with you about the sclerotic home-grown culture. Oh how do I agree with you.

For what it's worth, though, I'm less harsh on Pritchard than you, especially in a role like running back coach that is essentially a glorified recruiter role. You may have forgotten that Pritchard's first full assistant job with us was as the RB coach before Gould, coaching up Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson, or that when Pritchard was young and hungry he was one of the best recruiters in the history of the program (recruiter for, among others, Foster Sarell, Solomon Thomas, Kaden Smith, KJ Costello, Trent Irwin, Simi Fehoko, Austin Jones, and Connor Wedington). Even as maligned coordinator, I don't think it makes sense to blame Pritchard for Shawfense. After all these years it seems clear to me the problems were mostly with the head man. When we saw scripted segments at the beginning of games, or packages reportedly turned over to Pritchard in the red zone, they consistently worked better than Shawfense generally. My suspicion is Shaw held Pritchard back. That's not to cry tears for Pritchard but just to push back on notions he was some big failure. How would we know? Was he even really the offensive coordinator? Putting the scerotic culture issues (which I could not agree with you more about) aside, Pritchard would be a coup as a position coach. MUCH higher value proposition for him to be on staff than Gould IMHO.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Austroturf - 12-11-2022

(12-11-2022, 03:55 PM)msqueri Wrote:
(12-11-2022, 03:26 PM)Austroturf Wrote:
(12-11-2022, 12:54 PM)msqueri Wrote: 12. ...Ultimately, the Utah tenure is a mark against Taylor's reputation as an offensive wizard. Nonetheless, the fact he did it increases my confidence in the hire, as he's game planned against Pac-12 offenses and been mediocre at it, which is more than we can say for the man he's replacing. Moreover, people can learn and it is a very reasonable hope that Taylor will take lessons from that experience and be more poised to succeed in the Pac-12 this time around. For what it's worth, at Eastern Washington Taylor's offense averaged 42.36 points per game the year he was there compared to 34.64 the year before him and 34.45 the year after him, so that experience bolsters the narrative he was an outstanding FCS coordinator. Overall, there is extremely strong (I'd say ironclad) evidence Stanford is improving its offensive coaching.

Very insightful analysis of the Troy Taylor hiring. In point 12, I think you meant to write that Taylor has game-planned against Pac-12 defenses (see above).

I hope he doesn't retain any of the current staff. If he does, he should pick one or two of the better ones to ensure some semblance of continuity and put them in non-critical roles. Not sure why you think Pritchard would be good as an RB position coach. Nothing in his background and in Stanford's run game during his OC days indicate that he has any skills in this area. And if Taylor is the acting OC, then he needs to bring in some top-notch position coaches to develop the pieces he will be orchestrating. Pritchard wasn't even a top-notch QB coach, so I doubt his value in the new regime. The sclerotic home-grown culture that Shaw cultivated needs to be purged.

I will be happy if he retains none of the current staff. I want a clean break in terms of culture. I trust his Sacramento State staff much more than i trust Shaw's staff. No argument from me there. But it's just realistic to acknowledge that oftentimes programs will have a program guy who lasts across coaching staffs, and Pritchard is a classic example of the kind of coach who can fall into that role, like Dave Tipton did for many years. It's also just realistic to acknowledge that Stanford's administration will make a big deal of recruiting Stanford Men and navigating our admissions landscape, and Anderson is a uniquely qualified individual to provide continuity on those matters even if Pritchard doesn't stay. There's also Gould, who Taylor has known for a quarter century and spent four years in a foxhole with as extremely close colleagues. And then we have assistants who might be able to sell their resumes. The point is there may be some continuity. That's not to say I want it. I'd rather have a clean break. I agree with you about the sclerotic home-grown culture. Oh how do I agree with you.

For what it's worth, though, I'm less harsh on Pritchard than you, especially in a role like running back coach that is essentially a glorified recruiter role. You may have forgotten that Pritchard's first full assistant job with us was as the RB coach before Gould, coaching up Tyler Gaffney and Anthony Wilkerson, or that when Pritchard was young and hungry he was one of the best recruiters in the history of the program (recruiter for, among others, Foster Sarell, Solomon Thomas, Kaden Smith, KJ Costello, Trent Irwin, Simi Fehoko, Austin Jones, and Connor Wedington). Even as maligned coordinator, I don't think it makes sense to blame Pritchard for Shawfense. After all these years it seems clear to me the problems were mostly with the head man. When we saw scripted segments at the beginning of games, or packages reportedly turned over to Pritchard in the red zone, they consistently worked better than Shawfense generally. My suspicion is Shaw held Pritchard back. That's not to cry tears for Pritchard but just to push back on notions he was some big failure. How would we know? Was he even really the offensive coordinator? Putting the scerotic culture issues (which I could not agree with you more about) aside, Pritchard would be a coup as a position coach. MUCH higher value proposition for him to be on staff than Gould IMHO.

Interesting insights on Pritchard. Yes, maybe I am being unfair to him, but for me he is somehow the poster child of Shaw's "nurture the home-grown family" approach. When Bloomgren left, there was much hope that Shaw would finally bring in a top-flight OC from another P5 program -- potentially even the kind of coach who could be viewed as an heir-apparent to Shaw. During that same phase, fans were bemoaning the post-Hogan disarray in the QB position (Burns, Chryst, Costello), with each player showing retrograde rather than forward development. Whose fault was this? Pritchard's? In any case, there was a big enough question mark on Pritchard to warrant a discussion about whether he was the right QB position coach. But instead of that discussion and potentially a change, he got promoted. At that point, I was convinced the program's downward slide was inevitable. And my question was always: if Shaw's staff is so great, why aren't they getting poached for bigger roles elsewhere? In any case, if Pritchard has a value to the organization, then maybe Taylor can find a spot for him. I have nothing personal against him (and my opinion doesn't matter anyway, of course) -- I just see him as emblematic of all the staffing errors Shaw made during his tenure (fairly or unfairly).

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - winflop - 12-11-2022

Thanks for the in-depth analysis. I'm optimistic for the future

Pritchard needs to be among the first coaches to be "exited" - my preference is for a 100% fresh start. I hope that Taylor does hire an OC. Being the CEO of a P5 program is a much bigger job than an FCS program. Maybe he'll bring one of his assistants from Sac State who knows his system well

I'm not as worried about the bias toward offensive-minded coaches, especially given just how awful our offense has been the last few years. I also hope it influences EJ Smith to not enter the portal, and I think by far he's the player we most need to retain.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - SamuelMcF - 12-11-2022

(12-11-2022, 06:21 PM)winflop Wrote: I'm not as worried about the bias toward offensive-minded coaches, especially given just how awful our offense has been the last few years. I also hope it influences EJ Smith to not enter the portal, and I think by far he's the player we most need to retain.

An injury-prone player who will likely leave after next year?

Bailey and Cooper, easily.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - washingtonismoney - 12-12-2022

One worthwhile add to this thread -- Bill Connelly keeps S&P ratings for "small schools" This year Sacramento State, by his reckoning, actually has a better defense than offense: https://twitter.com/ESPN_BillC/status/1602349296690634753. (That's because offense is merely #2 in the country.) (FWIW, it looks like he projected Sacramento State to be #14 coming into the season.)

In 2021, Connelly had Sacramento State as #23 -- 18th in defense, 54th in offense.
In 2019, Connelly's "very, very beta" rankings put them at #11. (no apparent breakdown by offense vs. defense from what I can tell)

One consistent theme: at least by Connelly's reckoning, the Big Sky conference was one of, if not the, best in FCS.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Mick - 12-12-2022

(12-11-2022, 04:18 PM)Austroturf Wrote: Interesting insights on Pritchard. Yes, maybe I am being unfair to him, but for me he is somehow the poster child of Shaw's "nurture the home-grown family" approach. When Bloomgren left, there was much hope that Shaw would finally bring in a top-flight OC from another P5 program -- potentially even the kind of coach who could be viewed as an heir-apparent to Shaw. During that same phase, fans were bemoaning the post-Hogan disarray in the QB position (Burns, Chryst, Costello), with each player showing retrograde rather than forward development. Whose fault was this? Pritchard's? In any case, there was a big enough question mark on Pritchard to warrant a discussion about whether he was the right QB position coach. But instead of that discussion and potentially a change, he got promoted. At that point, I was convinced the program's downward slide was inevitable. And my question was always: if Shaw's staff is so great, why aren't they getting poached for bigger roles elsewhere? In any case, if Pritchard has a value to the organization, then maybe Taylor can find a spot for him. I have nothing personal against him (and my opinion doesn't matter anyway, of course) -- I just see him as emblematic of all the staffing errors Shaw made during his tenure (fairly or unfairly).

My first boss was fond of saying "1's hire 1's, 2's hire 3's". So who hires 2's?

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Giants - 12-12-2022

(12-12-2022, 11:00 AM)Mick Wrote:
(12-11-2022, 04:18 PM)Austroturf Wrote: Interesting insights on Pritchard. Yes, maybe I am being unfair to him, but for me he is somehow the poster child of Shaw's "nurture the home-grown family" approach. When Bloomgren left, there was much hope that Shaw would finally bring in a top-flight OC from another P5 program -- potentially even the kind of coach who could be viewed as an heir-apparent to Shaw. During that same phase, fans were bemoaning the post-Hogan disarray in the QB position (Burns, Chryst, Costello), with each player showing retrograde rather than forward development. Whose fault was this? Pritchard's? In any case, there was a big enough question mark on Pritchard to warrant a discussion about whether he was the right QB position coach. But instead of that discussion and potentially a change, he got promoted. At that point, I was convinced the program's downward slide was inevitable. And my question was always: if Shaw's staff is so great, why aren't they getting poached for bigger roles elsewhere? In any case, if Pritchard has a value to the organization, then maybe Taylor can find a spot for him. I have nothing personal against him (and my opinion doesn't matter anyway, of course) -- I just see him as emblematic of all the staffing errors Shaw made during his tenure (fairly or unfairly).

My first boss was fond of saying "1's hire 1's, 2's hire 3's". So who hires 2's?

1.5’s….

[split] Troy Taylor's introductory press conference this am - Austroturf - 12-12-2022

(12-12-2022, 11:00 AM)Mick Wrote:
(12-11-2022, 04:18 PM)Austroturf Wrote: Interesting insights on Pritchard. Yes, maybe I am being unfair to him, but for me he is somehow the poster child of Shaw's "nurture the home-grown family" approach. When Bloomgren left, there was much hope that Shaw would finally bring in a top-flight OC from another P5 program -- potentially even the kind of coach who could be viewed as an heir-apparent to Shaw. During that same phase, fans were bemoaning the post-Hogan disarray in the QB position (Burns, Chryst, Costello), with each player showing retrograde rather than forward development. Whose fault was this? Pritchard's? In any case, there was a big enough question mark on Pritchard to warrant a discussion about whether he was the right QB position coach. But instead of that discussion and potentially a change, he got promoted. At that point, I was convinced the program's downward slide was inevitable. And my question was always: if Shaw's staff is so great, why aren't they getting poached for bigger roles elsewhere? In any case, if Pritchard has a value to the organization, then maybe Taylor can find a spot for him. I have nothing personal against him (and my opinion doesn't matter anyway, of course) -- I just see him as emblematic of all the staffing errors Shaw made during his tenure (fairly or unfairly).

My first boss was fond of saying "1's hire 1's, 2's hire 3's". So who hires 2's?

They are appointed by popular demand of the organization they are entrusted to lead! 2s are clearly easier to work for. There's just the danger that the whole ship sinks under their aegis.

RE: Sunday morning thoughts - Troy Taylor! - Farm93 - 12-12-2022

(12-11-2022, 03:35 PM)msqueri Wrote: Recruiting very well may drop off, in the near term and even more generally. Shaw was empirically the most successful recruiter in Stanford history. But he badly under-performed his recruiting rankings. If we recruited like the #25 team in the country and played like the #75 team in the country under Shaw and then end up recruiting like the #40 team in the country and play like the #25 team in the country under Taylor, Taylor will be a big improvement. (Even if Taylor has us playing like #40 that's a big improvement) I view recruiting as the lifeblood and will be watching it closely, but the fact is the rot in Shaw's program was so bad that talent can decline at Stanford quite a bit without necessarily hurting us on the field because a less rotten coaching staff should be able to get more out of the talent they do have.

Funny thing about recruiting rankings. I remember Stanford used to be a negative to those services.

As in, the player WAS a 4 star recruit, but when they accepted their Stanford bid they would magically drop to a 3 star player. Or any player that accepted a Stanford offer too early would never see anything above a 3 star no matter what they did later in HS. Does everyone remember those days?

Conversely, a USC recruit almost always became a 4 or 5 star recruit the second they indicated they had a USC offer.

That spans many decades but definitely was the case in the mid-00s and I think members on this board started to capture this phenomenon.

I remember when Joe McKnight (RIP) was hailed as the next RB at USC. Future Voldemort winner, as talented as Bush, etc. Then on the field he was chased down in the open field by several members of the Stanford D rather than breaking away for TDs. And I thought speed is speed. Either that RB is not a true 4/5 star recruit or Stanford has a lot of underrated gems on this roster.

I can't help but think that at some point in the mid-teens recruiting services got lazy with Stanford recruits. If a top 10 program like Stanford offered that player then they must be a 4 star recruit. Why exactly? Well...because they got an offer from Stanford.

Shaw was also very good at building up every recruit in a way that was a bit more credible than other coaches. He also rarely complained about having to settle for a recruit because of admissions. So all of that presumably elevated his recruits a bit.

I am confident Stanford will see less of that rating inflation going forward as coaches that use Stanford as a transitional role want to highlight Stanford's limitations (admissions challenges, non-starters focused on academics) to explain away bad plays, bad recruits and bad loses. That focus on the limitations will presumably help those services reset the ratings value of a Stanford offer.