WSU Game Thread - Printable Version

WSU Game Thread - 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: WSU Game Thread (/thread-22431.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

RE: WSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 10-17-2021

Look at what the coaches before (Sarkisian) and after (Lake) Petersen have accomplished.

Not to state the obvious, but only one team can win the PAC-12 every year, and in the last decade, it has basically been Oregon x4, Stanford x3, Washington x2 and USC once. Two championships on the six years he was there, including one CFP playoff appearance, is not too shabby, and compares pretty favorably to any other coach in the conference.

BC

RE: WSU Game Thread - winflop - 10-17-2021

Probably time to put the talk of "Who's gonna replace Shaw?" back in the box under the floorboards covered by a rug. He's not resigning, and Muir is never going to fire him. I think the best we can hope for is a shakeup in the coaching staff, but he seems reluctant to do that either.

Get used to mediocrity going forward, folks.

RE: WSU Game Thread - gailtate - 10-17-2021

(10-17-2021, 03:23 PM)winflop Wrote: Probably time to put the talk of "Who's gonna replace Shaw?" back in the box under the floorboards covered by a rug. He's not resigning, and Muir is never going to fire him. I think the best we can hope for is a shakeup in the coaching staff, but he seems reluctant to do that either.

Get used to mediocrity going forward, folks.

Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

RE: WSU Game Thread - Austroturf - 10-17-2021

(10-17-2021, 03:23 PM)winflop Wrote: Probably time to put the talk of "Who's gonna replace Shaw?" back in the box under the floorboards covered by a rug. He's not resigning, and Muir is never going to fire him. I think the best we can hope for is a shakeup in the coaching staff, but he seems reluctant to do that either.

Get used to mediocrity going forward, folks.

I haven't completely given up hope that, at some point, Shaw will look at the state of the program and make some changes in the coaching staff. This is our only hope of avoiding total mediocrity for the next 5+ years. Tavita gets poached as head coach for some FCS program (discreetly managed by Shaw), Anderson resigns to "focus on his private life", and Shaw brings in a powerhouse duo that shake things up on offense and defense. Am I dreaming? Perhaps. But I still have hope. Barely.

RE: WSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 10-17-2021

(10-17-2021, 03:35 PM)gailtate Wrote: Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9. You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

RE: WSU Game Thread - teejers1 - 10-17-2021

(10-17-2021, 06:21 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 03:35 PM)gailtate Wrote: Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9. You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

BC, the credit you give Shaw for Harbs' full cupboard is astounding.

I also think his truly effing HORRIBLE game management, which has been going on for years and years, has numbed your mind. You no longer even appreciate what a competently run offense looks like because we've been force-fed the worst game management in the history of Stanford football for so long now. You would be shocked at what a competent offensive mind could do with the talent on the O side of the ball, even acknowledging mediocre O-line play. And there are competent offensive minds all over the college football landscape, in D1, DII, DIII.

And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires. It is killing this program, and our fearless leader simply shrugs and looks for the next good play call on 2nd and 26 . . . an off tackle run for 3 yards. Hand me the Sears Cup, I think I'm going to puke.

Again, every single one of us has had our sensory perception of good football bludgeoned to nothingness by this regime. It's sad. In so many ways - too many to count, really.

P.S. None of the above is to let the D off the hook. They've been pretty bad, too (though perhaps less bad relative to talent). But seriously, why even bother rushing 3 on pass plays. It is utterly hopeless.

RE: WSU Game Thread - gailtate - 10-18-2021

(10-17-2021, 06:21 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 03:35 PM)gailtate Wrote: Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9. You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

You are correct, sir. And that $9mil sealed it, ex post-facto.

RE: WSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 10-18-2021

(10-17-2021, 10:32 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 06:21 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 03:35 PM)gailtate Wrote: Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9. You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

BC, the credit you give Shaw for Harbs' full cupboard is astounding.

I also think his truly effing HORRIBLE game management, which has been going on for years and years, has numbed your mind. You no longer even appreciate what a competently run offense looks like because we've been force-fed the worst game management in the history of Stanford football for so long now. You would be shocked at what a competent offensive mind could do with the talent on the O side of the ball, even acknowledging mediocre O-line play. And there are competent offensive minds all over the college football landscape, in D1, DII, DIII.

And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires. It is killing this program, and our fearless leader simply shrugs and looks for the next good play call on 2nd and 26 . . . an off tackle run for 3 yards. Hand me the Sears Cup, I think I'm going to puke.

Again, every single one of us has had our sensory perception of good football bludgeoned to nothingness by this regime. It's sad. In so many ways - too many to count, really.

P.S. None of the above is to let the D off the hook. They've been pretty bad, too (though perhaps less bad relative to talent). But seriously, why even bother rushing 3 on pass plays. It is utterly hopeless.

Fine, start the clock in 2016, and Shaw still has as many winning seasons (4) than we had in the 80's (2) and 2000's (2) combined. But sure, let's credit everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh.

BC

RE: WSU Game Thread - DC 86 - 10-18-2021

(10-17-2021, 10:32 PM)teejers1 Wrote: And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires.

How is that different from the other 129 FBS teams?

RE: WSU Game Thread - teejers1 - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 08:12 AM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 10:32 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 06:21 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 03:35 PM)gailtate Wrote: Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9. You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

BC, the credit you give Shaw for Harbs' full cupboard is astounding.

I also think his truly effing HORRIBLE game management, which has been going on for years and years, has numbed your mind. You no longer even appreciate what a competently run offense looks like because we've been force-fed the worst game management in the history of Stanford football for so long now. You would be shocked at what a competent offensive mind could do with the talent on the O side of the ball, even acknowledging mediocre O-line play. And there are competent offensive minds all over the college football landscape, in D1, DII, DIII.

And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires. It is killing this program, and our fearless leader simply shrugs and looks for the next good play call on 2nd and 26 . . . an off tackle run for 3 yards. Hand me the Sears Cup, I think I'm going to puke.

Again, every single one of us has had our sensory perception of good football bludgeoned to nothingness by this regime. It's sad. In so many ways - too many to count, really.

P.S. None of the above is to let the D off the hook. They've been pretty bad, too (though perhaps less bad relative to talent). But seriously, why even bother rushing 3 on pass plays. It is utterly hopeless.

Fine, start the clock in 2016, and Shaw still has as many winning seasons (4) than we had in the 80's (2) and 2000's (2) combined. But sure, let's credit everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh.

BC

There is a difference between "credit[ing] everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh" and recognizing that what Shaw inherited at Stanford is not a great measure of Shaw at sea level. I think we are getting a much clearer picture of what sea level is now for David Shaw. (And it's not 2011-2015).

And btw, we weren't paying coaches in the 80s and 2000s what Stanford is paying its HC now. Thus, I think the "continuity" factor that you say works against all non-Shaw candidates is not the same as it was (certainly not as big a flight risk). I mean, if you loved coaching college football; and you were making $5+M/year (and Shaw makes MORE than that now), don't you think Stanford would be a very attractive program to run?

Now, maybe you think what we've seen 2016 on is about as good as Stanford fans can expect on a "regular" basis. And maybe that's a reasonable (if not an optimistic) position. Moreover, maybe you even think that level of play justifies the wage we've read about. Fewer people probably do, but let's not pretend they're unrelated things.

RE: WSU Game Thread - Phogge - 10-18-2021

BC... Harbs had Lord Fangio. Shaw has Anderson. Fangio had Skov, Murphy, Mike Thomas and Chase Thomas (and more). Anderson has basically, well nobody. So where is the fault? Recruiting. Whose fault? Shaw, the assistants, Eubanks and staff and the admissions issue.

Fire them all or take a chance on academic advancement a la Russell White. But Stanford won't do it. So with the trend toward a semi pro college football industry, de-emphasis to a lower division or to altogether dropping the sport is inevitable.

RE: WSU Game Thread - Goose - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 10:22 AM)Phogge Wrote: BC... Harbs had Lord Fangio.

Yes he did. For two years. Not really a viable long term option as Fangio was for sure looking for a NFL jump as soon as he could. Harbaugh was fortunate enough to take him to the 49ers, but he was probably gone either way. If you can get him to return, have at it but I think the odds are low.

RE: WSU Game Thread - gailtate - 10-18-2021

BC: What the hell, I'm gonna jump on the dog-pile here: Say what you will about Shaw's superior comparisons to what we slogged through in the WigginWagon-slash-PapaElway, et. al., years, but however much you feel the need to grasp at those straws in the wind just remember: This coach has shown absolutely no evidence, no temperament nor any shred of inclination to do whatever it will take to replenish what was gift-wrapped for him in 2011. Indeed, he is dismissive to the point of contempt whenever he catches a whiff of doubt about staying the course. The record is there for all to see: Left to his own devices after the last shred of ESPN confetti hit the ground after the Iowa Rose Bowl, the back-half of the Shaw era thus far has drifted (and now is accelerating) south: In the last 26 games he's 11-15. Arrow Down.

RE: WSU Game Thread - Austroturf - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 10:38 AM)Goose Wrote:
(10-18-2021, 10:22 AM)Phogge Wrote: BC... Harbs had Lord Fangio.
Yes he did. For two years. Not really a viable long term option as Fangio was for sure looking for a NFL jump as soon as he could. Harbaugh was fortunate enough to take him to the 49ers, but he was probably gone either way. If you can get him to return, have at it but I think the odds are low.

You're hitting on a really important point here. Excellent coaches hire excellent assistants/coordinators that are destined for higher things. A leader of any organization should be proud to lose very good people to better opportunities. They are your legacy.

As a stark counterpoint to Stanford, here is how Saban has staffed his OC position since 2014:
1) Lane Kiffin, 2014-2016, left for FAU as HC and then Ole Miss as HC.
2) Brian Daboll, 2017, left to be OC at the Buffalo Bills in 2018 after the NC game.
3) Mike Locksley, 2018, left to be HC at Maryland.
4) Steve Sarkisian, 2019-2020, left to be HC at Texas.
5) Bill O'Brien, 2021, former HC of the Houston Texans.

Here is the Stanford list:
1) Mike Bloomgren, 2013-2017, the only Shaw hire to land an HC job at an FBS school (HC Rice).
2) Tavita Pritchard, 2018-2021, former QB coach at Stanford.

Harbs hired a slew of coaches who were willing and able to move on to bigger and better things. Shaw seems to be favoring continuity over excellence. Not a good choice. He should hire the best and be happy to see them move on after two to three years.

Another contrast to this is Brent Venables at Clemson, who appears to have accepted DC with Swinney as his destination job. Also fine, because he is one of the best in the business. His $1.7M salary also makes it easy to resist tempting HC jobs elsewhere.

RE: WSU Game Thread - Red80 - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 09:42 AM)teejers1 Wrote:
(10-18-2021, 08:12 AM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 10:32 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 06:21 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-17-2021, 03:35 PM)gailtate Wrote: Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9. You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

BC, the credit you give Shaw for Harbs' full cupboard is astounding.

I also think his truly effing HORRIBLE game management, which has been going on for years and years, has numbed your mind. You no longer even appreciate what a competently run offense looks like because we've been force-fed the worst game management in the history of Stanford football for so long now. You would be shocked at what a competent offensive mind could do with the talent on the O side of the ball, even acknowledging mediocre O-line play. And there are competent offensive minds all over the college football landscape, in D1, DII, DIII.

And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires. It is killing this program, and our fearless leader simply shrugs and looks for the next good play call on 2nd and 26 . . . an off tackle run for 3 yards. Hand me the Sears Cup, I think I'm going to puke.

Again, every single one of us has had our sensory perception of good football bludgeoned to nothingness by this regime. It's sad. In so many ways - too many to count, really.

P.S. None of the above is to let the D off the hook. They've been pretty bad, too (though perhaps less bad relative to talent). But seriously, why even bother rushing 3 on pass plays. It is utterly hopeless.

Fine, start the clock in 2016, and Shaw still has as many winning seasons (4) than we had in the 80's (2) and 2000's (2) combined. But sure, let's credit everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh.

BC

There is a difference between "credit[ing] everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh" and recognizing that what Shaw inherited at Stanford is not a great measure of Shaw at sea level. I think we are getting a much clearer picture of what sea level is now for David Shaw. (And it's not 2011-2015).

And btw, we weren't paying coaches in the 80s and 2000s what Stanford is paying its HC now. Thus, I think the "continuity" factor that you say works against all non-Shaw candidates is not the same as it was (certainly not as big a flight risk). I mean, if you loved coaching college football; and you were making $5+M/year (and Shaw makes MORE than that now), don't you think Stanford would be a very attractive program to run?

Now, maybe you think what we've seen 2016 on is about as good as Stanford fans can expect on a "regular" basis. And maybe that's a reasonable (if not an optimistic) position. Moreover, maybe you even think that level of play justifies the wage we've read about. Fewer people probably do, but let's not pretend they're unrelated things.

It's BS that Shaw's success between 2011-15 is mostly attributable to Harbaugh. Shaw did inherit a loaded 2011 squad led by probably the best QB college football had seen in 25 years. A QB who, in addition to his physical tools, was astounding with his LOS decision-making. And to this day, I wonder how successful Harbaugh would have been at Stanford had he not been able to ink Luck. #12 was a program-changer for Stanford and a career-changer for Harbaugh.

2012 and 2013? It is true that Harbaugh left Shaw with a number a very good defensive players. Offense? Not so much. Take a look at the offensive personnel for those two CHAMPIONSHIP seasons and you'll discover pretty modest talent, with the exception being the TE position. Shaw made the decision to go with a RS freshman QB (His recruit) about midway through the season because the other QBs (Harbaugh's recruits) were not very good and Stanford was probably headed to a minor bowl with Nunes at the helm.

In addition to having the balls to go with an inexperienced QB freshman at midseason, Shaw (and Pep Hamilton) made the very wise choice to emphasize a power running scheme that took full advantage of the basically average talent that they had. They took Power O to the next level, with 8-man OL sets, featuring 3 TEs, 295 lb. wingbacks, and stud fullbacks acting as crowbars. The QB was under center most of the time, which also set-up effective play-action passing...something Stanford fans have not seen for a few years.

Stanford won back-to-back titles, in a conference that was MUCH better than it currently is, because of very smart and decisive scheming offensively. Pretty? Crowd pleasing? No, but brutally effective. The only people who hated Stanford's offense more than the "I Want My Offense, I Want My Offense" crowd, were the coaches, players and fans of their opponents. Not so much because of what Shaw's offense did to their defense, but because of what it did to THEIR offense. Talented, high-powered offenses like Oregon, USC, and UCLA were forced to the sidelines for many minutes at a time, which not only kept Stanford's defense fresh and rested, but it also disrupted the pace and tempo of opposing offenses, offenses that thrived on playing fast and running 90+ plays p/g. Stanford slowed the game down to a snail's pace, physically punished opposing front-sevens, while frustrating and discombobulating their offenses. It worked beautifully, for the most part. Do I think Stanford would have gone to two straight Rose Bowls those years running any other kind of offense? HELL NO! Do I think Harbaugh would have led those teams to Pasadena? I doubt it.

Harbaugh gets credit for Stanford's 2015 squad that finished #3? How? That team was 100% Shaw's players and coaching. Offensively, it was the ideal combination of ball control Power O, along with home run explosiveness from anywhere on the field. It remains "The Model" for Stanford's offense going forward, imo. Of course, it requires pursuing and inking the right kind of Jimmy and Joe to make it go. This is where Shaw is failing badly the past few years. Stanford used to be different, unique, offensively. Hard to prepare for. Since 2018 they're really running the same stuff as most of their opponents, to their detriment.

Recruiting and realigning is the way to reverse the program's fortunes.

RE: WSU Game Thread - Austroturf - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 12:03 PM)gailtate Wrote: BC: What the hell, I'm gonna jump on the dog-pile here: Say what you will about Shaw's superior comparisons to what we slogged through in the WigginWagon-slash-PapaElway, et. al., years, but however much you feel the need to grasp at those straws in the wind just remember: This coach has shown absolutely no evidence, no temperament nor any shred of inclination to do whatever it will take to replenish what was gift-wrapped for him in 2011. Indeed, he is dismissive to the point of contempt whenever he catches a whiff of doubt about staying the course. The record is there for all to see: Left to his own devices after the last shred of ESPN confetti hit the ground after the Iowa Rose Bowl, the back-half of the Shaw era thus far has drifted (and now is accelerating) south: In the last 26 games he's 11-15. Arrow Down.

11-14 in the last 25 games (4-8, 4-2, 3-4). Going 26 games back includes the 2018 Sun Bowl, which we won against Pitt.

RE: WSU Game Thread - slide - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 09:42 AM)teejers1 Wrote: ....And btw, we weren't paying coaches in the 80s and 2000s what Stanford is paying its HC now. Thus, I think the "continuity" factor that you say works against all non-Shaw candidates is not the same as it was (certainly not as big a flight risk). I mean, if you loved coaching college football; and you were making $5+M/year (and Shaw makes MORE than that now), don't you think Stanford would be a very attractive program to run?
....

give or take, 120 college coaches make less annually than Shaw and probably more than that face more scrutiny from the AD, media and fans on a day-to-day basis.

Stanford is paying a top 10 salary; you'd think we'd be close to a top 10 product. we may, may be in Sagarin's top 50 now and slipping....

RE: WSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 12:26 PM)Austroturf Wrote: Here is the Stanford list:

1) Mike Bloomgren, 2013-2017, the only Shaw hire to land an HC job at an FBS school (HC Rice).

2) Tavita Pritchard, 2018-2021, former QB coach at Stanford.

A few other former Stanford coaches under Shaw who went on to become HC:
Derek Mason (2010-2013), who left to coach Vanderbilt. He was originally hired by Harbaugh as DB coach, and then promoted to co-DC by Shaw in 2011, and sole DC in 2012.
Mike Sanford Jr (2011-2013) who eventually became head coach at Western Kentucky (via Boise State and Notre Dame OC stints)
Brian Polian (2010-2011), who eventually became head coach at Nevada (via a stint at Texas A&M as special teams coach); also originally hired by Harbaugh.

A few others who have come and gone:
Pep Hamilton OC 2011-2012 - left Stanford to become OC for the Indianapolis Colts
Jason Tarver co-DC and LB coach 2011 - left Stanford to become DC for the Raiders
Peter Hansen 2014-19 ILB coach - left Stanford to become ILB/DC for UNLV (which might have resulted in addition by subtraction)
Kevin Carberry 2018-20 OL coach - left Stanford to become OL coach for the LA Rams
Lance Taylor 2014-16 RB coach - left Stanford to become RB coach at the North Carolina Panthers

I get your point that for a coach of Shaw's tenure, few of his assistants have gone onto become head coach, and he has favored continuity, probably too much. While I do think that there is a strong case for making some changes in the staff, and for Shaw to look to bring in new assistants in places where we have struggled, turnover per se isn't a good thing, and lack of continuity impedes player development, as they have to adjust to new schemes, methods, etc. Shaw is probably an extreme outlier on the continuity end of the spectrum, to the detriment of the coaching, but it's not as simple as just changing things around for the sake of change.

BC

RE: WSU Game Thread - winflop - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 02:54 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(10-18-2021, 12:26 PM)Austroturf Wrote: Here is the Stanford list:

1) Mike Bloomgren, 2013-2017, the only Shaw hire to land an HC job at an FBS school (HC Rice).

2) Tavita Pritchard, 2018-2021, former QB coach at Stanford.
6

A few other former Stanford coaches under Shaw who went on to become HC:
Derek Mason (2010-2013), who left to coach Vanderbilt. He was originally hired by Harbaugh as DB coach, and then promoted to co-DC by Shaw in 2011, and sole DC in 2012.
Mike Sanford Jr (2011-2013) who eventually became head coach at Western Kentucky (via Boise State and Notre Dame OC stints)
Brian Polian (2010-2011), who eventually became head coach at Nevada (via a stint at Texas A&M as special teams coach); also originally hired by Harbaugh.

A few others who have come and gone:
Pep Hamilton OC 2011-2012 - left Stanford to become OC for the Indianapolis Colts
Jason Tarver co-DC and LB coach 2011 - left Stanford to become DC for the Raiders
Peter Hansen 2014-19 ILB coach - left Stanford to become ILB/DC for UNLV (which might have resulted in addition by subtraction)
Kevin Carberry 2018-20 OL coach - left Stanford to become OL coach for the LA Rams
Lance Taylor 2014-16 RB coach - left Stanford to become RB coach at the North Carolina Panthers

I get your point that for a coach of Shaw's tenure, few of his assistants have gone onto become head coach, and he has favored continuity, probably too much. While I do think that there is a strong case for making some changes in the staff, and for Shaw to look to bring in new assistants in places where we have struggled, turnover per se isn't a good thing, and lack of continuity impedes player development, as they have to adjust to new schemes, methods, etc. Shaw is probably an extreme outlier on the continuity end of the spectrum, to the detriment of the coaching, but it's not as simple as just changing things around for the sake of change.

BC

I think this offseason will be a perfect time to bring in a new DL coach. Next year's DL is going to be very young and inexperienced, and Coach Reynolds simply hasn't gotten the job done, mainly on the recruiting front but also development to some extent as demonstrated by our consistent lack of depth at the position the last several years.

RE: WSU Game Thread - BostonCard - 10-18-2021

(10-18-2021, 03:07 PM)winflop Wrote: I think this offseason will be a perfect time to bring in a new DL coach. Next year's DL is going to be very young and inexperienced, and Coach Reynolds simply hasn't gotten the job done, mainly on the recruiting front but also development to some extent as demonstrated by our consistent lack of depth at the position the last several years.

The results sort of speak for themselves, so I am inclined to agree with you. However, recruiting at the DL position has improved the last two years. Our second highest rated recruit in 2021 (Armitage) was a defensive lineman, and this year, our highest rated recruit Cooper is a DL (he would be bumped to #2 if Bailey commits). Numbers are still an issue (5 DL in 2 years and 6 in 3 is sub-optimal, of which only one is a DT), but it's an improvement of when we recruited three d-linemen over 3 years (one of which is not on the team right now). The key would be to keep it up, and of course to get someone who can coach those guys up. Unfortunately, with the likely departure of DWP, Johnson, and Booker, we are going to be relying on freshmen and sophomores next year, which will be tough no matter who is coach.

BC