Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - 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: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not (/thread-23529.html)
+- 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: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not (/thread-23529.html)
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - lex24 - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 01:57 PM)msqueri Wrote:(10-04-2022, 01:43 PM)Brickcity Wrote:(10-04-2022, 12:09 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: "One day it's fine and next it's black"
I voted yes toward keeping Shaw but it's a weak yes at the moment.
What most bothers me about Shaw as a head coach is his loyalty to failing lieutenants. There needs to be some accountability for the collapse we've seen over the last four years and I just haven't seen it applied by the guy on top. I would feel much better about retaining Coach Shaw if I had confidence we would see new leadership at the OC/DC positions next year.
On the plus side, I've been a Stanford fan since 1980 and missed the early 70s Rose Bowls. Prior to Coach Shaw I saw one Rose Bowl, under Willingham, which we lost. NOTHING in my Stanford fandom beats the glorious C-Mac Rose Bowl of 2016. Shaw earned some goodwill for bringing that to Stanford fans.
Less emotionally convincing but relevant is the year the Pac-12 implodes IS NOT a great time for a change and unsteady leadership. Having a respected representative able to communicate what's best about Stanford football is important and never more so than RIGHT NOW. Setting aside what's happening on the field (a big ask, I know), Coach Shaw is that guy.
There's no guarantee that we get the next hire right. We've gotten it wrong often. Imagine having Teevens or HARRIS at the helm right now ...
I would honestly take ANY coach other than David Shaw. Let's play this out: Muir hires someone who is as inept as Shaw (though, not easy to do) and that guy stinks up the joint for a couple seasons. Guess what: he gets fired and whoever the AD is then (hopefully not Muir) gets another bite at the apple.
Remember this - Teevens and Harris led us to Harbaugh. Our program is now arguably the worst in FBS and there's no reason to believe that next year the team will be any better. Keeping Shaw is only delaying the pain. We need to rip off the band aid and move on.
This is exactly right. I would gladly take Teevens 2.0 or even Harris 2.0 at this point. I'd take Lance Anderson. I'd take Tavita Pritchard. I'd take Lex. I'd take a Dr. Pepper throwing footballs in a barrel contest at halftime to pick the head coach for the next week.
I think a lot of people are in denial about just what it is that David Shaw has accomplished the last 3-4 years. Anything would be better and there is no risk to moving on. That's not because it's easy to get a new hire right, it's because it's really hard to do worse than we've been doing and if some miserable coach managed to do that we could move on with much less drama, expense, or constrained horizons than we face now.
Please make this end. David Shaw must go.
I will decline if offered…….
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Beeg_Dawg - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 09:06 AM)MV72018 Wrote:(10-04-2022, 08:08 AM)Phogge Wrote: I think he should have been fired after the Mommy Kicker game. Taking the ball out of the hands of Andrew Luck.
The move after Harballs should have been Lord Fangio.
Agree, Phoggmeister. Taking the ball out of Luck's hands when he was scalding hot was both a harbinger of bad things to come and unforgivable.
Interesting, I thought I was alone on the island. Met an OSU grad in 2016 who attended the game. He and several in his group couldn't believe what Shaw did, but were none the less quite happy with his decision.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - lex24 - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 02:27 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote:(10-04-2022, 09:06 AM)MV72018 Wrote:(10-04-2022, 08:08 AM)Phogge Wrote: I think he should have been fired after the Mommy Kicker game. Taking the ball out of the hands of Andrew Luck.
The move after Harballs should have been Lord Fangio.
Agree, Phoggmeister. Taking the ball out of Luck's hands when he was scalding hot was both a harbinger of bad things to come and unforgivable.
Interesting, I thought I was alone on the island. Met an OSU grad in 2016 who attended the game. He and several in his group couldn't believe what Shaw did, but were none the less quite happy with his decision.
Shaw played that just like an NFL coach. Bring clock down to last play and kick game winner. Problem was, he didn’t have an NFL kicker. He had a Freshman. Who looked terrified on the sidelines.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Maple Leaf - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 03:15 PM)lex24 Wrote:(10-04-2022, 02:27 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote:(10-04-2022, 09:06 AM)MV72018 Wrote:(10-04-2022, 08:08 AM)Phogge Wrote: I think he should have been fired after the Mommy Kicker game. Taking the ball out of the hands of Andrew Luck.
The move after Harballs should have been Lord Fangio.
Agree, Phoggmeister. Taking the ball out of Luck's hands when he was scalding hot was both a harbinger of bad things to come and unforgivable.
Interesting, I thought I was alone on the island. Met an OSU grad in 2016 who attended the game. He and several in his group couldn't believe what Shaw did, but were none the less quite happy with his decision.
Shaw played that just like an NFL coach. Bring clock down to last play and kick game winner. Problem was, he didn’t have an NFL kicker. He had a Freshman. Who looked terrified on the sidelines.
The Freshman kicker who started the season off with great results suffered an injury just before the USC game and did not play in that game and saw limited duty from then on, he was not 100%. Shaw put him in a bad position. Not a good choice of action on the part of Shaw.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - gailtate - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 12:09 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: "One day it's fine and next it's black"
I voted yes toward keeping Shaw but it's a weak yes at the moment.
What most bothers me about Shaw as a head coach is his loyalty to failing lieutenants. There needs to be some accountability for the collapse we've seen over the last four years and I just haven't seen it applied by the guy on top. I would feel much better about retaining Coach Shaw if I had confidence we would see new leadership at the OC/DC positions next year.
On the plus side, I've been a Stanford fan since 1980 and missed the early 70s Rose Bowls. Prior to Coach Shaw I saw one Rose Bowl, under Willingham, which we lost. NOTHING in my Stanford fandom beats the glorious C-Mac Rose Bowl of 2016. Shaw earned some goodwill for bringing that to Stanford fans.
Less emotionally convincing but relevant is the year the Pac-12 implodes IS NOT a great time for a change and unsteady leadership. Having a respected representative able to communicate what's best about Stanford football is important and never more so than RIGHT NOW. Setting aside what's happening on the field (a big ask, I know), Coach Shaw is that guy.
There's no guarantee that we get the next hire right. We've gotten it wrong often. Imagine having Teevens or HARRIS at the helm right now ...
If Shaw returns next year, it is GUARANTEED we got it WRONG.
Stanford needs to appraise the current landscape, replace Muir and Shaw, and integrate the new AD and HC into the process of joining a conference where it can re-establish a viable program. The option here is the doomsday scenario. Yes, it's that stark. Nobody wants to admit this.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Phogge - 10-04-2022
The offense was rolling. They weren't guarding Stepfan coming out of the backfield. Lex is correct. Easy way out so everyone could blame the kicker.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - lex24 - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 03:39 PM)gailtate Wrote:(10-04-2022, 12:09 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: "One day it's fine and next it's black"
I voted yes toward keeping Shaw but it's a weak yes at the moment.
What most bothers me about Shaw as a head coach is his loyalty to failing lieutenants. There needs to be some accountability for the collapse we've seen over the last four years and I just haven't seen it applied by the guy on top. I would feel much better about retaining Coach Shaw if I had confidence we would see new leadership at the OC/DC positions next year.
On the plus side, I've been a Stanford fan since 1980 and missed the early 70s Rose Bowls. Prior to Coach Shaw I saw one Rose Bowl, under Willingham, which we lost. NOTHING in my Stanford fandom beats the glorious C-Mac Rose Bowl of 2016. Shaw earned some goodwill for bringing that to Stanford fans.
Less emotionally convincing but relevant is the year the Pac-12 implodes IS NOT a great time for a change and unsteady leadership. Having a respected representative able to communicate what's best about Stanford football is important and never more so than RIGHT NOW. Setting aside what's happening on the field (a big ask, I know), Coach Shaw is that guy.
There's no guarantee that we get the next hire right. We've gotten it wrong often. Imagine having Teevens or HARRIS at the helm right now ...
If Shaw returns next year, it is GUARANTEED we got it WRONG.
Stanford needs to appraise the current landscape, replace Muir and Shaw, and integrate the new AD and HC into the process of joining a conference where it can re-establish a viable program. The option here is the doomsday scenario. Yes, it's that stark. Nobody wants to admit this.
I thought the program was dying back in the Wlat days. I also thought Leland didn’t care. Bowlsby did. They need a new AD, one that values football every bit as much as they need a new HC. I’ve always felt losing Bowlsby was worse than losing Harbaugh.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Mick - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 08:08 AM)Phogge Wrote: I think he should have been fired after the Mommy Kicker game. Taking the ball out of the hands of Andrew Luck.
The move after Harballs should have been Lord Fangio.
Fangio's unemployed, right? Looking for his next gig?
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - BostonCard - 10-04-2022
(10-03-2022, 08:24 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Geez BC, this was meant as a knee jerk poll after three horrendously coached, er, executed games. Pick one, it's anonymous.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Lol at the histrionics about “Shaw must go”. We are talking about football; we are not owed winning, or even entertaining games.
Given that Haase hasn’t been fired yet, and he has yet to take us to the tourney (and has one winning conference season), I think it’s more likely than not that Shaw will not be fired. Whether he resigns on his own and takes a cushy broadcasting job, I have no insight into. But I’m mentally prepared for him to be back, so I’m not wasting my energies on pointless demands in a message board. if you all find it cathartic, you do you.
BC
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - lex24 - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 05:08 PM)Mick Wrote:(10-04-2022, 08:08 AM)Phogge Wrote: I think he should have been fired after the Mommy Kicker game. Taking the ball out of the hands of Andrew Luck.
The move after Harballs should have been Lord Fangio.
Fangio's unemployed, right? Looking for his next gig?
Great defensive coordinator. Lousy HC.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - george - 10-04-2022
(10-04-2022, 05:00 PM)lex24 Wrote: I’ve always felt losing Bowlsby was worse than losing Harbaugh.
+1 to this.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Maple Leaf - 10-05-2022
(10-04-2022, 10:43 PM)george Wrote:(10-04-2022, 05:00 PM)lex24 Wrote: I’ve always felt losing Bowlsby was worse than losing Harbaugh.
+1 to this.
add in the retirements of the president and provost who were interested in the success of the football program and athletics in general.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - gailtate - 10-05-2022
(10-04-2022, 05:29 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(10-03-2022, 08:24 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Geez BC, this was meant as a knee jerk poll after three horrendously coached, er, executed games. Pick one, it's anonymous.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Lol at the histrionics about “Shaw must go”. We are talking about football; we are not owed winning, or even entertaining games.
Given that Haase hasn’t been fired yet, and he has yet to take us to the tourney (and has one winning conference season), I think it’s more likely than not that Shaw will not be fired. Whether he resigns on his own and takes a cushy broadcasting job, I have no insight into. But I’m mentally prepared for him to be back, so I’m not wasting my energies on pointless demands in a message board. if you all find it cathartic, you do you.
BC
Players are owed top-notch coaching, starting with the HC. They do not have this today and haven't for too long. This must change immediately. If Shaw cannot or will not change, he must step down.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - msqueri - 10-05-2022
I don't buy the "we're not owed winning or even entertaining games" line in the first place. I think it's grotesque to think we spend $30 million or whatever it is on a football program if it's for a reason other than benefiting the university community. Those who think it's solely for the benefit of the players have a warped view. No, it has to be about some combination of building up bonds of affection for the school, bringing in significant revenue, and generally being the straw that stirs the drink. Otherwise having the budget, stadium, admissions compromises, and the rest becomes a monstrosity. You don't spend $30 million for it to be about something other than making your alumni like the school more, bringing in money, and the like. All of that is fueled by winning and being entertaining. That's why every major college football team in the country moves on from a coach when they lose like Shaw does. We shouldn't even have a major college football program if we don't think winning and entertainment are foundational. You can call that histrionic or entitled if you like, I think it's just having perspective on the role of major sports in the university.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Mick - 10-05-2022
Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss. Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.
I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team. As the team won, applications skyrocketed. I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program. Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - lex24 - 10-05-2022
(10-05-2022, 08:30 AM)Mick Wrote: Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss. Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.
I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team. As the team won, applications skyrocketed. I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program. Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.
My guess is loss of football program would have little to no impact on applications and yield. It’s not Alabama…….
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - msqueri - 10-05-2022
(10-05-2022, 09:03 AM)lex24 Wrote:(10-05-2022, 08:30 AM)Mick Wrote: Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss. Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.
I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team. As the team won, applications skyrocketed. I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program. Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.
My guess is loss of football program would have little to no impact on applications and yield. It’s not Alabama…….
What about fundraising? What about the loss of numerous women's programs to comply with Title IX (and maybe cratering of the athletic department as a whole)? Would we be the same university without football?
Maybe football haters have gamed this out in a way I don't understand, but it seems pivotal to Stanford as we know it for football to survive.
Given the way we compete in college athletics, we've been sui generis for decades. But without football how would Stanford be differentiated from Cal Tech? With a lower level football team how would Stanford be differentiated from NYU? Maybe the calculus has been made that the legacy and endowment Stanford has built up would allow us to continue in/create a new and desirable niche in the college landscape. But my field of vision has trouble imagining it. I don't think we'd be Stanford without competing at the top levels in the things people care about.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Ohiocard - 10-05-2022
(10-05-2022, 09:17 AM)msqueri Wrote:(10-05-2022, 09:03 AM)lex24 Wrote:(10-05-2022, 08:30 AM)Mick Wrote: Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss. Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.
I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team. As the team won, applications skyrocketed. I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program. Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.
My guess is loss of football program would have little to no impact on applications and yield. It’s not Alabama…….
What about fundraising? What about the loss of numerous women's programs to comply with Title IX (and maybe cratering of the athletic department as a whole)? Would we be the same university without football?
Maybe football haters have gamed this out in a way I don't understand, but it seems pivotal to Stanford as we know it for football to survive.
Given the way we compete in college athletics, we've been sui generis for decades. But without football how would Stanford be differentiated from Cal Tech? With a lower level football team how would Stanford be differentiated from NYU? Maybe the calculus has been made that the legacy and endowment Stanford has built up would allow us to continue in/create a new and desirable niche in the college landscape. But my field of vision has trouble imagining it. I don't think we'd be Stanford without competing at the top levels in the things people care about.
You are correct that the athletics department could not continue the same without the football TV $$. That is why the realignment/ TV negotiation story is so important now.
How much will it cost the university to buy out Shaw & Co. and hire a new (worthy) coaching staff? How much money per year are we expecting the TV deal to be generating in the coming years? It is hard to make a big decision on costs, when you have such an unclear picture of what your future revenue will be.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - gailtate - 10-05-2022
(10-05-2022, 09:17 AM)msqueri Wrote:(10-05-2022, 09:03 AM)lex24 Wrote:(10-05-2022, 08:30 AM)Mick Wrote: Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss. Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.
I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team. As the team won, applications skyrocketed. I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program. Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.
My guess is loss of football program would have little to no impact on applications and yield. It’s not Alabama…….
What about fundraising? What about the loss of numerous women's programs to comply with Title IX (and maybe cratering of the athletic department as a whole)? Would we be the same university without football?
Maybe football haters have gamed this out in a way I don't understand, but it seems pivotal to Stanford as we know it for football to survive.
Given the way we compete in college athletics, we've been sui generis for decades. But without football how would Stanford be differentiated from Cal Tech? With a lower level football team how would Stanford be differentiated from NYU? Maybe the calculus has been made that the legacy and endowment Stanford has built up would allow us to continue in/create a new and desirable niche in the college landscape. But my field of vision has trouble imagining it. I don't think we'd be Stanford without competing at the top levels in the things people care about.
I've been singin' that psalm for a long time. Stanford sans big-time FB is not "Stanford". It's MIT/Caltech with palms, eucalyptus and a golf course.
RE: Simple Poll. Should Shaw Stay or Not - Phogge - 10-05-2022
I don't like palms unless I'm in Twenty Nine Palms, Gum trees shed their leaves to kill anything else on the ground but I do love golf courses except for Country Clubs and the elitism that goes with them.