A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - 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: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw (/thread-4152.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: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw (/thread-4152.html)
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - jayasena - 11-01-2012
(11-01-2012, 07:04 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Now that Shaw has lost full faith and confidence that the practice Nunes will show up in games, he is now where fans were weeks ago.
Given that Shaw sees a lot more of the team than fans do, has his job security tied up in the team's performance, and coaches football for a living (which I doubt any of the posters here does), I find it hard to believe that he is somehow behind the fans in perceiving the situation. Now, for precisely those reasons, Shaw may very well be less prone to rash decisions than fans would like. And that's exactly how it should be and hardly makes him unique among coaches.
It's seems clear that Shaw is willing to make a change when a viable option that he thinks is better than Nunes is available. It seems equally clear that Nottingham, at least in Shaw's mind, is not that option (for whatever reason). Hogan's improvement must be getting close to where he can be a viable alternative, which is likely a more reasonable explanation for Shaw's more open stance about the situation.
In other words, I think it's much more likely that Shaw's apparent change in attitude is a reflection of changing circumstances (i.e. he has an option -- Hogan -- he's comfortable talking about) rather than him being unaware or obstinate or a jerk or "selectively stupid" or some of the other descriptions that have been used on these forums.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - jayasena - 11-01-2012
(11-01-2012, 07:04 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Now that Shaw has lost full faith and confidence that the practice Nunes will show up in games, he is now where fans were weeks ago.
Given that Shaw sees a lot more of the team than fans do, has his job security tied up in the team's performance, and coaches football for a living (which I doubt any of the posters here does), I find it hard to believe that he is somehow behind the fans in perceiving the situation. Now, for precisely those reasons, Shaw may very well be less prone to rash decisions than fans would like. And that's exactly how it should be and hardly makes him unique among coaches.
It's seems clear that Shaw is willing to make a change when a viable option that he thinks is better than Nunes is available. It seems equally clear that Nottingham, at least in Shaw's mind, is not that option (for whatever reason). Hogan's improvement must be getting close to where he can be a viable alternative, which is likely a more reasonable explanation for Shaw's more open stance about the situation.
In other words, I think it's much more likely that Shaw's apparent change in attitude is a reflection of changing circumstances (i.e. he has an option -- Hogan -- he's comfortable talking about) rather than him being unaware or obstinate or a jerk or "selectively stupid" or some of the other descriptions that have been used on these forums.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - OutsiderFan - 11-01-2012
Regardless of why it is being made, I think Stanford fans have reason to feel a lot better about Shaw as a coach that a change in playing time at the QB position is being made.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - OutsiderFan - 11-01-2012
Regardless of why it is being made, I think Stanford fans have reason to feel a lot better about Shaw as a coach that a change in playing time at the QB position is being made.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ChicagoCard - 11-01-2012
Although the offense has frustrated us all, and the disparity of this team's offense vs defense is almost shocking, I still have a lot of faith and regard for Shaw. I recall during the short time between Harbaugh's announced departure and the naming of Shaw as new HC that Shaw was said to be very popular among the players. At the time that didn't make much of an impression. But I think it could be a big deal. Stanford needs an HC who is much more than just a very good offensive coordinator. I think T.edford for example has always just been a really good offensive coordinator without many of the other attributes of a good or great head coach. Shaw is apparently appealing to recruits, players are motivated to play for him, and he's devoted to installing a system and choosing players with certain attributes which I'm sure are not limited to just physical attributes. It'll be interesting to say the least how this QB situation evolves. Seems to me the jury is still out but so far I have a hard time concluding he's mucked it up, although there clearly is something lacking in the offensive output so far.
One more thing, I don't hear people giving Shaw credit for getting virtually the same results with the '11 team that the '10 team had. And although many key players came back, lots of important guys were lost from the defense (Fua, Skov, Sherman not to mention of few other key seniors), *and* R. Whalen and Baldwin. Even three new O-line starters. Sure Harbaugh deserves some credit, and so does Luck, but so does Shaw.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ChicagoCard - 11-01-2012
Although the offense has frustrated us all, and the disparity of this team's offense vs defense is almost shocking, I still have a lot of faith and regard for Shaw. I recall during the short time between Harbaugh's announced departure and the naming of Shaw as new HC that Shaw was said to be very popular among the players. At the time that didn't make much of an impression. But I think it could be a big deal. Stanford needs an HC who is much more than just a very good offensive coordinator. I think T.edford for example has always just been a really good offensive coordinator without many of the other attributes of a good or great head coach. Shaw is apparently appealing to recruits, players are motivated to play for him, and he's devoted to installing a system and choosing players with certain attributes which I'm sure are not limited to just physical attributes. It'll be interesting to say the least how this QB situation evolves. Seems to me the jury is still out but so far I have a hard time concluding he's mucked it up, although there clearly is something lacking in the offensive output so far.
One more thing, I don't hear people giving Shaw credit for getting virtually the same results with the '11 team that the '10 team had. And although many key players came back, lots of important guys were lost from the defense (Fua, Skov, Sherman not to mention of few other key seniors), *and* R. Whalen and Baldwin. Even three new O-line starters. Sure Harbaugh deserves some credit, and so does Luck, but so does Shaw.
Re: A theory re: WHAT MATTERS IS GAME TIME NOT PRACTICE TIME - JohnOlenchalk - 11-01-2012
SHAW'S STUBBORN DEFENSE OF NUNES IS WHAT HAS BEEN ASININE. NOW HE SEES THE LIGHT? A LOT OF PLAYERS DIDN'T LIKE HARBAUGH, INCLUDING LUCK AND BALDWIN, BUT IT'S NOT AN ESSENTIAL QUALITY THAT I HAVE TO HAVE IN OUR HEAD COACH IF WE CAN GO TO BCS GAMES AND MAINTAIN THE "BRAND". HARB'S BUILT THAT, NOT SHAW. SHAW WAS HANDED THE KEYS TO A FERRARI, NOW HE'S TASKED WITH HOT-RODDING A CHEVY (NUNES) AND IT AIN'T WORKING. AND IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE WASTING A DEFENSE, STEPFAN TAYLOR, AND LOSING GAMES WE SHOULD WIN. YEAH, I'M HARD ON THE GUY, BUT BOO EFFING HOO.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - fullmetal - 11-01-2012
I'm not convinced Shaw deserves that much credit for the defense. He came up through the offensive ranks and doesn't do any hands-on defensive coaching or defensive coordinating afaik. You can convince me otherwise if that's not true...
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - yvonne - 11-01-2012
Yeah, I can't imagine where he'd learn anything about defense.Â
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - yvonne - 11-01-2012
Yeah, I can't imagine where he'd learn anything about defense.Â
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ATLCard - 11-01-2012
I have no idea how much D he learned in the cradle, but it's a little ridiculous to deny the head coach any credit for installing a DC who is doing a great job. I was among the doubters who thought we were in trouble when Lord Fangio departed.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ATLCard - 11-01-2012
I have no idea how much D he learned in the cradle, but it's a little ridiculous to deny the head coach any credit for installing a DC who is doing a great job. I was among the doubters who thought we were in trouble when Lord Fangio departed.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ChicagoCard - 11-01-2012
I think David Shaw recently worked a reference to his dad being a long-time defensive coach into one of his press conference answers, although I don't know how that fact factors in to this discussion. Trivial fact maybe. I feel more certain that Mason, Tarver (he jumps from co-defensive coordinator for a college program to NFL DC), Kotulski and certainly the defensive line coach (can't remember the name at the moment) are generally recognized as solid defensive coaches.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ChicagoCard - 11-01-2012
I think David Shaw recently worked a reference to his dad being a long-time defensive coach into one of his press conference answers, although I don't know how that fact factors in to this discussion. Trivial fact maybe. I feel more certain that Mason, Tarver (he jumps from co-defensive coordinator for a college program to NFL DC), Kotulski and certainly the defensive line coach (can't remember the name at the moment) are generally recognized as solid defensive coaches.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - yvonne - 11-01-2012
Yes, but didn't Shaw hire those coaches?
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - yvonne - 11-01-2012
Yes, but didn't Shaw hire those coaches?
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ChicagoCard - 11-01-2012
I haven't been following this string too closely but yes I think Shaw must have hired Tarver although I think the defensive line coach was brought in under Harbaugh, possibly at the same time as Fangio (but not sure about that).
Re: A theory re: Nunes and Shaw - ChicagoCard - 11-01-2012
I haven't been following this string too closely but yes I think Shaw must have hired Tarver although I think the defensive line coach was brought in under Harbaugh, possibly at the same time as Fangio (but not sure about that).
Re: A theory re: Nunes and ShawMason and the defensive staff - JohnOlenchalk - 11-02-2012
are doing a brilliant job. Shaw promoted Mason, but that's about the only thing he deserves credit for on the Defense.
Re: A theory re: Nunes and ShawMason and the defensive staff - JohnOlenchalk - 11-02-2012
are doing a brilliant job. Shaw promoted Mason, but that's about the only thing he deserves credit for on the Defense.