David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity

David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - 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: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity (/thread-18692.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - BostonCard - 12-10-2019

1995: 7-4-1
1996: 7-5
1997: 5-6
1998: 3-8

Do you want to extrapolate that to Tyrone Willingham's 1999 record? I will even spot you a 69-17 drubbing in Austin and a loss at home to San Jose State.

BC

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - JustAnotherFan - 12-11-2019

(12-10-2019, 10:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote: 1995: 7-4-1
1996: 7-5
1997: 5-6
1998: 3-8

Do you want to extrapolate that to Tyrone Willingham's 1999 record? I will even spot you a 69-17 drubbing in Austin and a loss at home to San Jose State.

BC

1999: Woo hoo! 8-4 baby!! (and lose the bowl game)

Not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying that 1998 or 1999 is the outlier?

Also

2000: 5-6
2001: 9-3 (and lose the bowl game)

Are you suggesting that we should embrace the losing season as acceptable because ... we always have next year? Maybe next year we can lose 3 out of conference games and still have a chance of going to the Rose Bowl?

I'm genuinely confused by the point you're trying to drive home.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - French Rage - 12-11-2019

(12-11-2019, 01:43 PM)JustAnotherFan Wrote: Maybe next year we can lose 3 out of conference games and still have a chance of going to the Rose Bowl?

I mean they are technically unrelated.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - JustAnotherFan - 12-11-2019

(12-11-2019, 01:49 PM)French Rage Wrote:
(12-11-2019, 01:43 PM)JustAnotherFan Wrote: Maybe next year we can lose 3 out of conference games and still have a chance of going to the Rose Bowl?

I mean they are technically unrelated.

For sure, my point being that using 1999 is not a compelling 'take it easy on Shaw because this is what we may have lined up next year' example.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - Leftcoast - 12-11-2019

Fans tend to over-react, even on the Cardboard. For your edification ....

Here's a link to the justifiably famous Classic Hit "My god that sucked everything sucked my god what was that" thread in 2012 ... The very year we finished 12-2 and went on to beat Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. Shaw sucked then too. :-)

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=4127

(By the way, just about every post is duplicated in that thread - Is this a legacy from the format conversion a couple of years ago?)

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - BostonCard - 12-11-2019

(12-11-2019, 06:28 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: Fans tend to over-react, even on the Cardboard. For your edification ....

Here's a link to the justifiably famous Classic Hit "My god that sucked everything sucked my god what was that" thread in 2012 ... The very year we finished 12-2 and went on to beat Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. Shaw sucked then too. :-)

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=4127

(By the way, just about every post is duplicated in that thread - Is this a legacy from the format conversion a couple of years ago?)

Pretty sure there is a similar post after the Northwestern game. (2015 edition)

BC

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - cardcrimson - 12-11-2019

Not sure what your point is, but hey.

As far as this season went, as my finance professor so artfully commented during my first year at business school: "you can't polish a turd."

(12-11-2019, 06:28 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: Fans tend to over-react, even on the Cardboard. For your edification ....

Here's a link to the justifiably famous Classic Hit "My god that sucked everything sucked my god what was that" thread in 2012 ... The very year we finished 12-2 and went on to beat Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. Shaw sucked then too. :-)

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=4127

(By the way, just about every post is duplicated in that thread - Is this a legacy from the format conversion a couple of years ago?)

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - BostonCard - 12-11-2019

I don't know what my fellow west coaster's point was, but here is my thinking:

There is a reasonable possibility that we revert towards a less extreme injury situation next year, and that it is somewhat better than this year (important caveats about who else enters the portal, and what our injury situation, especially at defensive line, is). I think we will be a ways from being a contender.

Longer term I'm a bit more bullish given the freshman class and our incoming recruiting class. If we can plug some holes on the defense in what's left of the 2020 class and 2021 class, we can get back to winning ~8 games a year. And that's where I sit longer term. I think Shaw can sustain a 6 - 10 win team with occasional ups and downs around that. I think we will be in the conversation for a conference title; I don't think we will win it at the same clip as Shaw did his first five years. There will be room for improvement, and we will debate that ad nauseum on this board.

BC

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - JustAnotherFan - 12-11-2019

(12-11-2019, 07:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I don't know what my fellow west coaster's point was, but here is my thinking:

There is a reasonable possibility that we revert towards a less extreme injury situation next year, and that it is somewhat better than this year (important caveats about who else enters the portal, and what our injury situation, especially at defensive line, is). I think we will be a ways from being a contender.

Longer term I'm a bit more bullish given the freshman class and our incoming recruiting class. If we can plug some holes on the defense in what's left of the 2020 class and 2021 class, we can get back to winning ~8 games a year. And that's where I sit longer term. I think Shaw can sustain a 6 - 10 win team with occasional ups and downs around that. I think we will be in the conversation for a conference title; I don't think we will win it at the same clip as Shaw did his first five years. There will be room for improvement, and we will debate that ad nauseum on this board.

BC

I don't know what West Coaster's point was either. So why do you believe Shaw so successful his first five years and why do you believe he will not be able to match that going forward? Has the landscape of college football shifted that much that Stanford football has been put at a unique disadvantage relative to this first five years, or was he just an ~8 win coach riding what Harbaugh built?

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - cardcrimson - 12-11-2019

I believe Shaw has commented on several occasions that it's not his job to motivate. (if I'm wrong, oh well, I'm going with what I've read here)

Fine if he wants to delegate that to the players, but it is his responsibility to recruit those that can inspire their teammates. Katie Meyer's fire was infectious. She got knocked down, got fired up, and crushed it.

Where's that fire on the football team? Does Shaw recruit that type of player, that type of leader (granted presumptuous of me to assume Katie's a leader when I've no connection to the women's soccer team)?

(12-11-2019, 07:14 PM)JustAnotherFan Wrote:
(12-11-2019, 07:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I don't know what my fellow west coaster's point was, but here is my thinking:

There is a reasonable possibility that we revert towards a less extreme injury situation next year, and that it is somewhat better than this year (important caveats about who else enters the portal, and what our injury situation, especially at defensive line, is). I think we will be a ways from being a contender.

Longer term I'm a bit more bullish given the freshman class and our incoming recruiting class. If we can plug some holes on the defense in what's left of the 2020 class and 2021 class, we can get back to winning ~8 games a year. And that's where I sit longer term. I think Shaw can sustain a 6 - 10 win team with occasional ups and downs around that. I think we will be in the conversation for a conference title; I don't think we will win it at the same clip as Shaw did his first five years. There will be room for improvement, and we will debate that ad nauseum on this board.

BC

I don't know what West Coaster's point was either. So why do you believe Shaw so successful his first five years and why do you believe he will not be able to match that going forward? Has the landscape of college football shifted that much that Stanford football has been put at a unique disadvantage relative to this first five years, or was he just an ~8 win coach riding what Harbaugh built?

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - BostonCard - 12-11-2019

The short answer is that I don't think we have the defense that we did in 2012 - 2014 (2011 and 2015 weren't quite as good defensively, but one year we had Luck, and the other we had McCaffrey, and both those defenses were at least in positive territory). Moreover, looking at who is coming in, I don't see us getting that defense any time soon. Maybe the 2021 - 2023 classes will be well populated with defensive playmakers and in 4 years we will have a good defense again.

Here our our defensive FEI score and rankings through the Harbaugh/Shaw years (DFEI Defense Ratings (DFEI) represent the per possession scoring advantage a team's defense would be expected to have on a neutral field against an average offense.)

2019: -0.45 (90th)
2018: 0.12 (47th)
2017*: -0.02 (60th)
2016: 0.45 (20th)
2015**†: 0.15 (52nd)
2014: 0.91 (8th)
2013**†: 0.71 (13th)
2012**†: 0.90 (8th)
2011†: 0.59 (25th)
2010†: 0.82 (10th)
2009: -0.47 (99th)
2008: -0.17 (83rd)
2007: 0.24 (56th)

* Pac-12 N Champions
** Pac-12 Champions
† NY6 bowl

2015 was the only year we reached a NY6 bowl with a below-average defense. 2014 was the only year where our defense failed to carry us, and that year we a) didn't have a running back b) had a quarterback dealing with a sick father.

Defense doesn't get talked about as much around these parts, maybe because it is tougher to second-guess defensive play-calling than offensive play-calling (even though I frequently hear calls for more blitzes), or maybe because there is more of a focus on individual player deficiencies (coverage skills of our safeties, for example). But we had Pac-12 championship caliber teams in 2012 and 2013 not because the offenses on those teams were particularly good, but because we had top-10 defenses. I think if we can get our DFEI to 0 next year (that is, our defense is not hurting us), I think we'll be ok. Longer term, I'm hopeful that we can get to a defense to what we had in 2016: nothing to write home about, but it gave us a decent shot at winning if we had the lead late in the game. Twice this year we had that situation and the defense failed to hold onto the lead. I will be surprised if we can get back to the defenses we saw in 2012 - 2014 again, and thus I will be surprised if we can do much better than 8 wins a year routinely.

BC

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - cardcrimson - 12-11-2019

I have to admit, I burst out laughing after seeing your extensive post starting with "the short answer is".

(12-11-2019, 07:54 PM)BostonCard Wrote: The short answer is that I don't think we have the defense that we did in 2012 - 2014 (2011 and 2015 weren't quite as good defensively, but one year we had Luck, and the other we had McCaffrey, and both those defenses were at least in positive territory). Moreover, looking at who is coming in, I don't see us getting that defense any time soon. Maybe the 2021 - 2023 classes will be well populated with defensive playmakers and in 4 years we will have a good defense again.

Here our our defensive FEI score and rankings through the Harbaugh/Shaw years (DFEI Defense Ratings (DFEI) represent the per possession scoring advantage a team's defense would be expected to have on a neutral field against an average offense.)

2019: -0.45 (90th)
2018: 0.12 (47th)
2017*: -0.02 (60th)
2016: 0.45 (20th)
2015**†: 0.15 (52nd)
2014: 0.91 (8th)
2013**†: 0.71 (13th)
2012**†: 0.90 (8th)
2011†: 0.59 (25th)
2010†: 0.82 (10th)
2009: -0.47 (99th)
2008: -0.17 (83rd)
2007: 0.24 (56th)

* Pac-12 N Champions
** Pac-12 Champions
† NY6 bowl

2015 was the only year we reached a NY6 bowl with a below-average defense. 2014 was the only year where our defense failed to carry us, and that year we a) didn't have a running back b) had a quarterback dealing with a sick father.

Defense doesn't get talked about as much around these parts, maybe because it is tougher to second-guess defensive play-calling than offensive play-calling (even though I frequently hear calls for more blitzes), or maybe because there is more of a focus on individual player deficiencies (coverage skills of our safeties, for example). But we had Pac-12 championship caliber teams in 2012 and 2013 not because the offenses on those teams were particularly good, but because we had top-10 defenses. I think if we can get our DFEI to 0 next year (that is, our defense is not hurting us), I think we'll be ok. Longer term, I'm hopeful that we can get to a defense to what we had in 2016: nothing to write home about, but it gave us a decent shot at winning if we had the lead late in the game. Twice this year we had that situation and the defense failed to hold onto the lead. I will be surprised if we can get back to the defenses we saw in 2012 - 2014 again, and thus I will be surprised if we can do much better than 8 wins a year routinely.

BC

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - d4cohn - 12-12-2019

(12-11-2019, 07:54 PM)BostonCard Wrote: The short answer is that I don't think we have the defense that we did in 2012 - 2014 (2011 and 2015 weren't quite as good defensively, but one year we had Luck, and the other we had McCaffrey, and both those defenses were at least in positive territory). Moreover, looking at who is coming in, I don't see us getting that defense any time soon. Maybe the 2021 - 2023 classes will be well populated with defensive playmakers and in 4 years we will have a good defense again.

Here our our defensive FEI score and rankings through the Harbaugh/Shaw years (DFEI Defense Ratings (DFEI) represent the per possession scoring advantage a team's defense would be expected to have on a neutral field against an average offense.)

2019: -0.45 (90th)
2018: 0.12 (47th)
2017*: -0.02 (60th)
2016: 0.45 (20th)
2015**†: 0.15 (52nd)
2014: 0.91 (8th)
2013**†: 0.71 (13th)
2012**†: 0.90 (8th)
2011†: 0.59 (25th)
2010†: 0.82 (10th)
2009: -0.47 (99th)
2008: -0.17 (83rd)
2007: 0.24 (56th)

* Pac-12 N Champions
** Pac-12 Champions
† NY6 bowl

2015 was the only year we reached a NY6 bowl with a below-average defense. 2014 was the only year where our defense failed to carry us, and that year we a) didn't have a running back b) had a quarterback dealing with a sick father.

Defense doesn't get talked about as much around these parts, maybe because it is tougher to second-guess defensive play-calling than offensive play-calling (even though I frequently hear calls for more blitzes), or maybe because there is more of a focus on individual player deficiencies (coverage skills of our safeties, for example). But we had Pac-12 championship caliber teams in 2012 and 2013 not because the offenses on those teams were particularly good, but because we had top-10 defenses. I think if we can get our DFEI to 0 next year (that is, our defense is not hurting us), I think we'll be ok. Longer term, I'm hopeful that we can get to a defense to what we had in 2016: nothing to write home about, but it gave us a decent shot at winning if we had the lead late in the game. Twice this year we had that situation and the defense failed to hold onto the lead. I will be surprised if we can get back to the defenses we saw in 2012 - 2014 again, and thus I will be surprised if we can do much better than 8 wins a year routinely.

BC

The thing is we have had talent on defense (Mike Williams was a four star recruit, and we have also recruited some other highly touted prospects on the defensive side of the ball, as well as developing players like Harrison Phillips, Solomon Thomas and Justin Reid and placing them in the league). While one possible explanation is a deterioration in ILB play since Blake Martinez graduated, the other possible explanation of the numbers is that perhaps Derek Mason made the defenses tick, and our coaching at DC simply isn't as good.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - murky - 12-12-2019

(12-11-2019, 07:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote: ...I think Shaw can sustain a 6 - 10 win team with occasional ups and downs around that. I think we will be in the conversation for a conference title; I don't think we will win it at the same clip as Shaw did his first five years. There will be room for improvement, and we will debate that ad nauseum on this board.

BC

I share this view. And I think that's a great scenario for Stanford, substantially elevated from our historical (pre-Harbaugh/Shaw) performance and as much as can be expected from a coaching staff over a sustained period.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - Phogge - 12-12-2019

Some nights NFL coaches sleep on their office couches. DS will never do that.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - Farm93 - 12-12-2019

(12-12-2019, 11:00 AM)murky Wrote:
(12-11-2019, 07:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote: ...I think Shaw can sustain a 6 - 10 win team with occasional ups and downs around that. I think we will be in the conversation for a conference title; I don't think we will win it at the same clip as Shaw did his first five years. There will be room for improvement, and we will debate that ad nauseum on this board.

BC

I share this view. And I think that's a great scenario for Stanford, substantially elevated from our historical (pre-Harbaugh/Shaw) performance and as much as can be expected from a coaching staff over a sustained period.

If Stanford is finishing a decade with an average of 8 or more wins per season then that is a strong result.

There are just too many fast and strong kids out there with sub 4.6 40s and sub 3.5 GPAs for Stanford alums to expect 10+ win seasons as the norm.

In several sports getting a scholarship to an elite academic school is the goal for many playing the sport as teenagers. In those sports Stanford can sustain top 5 or top 10 results. Football is just not one of those sports.

The next threat to the status quo will be the money for likeness usage.

That is a benefit the players risking body and mind deserve, but I have to believe it will negatively impact Stanford Football.

I don’t see anyone outside of a small ring around campus buying anything because of a Stanford student-athlete image in the promotion.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - BostonCard - 12-12-2019

(12-12-2019, 12:14 PM)Phogge Wrote: Some nights NFL coaches sleep on their office couches. DS will never do that.

Nope, and I don't have a problem with it. It's just football.

BC

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - d4cohn - 12-12-2019

(12-12-2019, 12:34 PM)Farm93 Wrote: If Stanford is finishing a decade with an average of 8 or more wins per season then that is a strong result.

Not a bad run from 2009-2018 with this standard.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - Mick - 12-12-2019

(12-12-2019, 08:17 PM)d4cohn Wrote:
(12-12-2019, 12:34 PM)Farm93 Wrote: If Stanford is finishing a decade with an average of 8 or more wins per season then that is a strong result.
Not a bad run from 2009-2018 with this standard.

That is a good run. But I'm more concerned about the run from 2019 to 2028 at this point.

RE: David Shaw is still hot NFL commodity - winflop - 12-12-2019

(12-12-2019, 11:00 AM)murky Wrote:
(12-11-2019, 07:05 PM)BostonCard Wrote: ...I think Shaw can sustain a 6 - 10 win team with occasional ups and downs around that. I think we will be in the conversation for a conference title; I don't think we will win it at the same clip as Shaw did his first five years. There will be room for improvement, and we will debate that ad nauseum on this board.

BC

I share this view. And I think that's a great scenario for Stanford, substantially elevated from our historical (pre-Harbaugh/Shaw) performance and as much as can be expected from a coaching staff over a sustained period.

I do not share this view unless he demonstrates that he is willing to make changes in his staff. I don't see this team doing any better than 6 wins next season, and I don't see 10-win potential in this program without significant changes to the staff.