[BostonCard]

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.

BC

[BostonCard]

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.

BC

[AlbanyCardinal]

Very tough business. Yet they all earn millions of dollars for doing it. Shaw is the highest-paid employee on the Farm, no? Seems to me such high-paid, public positions should/would come with lots of scrutiny. Also, of these seven coaches/teams, how many have chosen not to fill their rosters with scholarship players? How many don't take a QB every year? I understand that Shaw is the only coach on this list who has to have his recruits apply and get through Stanford admissions, but we've all been witness to Shaw, for whatever reason, being very cavalier about filling roster spots. 

One more thing: I'm okay with rebuilding and down seasons. I've weathered plenty of them all these years as a Stanford fan, across multiple sports. But I'd like to see some adjustments and adaptations, b/c this isn't one year in the making. This 4-8/5-7 season didn't fall out of the sky suddenly. And maybe we will see some changes; I'm willing to give Shaw the benefit of the doubt here, for now.

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.

BC

[AlbanyCardinal]

Very tough business. Yet they all earn millions of dollars for doing it. Shaw is the highest-paid employee on the Farm, no? Seems to me such high-paid, public positions should/would come with lots of scrutiny. Also, of these seven coaches/teams, how many have chosen not to fill their rosters with scholarship players? How many don't take a QB every year? I understand that Shaw is the only coach on this list who has to have his recruits apply and get through Stanford admissions, but we've all been witness to Shaw, for whatever reason, being very cavalier about filling roster spots. 

One more thing: I'm okay with rebuilding and down seasons. I've weathered plenty of them all these years as a Stanford fan, across multiple sports. But I'd like to see some adjustments and adaptations, b/c this isn't one year in the making. This 4-8/5-7 season didn't fall out of the sky suddenly. And maybe we will see some changes; I'm willing to give Shaw the benefit of the doubt here, for now.

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.

BC

[BostonCard]

I don’t follow the other teams closely, but to me, it seems clear that there are many ways you can screw up a team to mediocrity, and if anything, the things you cite give one reason for optimism.  We will have a full or near full scholarship allotment next year, for example.

The underfilling of scholarships was a thing starting in 2018, which was the first year of the early signing period. Shaw allowed himself to get caught flat footed.  He didnt fully adapt last year, but it was better.  We should be above 80 scholarships used next year; it will depend not on how many we bring in, but how many players with eligibility remaining choose to leave.

BC

[BostonCard]

I don’t follow the other teams closely, but to me, it seems clear that there are many ways you can screw up a team to mediocrity, and if anything, the things you cite give one reason for optimism.  We will have a full or near full scholarship allotment next year, for example.

The underfilling of scholarships was a thing starting in 2018, which was the first year of the early signing period. Shaw allowed himself to get caught flat footed.  He didnt fully adapt last year, but it was better.  We should be above 80 scholarships used next year; it will depend not on how many we bring in, but how many players with eligibility remaining choose to leave.

BC

[cardcrimson]

I don’t follow the other teams closely, but to me, it seems clear that there are many ways you can screw up a team to mediocrity, and if anything, the things you cite give one reason for optimism.  We will have a full or near full scholarship allotment next year, for example.

The underfilling of scholarships was a thing starting in 2018, which was the first year of the early signing period. Shaw allowed himself to get caught flat footed.  He didnt fully adapt last year, but it was better.  We should be above 80 scholarships used next year; it will depend not on how many we bring in, but how many players with eligibility remaining choose to leave.

BC

Shouldn't we have closer to 85? 6%, at this level, is a big deal, isn't it?

[cardcrimson]

I don’t follow the other teams closely, but to me, it seems clear that there are many ways you can screw up a team to mediocrity, and if anything, the things you cite give one reason for optimism.  We will have a full or near full scholarship allotment next year, for example.

The underfilling of scholarships was a thing starting in 2018, which was the first year of the early signing period. Shaw allowed himself to get caught flat footed.  He didnt fully adapt last year, but it was better.  We should be above 80 scholarships used next year; it will depend not on how many we bring in, but how many players with eligibility remaining choose to leave.

BC

Shouldn't we have closer to 85? 6%, at this level, is a big deal, isn't it?

[ADPinWDC]

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.
BC

Excellent rack-up, BC.  I shared with my Class of 79. 
And Shaw is 86W-33L, and 5W-3L in Bowl games, which separates him from the pack. 
-- And all three Bowl losses went down to the wire... 
[OT vs OKST in Fiesta; Two points with TCU in Alamo; and One score in the Rose] 
How many on that list have a Bowl Record in that zone?

[ADPinWDC]

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.
BC

Excellent rack-up, BC.  I shared with my Class of 79. 
And Shaw is 86W-33L, and 5W-3L in Bowl games, which separates him from the pack. 
-- And all three Bowl losses went down to the wire... 
[OT vs OKST in Fiesta; Two points with TCU in Alamo; and One score in the Rose] 
How many on that list have a Bowl Record in that zone?

[Phogge]

Gravely disappointed in you BC. The header promised proof of extraterrestrial beings. Since I’ve seen UFOs’ a couple of times I had hoped you were so enlightened. Never had a trip on one but I’m open to a kidnap.

[Phogge]

Gravely disappointed in you BC. The header promised proof of extraterrestrial beings. Since I’ve seen UFOs’ a couple of times I had hoped you were so enlightened. Never had a trip on one but I’m open to a kidnap.

[Austroturf]

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.

BC

Nice summary.  Just a few points from my side, some of which echo what AlbanyCardinal pointed out.  

1) The current season is objectively the nadir of a long process (at least I hope it is the nadir) beginning already in 2014/2015.  An analysis of recent statistics shows that our defense started deteriorating after the 2014 season and is now ranked 95th in the nation on total yards given up per game.  Hence, this is not a one-season blip, but the culmination of a slow, but steady deterioration.  The offensive production has followed a similar, but less obvious downward trajectory.
2) Scott Frost and Chip Kelly inherited bankrupt programs and should not really be on the list.  If anything, they should be compared to the turnaround work Jim Harbaugh (Stanford) or Brian Kelly (Notre Dame) did at their respective downward trending programs.  In this context, Kelly is an instructive example because he produced a 4-8 2016 campaign sandwiched between two 10-3 efforts.  So, yes, such performance drops happen to otherwise successful coaches.   
3) In my view, the downward blips by Washington and Washington State are qualitatively different.  Washington won the Pac-12 championship as recently as 2016 and 2018, so this year's dip feels anomalous and not part of an overall trend.  In Wazzu's case, the defensive woes (started after Grinch's departure and not improved by Tracy Claeys's short tenure with the program) account for their issues this year; and this could become an ongoing theme if Lynch does not address it.  
4) The one case in this list that is truly comparable is Dantonio from MSU.  Since I have old MSU ties, I can assure you that the fan base is having more or less the same discussions we are having: Dantonio is their winningest coach in history, has 3 Big Ten titles, multiple BCS bowls, a CFP appearance, a dominant record against their rival, Michigan.  What's not to love?  And yet, the program has been declining, and MSU is no longer a serious contender in the Big Ten.  Many say he has lost touch, is too loyal to his coaching staff and isn't making the tough choices.  I don't think his goodwill at MSU is nearly as high as Shaw's is at Stanford.  The AD that hired him is gone, so his seat might get hot if things do not turn around. 
5) Fitzgerald's fall from grace is truly precipitous (from first to worst in one season).  Incredible drop.

What is certainly clear is that football success in any given context is not only difficult, but also a zero-sum game.  Great records by some programs have to be matched by poor records at other programs.  Every game has a winner and a loser.  Stanford's run of dominance between 2010 and 2015 meant other programs were winning less; now we are on the other side of this ledger.  The much larger question is whether Shaw can reverse the downward trend, and it is a trend, despite what the pair of recent 9 win seasons (2017-2018)) indicate.  Does he have what it takes to rebuild a program (not just lead an established program)?  Will he make the tough choices and ruffle the necessary feathers to get the program back to its erstwhile winning ways?  I am not convinced at this point, but that is the subject of another thread.

[Austroturf]

UW under Petersen is 6-5, having just lost to Colorado (and us)
Northwestern under Fitzgerald is 2-9, 0-8 in the BigTen (having lost to us and pretty much everyone else)
Michigan State under Mark Dantonio is 5-6
UCLA under Chip Kelley is 4-7 (though one of the four wins is against us)
WSU under the pirate is 6-5 (having just been on the other side of an epic coup by OSU)
Nebraska under Scott Frost is 5-6
And of course David Shaw is 4-7, having lost to two of the coaches on this list

All of these are excellent, well-respected coaches, who have a demonstrated capability of winning.  All of them have had disappointing seasons compared to what their fans have gotten used to. Some, like Frost and Kelley are only in their second seasons and are rebuilding their teams. I don’t go to other fans’ cardboard equivalents, but I would be shocked if we didn’t see posts bitching and moaning the demise of their program, and how their coach is not living up to expectations, and worrying about whether they’ve lost a step (or in Frost’s case just can’t hack it in a bigger conference).  I expect most (including Shaw) will bounce back next year.

The bottom line is coaching is a hard business, and Shaw is hardly the only good coach with a disappointing season.

BC

Nice summary.  Just a few points from my side, some of which echo what AlbanyCardinal pointed out.  

1) The current season is objectively the nadir of a long process (at least I hope it is the nadir) beginning already in 2014/2015.  An analysis of recent statistics shows that our defense started deteriorating after the 2014 season and is now ranked 95th in the nation on total yards given up per game.  Hence, this is not a one-season blip, but the culmination of a slow, but steady deterioration.  The offensive production has followed a similar, but less obvious downward trajectory.
2) Scott Frost and Chip Kelly inherited bankrupt programs and should not really be on the list.  If anything, they should be compared to the turnaround work Jim Harbaugh (Stanford) or Brian Kelly (Notre Dame) did at their respective downward trending programs.  In this context, Kelly is an instructive example because he produced a 4-8 2016 campaign sandwiched between two 10-3 efforts.  So, yes, such performance drops happen to otherwise successful coaches.   
3) In my view, the downward blips by Washington and Washington State are qualitatively different.  Washington won the Pac-12 championship as recently as 2016 and 2018, so this year's dip feels anomalous and not part of an overall trend.  In Wazzu's case, the defensive woes (started after Grinch's departure and not improved by Tracy Claeys's short tenure with the program) account for their issues this year; and this could become an ongoing theme if Lynch does not address it.  
4) The one case in this list that is truly comparable is Dantonio from MSU.  Since I have old MSU ties, I can assure you that the fan base is having more or less the same discussions we are having: Dantonio is their winningest coach in history, has 3 Big Ten titles, multiple BCS bowls, a CFP appearance, a dominant record against their rival, Michigan.  What's not to love?  And yet, the program has been declining, and MSU is no longer a serious contender in the Big Ten.  Many say he has lost touch, is too loyal to his coaching staff and isn't making the tough choices.  I don't think his goodwill at MSU is nearly as high as Shaw's is at Stanford.  The AD that hired him is gone, so his seat might get hot if things do not turn around. 
5) Fitzgerald's fall from grace is truly precipitous (from first to worst in one season).  Incredible drop.

What is certainly clear is that football success in any given context is not only difficult, but also a zero-sum game.  Great records by some programs have to be matched by poor records at other programs.  Every game has a winner and a loser.  Stanford's run of dominance between 2010 and 2015 meant other programs were winning less; now we are on the other side of this ledger.  The much larger question is whether Shaw can reverse the downward trend, and it is a trend, despite what the pair of recent 9 win seasons (2017-2018)) indicate.  Does he have what it takes to rebuild a program (not just lead an established program)?  Will he make the tough choices and ruffle the necessary feathers to get the program back to its erstwhile winning ways?  I am not convinced at this point, but that is the subject of another thread.

[BostonCard]

Gravely disappointed in you BC. The header promised proof of extraterrestrial beings. Since I’ve seen UFOs’ a couple of times I had hoped you were so enlightened. Never had a trip on one but I’m open to a kidnap.

I think my post has proven that extraterrestrials have come, and they are systematically kidnapping college football coaches and replacing them with aliens dressed in the coach's skins.  How else do you explain how so many good coaches have been so underwhelming?

BC

---

3) In my view, the downward blips by Washington and Washington State are qualitatively different.  Washington won the Pac-12 championship as recently as 2016 and 2018, so this year's dip feels anomalous and not part of an overall trend.  In Wazzu's case, the defensive woes (started after Grinch's departure and not improved by Tracy Claeys's short tenure with the program) account for their issues this year; and this could become an ongoing theme if Lynch does not address it.  

The narrative that we have been in a slow steady decline is somewhat contradicted by the fact that we won the Pac-12 North as recently as 2017.  We lost that Pac-12 championship 31-28 against a USC team that went on to beat Penn State in the Rose Bowl, so it wasn't like we didn't belong.

BC

[BostonCard]

Gravely disappointed in you BC. The header promised proof of extraterrestrial beings. Since I’ve seen UFOs’ a couple of times I had hoped you were so enlightened. Never had a trip on one but I’m open to a kidnap.

I think my post has proven that extraterrestrials have come, and they are systematically kidnapping college football coaches and replacing them with aliens dressed in the coach's skins.  How else do you explain how so many good coaches have been so underwhelming?

BC

---

3) In my view, the downward blips by Washington and Washington State are qualitatively different.  Washington won the Pac-12 championship as recently as 2016 and 2018, so this year's dip feels anomalous and not part of an overall trend.  In Wazzu's case, the defensive woes (started after Grinch's departure and not improved by Tracy Claeys's short tenure with the program) account for their issues this year; and this could become an ongoing theme if Lynch does not address it.  

The narrative that we have been in a slow steady decline is somewhat contradicted by the fact that we won the Pac-12 North as recently as 2017.  We lost that Pac-12 championship 31-28 against a USC team that went on to beat Penn State in the Rose Bowl, so it wasn't like we didn't belong.

BC

[Phogge]

I think I saw Invaders From Mars fifty times as a kid. And the original The Thing maybe a hundred times. Sunday Silence beating Easy Goer about 30 times.

When in doubt fall back on history. Read a book about the Vow Boys this week and you all will feel better.

[Phogge]

I think I saw Invaders From Mars fifty times as a kid. And the original The Thing maybe a hundred times. Sunday Silence beating Easy Goer about 30 times.

When in doubt fall back on history. Read a book about the Vow Boys this week and you all will feel better.

[Austroturf]

---

3) In my view, the downward blips by Washington and Washington State are qualitatively different.  Washington won the Pac-12 championship as recently as 2016 and 2018, so this year's dip feels anomalous and not part of an overall trend.  In Wazzu's case, the defensive woes (started after Grinch's departure and not improved by Tracy Claeys's short tenure with the program) account for their issues this year; and this could become an ongoing theme if Lynch does not address it.  

The narrative that we have been in a slow steady decline is somewhat contradicted by the fact that we won the Pac-12 North as recently as 2017.  We lost that Pac-12 championship 31-28 against a USC team that went on to beat Penn State in the Rose Bowl, so it wasn't like we didn't belong.

BC

This is a valid statement on the face of it.  However, just looking at pure statistics (rankings in offense and defense, PPG allowed vs. scored, etc.) and total win/loss numbers and our year-end rankings, each year is a kind of saw-tooth drop down from the earlier lofty heights. Just listing the records and year-end rankings shows that things have been slowly, but inexorably trending downward:

2010   12-1   4
2011   11-2   7
2012   12-2   7
2013   11-3  11
2014     8-5  NR
2015   12-2    3
2016   10-3  12
2017     9-5  20
2018     9-4  NR
2019     4-7  NR

Even in what was arguably a good 2017 season, we lost 5 games (USC twice, SDSU, Washington State and TCU).  In this list, it is hard to tell whether 2014 or 2015 is the outlier.  Starting from 2010 and going forward in the list, the 2014 season seems to be the anomalous blip downward.  Going backwards from 2019, the 2015 season seems to be an isolated upward blip.  But it is clear that our year-end rankings have been declining overall, and the number of losses we accumulate in a given season has been increasing (at least on a rolling average).  At the same time, our recruiting rankings have not noticeably declined, so that alone would argue against a downward performance trend.

There's also the expectations factor: I remember 2016 as a "disappointing" season because we lost three games in a four-game stretch (UW, Wazzu, Colorado) and stood at 4-3 after 7 games and unranked.  Eventually, after five straight victories to close the regular season and a gritty Sun Bowl victory over the Tar Heels, we finished 12th in the final AP poll.  Many fans were disappointed that we had been unable to crack the top ten (again).  But from today's perspective, that kind of ranking seems like a dream.  So, yes, we have been declining, step by step, year by year.  Even our expectations are declining.  And winning the north division in 2017 does not mask this reality.

[Austroturf]

---

3) In my view, the downward blips by Washington and Washington State are qualitatively different.  Washington won the Pac-12 championship as recently as 2016 and 2018, so this year's dip feels anomalous and not part of an overall trend.  In Wazzu's case, the defensive woes (started after Grinch's departure and not improved by Tracy Claeys's short tenure with the program) account for their issues this year; and this could become an ongoing theme if Lynch does not address it.  

The narrative that we have been in a slow steady decline is somewhat contradicted by the fact that we won the Pac-12 North as recently as 2017.  We lost that Pac-12 championship 31-28 against a USC team that went on to beat Penn State in the Rose Bowl, so it wasn't like we didn't belong.

BC

This is a valid statement on the face of it.  However, just looking at pure statistics (rankings in offense and defense, PPG allowed vs. scored, etc.) and total win/loss numbers and our year-end rankings, each year is a kind of saw-tooth drop down from the earlier lofty heights. Just listing the records and year-end rankings shows that things have been slowly, but inexorably trending downward:

2010   12-1   4
2011   11-2   7
2012   12-2   7
2013   11-3  11
2014     8-5  NR
2015   12-2    3
2016   10-3  12
2017     9-5  20
2018     9-4  NR
2019     4-7  NR

Even in what was arguably a good 2017 season, we lost 5 games (USC twice, SDSU, Washington State and TCU).  In this list, it is hard to tell whether 2014 or 2015 is the outlier.  Starting from 2010 and going forward in the list, the 2014 season seems to be the anomalous blip downward.  Going backwards from 2019, the 2015 season seems to be an isolated upward blip.  But it is clear that our year-end rankings have been declining overall, and the number of losses we accumulate in a given season has been increasing (at least on a rolling average).  At the same time, our recruiting rankings have not noticeably declined, so that alone would argue against a downward performance trend.

There's also the expectations factor: I remember 2016 as a "disappointing" season because we lost three games in a four-game stretch (UW, Wazzu, Colorado) and stood at 4-3 after 7 games and unranked.  Eventually, after five straight victories to close the regular season and a gritty Sun Bowl victory over the Tar Heels, we finished 12th in the final AP poll.  Many fans were disappointed that we had been unable to crack the top ten (again).  But from today's perspective, that kind of ranking seems like a dream.  So, yes, we have been declining, step by step, year by year.  Even our expectations are declining.  And winning the north division in 2017 does not mask this reality.

[Goose]

 But it is clear that our year-end rankings have been declining overall, and the number of losses we accumulate in a given season has been increasing (at least on a rolling average).  At the same time, our recruiting rankings have not noticeably declined, so that alone would argue against a downward performance trend.

Not necessarily. The fact we are losing more games can be equally attributed to other teams upward performance trend, not us getting worse. I think in reality there is some of both. Washington was bad for a long time. Oregon State was a total mess. WSU was all offense/no defense for quite a while (no more). Cal under Dykes was all offense as well. and never did get a defense. All we really had to worry about was Oregon. Things are harder now than they were. That makes a big difference.

[Goose]

 But it is clear that our year-end rankings have been declining overall, and the number of losses we accumulate in a given season has been increasing (at least on a rolling average).  At the same time, our recruiting rankings have not noticeably declined, so that alone would argue against a downward performance trend.

Not necessarily. The fact we are losing more games can be equally attributed to other teams upward performance trend, not us getting worse. I think in reality there is some of both. Washington was bad for a long time. Oregon State was a total mess. WSU was all offense/no defense for quite a while (no more). Cal under Dykes was all offense as well. and never did get a defense. All we really had to worry about was Oregon. Things are harder now than they were. That makes a big difference.

[Austroturf]

 But it is clear that our year-end rankings have been declining overall, and the number of losses we accumulate in a given season has been increasing (at least on a rolling average).  At the same time, our recruiting rankings have not noticeably declined, so that alone would argue against a downward performance trend.

Not necessarily. The fact we are losing more games can be equally attributed to other teams upward performance trend, not us getting worse. I think in reality there is some of both. Washington was bad for a long time. Oregon State was a total mess. WSU was all offense/no defense for quite a while (no more). Cal under Dykes was all offense as well. and never did get a defense. All we really had to worry about was Oregon. Things are harder now than they were. That makes a big difference.

Just to be clear: what are you referring to when you say "not necessarily"?

[Austroturf]

 But it is clear that our year-end rankings have been declining overall, and the number of losses we accumulate in a given season has been increasing (at least on a rolling average).  At the same time, our recruiting rankings have not noticeably declined, so that alone would argue against a downward performance trend.

Not necessarily. The fact we are losing more games can be equally attributed to other teams upward performance trend, not us getting worse. I think in reality there is some of both. Washington was bad for a long time. Oregon State was a total mess. WSU was all offense/no defense for quite a while (no more). Cal under Dykes was all offense as well. and never did get a defense. All we really had to worry about was Oregon. Things are harder now than they were. That makes a big difference.

Just to be clear: what are you referring to when you say "not necessarily"?

[Spiny_Norman]

The Stanford defense has been measurably worse each year since 2014. Even with All Americans (Thomas, Adebo), a future NFL MLB and other All P12 performers and future NFL contributors, the defense has continued to decline. It was masked in 2015 and 2017 by (sometimes) superior play on offense. The problems are basic - pressuring the passer, tackling, covering receivers, making plays.

I won't advocate for a total clean house. But the HC has to realize something is wrong and needs attention. He needs to hold his coaches accountable. That's what good leaders do.

[Spiny_Norman]

The Stanford defense has been measurably worse each year since 2014. Even with All Americans (Thomas, Adebo), a future NFL MLB and other All P12 performers and future NFL contributors, the defense has continued to decline. It was masked in 2015 and 2017 by (sometimes) superior play on offense. The problems are basic - pressuring the passer, tackling, covering receivers, making plays.

I won't advocate for a total clean house. But the HC has to realize something is wrong and needs attention. He needs to hold his coaches accountable. That's what good leaders do.

[BostonCard]

Stanford had one of the top defenses in the conference in 2015.  I remember that I used to do the per drive stats back then, and the key was that we had one of the best offenses in the country on a per drive basis, and one of the best defenses in the conference if not the country on that basis.

BC

---

Even in 2017 we had a very good defense.

BC

[BostonCard]

Stanford had one of the top defenses in the conference in 2015.  I remember that I used to do the per drive stats back then, and the key was that we had one of the best offenses in the country on a per drive basis, and one of the best defenses in the conference if not the country on that basis.

BC

---

Even in 2017 we had a very good defense.

BC

[Austroturf]

Stanford had one of the top defenses in the conference in 2015.  I remember that I used to do the per drive stats back then, and the key was that we had one of the best offenses in the country on a per drive basis, and one of the best defenses in the conference if not the country on that basis.

BC

---

Even in 2017 we had a very good defense.

BC

I have a lot of statistics on this.  On virtually every measure, we are giving up more yards and points than in earlier years of this decade.  Here are the numbers for PPG allowed by year and our national rank.  Yes, a potent offense helps keep the defense fresh and off the field.  But these are the naked defensive stats.  It's kind of hard not to see the decline.  I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).  Shaw's proclivity for punting was always predicated on the ability of our defense to get a stop and put the ball back in the hands of the offense.  As we have seen too often in recent years, he can no longer "ride" the defense.  First, our defense was "party-in-the-backfield".  Then it turned to "bend-but-don't-break".  Now, it is "bend and break".  The final Cal drive in Big Game was proof positive of this trend.  Earlier defensive units would have stuffed them in their own end of the field without sniffing midfield, let alone the red zone and the end zone.       

Year   PPG  rank

2010  17.4 10th  
2011  21.9 30th
2012  17.2 11th
2013  19.0 10th
2014  16.4  2nd
2015  22.6 33rd
2016  20.4 18th
2017  22.7 35th
2018  22.9 38th
2019  27.6 70th

[Austroturf]

Stanford had one of the top defenses in the conference in 2015.  I remember that I used to do the per drive stats back then, and the key was that we had one of the best offenses in the country on a per drive basis, and one of the best defenses in the conference if not the country on that basis.

BC

---

Even in 2017 we had a very good defense.

BC

I have a lot of statistics on this.  On virtually every measure, we are giving up more yards and points than in earlier years of this decade.  Here are the numbers for PPG allowed by year and our national rank.  Yes, a potent offense helps keep the defense fresh and off the field.  But these are the naked defensive stats.  It's kind of hard not to see the decline.  I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).  Shaw's proclivity for punting was always predicated on the ability of our defense to get a stop and put the ball back in the hands of the offense.  As we have seen too often in recent years, he can no longer "ride" the defense.  First, our defense was "party-in-the-backfield".  Then it turned to "bend-but-don't-break".  Now, it is "bend and break".  The final Cal drive in Big Game was proof positive of this trend.  Earlier defensive units would have stuffed them in their own end of the field without sniffing midfield, let alone the red zone and the end zone.       

Year   PPG  rank

2010  17.4 10th  
2011  21.9 30th
2012  17.2 11th
2013  19.0 10th
2014  16.4  2nd
2015  22.6 33rd
2016  20.4 18th
2017  22.7 35th
2018  22.9 38th
2019  27.6 70th

[SamuelMcF]

I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).

Here you go. No exact numbers on 3-and-outs that I saw, but a couple metrics that help paint a picture.

Average offensive TOP under Shaw (FBS rank) - naturally time on defense follows:
2011 33:46 #5
2012 31:40 #23
2013 31:43 #29
2014 32:15 #16
2015 34:45 #2
2016 32:46 #18
2017 30:15 #62
2018 29:51 #66
2019 32:22 #21

Opponent Third Down Conversion % under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 31.1% #7
2012 32.4% #12
2013 32.3% #9
2014 37.8% #37
2015 36.5% #40
2016 36.9% #33
2017 43.2% #97
2018 39.2% #61
2019 46.9% #118

Opponent Punts per Offensive Score under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 1.5 #31T
2012 2.1 #7T
2013 1.5 #19T
2014 2.0 #6
2015 1.1 #56T
2016 1.4 #25T
2017 1.0 #70T
2018 1.0 #66T
2019 0.7 #98T

Opponent 1st Downs per Game under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 16.2 #10
2012 18.1 #20
2013 20.1 #42
2014 17.8 #15
2015 19.1 #35
2016 19.5 #35
2017 20.9 #73
2018 21.4 #75
2019 22.7 #98

Pretty simple conclusions to draw from this. Our defense wasn't even on the field a lot...it was just plain bad.

[SamuelMcF]

I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).

Here you go. No exact numbers on 3-and-outs that I saw, but a couple metrics that help paint a picture.

Average offensive TOP under Shaw (FBS rank) - naturally time on defense follows:
2011 33:46 #5
2012 31:40 #23
2013 31:43 #29
2014 32:15 #16
2015 34:45 #2
2016 32:46 #18
2017 30:15 #62
2018 29:51 #66
2019 32:22 #21

Opponent Third Down Conversion % under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 31.1% #7
2012 32.4% #12
2013 32.3% #9
2014 37.8% #37
2015 36.5% #40
2016 36.9% #33
2017 43.2% #97
2018 39.2% #61
2019 46.9% #118

Opponent Punts per Offensive Score under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 1.5 #31T
2012 2.1 #7T
2013 1.5 #19T
2014 2.0 #6
2015 1.1 #56T
2016 1.4 #25T
2017 1.0 #70T
2018 1.0 #66T
2019 0.7 #98T

Opponent 1st Downs per Game under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 16.2 #10
2012 18.1 #20
2013 20.1 #42
2014 17.8 #15
2015 19.1 #35
2016 19.5 #35
2017 20.9 #73
2018 21.4 #75
2019 22.7 #98

Pretty simple conclusions to draw from this. Our defense wasn't even on the field a lot...it was just plain bad.

[Austroturf]

I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).

Here you go. No exact numbers on 3-and-outs that I saw, but a couple metrics that help paint a picture.

Pretty simple conclusions to draw from this. Our defense wasn't even on the field a lot...it was just plain bad.

Thanks for this comprehensive overview.  And, yes, the trend is clearly down from the early years under Shaw.

[Austroturf]

I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).

Here you go. No exact numbers on 3-and-outs that I saw, but a couple metrics that help paint a picture.

Pretty simple conclusions to draw from this. Our defense wasn't even on the field a lot...it was just plain bad.

Thanks for this comprehensive overview.  And, yes, the trend is clearly down from the early years under Shaw.

[Farm93]

No doubt 2019 was a bad year. 
Whether part of a trend, or just a function of finally falling on the unlucky side of injuries will be revealed over time.

Where we are alone is in recruiting limitations.   The number of fast, strong AND intelligent football players is not growing, and is likely shrinking dramatically thanks to CTE awareness.   The spread attacks designed to simplify the game helps a group of athletes that are unlikely to apply or get accepted by Stanford. 

Stanford was also alone because most Pac-12 programs could have enjoyed Stanford's success while keeping their coach in the program.

Which brings me to...Wilcox.   Wilcox clearly is a miracle worker.   If he can win at UCB with that crew and that administration then he can win anywhere!   I am sure a number of ACC, SEC and NFL teams will be calling soon.   

I can't help but wonder if UCB will discover that they too are not alone.  Jeff Wilcox has never stayed anywhere for more than 4 years in his professional career.   3 years at UCB is probably enough.

[Farm93]

No doubt 2019 was a bad year. 
Whether part of a trend, or just a function of finally falling on the unlucky side of injuries will be revealed over time.

Where we are alone is in recruiting limitations.   The number of fast, strong AND intelligent football players is not growing, and is likely shrinking dramatically thanks to CTE awareness.   The spread attacks designed to simplify the game helps a group of athletes that are unlikely to apply or get accepted by Stanford. 

Stanford was also alone because most Pac-12 programs could have enjoyed Stanford's success while keeping their coach in the program.

Which brings me to...Wilcox.   Wilcox clearly is a miracle worker.   If he can win at UCB with that crew and that administration then he can win anywhere!   I am sure a number of ACC, SEC and NFL teams will be calling soon.   

I can't help but wonder if UCB will discover that they too are not alone.  Jeff Wilcox has never stayed anywhere for more than 4 years in his professional career.   3 years at UCB is probably enough.

[GK3]

I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).

Here you go. No exact numbers on 3-and-outs that I saw, but a couple metrics that help paint a picture.

Average offensive TOP under Shaw (FBS rank) - naturally time on defense follows:
2011 33:46 #5
2012 31:40 #23
2013 31:43 #29
2014 32:15 #16
2015 34:45 #2
2016 32:46 #18
2017 30:15 #62
2018 29:51 #66
2019 32:22 #21

Opponent Third Down Conversion % under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 31.1% #7
2012 32.4% #12
2013 32.3% #9
2014 37.8% #37
2015 36.5% #40
2016 36.9% #33
2017 43.2% #97
2018 39.2% #61
2019 46.9% #118

Opponent Punts per Offensive Score under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 1.5 #31T
2012 2.1 #7T
2013 1.5 #19T
2014 2.0 #6
2015 1.1 #56T
2016 1.4 #25T
2017 1.0 #70T
2018 1.0 #66T
2019 0.7 #98T

Opponent 1st Downs per Game under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 16.2 #10
2012 18.1 #20
2013 20.1 #42
2014 17.8 #15
2015 19.1 #35
2016 19.5 #35
2017 20.9 #73
2018 21.4 #75
2019 22.7 #98

Pretty simple conclusions to draw from this. Our defense wasn't even on the field a lot...it was just plain bad.

FWLIW it seems to me that the defense is the seat of our problems.  While we can use some offensive improvements, with a decent defense we would have won more games and maybe gone to a bowl.  You can't allow opponents to convert nearly 50 percent of their 3rd downs and expect to win when your offense while good to decent isn't world class.  If we had had a few more touches on offense each game, who knows what the results would have been.  Of course we were not the only Pac XII team in the cellar of 3rd down conversion percentages, being joined by Arizona, UCLA, Colorado and OSU.  Utah of course is at the other end of the spectrum.
I am a firm believer that defense wins games first, last and always.  Whether it is talent or coaching, major repairs are needed on defense.  A good defense will keep you in games far longer than a good offense. At least that is my view and I am sticking to it.

[GK3]

I would also be interested to see statistics on how long our defense is on the field these days and how many 3-and-outs they manage versus previous defensive units (but I don't have the stats).

Here you go. No exact numbers on 3-and-outs that I saw, but a couple metrics that help paint a picture.

Average offensive TOP under Shaw (FBS rank) - naturally time on defense follows:
2011 33:46 #5
2012 31:40 #23
2013 31:43 #29
2014 32:15 #16
2015 34:45 #2
2016 32:46 #18
2017 30:15 #62
2018 29:51 #66
2019 32:22 #21

Opponent Third Down Conversion % under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 31.1% #7
2012 32.4% #12
2013 32.3% #9
2014 37.8% #37
2015 36.5% #40
2016 36.9% #33
2017 43.2% #97
2018 39.2% #61
2019 46.9% #118

Opponent Punts per Offensive Score under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 1.5 #31T
2012 2.1 #7T
2013 1.5 #19T
2014 2.0 #6
2015 1.1 #56T
2016 1.4 #25T
2017 1.0 #70T
2018 1.0 #66T
2019 0.7 #98T

Opponent 1st Downs per Game under Shaw (FBS rank):
2011 16.2 #10
2012 18.1 #20
2013 20.1 #42
2014 17.8 #15
2015 19.1 #35
2016 19.5 #35
2017 20.9 #73
2018 21.4 #75
2019 22.7 #98

Pretty simple conclusions to draw from this. Our defense wasn't even on the field a lot...it was just plain bad.

FWLIW it seems to me that the defense is the seat of our problems.  While we can use some offensive improvements, with a decent defense we would have won more games and maybe gone to a bowl.  You can't allow opponents to convert nearly 50 percent of their 3rd downs and expect to win when your offense while good to decent isn't world class.  If we had had a few more touches on offense each game, who knows what the results would have been.  Of course we were not the only Pac XII team in the cellar of 3rd down conversion percentages, being joined by Arizona, UCLA, Colorado and OSU.  Utah of course is at the other end of the spectrum.
I am a firm believer that defense wins games first, last and always.  Whether it is talent or coaching, major repairs are needed on defense.  A good defense will keep you in games far longer than a good offense. At least that is my view and I am sticking to it.

[Goose]

Which brings me to...Wilcox.   Wilcox clearly is a miracle worker.   If he can win at UCB with that crew and that administration then he can win anywhere!   I am sure a number of ACC, SEC and NFL teams will be calling soon.   


I can't help but wonder if UCB will discover that they too are not alone.  Jeff Wilcox has never stayed anywhere for more than 4 years in his professional career.   3 years at UCB is probably enough.

Until two weeks ago, the Cal internet sites were ready to tar and feather Beau Baldwin and Wilcox too if he didn't fire Baldwin. This wasn't just a few haters. This was about everybody. I wouldn't anoint Wilcox just yet. Cal is improved. They are slightly better than we are, and as has been noted here at length, we aren't very good right now. Let's see Cal in The Rose Bowl and then I will buy in. Until then, so far, so good for him.

[Goose]

Which brings me to...Wilcox.   Wilcox clearly is a miracle worker.   If he can win at UCB with that crew and that administration then he can win anywhere!   I am sure a number of ACC, SEC and NFL teams will be calling soon.   


I can't help but wonder if UCB will discover that they too are not alone.  Jeff Wilcox has never stayed anywhere for more than 4 years in his professional career.   3 years at UCB is probably enough.

Until two weeks ago, the Cal internet sites were ready to tar and feather Beau Baldwin and Wilcox too if he didn't fire Baldwin. This wasn't just a few haters. This was about everybody. I wouldn't anoint Wilcox just yet. Cal is improved. They are slightly better than we are, and as has been noted here at length, we aren't very good right now. Let's see Cal in The Rose Bowl and then I will buy in. Until then, so far, so good for him.