So, I think your concern is that, while you prefer Stanford football now, you feel Stanford is losing a cultural competitive edge, that the cultural competitive advantage came from Harbaugh's "enthusiasm unknown to mankind" style and that Shaw's understated, calm personality is the cause of losing that cultural advantage?
First, I will say, I admire Harbaugh. I really do think he is crazy, but I think there only a few extraordinary coaches who could have turned around Stanford's Teevens-Harris era as quickly as he did.
And to my recollection, Stanford tried very hard to retain Harbaugh.
But I think we're agreeing that Harbaugh wasn't the right long-term coach for Stanford. One of the arguments against Harbaugh is that he wears out his welcome after a few years. Another argument is that he gets close, but he has never captured the prize, both as a player as a coach. He went to the Rose Bowl as a player, did not win, and never made it as a coach. He made it to the AFC championship game as a player, and to the Super Bowl as a coach, but did not win. I think it actually makes it worse for the players that he gets so close time and time again without winning the big one.
As for David Shaw, he has gone to 3 Rose Bowls and won 2. I would pick my favorite Stanford game (since 1991) as the 2016 Rose Bowl (I recognize many may say the USC upset). And that was a team with Shaw-recruited players.
Now, as for losing the intellectual brutality label? I think every leader is different, and has a different style. Yes, of course, stylistically, Shaw is like the opposite of Harbaugh. I think to some degree Stanford may attract different players, who will play a different way. But I just think that's the way leadership and people are. I think it would be a mistake to try to follow one successful coach with someone whose personality seems most like the previous coach's. I think Stanford followed one great coach with another great coach, which is the most important similarity.
So yes, the culture is different, the style is different, to some extent, we'll get some recruits we didn't get before and may lose some recruits we would've gotten before, but I am OK with that. I had the feeling Luck preferred Shaw and may not have stayed that year if Harbaugh hadn't left. But are we losing intellectual brutality? I've missed the style the last 2 games, but I am counting an awful lot of pancakes this season. Was that Herbig who just totalled some guy while pulling during the SD State game?
Do I think the USC and SD State losses (or even the Northwestern loss) stem from Stanford being less physical or less committed? I do not. I think you're pretty much always gonna lose some games. And many teams in the Pac 12 are resurgent. I think SD State is a pretty good team. And I do think the losses of Randy Hart and Pep Hamilton are significant and sometimes you lose irreplaceable assistants and sometimes you gain Duane Akina..
But I think it's perfectly natural and actually a good thing that Shaw has his own way of doing things.
First, I will say, I admire Harbaugh. I really do think he is crazy, but I think there only a few extraordinary coaches who could have turned around Stanford's Teevens-Harris era as quickly as he did.
And to my recollection, Stanford tried very hard to retain Harbaugh.
But I think we're agreeing that Harbaugh wasn't the right long-term coach for Stanford. One of the arguments against Harbaugh is that he wears out his welcome after a few years. Another argument is that he gets close, but he has never captured the prize, both as a player as a coach. He went to the Rose Bowl as a player, did not win, and never made it as a coach. He made it to the AFC championship game as a player, and to the Super Bowl as a coach, but did not win. I think it actually makes it worse for the players that he gets so close time and time again without winning the big one.
As for David Shaw, he has gone to 3 Rose Bowls and won 2. I would pick my favorite Stanford game (since 1991) as the 2016 Rose Bowl (I recognize many may say the USC upset). And that was a team with Shaw-recruited players.
Now, as for losing the intellectual brutality label? I think every leader is different, and has a different style. Yes, of course, stylistically, Shaw is like the opposite of Harbaugh. I think to some degree Stanford may attract different players, who will play a different way. But I just think that's the way leadership and people are. I think it would be a mistake to try to follow one successful coach with someone whose personality seems most like the previous coach's. I think Stanford followed one great coach with another great coach, which is the most important similarity.
So yes, the culture is different, the style is different, to some extent, we'll get some recruits we didn't get before and may lose some recruits we would've gotten before, but I am OK with that. I had the feeling Luck preferred Shaw and may not have stayed that year if Harbaugh hadn't left. But are we losing intellectual brutality? I've missed the style the last 2 games, but I am counting an awful lot of pancakes this season. Was that Herbig who just totalled some guy while pulling during the SD State game?
Do I think the USC and SD State losses (or even the Northwestern loss) stem from Stanford being less physical or less committed? I do not. I think you're pretty much always gonna lose some games. And many teams in the Pac 12 are resurgent. I think SD State is a pretty good team. And I do think the losses of Randy Hart and Pep Hamilton are significant and sometimes you lose irreplaceable assistants and sometimes you gain Duane Akina..
But I think it's perfectly natural and actually a good thing that Shaw has his own way of doing things.