[JohnR34231]

I mean, I'm hopeful for Haase as well, but until he develops the team into a consistent winner, I would take Shaw's results (warts and all) all day every day before I take Haase's. I mean, Haase has had four seasons at Stanford and the furthest he's ever gotten was the second round of the NIT (he got cheated out of a return by coronavirus).  The guy has exactly one winning Pac-12 season, which is exactly how many losing seasons Shaw has.

Maybe in three or four years, after Haase has made it deep into the NCAA tourney a couple times and Shaw has gone bowl-less several times, it would be time to re-assess, but for goodness sakes, let's actually see proof that Haase can lead the program to the tourney before we anoint him as the more likely to be successful coach.

BC

Yeah, I agree it is a little premature to jump on the "Shaw sucks, Haase looks promising." bandwagon.
I also think the "Shaw has taken a Ferrari and turned it into a Yugo." argument is somewhat overdone.

[JohnR34231]

I mean, I'm hopeful for Haase as well, but until he develops the team into a consistent winner, I would take Shaw's results (warts and all) all day every day before I take Haase's. I mean, Haase has had four seasons at Stanford and the furthest he's ever gotten was the second round of the NIT (he got cheated out of a return by coronavirus).  The guy has exactly one winning Pac-12 season, which is exactly how many losing seasons Shaw has.

Maybe in three or four years, after Haase has made it deep into the NCAA tourney a couple times and Shaw has gone bowl-less several times, it would be time to re-assess, but for goodness sakes, let's actually see proof that Haase can lead the program to the tourney before we anoint him as the more likely to be successful coach.

BC

Yeah, I agree it is a little premature to jump on the "Shaw sucks, Haase looks promising." bandwagon.
I also think the "Shaw has taken a Ferrari and turned it into a Yugo." argument is somewhat overdone.