[teejers1]

if Stanford is paying Tavita Pritchard $900k-$1.5m he's never leaving...

Tavita Pritchard became offensive coordinator in 2018. Here are the FPI efficiency rankings for offense, defense and special teams since then:

2018: offense 15; defense 37, special teams 8
2019: 60, 90, 41
2020 (six games): 18, 96, 16
2021 (three games): 26, 69, 17

So in the Pritchard era, the offense has ranked better than the defense every year, even in that putrid 2019 year when our starting QB and most of our OL were injured. On the other hand, the special teams has ranked better than the offense each year.

I know I'm spitting metaphorically in the wind, but we are spending way too much time bellyaching about the offense, IMO.

Maybe yes; maybe no.
I'll agree that the O has performed better than the D, insofar as its place in D1 football rankings.
But for the numbers to have real meaning, I think you need to account for level of recruits on O vs. D.  My sense is that Stanford recruits FAR more highly-rated O players than D players; thus, they should perform better on O than D, all other things being equal (and I'm not suggesting all other things are equal).

[teejers1]

if Stanford is paying Tavita Pritchard $900k-$1.5m he's never leaving...

Tavita Pritchard became offensive coordinator in 2018. Here are the FPI efficiency rankings for offense, defense and special teams since then:

2018: offense 15; defense 37, special teams 8
2019: 60, 90, 41
2020 (six games): 18, 96, 16
2021 (three games): 26, 69, 17

So in the Pritchard era, the offense has ranked better than the defense every year, even in that putrid 2019 year when our starting QB and most of our OL were injured. On the other hand, the special teams has ranked better than the offense each year.

I know I'm spitting metaphorically in the wind, but we are spending way too much time bellyaching about the offense, IMO.

Maybe yes; maybe no.
I'll agree that the O has performed better than the D, insofar as its place in D1 football rankings.
But for the numbers to have real meaning, I think you need to account for level of recruits on O vs. D.  My sense is that Stanford recruits FAR more highly-rated O players than D players; thus, they should perform better on O than D, all other things being equal (and I'm not suggesting all other things are equal).