[teejers1]

Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9.  You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

BC, the credit you give Shaw for Harbs' full cupboard is astounding.

I also think his truly effing HORRIBLE game management, which has been going on for years and years, has numbed your mind.  You no longer even appreciate what a competently run offense looks like because we've been force-fed the worst game management in the history of Stanford football for so long now.  You would be shocked at what a competent offensive mind could do with the talent on the O side of the ball, even acknowledging mediocre O-line play.  And there are competent offensive minds all over the college football landscape, in D1, DII, DIII.  

And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires.  It is killing this program, and our fearless leader simply shrugs and looks for the next good play call on 2nd and 26 . . . an off tackle run for 3 yards.  Hand me the Sears Cup, I think I'm going to puke.

Again, every single one of us has had our sensory perception of good football bludgeoned to nothingness by this regime.  It's sad.  In so many ways - too many to count, really.

P.S.  None of the above is to let the D off the hook.  They've been pretty bad, too (though perhaps less bad relative to talent).  But seriously, why even bother rushing 3 on pass plays.  It is utterly hopeless.

Fine, start the clock in 2016, and Shaw still has as many winning seasons (4) than we had in the 80's (2) and 2000's (2) combined.  But sure, let's credit everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh.

BC

There is a difference between "credit[ing] everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh" and recognizing that what Shaw inherited at Stanford is not a great measure of Shaw at sea level.  I think we are getting a much clearer picture of what sea level is now for David Shaw.  (And it's not 2011-2015).  

And btw, we weren't paying coaches in the 80s and 2000s what Stanford is paying its HC now.  Thus, I think the "continuity" factor that you say works against all non-Shaw candidates is not the same as it was (certainly not as big a flight risk).  I mean, if you loved coaching college football; and you were making $5+M/year (and Shaw makes MORE than that now), don't you think Stanford would be a very attractive program to run?

Now, maybe you think what we've seen 2016 on is about as good as Stanford fans can expect on a "regular" basis.  And maybe that's a reasonable (if not an optimistic) position.  Moreover, maybe you even think that level of play justifies the wage we've read about.  Fewer people probably do, but let's not pretend they're unrelated things.

[teejers1]

Get used to it? Impossible. That's why I discontinued season tix (after 48 years) and cut off Buck Club donations. Lousy ROI. I am now a knot-hole kibitzer. A patron no more.

I would never begrudge someone who finds they would rather do something else than watch football, but 48 years of season tickets means that since 1972, when you started, you've witnessed 26 winning seasons of Stanford football if my math is right, of which Shaw has delivered 9.  You kept your season tickets through the decade of the of 80's when despite having John Elway, we had exactly 2 winning seasons (in 1980 and 1986) and endured 1-10 in 1983 and 3-8 in 1989, and then again went right through renewing your season tickets in the 2000's, enduring Buddy and Wlat, including 1-11 in 2006, and only getting winning seasons at the beginning (Willingham's fairwell 2001 season) and end (Harbaugh's 2009 Sun Bowl season) of the decade, and then, after Shaw may be headed to his second losing season in 11 years you decide "nah, I'm done here".

BC

BC, the credit you give Shaw for Harbs' full cupboard is astounding.

I also think his truly effing HORRIBLE game management, which has been going on for years and years, has numbed your mind.  You no longer even appreciate what a competently run offense looks like because we've been force-fed the worst game management in the history of Stanford football for so long now.  You would be shocked at what a competent offensive mind could do with the talent on the O side of the ball, even acknowledging mediocre O-line play.  And there are competent offensive minds all over the college football landscape, in D1, DII, DIII.  

And btw, a big reason for that O mediocrity is guys bailing on Shaw's teams before their eligibility expires.  It is killing this program, and our fearless leader simply shrugs and looks for the next good play call on 2nd and 26 . . . an off tackle run for 3 yards.  Hand me the Sears Cup, I think I'm going to puke.

Again, every single one of us has had our sensory perception of good football bludgeoned to nothingness by this regime.  It's sad.  In so many ways - too many to count, really.

P.S.  None of the above is to let the D off the hook.  They've been pretty bad, too (though perhaps less bad relative to talent).  But seriously, why even bother rushing 3 on pass plays.  It is utterly hopeless.

Fine, start the clock in 2016, and Shaw still has as many winning seasons (4) than we had in the 80's (2) and 2000's (2) combined.  But sure, let's credit everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh.

BC

There is a difference between "credit[ing] everything Shaw has done to Harbaugh" and recognizing that what Shaw inherited at Stanford is not a great measure of Shaw at sea level.  I think we are getting a much clearer picture of what sea level is now for David Shaw.  (And it's not 2011-2015).  

And btw, we weren't paying coaches in the 80s and 2000s what Stanford is paying its HC now.  Thus, I think the "continuity" factor that you say works against all non-Shaw candidates is not the same as it was (certainly not as big a flight risk).  I mean, if you loved coaching college football; and you were making $5+M/year (and Shaw makes MORE than that now), don't you think Stanford would be a very attractive program to run?

Now, maybe you think what we've seen 2016 on is about as good as Stanford fans can expect on a "regular" basis.  And maybe that's a reasonable (if not an optimistic) position.  Moreover, maybe you even think that level of play justifies the wage we've read about.  Fewer people probably do, but let's not pretend they're unrelated things.