[BostonCard]

I don't really care if Shaw stays or goes at this point, but the fact you guys all act like he is his own boss, free to remain coach as long as he wants, like he calls the shots, suggests the David Shaw tail wags the Stanford dog. This idea is absurd, and if true, it's completely unhinged.

It's akin to allowing Mark Zuckerberg to run his evil company with nobody having the ability to take him out. Think maybe if he was accountable to others, maybe his company would be less awful?

Not sure what Zuckerberg or his “evil”  company has to do with anything.  I also don’t know of anyone saying that Shaw gets to call his own shots etc.  

I do hear people (including me) saying he’s not going anywhere anytime soon. Which I suspect to be true. OTOH, Shanahan may be available soon…… :)

Forgetting the editorializing about Facebook (excuse me, Meta), I think the point was that because of the voting structure at Facebook, Zuckerberg is unaccountable to anyone else.  Like Zuckerberg, Shaw owns a disproportionate number of the voting shares at Stanford, and thus is unaccountable, or something.  Which is a joke, because even though his 11 year coaching record has earned him a fair bit of job security (probably more than most here would be comfortable with, but which, let’s be honest, we’d all like to have for ourselves), the truth is that Shaw would be held to account if he assaulted a player on the sidelines, if he tried to claim an exemption from the Stanford vaccination mandate, if he otherwise embarrassed the university, or if he went through a prolonged period of poor results (accent on prolonged).  The powers that be have concluded that leading the program to nine winning seasons, three Rose Bowls, and four PAC-12 North championships, all while sporting a conference best graduation rate has earned the coach a little slack when the program takes a (hopefully temporary) dive and has two losing seasons over three years (I am assuming Shaw cannot salvage a winning season this year, though technically, 7-6 is still on the table). I think the issue is many people here believe that Shaw cannot pullout of what they see as a tailspin, and that there is no reason to believe that the next five years will be much different than the last three.  They may well be right; I don’t claim to be able to predict the future.  But alas, the AD, the Provost, and the President have not yet concluded it is hopeless, and thus are not going to fire Shaw anything soon.  But I think OF mistakes the AD’s patience with a lack of accountability for Shaw, and I don’t think that is right.

BC

[BostonCard]

I don't really care if Shaw stays or goes at this point, but the fact you guys all act like he is his own boss, free to remain coach as long as he wants, like he calls the shots, suggests the David Shaw tail wags the Stanford dog. This idea is absurd, and if true, it's completely unhinged.

It's akin to allowing Mark Zuckerberg to run his evil company with nobody having the ability to take him out. Think maybe if he was accountable to others, maybe his company would be less awful?

Not sure what Zuckerberg or his “evil”  company has to do with anything.  I also don’t know of anyone saying that Shaw gets to call his own shots etc.  

I do hear people (including me) saying he’s not going anywhere anytime soon. Which I suspect to be true. OTOH, Shanahan may be available soon…… :)

Forgetting the editorializing about Facebook (excuse me, Meta), I think the point was that because of the voting structure at Facebook, Zuckerberg is unaccountable to anyone else.  Like Zuckerberg, Shaw owns a disproportionate number of the voting shares at Stanford, and thus is unaccountable, or something.  Which is a joke, because even though his 11 year coaching record has earned him a fair bit of job security (probably more than most here would be comfortable with, but which, let’s be honest, we’d all like to have for ourselves), the truth is that Shaw would be held to account if he assaulted a player on the sidelines, if he tried to claim an exemption from the Stanford vaccination mandate, if he otherwise embarrassed the university, or if he went through a prolonged period of poor results (accent on prolonged).  The powers that be have concluded that leading the program to nine winning seasons, three Rose Bowls, and four PAC-12 North championships, all while sporting a conference best graduation rate has earned the coach a little slack when the program takes a (hopefully temporary) dive and has two losing seasons over three years (I am assuming Shaw cannot salvage a winning season this year, though technically, 7-6 is still on the table). I think the issue is many people here believe that Shaw cannot pullout of what they see as a tailspin, and that there is no reason to believe that the next five years will be much different than the last three.  They may well be right; I don’t claim to be able to predict the future.  But alas, the AD, the Provost, and the President have not yet concluded it is hopeless, and thus are not going to fire Shaw anything soon.  But I think OF mistakes the AD’s patience with a lack of accountability for Shaw, and I don’t think that is right.

BC