[murky]

Speaking of Oregon and Aliotti, two of the greatest wins in Stanford football history were against Oregon in '12 and '13. UO was ranked #1 when SU beat them in Eugene, 17-14. One year later, #3 Oregon, averaging 55 points and 600 yards per game, was bludgeoned to death on national TV by a Stanford offense that held the ball for an astonishing 43 minutes. One of my all-time favorite Stanford football memories was watching virtually all of the many Oregon fans exiting the stadium by the end of the 3rd quarter.

IMHO David Shaw would bring back that offense if he could. He can't, because the players don't exist anymore, or to the extent they do they are not going to attend Stanford. High School football has gone toward the spread option and the passing game. The rules have done the same. There aren't a lot of big power backs out there. Offensive coordinators don't want to run that system because there is no glory in it, no big name and no NFL/Head 


Coach job. Players don't want to play in that system because it is viewed as a dead end. What happened 10 years ago is not available to Stanford and more. I think Shaw actively prefers that style (obviously I haven't been able to ask him myself). He has been forced to change over the last 6 or so years not necessarily because he wanted to but because he had to.


Everything above could have been stated 10 years ago, and Shaw proved it wrong. And there are plenty of "Thumpers'" out there, big backs who would love to run downhill 30+ times a game. To say that Power O doesn't translate to the NFL is not true. There are elements of the offense that are used by just about every NFL team. The Power O system, however stigmatized, is more nuanced and has elements of finesse that the average fan is not aware of. The main reason(s) Shaw has drifted away from the Power O are injuries, recruiting mistakes, and lazy-a$$ recruiting. There's no good reason why it can't return. I'm all for tweaking the offense, especially if the right personnel comes along, but the at the crux has to be a punishing ground game that controls the clock, tempo, and assists Stanford's defense by keeping them off the field. 

Shaw has only proven that with superior players handed to him he can win playing his plodding style of offense.  THAT is what he has proven.

Well, that and that he has an uncanny ability to make some of the worst game management decisions in Stanford history.

He has shown no ability to sustain anything, particularly with his own players; he has shown no ability to out-coach an opponent.  The Oregon game mentioned above is the closest thing to that, but I believe that was necessity, as opposed to some deep/clever thinking.  Indeed, in that game Stanford had no choice.  It had no other kind of offense other than slamming a RB into the line play after play after play.  Did I support it at the time?  Yes, absolutely, because it gave Stanford its best chance to win. 3+ yards a carry for 40+ minutes.   Remarkable.  Do I think it was a great offensive scheme?  No.  Same holds for the season Bryce Love went wild on 50+ yard TD scampers.  Handing the ball off to Bryce and hoping he makes a house call is not a great offensive scheme.  And when Bryce went down with (a predictable injury), we saw what remained of that offensive scheme.  Give me the guy running the O show at Purdue (or maybe even Wake).  Do they have superior athletes.  Do they rely on a generational talent to win games?  The point is that there are lots of "non-gimmicky" coaches out there who can install a real offense and understand game management far better than the current guy.  And oh yeah, it might . . . just might encourage fans to show up and watch (though that horse may have left the barn too long ago to retrieve).

From 2015-2018, 5 years removed from the previous head coach, Stanford averaged 10 wins per season under Shaw over those 4 years.  Who handed him those players?

[murky]

Speaking of Oregon and Aliotti, two of the greatest wins in Stanford football history were against Oregon in '12 and '13. UO was ranked #1 when SU beat them in Eugene, 17-14. One year later, #3 Oregon, averaging 55 points and 600 yards per game, was bludgeoned to death on national TV by a Stanford offense that held the ball for an astonishing 43 minutes. One of my all-time favorite Stanford football memories was watching virtually all of the many Oregon fans exiting the stadium by the end of the 3rd quarter.

IMHO David Shaw would bring back that offense if he could. He can't, because the players don't exist anymore, or to the extent they do they are not going to attend Stanford. High School football has gone toward the spread option and the passing game. The rules have done the same. There aren't a lot of big power backs out there. Offensive coordinators don't want to run that system because there is no glory in it, no big name and no NFL/Head 


Coach job. Players don't want to play in that system because it is viewed as a dead end. What happened 10 years ago is not available to Stanford and more. I think Shaw actively prefers that style (obviously I haven't been able to ask him myself). He has been forced to change over the last 6 or so years not necessarily because he wanted to but because he had to.


Everything above could have been stated 10 years ago, and Shaw proved it wrong. And there are plenty of "Thumpers'" out there, big backs who would love to run downhill 30+ times a game. To say that Power O doesn't translate to the NFL is not true. There are elements of the offense that are used by just about every NFL team. The Power O system, however stigmatized, is more nuanced and has elements of finesse that the average fan is not aware of. The main reason(s) Shaw has drifted away from the Power O are injuries, recruiting mistakes, and lazy-a$$ recruiting. There's no good reason why it can't return. I'm all for tweaking the offense, especially if the right personnel comes along, but the at the crux has to be a punishing ground game that controls the clock, tempo, and assists Stanford's defense by keeping them off the field. 

Shaw has only proven that with superior players handed to him he can win playing his plodding style of offense.  THAT is what he has proven.

Well, that and that he has an uncanny ability to make some of the worst game management decisions in Stanford history.

He has shown no ability to sustain anything, particularly with his own players; he has shown no ability to out-coach an opponent.  The Oregon game mentioned above is the closest thing to that, but I believe that was necessity, as opposed to some deep/clever thinking.  Indeed, in that game Stanford had no choice.  It had no other kind of offense other than slamming a RB into the line play after play after play.  Did I support it at the time?  Yes, absolutely, because it gave Stanford its best chance to win. 3+ yards a carry for 40+ minutes.   Remarkable.  Do I think it was a great offensive scheme?  No.  Same holds for the season Bryce Love went wild on 50+ yard TD scampers.  Handing the ball off to Bryce and hoping he makes a house call is not a great offensive scheme.  And when Bryce went down with (a predictable injury), we saw what remained of that offensive scheme.  Give me the guy running the O show at Purdue (or maybe even Wake).  Do they have superior athletes.  Do they rely on a generational talent to win games?  The point is that there are lots of "non-gimmicky" coaches out there who can install a real offense and understand game management far better than the current guy.  And oh yeah, it might . . . just might encourage fans to show up and watch (though that horse may have left the barn too long ago to retrieve).

From 2015-2018, 5 years removed from the previous head coach, Stanford averaged 10 wins per season under Shaw over those 4 years.  Who handed him those players?