[teejers1]

I stand corrected.  I should not have pronounced that I was unwilling to further engage.  I should instead have the courage of my convictions and be prepared to defend what I posted.  To do otherwise would be to contribute to the the declining tone of this board that I had lamented in my message.  For that I apologize.

I thought long and hard about posting that first message.  Emotions are running high.  Many of us are in grief.   This is a sports board, and those of us who come here have lost something that was deeply important to us.  We enjoyed success in football for a number of  years beyond our wildest "dreams," but now seem to have lost it all, as far as football is concerned.  People in grief respond in different ways.  Some of you are angry.  I am simply sad.

Let me clarify a couple of things.  I suspect that Shaw does not have what is needed to turn things around, although I hope I am wrong.  As I said, I am sad--even morose--to have come to that conclusion.  But others are feeling different passions now, and these passions are sometimes expressed in ways that seem less than civil.  And so I am grieving not only for our lost excellence in football, but for the warmth of a community of like minded sports fans.  The atmosphere that made the Cardboard so different from invective-filled sports boards may also be a casualty of the decline of Stanford football. 

The endangerment of football as a sport at Stanford does not seem to have registered on people.  By several accounts, ending the program was considered prior to Harbaugh's hiring.  Even then, the program was not sitting well within a elite academic institution. 

But think of what has happened since then.  There is a growing concern over CTE, there is the professionalization of "student-athletes," the decline of attendance and interest in football in ALL the Bay Area football programs, the rise to stratospheric heights in admissions requirements, the increasing regionalization and concentration in the South of interest in high school football.  Even our nation's growing ideological divide factors into declining interest:  California--and especially the Bay Area--has become increasingly blue and college football doesn't fit that demographic well:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how...litically/

Could we lose football?  Every time a coach is replaced, there is soul-searching about Stanford athletics, but when the most successful coach in Stanford history is replaced there will be more than soul-searching.  In the minds of most of the Stanford community, David Shaw has stood against the rising tide of unfavorable conditions.  His personal example and his reputation as "the conscience of college football" has held back the existential debate over whether Stanford should be in the football business at all.  As the rest of college football gets increasingly slimy, at least Stanford faculty, students, Trustees and fans could rationalize to themselves, "but we are not like the rest of them.  We are resisting those trends.  We have David Shaw.  We have a purpose and that purpose is to show the rest of the nation what college sports really SHOULD look like."  Naive certainly, but charming in its way and oh-so-Stanford-like.  The Camelot of college football. 

But we know what happened to Camelot. 

So I am quite serious when I suggest that the real choice is not between David Shaw and some collage of a coach that people imagine will have all the right characteristics.  The choice could well be between David Shaw and....nothing at all.

Good to hear from you.  Don’t stay away.  I’ve said several times the big issue is Admin.  I don’t think they need much of an excuse to dump football.  Violent. Only men play.  The CTE issue.  

Always felt losing Bowlsby was much bigger than losing Harbaugh.

There have been those that never warmed to Shaw.  No matter how much he won, it should have been more. Or it was actually JH. Boring etc.  

This was never going to last forever. Rationally a coach that has 4 COY’s, the best record of any modern era coach and won more PAC  championships in 5 years then had been won over the previous 40 at a University where football is almost an afterthought, should have built some equity.

 I think your warning is wise - be careful what you wish for.

People need to shake themselves a bit (and I'll include myself in that group). There are some facts/considerations that should inform all of our thinking in these parts:

1.  It's just football;

2.  Shaw, with his all-time high W/L record for Stanford, is also the coach of the team at its all time low in terms of performance and fan interest  (based on some pretty fundamental metrics).  He makes $5-$6M/year base salary and made $9.2M in 2019.  (We won't have specifics for 2020 and this year until the 990s come out for those years).  He's neither a saint, nor a villain. Shaw is a football coach.  

3.  Stanford dumping football is not as easy as some here would make it out to be.  There will be Title IX ramifications, most notably (if I understand things correctly) a parallel required drop of women's scholarship sports at Stanford.  If Stanford dumps football, I don't think it will be for competitive reasons, per se, but rather based on a determination that playing it in NIL world (and with increased CTE concerns) is not consistent with the university's mission.  I'm not saying Stanford Football is here forever - or even for the next 10 years - I am saying that its duration on campus will not be tied to whether or not Shaw is the head coach.

4.  Shaw is not going anywhere . . . unless he decides to resign or move on.  Thus, the fortunes of Stanford football depend on him hiring great assistants and giving them the autonomy to do their jobs.  Based on history, it's hard to be optimistic on that front, but we shall see.

[teejers1]

I stand corrected.  I should not have pronounced that I was unwilling to further engage.  I should instead have the courage of my convictions and be prepared to defend what I posted.  To do otherwise would be to contribute to the the declining tone of this board that I had lamented in my message.  For that I apologize.

I thought long and hard about posting that first message.  Emotions are running high.  Many of us are in grief.   This is a sports board, and those of us who come here have lost something that was deeply important to us.  We enjoyed success in football for a number of  years beyond our wildest "dreams," but now seem to have lost it all, as far as football is concerned.  People in grief respond in different ways.  Some of you are angry.  I am simply sad.

Let me clarify a couple of things.  I suspect that Shaw does not have what is needed to turn things around, although I hope I am wrong.  As I said, I am sad--even morose--to have come to that conclusion.  But others are feeling different passions now, and these passions are sometimes expressed in ways that seem less than civil.  And so I am grieving not only for our lost excellence in football, but for the warmth of a community of like minded sports fans.  The atmosphere that made the Cardboard so different from invective-filled sports boards may also be a casualty of the decline of Stanford football. 

The endangerment of football as a sport at Stanford does not seem to have registered on people.  By several accounts, ending the program was considered prior to Harbaugh's hiring.  Even then, the program was not sitting well within a elite academic institution. 

But think of what has happened since then.  There is a growing concern over CTE, there is the professionalization of "student-athletes," the decline of attendance and interest in football in ALL the Bay Area football programs, the rise to stratospheric heights in admissions requirements, the increasing regionalization and concentration in the South of interest in high school football.  Even our nation's growing ideological divide factors into declining interest:  California--and especially the Bay Area--has become increasingly blue and college football doesn't fit that demographic well:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how...litically/

Could we lose football?  Every time a coach is replaced, there is soul-searching about Stanford athletics, but when the most successful coach in Stanford history is replaced there will be more than soul-searching.  In the minds of most of the Stanford community, David Shaw has stood against the rising tide of unfavorable conditions.  His personal example and his reputation as "the conscience of college football" has held back the existential debate over whether Stanford should be in the football business at all.  As the rest of college football gets increasingly slimy, at least Stanford faculty, students, Trustees and fans could rationalize to themselves, "but we are not like the rest of them.  We are resisting those trends.  We have David Shaw.  We have a purpose and that purpose is to show the rest of the nation what college sports really SHOULD look like."  Naive certainly, but charming in its way and oh-so-Stanford-like.  The Camelot of college football. 

But we know what happened to Camelot. 

So I am quite serious when I suggest that the real choice is not between David Shaw and some collage of a coach that people imagine will have all the right characteristics.  The choice could well be between David Shaw and....nothing at all.

Good to hear from you.  Don’t stay away.  I’ve said several times the big issue is Admin.  I don’t think they need much of an excuse to dump football.  Violent. Only men play.  The CTE issue.  

Always felt losing Bowlsby was much bigger than losing Harbaugh.

There have been those that never warmed to Shaw.  No matter how much he won, it should have been more. Or it was actually JH. Boring etc.  

This was never going to last forever. Rationally a coach that has 4 COY’s, the best record of any modern era coach and won more PAC  championships in 5 years then had been won over the previous 40 at a University where football is almost an afterthought, should have built some equity.

 I think your warning is wise - be careful what you wish for.

People need to shake themselves a bit (and I'll include myself in that group). There are some facts/considerations that should inform all of our thinking in these parts:

1.  It's just football;

2.  Shaw, with his all-time high W/L record for Stanford, is also the coach of the team at its all time low in terms of performance and fan interest  (based on some pretty fundamental metrics).  He makes $5-$6M/year base salary and made $9.2M in 2019.  (We won't have specifics for 2020 and this year until the 990s come out for those years).  He's neither a saint, nor a villain. Shaw is a football coach.  

3.  Stanford dumping football is not as easy as some here would make it out to be.  There will be Title IX ramifications, most notably (if I understand things correctly) a parallel required drop of women's scholarship sports at Stanford.  If Stanford dumps football, I don't think it will be for competitive reasons, per se, but rather based on a determination that playing it in NIL world (and with increased CTE concerns) is not consistent with the university's mission.  I'm not saying Stanford Football is here forever - or even for the next 10 years - I am saying that its duration on campus will not be tied to whether or not Shaw is the head coach.

4.  Shaw is not going anywhere . . . unless he decides to resign or move on.  Thus, the fortunes of Stanford football depend on him hiring great assistants and giving them the autonomy to do their jobs.  Based on history, it's hard to be optimistic on that front, but we shall see.