[teejers1]

I won't recommend replacing him with somebody who I think might be better or I hope would be better or that could perhaps be better. Would you? 

Yes, I would, because we know what we have with the current guy.  He took charge of Stanford Football when it was at its apex and presided over its decline to its lowest point ever (or as Stewart Mandel at The Athletic said, "rock bottom.").  I know BC and others think we've had worse runs, but I know what my eyes tell me vis a vis the play on the field and the interest in the stands, and I believe we're at the low point . . . certainly of my lifetime.

And sure, almost any hire - certainly the ones Stanford would consider at its salary point - will be a roll of the dice; but when you're desperate to bring hope back to the program, you should be more willing to roll 'em.

[teejers1]

I won't recommend replacing him with somebody who I think might be better or I hope would be better or that could perhaps be better. Would you? 

Yes, I would, because we know what we have with the current guy.  He took charge of Stanford Football when it was at its apex and presided over its decline to its lowest point ever (or as Stewart Mandel at The Athletic said, "rock bottom.").  I know BC and others think we've had worse runs, but I know what my eyes tell me vis a vis the play on the field and the interest in the stands, and I believe we're at the low point . . . certainly of my lifetime.

And sure, almost any hire - certainly the ones Stanford would consider at its salary point - will be a roll of the dice; but when you're desperate to bring hope back to the program, you should be more willing to roll 'em.