[BostonCard]

I agree, directionally. I think that what is missing is the culture of the program, team, offense, and position groups. This plays into each of the things you highlighted. How much effort are the players putting into training, film study, etc.? Do the guys who are calling the plays know how to leverage their advantages in advance of the games to prepare the players to have favorable matchups? We've seen teams with inferior talent outperform teams with superior talent, sometimes consistently (e.g., Utah vs Stanford). I think the problems with Stanford indeed have to do with slipping recruiting and unimpressive play calling, but it seems to me that it also has to do with a culture of complacency.

I think that is fair, and unfortunately something I couldn’t capture in my simplifying assumptions. The inspiration for the question was the interview with Shaw, where Sam asked what realistic answer were we expecting from Shaw, and my mind turned to “if we could get one thing out of Shaw, what would it be?”  Would I rather have him revamp his approach to recruiting and player development but remain as the play caller or would I be happier if he replaced himself with a new offensive coordinator but continued with the recruiting strategy that gave us the players we have.  My answer here should provide some insight into my beliefs and why I am a bit more sanguine than most about the medium term prospects for the team.  I think if David Shaw can nail class of 2022 quality classes (both quality and depth) year in and year out, I think in the long term we will be ok, even if Pritchard stays as OC and Shaw continues to call plays. But if we continue to have very inconsistent recruiting classes, with significant holes at key positions, such that we get destroyed on both lines, I don’t care if Bear Bryant comes in to take the play-calling, we aren’t going to beat any of their-uns.

BC

[BostonCard]

I agree, directionally. I think that what is missing is the culture of the program, team, offense, and position groups. This plays into each of the things you highlighted. How much effort are the players putting into training, film study, etc.? Do the guys who are calling the plays know how to leverage their advantages in advance of the games to prepare the players to have favorable matchups? We've seen teams with inferior talent outperform teams with superior talent, sometimes consistently (e.g., Utah vs Stanford). I think the problems with Stanford indeed have to do with slipping recruiting and unimpressive play calling, but it seems to me that it also has to do with a culture of complacency.

I think that is fair, and unfortunately something I couldn’t capture in my simplifying assumptions. The inspiration for the question was the interview with Shaw, where Sam asked what realistic answer were we expecting from Shaw, and my mind turned to “if we could get one thing out of Shaw, what would it be?”  Would I rather have him revamp his approach to recruiting and player development but remain as the play caller or would I be happier if he replaced himself with a new offensive coordinator but continued with the recruiting strategy that gave us the players we have.  My answer here should provide some insight into my beliefs and why I am a bit more sanguine than most about the medium term prospects for the team.  I think if David Shaw can nail class of 2022 quality classes (both quality and depth) year in and year out, I think in the long term we will be ok, even if Pritchard stays as OC and Shaw continues to call plays. But if we continue to have very inconsistent recruiting classes, with significant holes at key positions, such that we get destroyed on both lines, I don’t care if Bear Bryant comes in to take the play-calling, we aren’t going to beat any of their-uns.

BC