[BostonCard]

AYFKM Teejers?

David Shaw: 92-38, conference record 64-31, post-season record 5-3; PAC-12 titles: 3
Jerod Haase: 95-83, conference record 50-54, post-season record 1-1 (a single NIT bid); PAC-12 titles: 0.  Best finish: 3rd in conference

Even if you truncate Shaw’s record to 2016, when Haase started, Shaw has a 22-20 conference record, which is, at least, a winning record.  Haase has a losing conference record and has had exactly one winning conference seqson in his entire tenure at Stanford (we might limp to a second winning conference record this year); Shaw has done it all but two years in his tenure, including 4 times in the last six years. 

Even if you adopt a what have you done for me lately attitude, the last time Shaw went to a Bowl game was in 2018.  The last time Haase went to the NCAA tournament, he was coaching for UAB and Shaw was taking us to the Rose Bowl.

You have to have a very selective three year horizon to look at Haase’s record versus Shaw’s and conclude that they are remotely in the same ballpark.  You can put them in the same league when Haase takes us to the postseason 8 out of the next 11 years.

BC

---

You're really reaching trying to equate the two. One has coached for over a decade, resulting in some incredible seasons, some really solid seasons, and 2 really bad seasons. The other hasn't done squat. It may turn out that Shaw has seen his best days, but the overall bodies of work of these two coaches are nowhere close.

How long before the "overall body of work" no longer suffices as an argument? 2 more years of crap? 3? 5? 10?

Sort of depends, I guess, on how bad the crap smells. If he only wins a couple games for 2 straight years, then yes, IMO the "overall body of work" argument is out the window. But he could go .500 for a bunch of years before the AD would act. 

Backatcha - what's your take on the counter question? What would it take for him to get back in everyone's good graces? If he wins the P12 north in the next 3 years, is that enough? What is?

If he wins the P12 north in the next 3 years, that would both surprise the ever-loving s*** out of me and certainly buy him a lot more time. I just have zero faith that happens.

The other question is whether he wins the P12 north and the other 2 seasons are still crap...what then? I don't know if we've really seen examples of teams doing that, though.

Didn't Willingham do something like that, in the Pac 10.  Went to the Rose Bowl after 2 losing seasons.

Rose Bowl in the 2020 season followed 5-6 and 3-8 seasons and an Epic loss to Texas.  The year after the Rose Bowl was also a losing season (5-6), and a Seattle Bowl season the following year was enough to get him the Notre Dame job.

BC

[BostonCard]

AYFKM Teejers?

David Shaw: 92-38, conference record 64-31, post-season record 5-3; PAC-12 titles: 3
Jerod Haase: 95-83, conference record 50-54, post-season record 1-1 (a single NIT bid); PAC-12 titles: 0.  Best finish: 3rd in conference

Even if you truncate Shaw’s record to 2016, when Haase started, Shaw has a 22-20 conference record, which is, at least, a winning record.  Haase has a losing conference record and has had exactly one winning conference seqson in his entire tenure at Stanford (we might limp to a second winning conference record this year); Shaw has done it all but two years in his tenure, including 4 times in the last six years. 

Even if you adopt a what have you done for me lately attitude, the last time Shaw went to a Bowl game was in 2018.  The last time Haase went to the NCAA tournament, he was coaching for UAB and Shaw was taking us to the Rose Bowl.

You have to have a very selective three year horizon to look at Haase’s record versus Shaw’s and conclude that they are remotely in the same ballpark.  You can put them in the same league when Haase takes us to the postseason 8 out of the next 11 years.

BC

---

You're really reaching trying to equate the two. One has coached for over a decade, resulting in some incredible seasons, some really solid seasons, and 2 really bad seasons. The other hasn't done squat. It may turn out that Shaw has seen his best days, but the overall bodies of work of these two coaches are nowhere close.

How long before the "overall body of work" no longer suffices as an argument? 2 more years of crap? 3? 5? 10?

Sort of depends, I guess, on how bad the crap smells. If he only wins a couple games for 2 straight years, then yes, IMO the "overall body of work" argument is out the window. But he could go .500 for a bunch of years before the AD would act. 

Backatcha - what's your take on the counter question? What would it take for him to get back in everyone's good graces? If he wins the P12 north in the next 3 years, is that enough? What is?

If he wins the P12 north in the next 3 years, that would both surprise the ever-loving s*** out of me and certainly buy him a lot more time. I just have zero faith that happens.

The other question is whether he wins the P12 north and the other 2 seasons are still crap...what then? I don't know if we've really seen examples of teams doing that, though.

Didn't Willingham do something like that, in the Pac 10.  Went to the Rose Bowl after 2 losing seasons.

Rose Bowl in the 2020 season followed 5-6 and 3-8 seasons and an Epic loss to Texas.  The year after the Rose Bowl was also a losing season (5-6), and a Seattle Bowl season the following year was enough to get him the Notre Dame job.

BC