(09-22-2022, 07:53 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(09-21-2022, 05:03 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-21-2022, 07:57 AM)gailtate Wrote:(09-20-2022, 08:51 AM)winflop Wrote:(09-20-2022, 07:53 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote: Also you could make an argument that the Covid year should be thrown out and then it would be 35-29. Think what you wish, though.
If you throw out the COVID year you get 25-26. If you substitute 2016 for 2020 you get 35-29.
My overall point is that "recent history" of Shaw's record is mediocre at best. Even if this season is 6-6 (which I think is a pipe dream), Shaw's record over the last three full seasons would be well below mediocre.
While I understand the sacrilege that many readers here perceive when it comes to blunt criticism of Shaw, the record reveals that he is now well into mediocrity as a coach, it's been showing for some time, and it is undeniable (except for the self-deluded). Look at the thinness of this team. Look at the mediocrities he retains on his staff. Look at the naked emperor. Check the outlook for this season. This mess gets worse by the year and has not hit bottom. We are smack in The Shawlight Zone. Anybody who sees a way out should make it known.
The record shows that in terms of winning percentage of .671 (94-46) is better than Jim Harbaugh (.580), Walt Harris (.261), Buddy Teavens (.303), Tyrone Willingham (.549), Dennis Green (.471), Jack Elway (.464), Paul Wiggin (.364), Rod Dowhower (.500), Bill Walsh (.585), Jack Christiansen (.573), John Ralston (.601), Jack Curtice (.280), Chuck Taylor (.577), Marchmont Schwartz (.500), etc. the only coaches with a better record than Shaw were Clark Schaunessy, Pop Warner, and some pre-World War I coaches.
If that is mediocrity as a coach… so in order to justify that his record is mediocre, you have to point to the record in the last three years (but not the COVID year), and say that everything he accomplished before is attributable to his predecessor.
There is a legitimate danger that the recent trend will continue, and if it does, his winning percentage will plummet. And maybe in your mind, Shaw is owed nothing and three-plus bad years are enough to conclude that new blood is needed (it was for Teevens and Harris, but they didn’t have nearly a decade of success before then). But if you are going to make sweeping statements about Shaw, give him the courtesy of evaluating his entire record.
BC
No doubt Shaw's overall record at Stanford has been exemplary.
However, for better or worse, college football coaching is very much a "what have you done for us lately" profession, and let's face it, two out of the last three years have sucked. I guess the question is how many more years does it have to suck before we conclude things have to change.
Hopefully Shaw will get things turned around so we won't have to address that question.
Which of Stanford's last 5 or 6 head coaches would you rather have instead of Shaw? Based on when they left Stanford.
Denny Green? Harbaugh?
Walsh II had a pretty miserable record after coasting the first year with the cards Green handed him. I assume you're in the camp that thinks Willingham was a lazy golfer who got lucky with the Rose Bowl season, and he didn't paint the field with glory after he left.
I'm paraphrasing, taking some license, my version of what I've gleaned from message boards from unhappy fans.