[msqueri]

Since I am a proponent of “never replace your coach until you are absolutely certain you can find someone who can do a better job than the incumbent”, the outstanding question has to be - who is the person who meets that criteria?  

In this era, are there candidates who could do a better job than Shaw AND (most importantly) would want to coach at Stanford (given all the PERCEIVED barriers to success)?  

The world of college athletics is in turmoil and a number of schools are going to have to decide whether to be a serious player or just a player.  Once Stanford makes that decision, I think the answer to the question in paragraph two will become evident.

That's a reasonable question to ask if your coach is mediocre but, to be blunt, a crazy one in this context. Anybody would do better, or at least close enough to anybody if we halfway tried with a hire. As I've laid out, Shaw is the losingest coach in America and has been losing at a level Stanford hasn't seen aside from Paul Wiggin and Walt Harris, who got fired for it. And, predictably, our next coaches did much better. They did much better because it's really, really easy to do better than worst in America.

If you're asking for specific names, Bryan Harsin is reviled at Auburn and would be a much better coach than Shaw at Stanford. Troy Taylor is coaching FCS and would presumably jump at the opportunity. Brent Brennan coaching Group of Five.

Personally I think we could put together a package to entice a Power Five rising star like Liebold or Klieman, but even if not, we'd have Group of Five and FCS guys beating down our door due to sheer career ambition and pecuniary interest, no matter how negative one gets on the perceived barriers to our success (which I think some exaggerate).

Your question is an analytically good one, but it's one you ask when your coach is 2018 David Shaw or 2022 Chip Kelly. 2022 David Shaw is the easiest thing to replace. You or I wouldn't do worse than this.

[msqueri]

Since I am a proponent of “never replace your coach until you are absolutely certain you can find someone who can do a better job than the incumbent”, the outstanding question has to be - who is the person who meets that criteria?  

In this era, are there candidates who could do a better job than Shaw AND (most importantly) would want to coach at Stanford (given all the PERCEIVED barriers to success)?  

The world of college athletics is in turmoil and a number of schools are going to have to decide whether to be a serious player or just a player.  Once Stanford makes that decision, I think the answer to the question in paragraph two will become evident.

That's a reasonable question to ask if your coach is mediocre but, to be blunt, a crazy one in this context. Anybody would do better, or at least close enough to anybody if we halfway tried with a hire. As I've laid out, Shaw is the losingest coach in America and has been losing at a level Stanford hasn't seen aside from Paul Wiggin and Walt Harris, who got fired for it. And, predictably, our next coaches did much better. They did much better because it's really, really easy to do better than worst in America.

If you're asking for specific names, Bryan Harsin is reviled at Auburn and would be a much better coach than Shaw at Stanford. Troy Taylor is coaching FCS and would presumably jump at the opportunity. Brent Brennan coaching Group of Five.

Personally I think we could put together a package to entice a Power Five rising star like Liebold or Klieman, but even if not, we'd have Group of Five and FCS guys beating down our door due to sheer career ambition and pecuniary interest, no matter how negative one gets on the perceived barriers to our success (which I think some exaggerate).

Your question is an analytically good one, but it's one you ask when your coach is 2018 David Shaw or 2022 Chip Kelly. 2022 David Shaw is the easiest thing to replace. You or I wouldn't do worse than this.