[lex24]

Troy Taylor does appear to be the man.

Some positives:
1) knows the college came;
2) brought Sac State back from last place to first place, so there's a turnaround gene there;
3) seems to be a keen offensive mind;
4) knows the Cal/Bay Area environment;
5) appears to have lots of energy and passion.

Some concerns:
1) Actually, he's not that young: he's four years older than Shaw, who resigned after 12 years at the helm.  For his first shot at a P5 head-coaching job, Taylor is rather old.  
2) Not sure how defensive-minded he is.  Will Stanford once again become a team that can only win shoot-outs?  Let's see.  
3) His one-year stint at Utah is a bit of a concern: Whittingham appears to run a tight ship, and failing there is certainly not a good sign.
4) The assessment that he can be a "jerk" isn't encouraging, but concerns me less than points 1-3.  Shaw was the ultimate nice guy, and that didn't end well.  Harbaugh has been accused of being a "jerk", but gets things done wherever he lands.  I don't think the world of college football is a place where nice guys necessarily end up on top.  

Maybe he can bring some of his key players with him from Sac State (if they can qualify academically).  If Riley and Sanders can do it, why not Taylor?

He will need to hire a good DC.  When Alito was at Oregon he spoke about the difficulties of the defense when the offense plays a wide open up tempo spread. Key - depth. Cause you are on the field more.

Have to recruit hard on defensive end.  Have to care about defense.  If you don’t , you are Sonny Dykes at Cal. 

I don’t like tha air raid type offenses.  I find constant 55-48 games and 40 passes at or near the LOS. to be strangely boring,  Yawn.  Another TD.  I realize I’m on an island on that one. 

He will need speed.  Always a hard commodity for a Stanford to recruit.

Having said that - hope like hell he succeeds.  I’ll learn to live with 55-48 wins…..  :)

---

I’m not going to crap on our likely new coach, especially given that this was a playoff game, but I’d rather win 2-0 than lose 66-63.

BC

When Shaw was winning I remember people complaining he wasn't playing exciting enough football. One comment even went far enough to say losing 44-41 was preferable to winning 17-10.

It's true that some Shaw-coached games were downright soporific.  But I was OK with that as long as Stanford secured the W.  The old adage that offense sells tickets and defense wins championships is still true.  That's why I hope the new coach (whoever it is) will get the team back to elite-level defense.  Winning 35-10 is better than a W at 2-0 or an L at 66-63.

Yep.  The most ridiculous part of the Shawbashing during The Glory Years. But time to turn the page.  Hopefully Taylor can right the ship.

[lex24]

Troy Taylor does appear to be the man.

Some positives:
1) knows the college came;
2) brought Sac State back from last place to first place, so there's a turnaround gene there;
3) seems to be a keen offensive mind;
4) knows the Cal/Bay Area environment;
5) appears to have lots of energy and passion.

Some concerns:
1) Actually, he's not that young: he's four years older than Shaw, who resigned after 12 years at the helm.  For his first shot at a P5 head-coaching job, Taylor is rather old.  
2) Not sure how defensive-minded he is.  Will Stanford once again become a team that can only win shoot-outs?  Let's see.  
3) His one-year stint at Utah is a bit of a concern: Whittingham appears to run a tight ship, and failing there is certainly not a good sign.
4) The assessment that he can be a "jerk" isn't encouraging, but concerns me less than points 1-3.  Shaw was the ultimate nice guy, and that didn't end well.  Harbaugh has been accused of being a "jerk", but gets things done wherever he lands.  I don't think the world of college football is a place where nice guys necessarily end up on top.  

Maybe he can bring some of his key players with him from Sac State (if they can qualify academically).  If Riley and Sanders can do it, why not Taylor?

He will need to hire a good DC.  When Alito was at Oregon he spoke about the difficulties of the defense when the offense plays a wide open up tempo spread. Key - depth. Cause you are on the field more.

Have to recruit hard on defensive end.  Have to care about defense.  If you don’t , you are Sonny Dykes at Cal. 

I don’t like tha air raid type offenses.  I find constant 55-48 games and 40 passes at or near the LOS. to be strangely boring,  Yawn.  Another TD.  I realize I’m on an island on that one. 

He will need speed.  Always a hard commodity for a Stanford to recruit.

Having said that - hope like hell he succeeds.  I’ll learn to live with 55-48 wins…..  :)

---

I’m not going to crap on our likely new coach, especially given that this was a playoff game, but I’d rather win 2-0 than lose 66-63.

BC

When Shaw was winning I remember people complaining he wasn't playing exciting enough football. One comment even went far enough to say losing 44-41 was preferable to winning 17-10.

It's true that some Shaw-coached games were downright soporific.  But I was OK with that as long as Stanford secured the W.  The old adage that offense sells tickets and defense wins championships is still true.  That's why I hope the new coach (whoever it is) will get the team back to elite-level defense.  Winning 35-10 is better than a W at 2-0 or an L at 66-63.

Yep.  The most ridiculous part of the Shawbashing during The Glory Years. But time to turn the page.  Hopefully Taylor can right the ship.