[Goose]

In any case, the point is less to predict how Taylor will do compared to Harbaugh and more to say you could not have asked for a closer comparison resume-wise - former NFL QBs with limited (three years) but spectacular FCS level head coaching experience, a lifetime of succeeding at essentially everything they've ever done,

Let's not get carried away here. TT failed spectacularly as the OC at Utah. I am sure you know that. It may be argued that the OC job at Utah is a difficult one based on the turnover there, but TT knew about that going in. He and the head coach saw the way ahead differently, and unsurprisingly TT lost that fight. He was basically pushed out of the strategic decision making mid-season and left at the end of the year.

That doesn't mean he was wrong about what he wanted to do, and it doesn't mean he isn't a good coach, and it doesn't mean he won't have success at Stanford. However is just isn't accurate to say  "a lifetime of succeeding at essentially everything they've ever done". At the very least he massively misread that situation.

I know that Taylor coached at Utah and that there are some indications the parting may have been mutual but you are mistaken that he failed miserably at Utah. They were #52 and #75 in scoring offense his two years there, which compares to #55 and #60 in the two years preceding him (and #52, #66, #75, and #74 before that). Absolutely absurd to say he failed miserably. He was not what Whittingham wanted. That's the most you can say, that Whittingham did not set Taylor up for success because Whittingham hired something he didn't want, and perhaps that Taylor should not have taken a job that wasn't a perfect fit. But Taylor did just fine. Literally tied for the highest scoring offense rank in seven years in the one year he had "strategic decision making" as you put it.

I guess it's in the eye of the beholder whether being as successful as Whittingham's various OCs before he finally found one that clicked in the brief detour that was the Utah job disqualified from "essentially" succeeding at everything he's done. That was arguably the least successful chapter of Taylor's life and I'd say finishing sixth and ninth in the Pac-12 in scoring offense and matching the best national rank they'd had in seven years is the kind of "failed spectacularly" that makes my point.

Not at all accurate IMO. The first year that they did "just fine" they ran Whittingham's preferred offense. The second year TT tried to change things pretty fundamentally and at that point the wheels came off. They started poorly and he was removed from having any input on the team. The statistics you cite were obtained independent of TTs presence, not because of it. This is demonstrably the case in the second year. I really don't see any way his time at Utah could be described as a "success" in any sense of the word. Your attributing their best national ranking to a coach that was forced out is difficult to understand. If he were essential to the process he certainly would have been retained. He clearly was not, as he had no input the last 2/3 of the season. At the very least, he politically failed totally as he lost the confidence of the HC. You can't do that and be a successful assistant coach.

When you say "least successful chapter" I certainly agree. IMO in no way was it a success at all, other than perhaps convincing TT that he needed to be a head coach so that he could do what he believed was optimal, not what "the boss" wanted. One often does learn more from failure than success, and I am pretty sure this was the case at Utah.

[Goose]

In any case, the point is less to predict how Taylor will do compared to Harbaugh and more to say you could not have asked for a closer comparison resume-wise - former NFL QBs with limited (three years) but spectacular FCS level head coaching experience, a lifetime of succeeding at essentially everything they've ever done,

Let's not get carried away here. TT failed spectacularly as the OC at Utah. I am sure you know that. It may be argued that the OC job at Utah is a difficult one based on the turnover there, but TT knew about that going in. He and the head coach saw the way ahead differently, and unsurprisingly TT lost that fight. He was basically pushed out of the strategic decision making mid-season and left at the end of the year.

That doesn't mean he was wrong about what he wanted to do, and it doesn't mean he isn't a good coach, and it doesn't mean he won't have success at Stanford. However is just isn't accurate to say  "a lifetime of succeeding at essentially everything they've ever done". At the very least he massively misread that situation.

I know that Taylor coached at Utah and that there are some indications the parting may have been mutual but you are mistaken that he failed miserably at Utah. They were #52 and #75 in scoring offense his two years there, which compares to #55 and #60 in the two years preceding him (and #52, #66, #75, and #74 before that). Absolutely absurd to say he failed miserably. He was not what Whittingham wanted. That's the most you can say, that Whittingham did not set Taylor up for success because Whittingham hired something he didn't want, and perhaps that Taylor should not have taken a job that wasn't a perfect fit. But Taylor did just fine. Literally tied for the highest scoring offense rank in seven years in the one year he had "strategic decision making" as you put it.

I guess it's in the eye of the beholder whether being as successful as Whittingham's various OCs before he finally found one that clicked in the brief detour that was the Utah job disqualified from "essentially" succeeding at everything he's done. That was arguably the least successful chapter of Taylor's life and I'd say finishing sixth and ninth in the Pac-12 in scoring offense and matching the best national rank they'd had in seven years is the kind of "failed spectacularly" that makes my point.

Not at all accurate IMO. The first year that they did "just fine" they ran Whittingham's preferred offense. The second year TT tried to change things pretty fundamentally and at that point the wheels came off. They started poorly and he was removed from having any input on the team. The statistics you cite were obtained independent of TTs presence, not because of it. This is demonstrably the case in the second year. I really don't see any way his time at Utah could be described as a "success" in any sense of the word. Your attributing their best national ranking to a coach that was forced out is difficult to understand. If he were essential to the process he certainly would have been retained. He clearly was not, as he had no input the last 2/3 of the season. At the very least, he politically failed totally as he lost the confidence of the HC. You can't do that and be a successful assistant coach.

When you say "least successful chapter" I certainly agree. IMO in no way was it a success at all, other than perhaps convincing TT that he needed to be a head coach so that he could do what he believed was optimal, not what "the boss" wanted. One often does learn more from failure than success, and I am pretty sure this was the case at Utah.