[BostonCard]

Wondering if anyone can answer my last question at top of this page before this thread gets pushed out of sight...

I doubt Stanford would pay what the market would support for a top-10 coach.  My guess is that he could command upwards of $4 million if he went into the marketplace ($4 million is what Richt, Spurrier, and Dan Mullen (Miss State) made in the last year from the school (http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/), and Shaw could easily make that or more in the NFL.  Stanford I am sure will stretch for Shaw, but I don't think they'll go all the way to market rate.  I do think he ought towards the top end of the Pac-12, which would imply a $3 million/year contract.

BC

[BostonCard]

Wondering if anyone can answer my last question at top of this page before this thread gets pushed out of sight...

I doubt Stanford would pay what the market would support for a top-10 coach.  My guess is that he could command upwards of $4 million if he went into the marketplace ($4 million is what Richt, Spurrier, and Dan Mullen (Miss State) made in the last year from the school (http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/), and Shaw could easily make that or more in the NFL.  Stanford I am sure will stretch for Shaw, but I don't think they'll go all the way to market rate.  I do think he ought towards the top end of the Pac-12, which would imply a $3 million/year contract.

BC

[winflop]

It's not clear to me that a coach who would command $4M+ would be the right fit for Stanford.  Not sure that's someone who can deliver the kind of recruiting success in the different pond in which our program fishes, nor is that someone who could work with admissions in the way that all Stanford head coaches need to - has any of those guys ever even spoken to a Director of Admissions at the places they've been?

But the point about assistants is well-taken.  It's as much about the guy at the top as it is about the guys underneath him.  The housing situation has gone from a detraction under Ted Leland to a plus today.  IIRC, this was something Bumbling Bob did that was actually a very positive thing.  Wow, that's twice in the last two months I've said something nice about him.  Must be off my meds.

[winflop]

It's not clear to me that a coach who would command $4M+ would be the right fit for Stanford.  Not sure that's someone who can deliver the kind of recruiting success in the different pond in which our program fishes, nor is that someone who could work with admissions in the way that all Stanford head coaches need to - has any of those guys ever even spoken to a Director of Admissions at the places they've been?

But the point about assistants is well-taken.  It's as much about the guy at the top as it is about the guys underneath him.  The housing situation has gone from a detraction under Ted Leland to a plus today.  IIRC, this was something Bumbling Bob did that was actually a very positive thing.  Wow, that's twice in the last two months I've said something nice about him.  Must be off my meds.

[CTcard]

It's not clear to me that a coach who would command $4M+ would be the right fit for Stanford. 

Well, I think that David Shaw could command $4M+ if he were to look for it.

But I agree that not all coaches who could command $4M+ would be a good fit for Stanford.

[CTcard]

It's not clear to me that a coach who would command $4M+ would be the right fit for Stanford. 

Well, I think that David Shaw could command $4M+ if he were to look for it.

But I agree that not all coaches who could command $4M+ would be a good fit for Stanford.

[winflop]

Any thoughts about whether Shaw sees Stanford as a forty-year decision like he asks recruits to think about it?

[winflop]

Any thoughts about whether Shaw sees Stanford as a forty-year decision like he asks recruits to think about it?

[OutsiderFan]

While I agree not all, maybe even few $4MM/yr. coaches would fit at Stanford, we're not talking about all coaches.  We're talking about Stanford coaches with track records of exceptional performance at Stanford. 

If Stanford wins tomorrow, what other coach has three conference titles in five seasons? He's one win away from going to a major Bowl game for 4/5 years as a head coach.  That's Urban Meyer, Nick Saban territory.  You'd be crazy to think Shaw's agent isn't bringing this up.  If Shaw is worth $4MM/yr. and he is performing at the level he is, why wouldn't Stanford want to increase his compensation to keep him?  He's at least worth double what Dawkins is, right?

It sure would be interesting to see how much revenue Stanford football has brought in to the university as a Top 10 program under Shaw's leadership. 

[OutsiderFan]

While I agree not all, maybe even few $4MM/yr. coaches would fit at Stanford, we're not talking about all coaches.  We're talking about Stanford coaches with track records of exceptional performance at Stanford. 

If Stanford wins tomorrow, what other coach has three conference titles in five seasons? He's one win away from going to a major Bowl game for 4/5 years as a head coach.  That's Urban Meyer, Nick Saban territory.  You'd be crazy to think Shaw's agent isn't bringing this up.  If Shaw is worth $4MM/yr. and he is performing at the level he is, why wouldn't Stanford want to increase his compensation to keep him?  He's at least worth double what Dawkins is, right?

It sure would be interesting to see how much revenue Stanford football has brought in to the university as a Top 10 program under Shaw's leadership. 

[CornFed]

Any thoughts about whether Shaw sees Stanford as a forty-year decision like he asks recruits to think about it?

He already made a forty-year decision when he accepted admission at Stanford.  Seems to be working out for him.

[CornFed]

Any thoughts about whether Shaw sees Stanford as a forty-year decision like he asks recruits to think about it?

He already made a forty-year decision when he accepted admission at Stanford.  Seems to be working out for him.

[OutsiderFan]

I've never commented on Shaw's contract before because I don't know what it is.  And please, let's not make this thread about anything more than a discussion of what Stanford will or won't do to pay market rate for football coaches.  If you want to call me out for things I've said, garivn, feel free to start another thread called "Calling out OutsiderFan" and I will be happy to engage there :)

[OutsiderFan]

I've never commented on Shaw's contract before because I don't know what it is.  And please, let's not make this thread about anything more than a discussion of what Stanford will or won't do to pay market rate for football coaches.  If you want to call me out for things I've said, garivn, feel free to start another thread called "Calling out OutsiderFan" and I will be happy to engage there :)

[Farm93]

Any thoughts about whether Shaw sees Stanford as a forty-year decision like he asks recruits to think about it?

Well, from a certain point of view HIS 40 year decision was made in the very early 90s.  And from that perspective he is ~30 years into his 40 year decision.

As a coach he has noted several times that he hopes to stay at Stanford until his kids are in college.  So given the age of his children that implies the Stanford coaching stop was at least a 20 year decision.  There too, a bit of perspective is needed because he has already been with this employer for 9 seasons now.

For players that want their coach to stay with a program during their four or five years on campus I don't think there are many better bets than Shaw staying at Stanford.  That doesn't mean he can't leave in January, but as a recruit looks at the national landscape very few coaches can really give any better assurances they will be at their gig in 2020.

[Farm93]

Any thoughts about whether Shaw sees Stanford as a forty-year decision like he asks recruits to think about it?

Well, from a certain point of view HIS 40 year decision was made in the very early 90s.  And from that perspective he is ~30 years into his 40 year decision.

As a coach he has noted several times that he hopes to stay at Stanford until his kids are in college.  So given the age of his children that implies the Stanford coaching stop was at least a 20 year decision.  There too, a bit of perspective is needed because he has already been with this employer for 9 seasons now.

For players that want their coach to stay with a program during their four or five years on campus I don't think there are many better bets than Shaw staying at Stanford.  That doesn't mean he can't leave in January, but as a recruit looks at the national landscape very few coaches can really give any better assurances they will be at their gig in 2020.

[Treebound]

Wondering if anyone can answer my last question at top of this page before this thread gets pushed out of sight...

The reality is that there is a much bigger decision that is happening at Stanford in the near future, and that is the process of the BOT interviewing and hiring a successor to John Hennessy as Stanford's next president.  John is a brobdingnagian fan of Stanford sports and he helped reinvigorate the program overall.    I think he saw the positive impact that a strong sports program can have on the alumni base. 

To be clear, academics is clearly the priority at Stanford, but athletics has its place at the table.  The attitude of the new president will be a major factor in how we hire and retain our coaches given the significant dollars involved.    We won't be part of an Alabama or $C like arms race - those two universities have very different priorities than Stanford - Thankfully!

[Treebound]

Wondering if anyone can answer my last question at top of this page before this thread gets pushed out of sight...

The reality is that there is a much bigger decision that is happening at Stanford in the near future, and that is the process of the BOT interviewing and hiring a successor to John Hennessy as Stanford's next president.  John is a brobdingnagian fan of Stanford sports and he helped reinvigorate the program overall.    I think he saw the positive impact that a strong sports program can have on the alumni base. 

To be clear, academics is clearly the priority at Stanford, but athletics has its place at the table.  The attitude of the new president will be a major factor in how we hire and retain our coaches given the significant dollars involved.    We won't be part of an Alabama or $C like arms race - those two universities have very different priorities than Stanford - Thankfully!

[OutsiderFan]

I'm not going to engage in that discussion in this thread, but said I would in another. 

[OutsiderFan]

I'm not going to engage in that discussion in this thread, but said I would in another. 

[yvonne]

But you haven't replied in this thread, either.

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?...#msg145633

[yvonne]

But you haven't replied in this thread, either.

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?...#msg145633

[doubledub]

I have to agree that the comparison to Tedford is ridiculous.  I am not a very big fan of David Shaw, but what OutsiderFan fails to understand is that the coach and players derive their motivation from an insane desire to win/hatred of losing that is not frequently or easily understood by those who do not possess that level of intensity.  These types of people don't get sick of winning - which is what OutsiderFan seems to imply.  As soon as they win one game, they are aleady thinking about winning the next one.  Winning is their "addiction" so to speak.  OutsiderFan's reasoning is like saying that a venture capital guy will get bored after his first 100 million because he is now comfortably rich.  Nope, he is thinking about how he can make that 100 million into 1 billion because he wants to win that badly. Or like saying that Michael Jordan would have relaxed after getting his first MVP, or one NBA championship.  Some folks might get "fat and happy" with a little bit of winning or $1 million, but true champions are never satisfied and have a will to succeed.

Like Garvin said "ridiculous."  I know OutsiderFan won't respond here...

[doubledub]

I have to agree that the comparison to Tedford is ridiculous.  I am not a very big fan of David Shaw, but what OutsiderFan fails to understand is that the coach and players derive their motivation from an insane desire to win/hatred of losing that is not frequently or easily understood by those who do not possess that level of intensity.  These types of people don't get sick of winning - which is what OutsiderFan seems to imply.  As soon as they win one game, they are aleady thinking about winning the next one.  Winning is their "addiction" so to speak.  OutsiderFan's reasoning is like saying that a venture capital guy will get bored after his first 100 million because he is now comfortably rich.  Nope, he is thinking about how he can make that 100 million into 1 billion because he wants to win that badly. Or like saying that Michael Jordan would have relaxed after getting his first MVP, or one NBA championship.  Some folks might get "fat and happy" with a little bit of winning or $1 million, but true champions are never satisfied and have a will to succeed.

Like Garvin said "ridiculous."  I know OutsiderFan won't respond here...

[Leftcoast]

OF wasn't the only one to be very disappointed after game 1. 

I know I took a break from posting because I knew I needed some emotional distance that time alone could provide.  I suspect many of us were in the same boat. 

Shaw never was Tedford as he showed for the rest of the season but neither was our team full of "steak eaters" as one ex player stated.  OF isn't the only one who inserted his foot in his mouth in September.

[Leftcoast]

OF wasn't the only one to be very disappointed after game 1. 

I know I took a break from posting because I knew I needed some emotional distance that time alone could provide.  I suspect many of us were in the same boat. 

Shaw never was Tedford as he showed for the rest of the season but neither was our team full of "steak eaters" as one ex player stated.  OF isn't the only one who inserted his foot in his mouth in September.

[socalstanfan1]

OF wasn't the only one to be very disappointed after game 1. 

I know I took a break from posting because I knew I needed some emotional distance that time alone could provide.  I suspect many of us were in the same boat. 

Shaw never was Tedford as he showed for the rest of the season but neither was our team full of "steak eaters" as one ex player stated.  OF isn't the only one who inserted his foot in his mouth in September.

I too took a step away from posting for a bit after that disappointing loss.  And I don't think that the environment would have no impact on character.  I assume some VCs DO get complacent after their first $10 million, while others do not.  And that, precisely, is the problem with making a straight comparison between Tedford and Shaw.

But I think it is often too simple to take a relatively facile similarity (the nature of the two institutions vis-a-vis football) and from that create a narrative that points clearly to the future.  There are just too many other factors.  Regardless of what Shaw and Tedford project on the sidelines, we don't really know what makes the men tick, internally. The quality of the student-athlete, and general culture of the program are also likely different.  Perhaps Shaw's personal connection to Stanford doesn't lead to complacency, but the opposite: a burning commitment to show that this program CAN be a world beater (something that, to construct a counter-narrative, Tedford would never have since he didn't have the same deep roots at Cal).

Maybe over time there will be a drop-off in quality.  We will have to wait and see.  Thankfully, it hasn't happened so far.

[socalstanfan1]

OF wasn't the only one to be very disappointed after game 1. 

I know I took a break from posting because I knew I needed some emotional distance that time alone could provide.  I suspect many of us were in the same boat. 

Shaw never was Tedford as he showed for the rest of the season but neither was our team full of "steak eaters" as one ex player stated.  OF isn't the only one who inserted his foot in his mouth in September.

I too took a step away from posting for a bit after that disappointing loss.  And I don't think that the environment would have no impact on character.  I assume some VCs DO get complacent after their first $10 million, while others do not.  And that, precisely, is the problem with making a straight comparison between Tedford and Shaw.

But I think it is often too simple to take a relatively facile similarity (the nature of the two institutions vis-a-vis football) and from that create a narrative that points clearly to the future.  There are just too many other factors.  Regardless of what Shaw and Tedford project on the sidelines, we don't really know what makes the men tick, internally. The quality of the student-athlete, and general culture of the program are also likely different.  Perhaps Shaw's personal connection to Stanford doesn't lead to complacency, but the opposite: a burning commitment to show that this program CAN be a world beater (something that, to construct a counter-narrative, Tedford would never have since he didn't have the same deep roots at Cal).

Maybe over time there will be a drop-off in quality.  We will have to wait and see.  Thankfully, it hasn't happened so far.

[OutsiderFan]

Can we please make this thread about coaching compensation?  Garvin dredged up the one from three months ago to remind everyone how stupid I am.  That thread is now available in the "what is the problem really?" post Please pile on me there.  Thanks.

[OutsiderFan]

Can we please make this thread about coaching compensation?  Garvin dredged up the one from three months ago to remind everyone how stupid I am.  That thread is now available in the "what is the problem really?" post Please pile on me there.  Thanks.