[Mick]

I think the point is completely moot.  Shaw has a ridiculously good gig here with permanent roots, a much-higher-than-you-think compensation and a media and a fan base that doesn't care too much whether he wins or loses.  I'm happy with nine win seasons because I remember the days when people suggested that Stanford give up football.

We've gone to ten straight bowl games.  Could he use an OC?  I think so.  Do I wish he were less conservative?  Yup.  Am I 90%+ satisfied with Coach Shaw?  You betcha...

[Mick]

I think the point is completely moot.  Shaw has a ridiculously good gig here with permanent roots, a much-higher-than-you-think compensation and a media and a fan base that doesn't care too much whether he wins or loses.  I'm happy with nine win seasons because I remember the days when people suggested that Stanford give up football.

We've gone to ten straight bowl games.  Could he use an OC?  I think so.  Do I wish he were less conservative?  Yup.  Am I 90%+ satisfied with Coach Shaw?  You betcha...

[82lsju]

My belief Shaw wouldn't be an option was based on an ESPN report that threw out possibilities for all current NFL HC vacancies.  I didn't see David Shaw's name mentioned with any of them, but did see Harbaugh, Fitzgerald and Kelly's name mentioned in that report.

I guess I should give some extra weight to Shaw being black. There are now only two black NFL Head Coaches - Mike Tomlin and Anthony Lynn - after Vance Joseph, Todd Bowles, and Steve Wilks were are fired. Ron Rivera is the only non-white HC in the NFC.

you missed Marvin Lewis of the Bengals in your list of recently fired African-American NFL head coaches

[82lsju]

My belief Shaw wouldn't be an option was based on an ESPN report that threw out possibilities for all current NFL HC vacancies.  I didn't see David Shaw's name mentioned with any of them, but did see Harbaugh, Fitzgerald and Kelly's name mentioned in that report.

I guess I should give some extra weight to Shaw being black. There are now only two black NFL Head Coaches - Mike Tomlin and Anthony Lynn - after Vance Joseph, Todd Bowles, and Steve Wilks were are fired. Ron Rivera is the only non-white HC in the NFC.

you missed Marvin Lewis of the Bengals in your list of recently fired African-American NFL head coaches

[SamuelMcF]

My belief Shaw wouldn't be an option was based on an ESPN report that threw out possibilities for all current NFL HC vacancies.  I didn't see David Shaw's name mentioned with any of them, but did see Harbaugh, Fitzgerald and Kelly's name mentioned in that report.

I guess I should give some extra weight to Shaw being black. There are now only two black NFL Head Coaches - Mike Tomlin and Anthony Lynn - after Vance Joseph, Todd Bowles, and Steve Wilks were are fired. Ron Rivera is the only non-white HC in the NFC.

you missed Marvin Lewis of the Bengals in your list of recently fired African-American NFL head coaches

Who just recommended Hue Jackson (African-American) as his replacement - LMAO!

[SamuelMcF]

My belief Shaw wouldn't be an option was based on an ESPN report that threw out possibilities for all current NFL HC vacancies.  I didn't see David Shaw's name mentioned with any of them, but did see Harbaugh, Fitzgerald and Kelly's name mentioned in that report.

I guess I should give some extra weight to Shaw being black. There are now only two black NFL Head Coaches - Mike Tomlin and Anthony Lynn - after Vance Joseph, Todd Bowles, and Steve Wilks were are fired. Ron Rivera is the only non-white HC in the NFC.

you missed Marvin Lewis of the Bengals in your list of recently fired African-American NFL head coaches

Who just recommended Hue Jackson (African-American) as his replacement - LMAO!

[UltimateCard]

N

I think the point is completely moot.  Shaw has a ridiculously good gig here with permanent roots, a much-higher-than-you-think compensation and a media and a fan base that doesn't care too much whether he wins or loses.  I'm happy with nine win seasons because I remember the days when people suggested that Stanford give up football.

We've gone to ten straight bowl games.  Could he use an OC?  I think so.  Do I wish he were less conservative?  Yup.  Am I 90%+ satisfied with Coach Shaw?  You betcha...

Plus I sense that Shaw wouldn’t consider going back to the NFL until his kids are older... hoping they go to Stanford to extend Shaw’s tenure! ;-)

[UltimateCard]

N

I think the point is completely moot.  Shaw has a ridiculously good gig here with permanent roots, a much-higher-than-you-think compensation and a media and a fan base that doesn't care too much whether he wins or loses.  I'm happy with nine win seasons because I remember the days when people suggested that Stanford give up football.

We've gone to ten straight bowl games.  Could he use an OC?  I think so.  Do I wish he were less conservative?  Yup.  Am I 90%+ satisfied with Coach Shaw?  You betcha...

Plus I sense that Shaw wouldn’t consider going back to the NFL until his kids are older... hoping they go to Stanford to extend Shaw’s tenure! ;-)

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

I think the point is completely moot.  Shaw has a ridiculously good gig here with permanent roots, a much-higher-than-you-think compensation and a media and a fan base that doesn't care too much whether he wins or loses.  I'm happy with nine win seasons because I remember the days when people suggested that Stanford give up football.

We've gone to ten straight bowl games.  Could he use an OC?  I think so.  Do I wish he were less conservative?  Yup.  Am I 90%+ satisfied with Coach Shaw?  You betcha...

I agree . All factors considered, Stanford is fortunate to have Shaw.
Most college head coaches seem to consider the recruiting process a negative. Since Stanford offers a unique combination of top level academics and athletics, is it relatively easy for Shaw to sign qualified football player prospects ? If that's the case then I am thinking Stanford and  Notre Dame should be the most coveted head coach jobs. 
Maybe I am making a wrong assumption here as I have no idea what percentage of scholarship offers Shaw extends result in player signings.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

I think the point is completely moot.  Shaw has a ridiculously good gig here with permanent roots, a much-higher-than-you-think compensation and a media and a fan base that doesn't care too much whether he wins or loses.  I'm happy with nine win seasons because I remember the days when people suggested that Stanford give up football.

We've gone to ten straight bowl games.  Could he use an OC?  I think so.  Do I wish he were less conservative?  Yup.  Am I 90%+ satisfied with Coach Shaw?  You betcha...

I agree . All factors considered, Stanford is fortunate to have Shaw.
Most college head coaches seem to consider the recruiting process a negative. Since Stanford offers a unique combination of top level academics and athletics, is it relatively easy for Shaw to sign qualified football player prospects ? If that's the case then I am thinking Stanford and  Notre Dame should be the most coveted head coach jobs. 
Maybe I am making a wrong assumption here as I have no idea what percentage of scholarship offers Shaw extends result in player signings.

[BobK]

All fans care about wins vs losses. Every one of any sport.

Roughly 3.0 to 3.5 offers to signings.

[BobK]

All fans care about wins vs losses. Every one of any sport.

Roughly 3.0 to 3.5 offers to signings.

[Goose]

All fans care about wins vs losses.  Every one of any sport.

For sure.

Roughly 3.0 to 3.5 offers to signings.

Bob, I think the plan is that we offer people who are not yet admitted but who we think possibly can be admitted Obviously any High School junior is probably not "in" yet. Of the 3 to 3.5 offers we make, could you make an estimate of how many simply don't apply or don't get admitted?

[Goose]

All fans care about wins vs losses.  Every one of any sport.

For sure.

Roughly 3.0 to 3.5 offers to signings.

Bob, I think the plan is that we offer people who are not yet admitted but who we think possibly can be admitted Obviously any High School junior is probably not "in" yet. Of the 3 to 3.5 offers we make, could you make an estimate of how many simply don't apply or don't get admitted?

[BobK]

Actually for 2019 it was closer to 4:1. Not admitted, none this class. Remember we lost 5 to admissions several years ago.
Never applied? Just a wild guess half the offers were not sent Apps by the Staff. But great question. Test scores not there, got a C in a class, lack of AP classes.

[BobK]

Actually for 2019 it was closer to 4:1. Not admitted, none this class. Remember we lost 5 to admissions several years ago.
Never applied? Just a wild guess half the offers were not sent Apps by the Staff. But great question. Test scores not there, got a C in a class, lack of AP classes.

[PVTree]

Coach Shaw is staying at Stanford (my opinion), and am glad he is. This doesn't mean that I don't want him to get an experienced OC to upgrade our offensive play calling.

However, I'd like to think that Coach Shaw is respected enough that he could get the Denver job (or others) if he were interested in it with Sir John of Elway there.

[PVTree]

Coach Shaw is staying at Stanford (my opinion), and am glad he is. This doesn't mean that I don't want him to get an experienced OC to upgrade our offensive play calling.

However, I'd like to think that Coach Shaw is respected enough that he could get the Denver job (or others) if he were interested in it with Sir John of Elway there.

[CTcard]

Coach Shaw is staying at Stanford (my opinion), and am glad he is. This doesn't mean that I don't want him to get an experienced OC to upgrade our offensive play calling.

Well, we do this every couple of months or so.

I still don't get why the fan base is so hung up on Shaw's failings on the offensive side of the ball in particular. 

Over Shaw's eight years as head coach, the offense has been better than the defense pretty much half the time; with the trend moving towards the offenses. 

Here are the S&P+ ratings for offense and defense under Shaw. There's other advanced stat systems (I think Stanford has generally fared a touch better in FEI), but any of them will bear out this general trend.

Year    Offense    Defense
2011       8            22
2012     29            11
2013     17             9
2014     54             4
2015     12            43
2016     60            18
2017     29            59
2018     22            51


We may have more of a need of new blood on the defensive side.

[CTcard]

Coach Shaw is staying at Stanford (my opinion), and am glad he is. This doesn't mean that I don't want him to get an experienced OC to upgrade our offensive play calling.

Well, we do this every couple of months or so.

I still don't get why the fan base is so hung up on Shaw's failings on the offensive side of the ball in particular. 

Over Shaw's eight years as head coach, the offense has been better than the defense pretty much half the time; with the trend moving towards the offenses. 

Here are the S&P+ ratings for offense and defense under Shaw. There's other advanced stat systems (I think Stanford has generally fared a touch better in FEI), but any of them will bear out this general trend.

Year    Offense    Defense
2011       8            22
2012     29            11
2013     17             9
2014     54             4
2015     12            43
2016     60            18
2017     29            59
2018     22            51


We may have more of a need of new blood on the defensive side.

[stupac2]

Well, we do this every couple of months or so.

I still don't get why the fan base is so hung up on Shaw's failings on the offensive side of the ball in particular.

Because fans of every team at every level want to fire their OC if they don't score a touchdown on every drive. WiM (really miss him, where'd he go?) always used to point out how quickly playcallers can go from heralded to villified, and it's bizarre. The recency bias and grass is always greener mentalities are so pervasive, and everyone thinks they're an expert at evaluating offense. Not to mention that the other team has players too...

[stupac2]

Well, we do this every couple of months or so.

I still don't get why the fan base is so hung up on Shaw's failings on the offensive side of the ball in particular.

Because fans of every team at every level want to fire their OC if they don't score a touchdown on every drive. WiM (really miss him, where'd he go?) always used to point out how quickly playcallers can go from heralded to villified, and it's bizarre. The recency bias and grass is always greener mentalities are so pervasive, and everyone thinks they're an expert at evaluating offense. Not to mention that the other team has players too...

[JohnR34231]

Well, we do this every couple of months or so.

I still don't get why the fan base is so hung up on Shaw's failings on the offensive side of the ball in particular.

Because fans of every team at every level want to fire their OC if they don't score a touchdown on every drive. WiM (really miss him, where'd he go?) always used to point out how quickly playcallers can go from heralded to villified, and it's bizarre. The recency bias and grass is always greener mentalities are so pervasive, and everyone thinks they're an expert at evaluating offense. Not to mention that the other team has players too...

Yeah, I agree. "The playcalling sucked" posts after nearly every game and the constant calls for us to hire an "experienced, veteran OC" really do get a little old and tiresome.
If Shaw were going to do it, he would have done it by now.

[JohnR34231]

Well, we do this every couple of months or so.

I still don't get why the fan base is so hung up on Shaw's failings on the offensive side of the ball in particular.

Because fans of every team at every level want to fire their OC if they don't score a touchdown on every drive. WiM (really miss him, where'd he go?) always used to point out how quickly playcallers can go from heralded to villified, and it's bizarre. The recency bias and grass is always greener mentalities are so pervasive, and everyone thinks they're an expert at evaluating offense. Not to mention that the other team has players too...

Yeah, I agree. "The playcalling sucked" posts after nearly every game and the constant calls for us to hire an "experienced, veteran OC" really do get a little old and tiresome.
If Shaw were going to do it, he would have done it by now.

[OutsiderFan]

I'm very much more inclined to replace the DC than any other coach on the staff.  Shaw is never going to field the offense I want to see, but he showed some ability to adapt to new things this year which is very good to see. The defense is getting worse year after year, and when Cal can field a better defense than Stanford two years removed from being bottom in Pac-12, with mediocre recruiting, Stanford can do better, IMO.

[OutsiderFan]

I'm very much more inclined to replace the DC than any other coach on the staff.  Shaw is never going to field the offense I want to see, but he showed some ability to adapt to new things this year which is very good to see. The defense is getting worse year after year, and when Cal can field a better defense than Stanford two years removed from being bottom in Pac-12, with mediocre recruiting, Stanford can do better, IMO.

[terry]

If coaches are held responsible for performance, then I would think the OL coach would be on the hot seat.

[terry]

If coaches are held responsible for performance, then I would think the OL coach would be on the hot seat.

[Goose]

If coaches are held responsible for performance, then I would think the OL coach would be on the hot seat.

I suspect he is. The fact he is new and that these aren't "his players" probably mitigates the pressure a bit, but only a bit. It appears to me, looking from the outside with no contact with players or staff, that there may be some controversy inside the OL itself. That also could be me looking for an explanation of unexpectedly poor performance. It is hard to know the impact of injuries, as well as why the line never seemed to "gel". Even early on, when injuries were less of a problem, we couldn't run the ball. Then again, we were facing 8+ in the box all the time. I can't explain it. I hope somebody on the staff can, or that we just get lucky and it fixes itself.

[Goose]

If coaches are held responsible for performance, then I would think the OL coach would be on the hot seat.

I suspect he is. The fact he is new and that these aren't "his players" probably mitigates the pressure a bit, but only a bit. It appears to me, looking from the outside with no contact with players or staff, that there may be some controversy inside the OL itself. That also could be me looking for an explanation of unexpectedly poor performance. It is hard to know the impact of injuries, as well as why the line never seemed to "gel". Even early on, when injuries were less of a problem, we couldn't run the ball. Then again, we were facing 8+ in the box all the time. I can't explain it. I hope somebody on the staff can, or that we just get lucky and it fixes itself.

[Phogge]

What I have heard about discord is from multiple sources and revolves around the O line and no other position group. A good administrator should be able to figure out the issue. It seems that it’s more than the usual bitching about playing time.

As for the OC nothing is going to change now. The one specific that I abhor is the almost total abandonment of the T formation. Agreed that the shotgun gives the QB a better look than a turn and drop back but it also limits the run game to a few plays. Maybe Mick the Stats Guy could figure out some correlation but I think Stanford ran better with a fullback, a sometimes H Back and some motion. Those formations were almost non existent in El Paso. Of course they don’t have Marx or Maricic. Find somebody.

I don’t think Lance is the problem. It is personnel. Coming back is a pre season AA corner, a savvy OLB who finds the ball if he stays and can stay healthy, a veteran ILB if he doesn’t stray to the Beehive State and some promising young D linemen. Need to find a corner and two safeties who can tackle and LB depth which may come from Sinclair. I would hope that the defense would do more attacking. Maybe really good D in 2020.

6-6 is a reasonable prognosis given some uncertainty and a talented but flawed QB. However if the overall health improves more wins are possible. Remember the league right now is fairly crappy.

[Phogge]

What I have heard about discord is from multiple sources and revolves around the O line and no other position group. A good administrator should be able to figure out the issue. It seems that it’s more than the usual bitching about playing time.

As for the OC nothing is going to change now. The one specific that I abhor is the almost total abandonment of the T formation. Agreed that the shotgun gives the QB a better look than a turn and drop back but it also limits the run game to a few plays. Maybe Mick the Stats Guy could figure out some correlation but I think Stanford ran better with a fullback, a sometimes H Back and some motion. Those formations were almost non existent in El Paso. Of course they don’t have Marx or Maricic. Find somebody.

I don’t think Lance is the problem. It is personnel. Coming back is a pre season AA corner, a savvy OLB who finds the ball if he stays and can stay healthy, a veteran ILB if he doesn’t stray to the Beehive State and some promising young D linemen. Need to find a corner and two safeties who can tackle and LB depth which may come from Sinclair. I would hope that the defense would do more attacking. Maybe really good D in 2020.

6-6 is a reasonable prognosis given some uncertainty and a talented but flawed QB. However if the overall health improves more wins are possible. Remember the league right now is fairly crappy.

[StanfordMatt]

I have a hard time believing that any assistant coach is on the hot seat until Shaw actually fires someone. I don't believe he has fired anyone in his eight years as head coach. I'm not advocating that Carberry or anyone else lose their job, just making an observation.

[StanfordMatt]

I have a hard time believing that any assistant coach is on the hot seat until Shaw actually fires someone. I don't believe he has fired anyone in his eight years as head coach. I'm not advocating that Carberry or anyone else lose their job, just making an observation.