[BillBradley]

I’m sorry, but I think there is a fair amount of delusion on this board.  The talent level is low.  It will continue to be unless and until Stanford changes its approach to NIL and the portal.  You aren’t going to get top talent without shelling out big bucks for it.  You think, for example, Elway or McCaffrey would have gone to Stanford under today’s situation? And if so, stayed?   Luck, maybe.  But he’s a unicorn. 

They are not going to get enough good players to compete unless they increase NIL and loosen up transfer rules to take full advantage of the portal.

Fire TT and hire who?  I mean it’s not quite like the Chicago White Sox job.  But close.

The program is on life support.  I don’t think the Admin gives a damn.  Therein lies the biggest problem.  Not the HC.

Ditto. Well,said and right on target. New President and New Provost have to set the tone.

100% agree. I'm obviously in the get-off-your-ass-and-compete-in-the-new-world camp. I think it's important to the Stanford brand to be competitive in football and the other major team sports and continue to be world class in the Olympic sports. I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment. Will be interesting to see what they do, though, if anything.

The money is there. BUT...what is Stanford leadership hearing from the Cardinal constituency? Are students, alums, administrators, educators, etc. all calling for increased investment in NIL? This is a Stanford sports board and there are many posters who can't stand the new world of college athletics, have sworn it off, moarn the end of amateurism, etc. and do not want Stanford to go down that path. There has been much discussion about the lack of fan interest in the undergraduate community. The professors are the professors. They aren't beating any drums. Is it all about the alumni voice? And what % of the alums want the increase in NIL investment? This really could be a slow death march.

[BillBradley]

I’m sorry, but I think there is a fair amount of delusion on this board.  The talent level is low.  It will continue to be unless and until Stanford changes its approach to NIL and the portal.  You aren’t going to get top talent without shelling out big bucks for it.  You think, for example, Elway or McCaffrey would have gone to Stanford under today’s situation? And if so, stayed?   Luck, maybe.  But he’s a unicorn. 

They are not going to get enough good players to compete unless they increase NIL and loosen up transfer rules to take full advantage of the portal.

Fire TT and hire who?  I mean it’s not quite like the Chicago White Sox job.  But close.

The program is on life support.  I don’t think the Admin gives a damn.  Therein lies the biggest problem.  Not the HC.

Ditto. Well,said and right on target. New President and New Provost have to set the tone.

100% agree. I'm obviously in the get-off-your-ass-and-compete-in-the-new-world camp. I think it's important to the Stanford brand to be competitive in football and the other major team sports and continue to be world class in the Olympic sports. I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment. Will be interesting to see what they do, though, if anything.

The money is there. BUT...what is Stanford leadership hearing from the Cardinal constituency? Are students, alums, administrators, educators, etc. all calling for increased investment in NIL? This is a Stanford sports board and there are many posters who can't stand the new world of college athletics, have sworn it off, moarn the end of amateurism, etc. and do not want Stanford to go down that path. There has been much discussion about the lack of fan interest in the undergraduate community. The professors are the professors. They aren't beating any drums. Is it all about the alumni voice? And what % of the alums want the increase in NIL investment? This really could be a slow death march.

[StanfordMatt]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

[StanfordMatt]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

[BillBradley]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

Thank you for the correction. Edit: "I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in a power conference without a significant NIL investment".  I'm sure over time Stanford could field a competitive football team in the American Athletic Conference without much NIL money.

[BillBradley]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

Thank you for the correction. Edit: "I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in a power conference without a significant NIL investment".  I'm sure over time Stanford could field a competitive football team in the American Athletic Conference without much NIL money.

[CardinalSagehen]

1730585074[/url]']

1730579198[/url]']
I’m sorry, but I think there is a fair amount of delusion on this board.  The talent level is low.  It will continue to be unless and until Stanford changes its approach to NIL and the portal.  You aren’t going to get top talent without shelling out big bucks for it.  You think, for example, Elway or McCaffrey would have gone to Stanford under today’s situation? And if so, stayed?   Luck, maybe.  But he’s a unicorn. 

They are not going to get enough good players to compete unless they increase NIL and loosen up transfer rules to take full advantage of the portal.

Fire TT and hire who?  I mean it’s not quite like the Chicago White Sox job.  But close.

The program is on life support.  I don’t think the Admin gives a damn.  Therein lies the biggest problem.  Not the HC.

This team doesn't have great talent. Nobody is expecting miracles. But there is a massive gulf between our current talent level and our current performance, and I don't think you fully appreciate the first-order and second-order implications of this.

After two years of player development and two off-seasons under the current AD and head coach, I believe the right questions are as follows:

1) Is this coach getting anywhere close to a reasonable degree of performance out of his team's talent?
No. And it isn't close. We have #42 talent and #104 performance (probably lower, after today). You can even discount the talent by 30-50 places due to the relative maturity of transfers, and it's still not acceptable. We are performing at the bottom of expectations for a Group of 5 team, and we're probably worse than a handful of FCS teams. Sagarin says we'd be the 4th best team in the Missouri Valley Conference! Our talent level certainly is not that low. Hypotheticaly, we could be 2-7 with very acceptable performance and signs of progress, but this team's performance is unacceptable.

2) Are this AD and this coach the right people to compete in the new world for NIL money and transfers?
No. Muir selected TT on the theory that he could establish a winning culture with middle-of-the-road high school recruits and utilize them in an innovative offensive system. Now TT himself admits that his original premise was wrong. TT does not have the charisma, coaching prowess, or proven P4 results to attract recruits or transfers. That's not the kind of coach or leader he is. If his original premise was wrong, then he was never the right guy for the job.

3) Is the current AD the right person to shift Stanford into the NIL world?
No, because he has resisted it for years. He is the symbol of resisting it. He who built the current castle should not be the one to tear it down. And TT is caught up in this, too, because he is not the right kind of forceful advocate for the program's needs vis a vis the rest of the institution and other non-revenue sports. Part of his job is to be the strongest advocate for football. He shouldn't win all of those internal battles, but he needs to provide the tension for his superiors to make the right decisions.

4) Will boosters line up to give money to this AD and this coach?
No, I think they're too smart for that. A new coach has a honeymoon period when boosters, recruits, transfers, and admins believe anything is possible. TT has unfortunately burned up his honeymoon period. The only way to effect change is with another change at the top to open another new chapter.

I continue to believe that Muir is the one who needs to go first, and the new AD should evaluate and select the new coach. If, as you say, nobody in the Administration fricking cares, then you're right that nothing will happen. But isn't it also irrational to pay an AD and a head football coach millions of dollars per year if this is the case?

Frankly, I don’t think there is much disagreement between us.  No matter how it happens, Stanford has to step up with NIL and address changes relative to the portal. . If that means dumping TT and Muir, so be it.  But imo the change in administrative philosophy need come first.  Otherwise, whomever is the next coach will fail as well.

Perhaps  Bob Bowlsby is tired by being the Big 12 Commish.

Yes, I believe you're right.

The two changes - philosophy and AD - are probably tied together. I don't think they can or should pursue a new philosophy with Muir. His dismissal would be a pretty good external indication of a bona fide change in philosophy. It seems unlikely, though...

[CardinalSagehen]

1730585074[/url]']

1730579198[/url]']
I’m sorry, but I think there is a fair amount of delusion on this board.  The talent level is low.  It will continue to be unless and until Stanford changes its approach to NIL and the portal.  You aren’t going to get top talent without shelling out big bucks for it.  You think, for example, Elway or McCaffrey would have gone to Stanford under today’s situation? And if so, stayed?   Luck, maybe.  But he’s a unicorn. 

They are not going to get enough good players to compete unless they increase NIL and loosen up transfer rules to take full advantage of the portal.

Fire TT and hire who?  I mean it’s not quite like the Chicago White Sox job.  But close.

The program is on life support.  I don’t think the Admin gives a damn.  Therein lies the biggest problem.  Not the HC.

This team doesn't have great talent. Nobody is expecting miracles. But there is a massive gulf between our current talent level and our current performance, and I don't think you fully appreciate the first-order and second-order implications of this.

After two years of player development and two off-seasons under the current AD and head coach, I believe the right questions are as follows:

1) Is this coach getting anywhere close to a reasonable degree of performance out of his team's talent?
No. And it isn't close. We have #42 talent and #104 performance (probably lower, after today). You can even discount the talent by 30-50 places due to the relative maturity of transfers, and it's still not acceptable. We are performing at the bottom of expectations for a Group of 5 team, and we're probably worse than a handful of FCS teams. Sagarin says we'd be the 4th best team in the Missouri Valley Conference! Our talent level certainly is not that low. Hypotheticaly, we could be 2-7 with very acceptable performance and signs of progress, but this team's performance is unacceptable.

2) Are this AD and this coach the right people to compete in the new world for NIL money and transfers?
No. Muir selected TT on the theory that he could establish a winning culture with middle-of-the-road high school recruits and utilize them in an innovative offensive system. Now TT himself admits that his original premise was wrong. TT does not have the charisma, coaching prowess, or proven P4 results to attract recruits or transfers. That's not the kind of coach or leader he is. If his original premise was wrong, then he was never the right guy for the job.

3) Is the current AD the right person to shift Stanford into the NIL world?
No, because he has resisted it for years. He is the symbol of resisting it. He who built the current castle should not be the one to tear it down. And TT is caught up in this, too, because he is not the right kind of forceful advocate for the program's needs vis a vis the rest of the institution and other non-revenue sports. Part of his job is to be the strongest advocate for football. He shouldn't win all of those internal battles, but he needs to provide the tension for his superiors to make the right decisions.

4) Will boosters line up to give money to this AD and this coach?
No, I think they're too smart for that. A new coach has a honeymoon period when boosters, recruits, transfers, and admins believe anything is possible. TT has unfortunately burned up his honeymoon period. The only way to effect change is with another change at the top to open another new chapter.

I continue to believe that Muir is the one who needs to go first, and the new AD should evaluate and select the new coach. If, as you say, nobody in the Administration fricking cares, then you're right that nothing will happen. But isn't it also irrational to pay an AD and a head football coach millions of dollars per year if this is the case?

Frankly, I don’t think there is much disagreement between us.  No matter how it happens, Stanford has to step up with NIL and address changes relative to the portal. . If that means dumping TT and Muir, so be it.  But imo the change in administrative philosophy need come first.  Otherwise, whomever is the next coach will fail as well.

Perhaps  Bob Bowlsby is tired by being the Big 12 Commish.

Yes, I believe you're right.

The two changes - philosophy and AD - are probably tied together. I don't think they can or should pursue a new philosophy with Muir. His dismissal would be a pretty good external indication of a bona fide change in philosophy. It seems unlikely, though...

[JohnR34231]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

If we wanted to drop down and play the kind of schedule Army and Navy do I think we would have considerably more success.
I mean what was the score when Navy played the Domers this year.

[JohnR34231]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

If we wanted to drop down and play the kind of schedule Army and Navy do I think we would have considerably more success.
I mean what was the score when Navy played the Domers this year.

[StanfordMatt]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

Thank you for the correction. Edit: "I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in a power conference without a significant NIL investment".  I'm sure over time Stanford could field a competitive football team in the American Athletic Conference without much NIL money.

If this is the mindset we want to have, then so be it. Turn our nose up at them because we’re in a power conference and they’re not. We can be like Vanderbilt fans chanting “SEC” while their team is 1-11.

Meanwhile, both Army and Navy would wipe the floor with us, while Army is in the top 25 and remains in contention for a CFP berth.

Will Army beat Notre Dame in a few weeks? I don’t know. But I know they have a heckuva better chance than Stanford did this season.

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

[StanfordMatt]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

Thank you for the correction. Edit: "I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in a power conference without a significant NIL investment".  I'm sure over time Stanford could field a competitive football team in the American Athletic Conference without much NIL money.

If this is the mindset we want to have, then so be it. Turn our nose up at them because we’re in a power conference and they’re not. We can be like Vanderbilt fans chanting “SEC” while their team is 1-11.

Meanwhile, both Army and Navy would wipe the floor with us, while Army is in the top 25 and remains in contention for a CFP berth.

Will Army beat Notre Dame in a few weeks? I don’t know. But I know they have a heckuva better chance than Stanford did this season.

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

[lex24]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

Thank you for the correction. Edit: "I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in a power conference without a significant NIL investment".  I'm sure over time Stanford could field a competitive football team in the American Athletic Conference without much NIL money.

If this is the mindset we want to have, then so be it. Turn our nose up at them because we’re in a power conference and they’re not. We can be like Vanderbilt fans chanting “SEC” while their team is 1-11.

Meanwhile, both Army and Navy would wipe the floor with us, while Army is in the top 25 and remains in contention for a CFP berth.

Will Army beat Notre Dame in a few weeks? I don’t know. But I know they have a heckuva better chance than Stanford did this season.

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

Can’t compare the Service Academies to anyone.   That is an altogether different commitment.

[lex24]

I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in this new world without a significant NIL investment.

Army and Navy would like a word.

$0 NIL investment
Zero transfer portal admits
5 year service commitment post-graduation
Combined record: 14-2

Thank you for the correction. Edit: "I think most everyone who follows major college sports knows that it's nearly impossible to compete in a power conference without a significant NIL investment".  I'm sure over time Stanford could field a competitive football team in the American Athletic Conference without much NIL money.

If this is the mindset we want to have, then so be it. Turn our nose up at them because we’re in a power conference and they’re not. We can be like Vanderbilt fans chanting “SEC” while their team is 1-11.

Meanwhile, both Army and Navy would wipe the floor with us, while Army is in the top 25 and remains in contention for a CFP berth.

Will Army beat Notre Dame in a few weeks? I don’t know. But I know they have a heckuva better chance than Stanford did this season.

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

Can’t compare the Service Academies to anyone.   That is an altogether different commitment.

[StanfordMatt]

Can’t compare the Service Academies to anyone.   That is an altogether different commitment.

Why not? Any two items can be compared. You can compare allen wrenches to bottlenose dolphins. Now, you can say that recruiting to Stanford and recruiting to a service academy are night and day different and you’d be correct. Recruiting to the service academies is 100x more difficult than recruiting to Stanford.

Also, Jamey Chadwell has never coached at a service academy. It’s not about the service academies. It’s about thinking outside the box when it comes to unconventional hires that become necessary due to institutional hurdles.

[StanfordMatt]

Can’t compare the Service Academies to anyone.   That is an altogether different commitment.

Why not? Any two items can be compared. You can compare allen wrenches to bottlenose dolphins. Now, you can say that recruiting to Stanford and recruiting to a service academy are night and day different and you’d be correct. Recruiting to the service academies is 100x more difficult than recruiting to Stanford.

Also, Jamey Chadwell has never coached at a service academy. It’s not about the service academies. It’s about thinking outside the box when it comes to unconventional hires that become necessary due to institutional hurdles.

[gailtate]

Which would you rather have? (1) a return to civil, sane (even if occasionally sleazy) national politics or (2) a return to enjoyable, kick-ass Stanford football?

[gailtate]

Which would you rather have? (1) a return to civil, sane (even if occasionally sleazy) national politics or (2) a return to enjoyable, kick-ass Stanford football?

[CardinalSagehen]

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

TT sold himself as exactly that type of guy. He didn't sell himself as the killer recruiter or the guy that could win in NIL, he said he's been a high school coach and could win with a mishmash of talent. He said that his offensive scheme was geared around making the game super simple for QBs so that they could play free, which felt like the Anti-Shaw at that point, whose system was notoriously complex for new QBs to learn. 

But TT is not that guy. He's not It. Does It really exist anymore? Maybe, with your example being Troy Calhoun. But the massively more prevalent way to win is to accept transfers, loosen admissions, and pay NIL/revenue-sharing money. I worry that if we try to thread the needle by identifying another Troy Calhoun, it's possible they were just lucky in their prior job, they were relying on assistants that won't end up following them, and/or their system only works at a lower level of football (all of which can now be alleged about Troy Taylor). I think it's great if a coach can actually get more out of less talent, but it's a risky proposition compared to making the other structural changes that increase talent and make coaching easier.

The other problem is that picking someone on the premise that nothing else needs to change is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It takes the administration off the hook for another few years and fosters inaction. That's what we've seen with TT.

[CardinalSagehen]

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

TT sold himself as exactly that type of guy. He didn't sell himself as the killer recruiter or the guy that could win in NIL, he said he's been a high school coach and could win with a mishmash of talent. He said that his offensive scheme was geared around making the game super simple for QBs so that they could play free, which felt like the Anti-Shaw at that point, whose system was notoriously complex for new QBs to learn. 

But TT is not that guy. He's not It. Does It really exist anymore? Maybe, with your example being Troy Calhoun. But the massively more prevalent way to win is to accept transfers, loosen admissions, and pay NIL/revenue-sharing money. I worry that if we try to thread the needle by identifying another Troy Calhoun, it's possible they were just lucky in their prior job, they were relying on assistants that won't end up following them, and/or their system only works at a lower level of football (all of which can now be alleged about Troy Taylor). I think it's great if a coach can actually get more out of less talent, but it's a risky proposition compared to making the other structural changes that increase talent and make coaching easier.

The other problem is that picking someone on the premise that nothing else needs to change is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It takes the administration off the hook for another few years and fosters inaction. That's what we've seen with TT.

[StanUSwagU]

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

TT sold himself as exactly that type of guy. He didn't sell himself as the killer recruiter or the guy that could win in NIL, he said he's been a high school coach and could win with a mishmash of talent. He said that his offensive scheme was geared around making the game super simple for QBs so that they could play free, which felt like the Anti-Shaw at that point, whose system was notoriously complex for new QBs to learn. 

But TT is not that guy. He's not It. Does It really exist anymore? Maybe, with your example being Troy Calhoun. But the massively more prevalent way to win is to accept transfers, loosen admissions, and pay NIL/revenue-sharing money. I worry that if we try to thread the needle by identifying another Troy Calhoun, it's possible they were just lucky in their prior job, they were relying on assistants that won't end up following them, and/or their system only works at a lower level of football (all of which can now be alleged about Troy Taylor). I think it's great if a coach can actually get more out of less talent, but it's a risky proposition compared to making the other structural changes that increase talent and make coaching easier.

The other problem is that picking someone on the premise that nothing else needs to change is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It takes the administration off the hook for another few years and fosters inaction. That's what we've seen with TT.

CardinalSagehen,

Agree. Structural Changes like the ones you list above are a Prerequisite & Must Be Made, if Stanford Football wants to be Successful going forward. Period.

[StanUSwagU]

We can either toss our hands up and blame everything on the transfer portal and NIL or we can adapt and find a way.

Instead of Troy Taylor, we should’ve hired Troy Calhoun or someone from that mold. Someone with a system designed to compensate for talent deficiencies. Jamey Chadwell never would’ve fit because of the academic piece but he’s another HC with a system that punches above its weight and doesn’t have the triple option stigma attached to it (even though that’s not what Army and Navy are running these days anyways).

TT sold himself as exactly that type of guy. He didn't sell himself as the killer recruiter or the guy that could win in NIL, he said he's been a high school coach and could win with a mishmash of talent. He said that his offensive scheme was geared around making the game super simple for QBs so that they could play free, which felt like the Anti-Shaw at that point, whose system was notoriously complex for new QBs to learn. 

But TT is not that guy. He's not It. Does It really exist anymore? Maybe, with your example being Troy Calhoun. But the massively more prevalent way to win is to accept transfers, loosen admissions, and pay NIL/revenue-sharing money. I worry that if we try to thread the needle by identifying another Troy Calhoun, it's possible they were just lucky in their prior job, they were relying on assistants that won't end up following them, and/or their system only works at a lower level of football (all of which can now be alleged about Troy Taylor). I think it's great if a coach can actually get more out of less talent, but it's a risky proposition compared to making the other structural changes that increase talent and make coaching easier.

The other problem is that picking someone on the premise that nothing else needs to change is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It takes the administration off the hook for another few years and fosters inaction. That's what we've seen with TT.

CardinalSagehen,

Agree. Structural Changes like the ones you list above are a Prerequisite & Must Be Made, if Stanford Football wants to be Successful going forward. Period.

[newguy]

Which would you rather have? (1) a return to civil, sane (even if occasionally sleazy) national politics or (2) a return to enjoyable, kick-ass Stanford football?

the former.

[newguy]

Which would you rather have? (1) a return to civil, sane (even if occasionally sleazy) national politics or (2) a return to enjoyable, kick-ass Stanford football?

the former.

[lex24]

Can’t compare the Service Academies to anyone.   That is an altogether different commitment.

Why not? Any two items can be compared. You can compare allen wrenches to bottlenose dolphins. Now, you can say that recruiting to Stanford and recruiting to a service academy are night and day different and you’d be correct. Recruiting to the service academies is 100x more difficult than recruiting to Stanford.

Also, Jamey Chadwell has never coached at a service academy. It’s not about the service academies. It’s about thinking outside the box when it comes to unconventional hires that become necessary due to institutional hurdles.

You aren’t going to get the same type of commitment at any other university.  The portal is irrelevant.  NIL is irrelevant.  And I’ll suggest those that choose to make the commitment to a service academy and what follows are cut from a somewhat different cloth.

But sure, you can compare anything.  And sometimes the comparison falls short.  Stanford is not a service academy.

As for an out of the box coach.  Great.  Show me where that has worked over a significant period of time at a major D-1 football program.  

Maybe Stanford can find someone to run the wishbone.  That will play well.

[lex24]

Can’t compare the Service Academies to anyone.   That is an altogether different commitment.

Why not? Any two items can be compared. You can compare allen wrenches to bottlenose dolphins. Now, you can say that recruiting to Stanford and recruiting to a service academy are night and day different and you’d be correct. Recruiting to the service academies is 100x more difficult than recruiting to Stanford.

Also, Jamey Chadwell has never coached at a service academy. It’s not about the service academies. It’s about thinking outside the box when it comes to unconventional hires that become necessary due to institutional hurdles.

You aren’t going to get the same type of commitment at any other university.  The portal is irrelevant.  NIL is irrelevant.  And I’ll suggest those that choose to make the commitment to a service academy and what follows are cut from a somewhat different cloth.

But sure, you can compare anything.  And sometimes the comparison falls short.  Stanford is not a service academy.

As for an out of the box coach.  Great.  Show me where that has worked over a significant period of time at a major D-1 football program.  

Maybe Stanford can find someone to run the wishbone.  That will play well.

[JohnR34231]

My experience (I had a son play at a service academy) is that most of the players there are ones that wanted to play D-1 football but couldn't get satisfactory offers from other D-1 schools because they were considered too small, too slow, whatever.
I asked him one time if there were many kids on the team that were gung-ho military. He said there were a few but they never played and took a lot of ribbing from the other players for being gung ho.
Take Navy's star QB, He comes from right outside of Columbus and his family were reportedly brobdingnagian Ohio State fans. Don't know if he got an offer there or not but I'll bet he didn't and that's why he ended up at Navy.

[JohnR34231]

My experience (I had a son play at a service academy) is that most of the players there are ones that wanted to play D-1 football but couldn't get satisfactory offers from other D-1 schools because they were considered too small, too slow, whatever.
I asked him one time if there were many kids on the team that were gung-ho military. He said there were a few but they never played and took a lot of ribbing from the other players for being gung ho.
Take Navy's star QB, He comes from right outside of Columbus and his family were reportedly brobdingnagian Ohio State fans. Don't know if he got an offer there or not but I'll bet he didn't and that's why he ended up at Navy.

[StanfordMatt]

As for an out of the box coach.  Great.  Show me where that has worked over a significant period of time at a major D-1 football program.  

To a certain extent, it worked at Stanford in 2007 with Harbaugh’s hire. We hired an FCS coach from a non-scholarship program who ran a pro-style offense with formations featuring 9 OL. We zigged while everyone else was zagging because we knew we had to be different to succeed. We used our uniqueness to topple the Oregon’s and USC’s of the world even though we couldn’t hold a candle to those programs in terms of resources.

Fast forward to 2024 and you can make the argument that the institutional disadvantages for Stanford are bigger than they were in 2007 as a result of NIL, the portal, etc.

The “zig” of loading up on OL and an elite pocket passing QB is no longer big enough to compensate for those institutional disadvantages.

The “zig” has to be bigger for us to succeed nowadays. Like Billy Beane’s Moneyball.

Is it guaranteed to work? No. Credit to Presbyterian for hiring the Arkansas HS coach who never punted a few years ago. That failed miserably. But they dared to be great and didn’t settle for the easy way out (e.g. just hiring the coach from up the street who’s had some success at a lower level).

Stanford is an institution that dares to be great. Rather than sell our soul to the NIL gods or sacrifice our academics to slum it in the portal (options which are moot anyway because the powers that be won’t allow it), I’d rather dare to be great in our hiring process. Sadly, Muir is woefully unequipped to handle that task.

[StanfordMatt]

As for an out of the box coach.  Great.  Show me where that has worked over a significant period of time at a major D-1 football program.  

To a certain extent, it worked at Stanford in 2007 with Harbaugh’s hire. We hired an FCS coach from a non-scholarship program who ran a pro-style offense with formations featuring 9 OL. We zigged while everyone else was zagging because we knew we had to be different to succeed. We used our uniqueness to topple the Oregon’s and USC’s of the world even though we couldn’t hold a candle to those programs in terms of resources.

Fast forward to 2024 and you can make the argument that the institutional disadvantages for Stanford are bigger than they were in 2007 as a result of NIL, the portal, etc.

The “zig” of loading up on OL and an elite pocket passing QB is no longer big enough to compensate for those institutional disadvantages.

The “zig” has to be bigger for us to succeed nowadays. Like Billy Beane’s Moneyball.

Is it guaranteed to work? No. Credit to Presbyterian for hiring the Arkansas HS coach who never punted a few years ago. That failed miserably. But they dared to be great and didn’t settle for the easy way out (e.g. just hiring the coach from up the street who’s had some success at a lower level).

Stanford is an institution that dares to be great. Rather than sell our soul to the NIL gods or sacrifice our academics to slum it in the portal (options which are moot anyway because the powers that be won’t allow it), I’d rather dare to be great in our hiring process. Sadly, Muir is woefully unequipped to handle that task.

[Goose]

As for an out of the box coach.  Great.  Show me where that has worked over a significant period of time at a major D-1 football program.  

To a certain extent, it worked at Stanford in 2007 with Harbaugh’s hire. We hired an FCS coach from a non-scholarship program who ran a pro-style offense with formations featuring 9 OL. We zigged while everyone else was zagging because we knew we had to be different to succeed. We used our uniqueness to topple the Oregon’s and USC’s of the world even though we couldn’t hold a candle to those programs in terms of resources.

IMO you are exactly correct. EUTM also was a factor. However, it must be said that JH also had the good fortune of already having Toby on his squad and in successfully recruiting some OL that were not merely good players but also good leaders. They helped form the culture.

Fast forward to 2024 and you can make the argument that the institutional disadvantages for Stanford are bigger than they were in 2007 as a result of NIL, the portal, etc.

Agree. Some of these things can be "fixed" through actions Stanford can actually take. Others cannot.

The “zig” of loading up on OL and an elite pocket passing QB is no longer big enough to compensate for those institutional disadvantages.

Disagree. The fact is that Stanford progressively lost the ability to "load up" on OL culminating in the last two years of David Shaw's tenure where our lines were simply not good. Coaching turnover was part of it, but the root cause is still unknown. We are still acutely suffering from this issue. Tanner McKee was the last QB Stanford successfully recruited that can be even remotely considered "elite". What we have playing now is anything but.

For these reasons we can't know if loading up on OL and having an elite passing QB is "enough" because right now we can't do it. The institutional disadvantages may have rendered so doing impossible, but we haven't "proven" that to be the case. The approach itself may still be fine. We would however need to find a coach that can execute that approach. So far TT is definitely not that and schematically doesn't want to be that. However, until he gets an OL it won't matter one whit what he wants to do schematically :-).

The “zig” has to be bigger for us to succeed nowadays. Like Billy Beane’s Moneyball.

Is it guaranteed to work? No. Credit to Presbyterian for hiring the Arkansas HS coach who never punted a few years ago. That failed miserably. But they dared to be great and didn’t settle for the easy way out (e.g. just hiring the coach from up the street who’s had some success at a lower level).

Stanford is an institution that dares to be great. Rather than sell our soul to the NIL gods or sacrifice our academics to slum it in the portal (options which are moot anyway because the powers that be won’t allow it), I’d rather dare to be great in our hiring process. Sadly, Muir is woefully unequipped to handle that task.

I mostly agree that "daring to be great" in the hiring process is what Stanford needs to do. However, be aware that may mean hiring a conservative coach that wants to run the ball and play defense a lot. It may not be flashy. Sometimes hiring a coach from just down the street (in San Diego) who had success at a lower level is the right thing to do. Hiring a coach that can lead a team out of the wilderness isn't easy. Most coaching hires fail to accomplish their goal. I agree Muir isn't the guy to do that hiring. However, "good" ADs don't grow on trees either.

[Goose]

As for an out of the box coach.  Great.  Show me where that has worked over a significant period of time at a major D-1 football program.  

To a certain extent, it worked at Stanford in 2007 with Harbaugh’s hire. We hired an FCS coach from a non-scholarship program who ran a pro-style offense with formations featuring 9 OL. We zigged while everyone else was zagging because we knew we had to be different to succeed. We used our uniqueness to topple the Oregon’s and USC’s of the world even though we couldn’t hold a candle to those programs in terms of resources.

IMO you are exactly correct. EUTM also was a factor. However, it must be said that JH also had the good fortune of already having Toby on his squad and in successfully recruiting some OL that were not merely good players but also good leaders. They helped form the culture.

Fast forward to 2024 and you can make the argument that the institutional disadvantages for Stanford are bigger than they were in 2007 as a result of NIL, the portal, etc.

Agree. Some of these things can be "fixed" through actions Stanford can actually take. Others cannot.

The “zig” of loading up on OL and an elite pocket passing QB is no longer big enough to compensate for those institutional disadvantages.

Disagree. The fact is that Stanford progressively lost the ability to "load up" on OL culminating in the last two years of David Shaw's tenure where our lines were simply not good. Coaching turnover was part of it, but the root cause is still unknown. We are still acutely suffering from this issue. Tanner McKee was the last QB Stanford successfully recruited that can be even remotely considered "elite". What we have playing now is anything but.

For these reasons we can't know if loading up on OL and having an elite passing QB is "enough" because right now we can't do it. The institutional disadvantages may have rendered so doing impossible, but we haven't "proven" that to be the case. The approach itself may still be fine. We would however need to find a coach that can execute that approach. So far TT is definitely not that and schematically doesn't want to be that. However, until he gets an OL it won't matter one whit what he wants to do schematically :-).

The “zig” has to be bigger for us to succeed nowadays. Like Billy Beane’s Moneyball.

Is it guaranteed to work? No. Credit to Presbyterian for hiring the Arkansas HS coach who never punted a few years ago. That failed miserably. But they dared to be great and didn’t settle for the easy way out (e.g. just hiring the coach from up the street who’s had some success at a lower level).

Stanford is an institution that dares to be great. Rather than sell our soul to the NIL gods or sacrifice our academics to slum it in the portal (options which are moot anyway because the powers that be won’t allow it), I’d rather dare to be great in our hiring process. Sadly, Muir is woefully unequipped to handle that task.

I mostly agree that "daring to be great" in the hiring process is what Stanford needs to do. However, be aware that may mean hiring a conservative coach that wants to run the ball and play defense a lot. It may not be flashy. Sometimes hiring a coach from just down the street (in San Diego) who had success at a lower level is the right thing to do. Hiring a coach that can lead a team out of the wilderness isn't easy. Most coaching hires fail to accomplish their goal. I agree Muir isn't the guy to do that hiring. However, "good" ADs don't grow on trees either.

[Goose]

What was actually the call on the David Bailey ejection? I think it was a "flagrant personal foul" which comes with an ejection and an automatic 1 game suspension. Is this correct? A simple "personal foul" doesn't come with an ejection or a suspension.

[Goose]

What was actually the call on the David Bailey ejection? I think it was a "flagrant personal foul" which comes with an ejection and an automatic 1 game suspension. Is this correct? A simple "personal foul" doesn't come with an ejection or a suspension.

[CowboyIndian]

What was actually the call on the David Bailey ejection? I think it was a "flagrant personal foul" which comes with an ejection and an automatic 1 game suspension. Is this correct? A simple "personal foul" doesn't come with an ejection or a suspension.

They (the announcers...didn't hear the ref) specifically said he was "disqualified", not ejected. That allowed him to stay on the sidelines rather than leave the field and I assume it means he won't have to sit out a game.

[CowboyIndian]

What was actually the call on the David Bailey ejection? I think it was a "flagrant personal foul" which comes with an ejection and an automatic 1 game suspension. Is this correct? A simple "personal foul" doesn't come with an ejection or a suspension.

They (the announcers...didn't hear the ref) specifically said he was "disqualified", not ejected. That allowed him to stay on the sidelines rather than leave the field and I assume it means he won't have to sit out a game.