[cardcrimson]

I was there at the same time. The student body and campus culture are very different now. Walk around campus on a Friday afternoon. How many students do you see shooting hoops, playing ultimate, throwing or kicking a ball around, hitting a tennis ball with a friend? Stanford used to admit people like me, academically-minded students who also loved sports. Probably like many of you. We created and sustained a goofy and fun Stanford style of rah-rah while we were students. We became alumni with that same Stanford spirit. 

As was I. One of my best memories was freshman year. Our dorm had a party on a spring Thursday night and we had half a keg left over on Friday. So we dragged it out to the Wilbur fields for a softball game. One of the guys in our dorm played football and was good friends with our QB, who also played baseball. With an offer of free beer, he enticed him and his buddies over. So we played beer softball with a future HOFer, and several NFL and MLB players. What an absolute hoot. Doubt that happens on campus any more. . ..

[cardcrimson]

I was there at the same time. The student body and campus culture are very different now. Walk around campus on a Friday afternoon. How many students do you see shooting hoops, playing ultimate, throwing or kicking a ball around, hitting a tennis ball with a friend? Stanford used to admit people like me, academically-minded students who also loved sports. Probably like many of you. We created and sustained a goofy and fun Stanford style of rah-rah while we were students. We became alumni with that same Stanford spirit. 

As was I. One of my best memories was freshman year. Our dorm had a party on a spring Thursday night and we had half a keg left over on Friday. So we dragged it out to the Wilbur fields for a softball game. One of the guys in our dorm played football and was good friends with our QB, who also played baseball. With an offer of free beer, he enticed him and his buddies over. So we played beer softball with a future HOFer, and several NFL and MLB players. What an absolute hoot. Doubt that happens on campus any more. . ..

[martyup]

That reminds me of a day when our fraternity was in the IM flag football championship game and we showed up with Dot on our team.  The other team, representing a rival fraternity, was nearly in tears and refused to play the game unless Dot didn't participate.  We knew he couldn't play because he was a varsity athlete, but we wanted to see how they would react.  We beat them anyway while Dot coached us and cheered us on from the sidelines.

[martyup]

That reminds me of a day when our fraternity was in the IM flag football championship game and we showed up with Dot on our team.  The other team, representing a rival fraternity, was nearly in tears and refused to play the game unless Dot didn't participate.  We knew he couldn't play because he was a varsity athlete, but we wanted to see how they would react.  We beat them anyway while Dot coached us and cheered us on from the sidelines.

[d4cohn]

I think football/basketball attendance is being conflated with sports interest/attendance in general (in the student body, in the alumni base etc.). Stanford softball is building a bigger stadium, because as BobK points out, there are not enough seats for all the fans.

Do I think we would sell out if the football team was good again? Not necessarily. But I think the student body, and fan base in general, would be engaged if the team was winning.

Stanford men's basketball has been (with the exception of a Sweet Sixteen run) awful for 15 years (I am optimistic about Kyle Smith though). Stanford football, except for a COVID season where no fans could attend, has had or is on track for losing seasons in 5 years. 

If the teams aren't good enough, people have other options to do with their time.

On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

[d4cohn]

I think football/basketball attendance is being conflated with sports interest/attendance in general (in the student body, in the alumni base etc.). Stanford softball is building a bigger stadium, because as BobK points out, there are not enough seats for all the fans.

Do I think we would sell out if the football team was good again? Not necessarily. But I think the student body, and fan base in general, would be engaged if the team was winning.

Stanford men's basketball has been (with the exception of a Sweet Sixteen run) awful for 15 years (I am optimistic about Kyle Smith though). Stanford football, except for a COVID season where no fans could attend, has had or is on track for losing seasons in 5 years. 

If the teams aren't good enough, people have other options to do with their time.

On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

[Goose]

I think football/basketball attendance is being conflated with sports interest/attendance in general (in the student body, in the alumni base etc.). Stanford softball is building a bigger stadium, because as BobK points out, there are not enough seats for all the fans.

Do I think we would sell out if the football team was good again? Not necessarily. But I think the student body, and fan base in general, would be engaged if the team was winning.

Stanford men's basketball has been (with the exception of a Sweet Sixteen run) awful for 15 years (I am optimistic about Kyle Smith though). Stanford football, except for a COVID season where no fans could attend, has had or is on track for losing seasons in 5 years. 

If the teams aren't good enough, people have other options to do with their time.

On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

At this point I think most of us would be deliriously happy with four wins.

[Goose]

I think football/basketball attendance is being conflated with sports interest/attendance in general (in the student body, in the alumni base etc.). Stanford softball is building a bigger stadium, because as BobK points out, there are not enough seats for all the fans.

Do I think we would sell out if the football team was good again? Not necessarily. But I think the student body, and fan base in general, would be engaged if the team was winning.

Stanford men's basketball has been (with the exception of a Sweet Sixteen run) awful for 15 years (I am optimistic about Kyle Smith though). Stanford football, except for a COVID season where no fans could attend, has had or is on track for losing seasons in 5 years. 

If the teams aren't good enough, people have other options to do with their time.

On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

At this point I think most of us would be deliriously happy with four wins.

[martyup]

At this point I think most of us would be deliriously happy with four wins.

[martyup]

At this point I think most of us would be deliriously happy with four wins.

[gailtate]

I think football/basketball attendance is being conflated with sports interest/attendance in general (in the student body, in the alumni base etc.). Stanford softball is building a bigger stadium, because as BobK points out, there are not enough seats for all the fans.

Do I think we would sell out if the football team was good again? Not necessarily. But I think the student body, and fan base in general, would be engaged if the team was winning.

Stanford men's basketball has been (with the exception of a Sweet Sixteen run) awful for 15 years (I am optimistic about   Kyle Smith though). Stanford football, except for a COVID season where no fans could attend, has had or is on track for losing seasons in 5 years. 

If the teams aren't good enough, people have other options to do with their time.

On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

"Faint"? Anyone to whom a path to .500 is discernible at this point is not paying attention.

[gailtate]

I think football/basketball attendance is being conflated with sports interest/attendance in general (in the student body, in the alumni base etc.). Stanford softball is building a bigger stadium, because as BobK points out, there are not enough seats for all the fans.

Do I think we would sell out if the football team was good again? Not necessarily. But I think the student body, and fan base in general, would be engaged if the team was winning.

Stanford men's basketball has been (with the exception of a Sweet Sixteen run) awful for 15 years (I am optimistic about   Kyle Smith though). Stanford football, except for a COVID season where no fans could attend, has had or is on track for losing seasons in 5 years. 

If the teams aren't good enough, people have other options to do with their time.

On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

"Faint"? Anyone to whom a path to .500 is discernible at this point is not paying attention.

[SkiBum80]

...On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

Maybe if we watch "Hoosiers" enough times.
But we still need a Jimmy Chitwood on the team.

[SkiBum80]

...On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

Maybe if we watch "Hoosiers" enough times.
But we still need a Jimmy Chitwood on the team.

[martyup]

...On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

Maybe if we watch "Hoosiers" enough times.
But we still need a Jimmy Chitwood on the team.

Well, we've been playing like sh*t, which rhymes with chit.  And we call ourselves trees, which make wood.  So, we're kinda there already.

[martyup]

...On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

Maybe if we watch "Hoosiers" enough times.
But we still need a Jimmy Chitwood on the team.

Well, we've been playing like sh*t, which rhymes with chit.  And we call ourselves trees, which make wood.  So, we're kinda there already.

[Mick]

...On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

Maybe if we watch "Hoosiers" enough times.
But we still need a Jimmy Chitwood on the team.

Too many Rudys, not enough Hornungs.

[Mick]

...On a hopeful note, the closing schedule is very favorable. Though unlikely to very unlikely, if the team can beat Wake Forest at home, there may be a faint path to 6 wins.

Maybe if we watch "Hoosiers" enough times.
But we still need a Jimmy Chitwood on the team.

Too many Rudys, not enough Hornungs.

[vataha]

The football has been almost unwatchable for at least the past five years, men's basketball maybe 10-15 years. HOWEVER, we "watch" (through hands over eyes) because we are loyal Stanford fans, and there aren't a whole lot of us. We support these teams as if they are family members, its in our DNA. But seriously why would anyone else want to watch such a boring, uninspiring product? If you dont have a connection to Stanford why would you spend three hours watching paint dry, much less pay good money to watch in person?

Remember not long ago when we started to kick everyone's ass, I remember seeing much more people showing up and supporting stanford, and many of these folks were those who you never saw at games previously and that is because we were WINNERS. These were the very same folks who came out of the woodwork to support cal when they were winning with Tedford. Many a neanderthal were claiming stanford for their own because we were winning and winning with INTELLECTUAL BRUTALITY.

People want to be entertained even if the outcome is a L. We didnt win much with Elway but with him Stanford was entertaining and from what I can remember people showed up and games were mostly entertaining. 

I will support Stanford to the grave but losing horribly week after week, year after year is a bit mind and spirit numbing.

[vataha]

The football has been almost unwatchable for at least the past five years, men's basketball maybe 10-15 years. HOWEVER, we "watch" (through hands over eyes) because we are loyal Stanford fans, and there aren't a whole lot of us. We support these teams as if they are family members, its in our DNA. But seriously why would anyone else want to watch such a boring, uninspiring product? If you dont have a connection to Stanford why would you spend three hours watching paint dry, much less pay good money to watch in person?

Remember not long ago when we started to kick everyone's ass, I remember seeing much more people showing up and supporting stanford, and many of these folks were those who you never saw at games previously and that is because we were WINNERS. These were the very same folks who came out of the woodwork to support cal when they were winning with Tedford. Many a neanderthal were claiming stanford for their own because we were winning and winning with INTELLECTUAL BRUTALITY.

People want to be entertained even if the outcome is a L. We didnt win much with Elway but with him Stanford was entertaining and from what I can remember people showed up and games were mostly entertaining. 

I will support Stanford to the grave but losing horribly week after week, year after year is a bit mind and spirit numbing.

[gailtate]

The football has been almost unwatchable for at least the past five years, men's basketball maybe 10-15 years. HOWEVER, we "watch" (through hands over eyes) because we are loyal Stanford fans, and there aren't a whole lot of us. We support these teams as if they are family members, its in our DNA. But seriously why would anyone else want to watch such a boring, uninspiring product? If you dont have a connection to Stanford why would you spend three hours watching paint dry, much less pay good money to watch in person?

Remember not long ago when we started to kick everyone's ass, I remember seeing much more people showing up and supporting stanford, and many of these folks were those who you never saw at games previously and that is because we were WINNERS. These were the very same folks who came out of the woodwork to support cal when they were winning with Tedford. Many a neanderthal were claiming stanford for their own because we were winning and winning with INTELLECTUAL BRUTALITY.

People want to be entertained even if the outcome is a L. We didnt win much with Elway but with him Stanford was entertaining and from what I can remember people showed up and games were mostly entertaining. 

I will support Stanford to the grave but losing horribly week after week, year after year is a bit mind and spirit numbing.

Trivial for some people, maybe, but it's of symbolic importance. Messing with the uniforms in this bedraggled year is misguided and mistimed.  (Oregon is really the only serious program that has established "variety" and playfulness as a brand.) Let's get serious again. And look like it. Think how we looked in the Big Bowls. We can look like that again. Week after week. Might not help but it sure as sh!t wouldn't hurt.

[gailtate]

The football has been almost unwatchable for at least the past five years, men's basketball maybe 10-15 years. HOWEVER, we "watch" (through hands over eyes) because we are loyal Stanford fans, and there aren't a whole lot of us. We support these teams as if they are family members, its in our DNA. But seriously why would anyone else want to watch such a boring, uninspiring product? If you dont have a connection to Stanford why would you spend three hours watching paint dry, much less pay good money to watch in person?

Remember not long ago when we started to kick everyone's ass, I remember seeing much more people showing up and supporting stanford, and many of these folks were those who you never saw at games previously and that is because we were WINNERS. These were the very same folks who came out of the woodwork to support cal when they were winning with Tedford. Many a neanderthal were claiming stanford for their own because we were winning and winning with INTELLECTUAL BRUTALITY.

People want to be entertained even if the outcome is a L. We didnt win much with Elway but with him Stanford was entertaining and from what I can remember people showed up and games were mostly entertaining. 

I will support Stanford to the grave but losing horribly week after week, year after year is a bit mind and spirit numbing.

Trivial for some people, maybe, but it's of symbolic importance. Messing with the uniforms in this bedraggled year is misguided and mistimed.  (Oregon is really the only serious program that has established "variety" and playfulness as a brand.) Let's get serious again. And look like it. Think how we looked in the Big Bowls. We can look like that again. Week after week. Might not help but it sure as sh!t wouldn't hurt.

[martyup]

I agree on the uniforms.  I was once told by a wise race care builder, "Don't paint it until it runs."

[martyup]

I agree on the uniforms.  I was once told by a wise race care builder, "Don't paint it until it runs."

[oman]

I went to Stanford when Elway was throwing to Margerum.  

I didn't care about attendance because of what was going on the field way far from the student section and because the sun was making me hallucinate and I had splinters in my ass.  

We just need to work to re-establish the brand.   It looks like it's going to take awhile.

This thread makes me sad.

[oman]

I went to Stanford when Elway was throwing to Margerum.  

I didn't care about attendance because of what was going on the field way far from the student section and because the sun was making me hallucinate and I had splinters in my ass.  

We just need to work to re-establish the brand.   It looks like it's going to take awhile.

This thread makes me sad.

[Row80Critic]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

[Row80Critic]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

[SkiBum80]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

[SkiBum80]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

[crackpot]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

It won't. But is it too much to ask that Muir insist TT hire a QB coach and offensive coordinator?

[crackpot]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

It won't. But is it too much to ask that Muir insist TT hire a QB coach and offensive coordinator?

[Row80Critic]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

[Row80Critic]

Institutional roadblocks aside, I still think Taylor's seat-heater deserves to be clicked on.  

After 20 games, Taylor officially has the worst win-loss record in the 130 yr history of the program -- worse than Harris, worse than Teevens, worse than Wiggin, worse than every coach fired after one season.  Surprisingly, he's now coached more games than about half of all Stanford head coaches.  WF made some bad in-game coaching decisions today, yet Stanford was still out-coached. As Shaw said about himself, it's time. If Stanford wants to compete at this level (do they?), they need to go out and get a name-brand coach.  They certainly have the money if they want to, as evidenced by Shaw's final paychecks...

All good points.
I’m reminded of Yankees back in the day. The owner didn’t tolerate losing
Patience was in short supply.
Managers were fired spontaneously and often for poor team performance.
But Muir isn’t Steinbrenner and Cards are not the Yankees
Hence I’d be shocked if any move towards Coach TT is taken any time before end of this season, if then.

Oh, for sure.  No real point in doing anything before the end of the season, unless needed to secure someone new.  That said, I'm very aware the whole concept of pro-actively replacing a bad coach in a timely manner is something between a pipe dream and a coin in a fountain. Same could be said for all of the program's other administration-imposed obstacles. If they go 2-10 this season, maybe they'd take some action on the coach, but I'd still put the odds at or under 50%, sadly.

[fullmetal]

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

[fullmetal]

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

[martyup]

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

The question is, has Taylor shown that he can build a winning program?  With the personnel we have, should we have won more games over the past two seasons?  Does TT make good in-game decisions?  Does TT get his team ready to play D1 football by implementing a solid strength and conditioning program?  Does TT bring out the best efforts from his players through his leadership style?

There has to be a tipping point when it becomes clear that Taylor is not the coach Stanford needs to build back a winning program.  The hard part is determining when we are at that point.

BTW, I believe that April has proven himself as a solid DC.

[martyup]

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

The question is, has Taylor shown that he can build a winning program?  With the personnel we have, should we have won more games over the past two seasons?  Does TT make good in-game decisions?  Does TT get his team ready to play D1 football by implementing a solid strength and conditioning program?  Does TT bring out the best efforts from his players through his leadership style?

There has to be a tipping point when it becomes clear that Taylor is not the coach Stanford needs to build back a winning program.  The hard part is determining when we are at that point.

BTW, I believe that April has proven himself as a solid DC.

[Row80Critic]

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

I do believe that Stanford could have beaten TCU and WF with better in-game decisions.  Both games were very close at the end, and in both cases head coach decisions cost them the game.  And stop calling me Shirley.

---

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

The question is, has Taylor shown that he can build a winning program?  With the personnel we have, should we have won more games over the past two seasons?  Does TT make good in-game decisions?  Does TT get his team ready to play D1 football by implementing a solid strength and conditioning program?  Does TT bring out the best efforts from his players through his leadership style?

There has to be a tipping point when it becomes clear that Taylor is not the coach Stanford needs to build back a winning program.  The hard part is determining when we are at that point.

BTW, I believe that April has proven himself as a solid DC.

With 2 recruiting classes under his belt, and no results to show for it, does anyone realistically believe next year would see a meaningful uptick?  Between the draft and the one-way portal, will the team even have more skill?  I get that I'm being harsh -- my bad, just frustrated -- but this isn't working.  If Stanford stays on the same path, it will ensure the same results.  Do they care?

[Row80Critic]

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

I do believe that Stanford could have beaten TCU and WF with better in-game decisions.  Both games were very close at the end, and in both cases head coach decisions cost them the game.  And stop calling me Shirley.

---

Between DB injuries and not having a great solution at QB, you surely can't think a coaching change solves either of those problems.

The question is, has Taylor shown that he can build a winning program?  With the personnel we have, should we have won more games over the past two seasons?  Does TT make good in-game decisions?  Does TT get his team ready to play D1 football by implementing a solid strength and conditioning program?  Does TT bring out the best efforts from his players through his leadership style?

There has to be a tipping point when it becomes clear that Taylor is not the coach Stanford needs to build back a winning program.  The hard part is determining when we are at that point.

BTW, I believe that April has proven himself as a solid DC.

With 2 recruiting classes under his belt, and no results to show for it, does anyone realistically believe next year would see a meaningful uptick?  Between the draft and the one-way portal, will the team even have more skill?  I get that I'm being harsh -- my bad, just frustrated -- but this isn't working.  If Stanford stays on the same path, it will ensure the same results.  Do they care?