|
How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 7:38 AM
How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
It can happen, even in the Dome.  It needs to start with the realization that he is 17-4 and not going anywhere anytime soon. So the next coach stuff is a pipe dream. What does he do well: 1. Recruit. Absolutely key. And so far I think we'd all agree he's been very strong here. 2. Philosophy. Shaw, I think, has the right philosophy offensively for Stanford - power football. The anti-spread if you will. Stanford wil never recruit the speed to play a spread. They can recruit the lineman to play power ball. Shaw I think sees that. 3. Team readiness. WSU was an aberration. The team has always been ready to play and plays hard for him. Again, two keys. What he does not do well: 1. Adjust. To me this is his biggest failing. Call it stubborness etc, but his failure to look at the QB situation is huge. 2. Game management. A work in progress. This to me was Harbs strength. Still is with the Niners. Shaw isn't there yet. 3. Game plan. Weird this year. It seems to be almost an overreation every week to the previous. WSU was just plain awful. Beyond Vanilla. OTOH, they threw a lot against CAl on First down, opened things up versus Arizona. I just don't see any real consistency here. Don't get it. 4. Overly conservative. He simply has not shown that ability to roll the dice that I'd like to see at times. I'm talking primarily 4th down stuff on the opponents side of the 5o. OTOH - part of that is the realization that this team butters its bread on defense. The future: 1. Can he grow? A valid question. He is still a very young coach. Last year he had Harbaugh's team and Luck. In many ways this is his first real year. Good coaches learn from their mistakes. Not sure Shaw can even admit one yet. 2. Coordinators. If Shaw's best attribute is recruiting, strong coordinators are a must. Pep has shown very very little. Lets hope he grows a bit too. I like Mason. The defense is varied and aggressive. There have been some very successful college coaches that aren't great game day guys but recruit like hell and have strong coordinators. Switzer comes to mind. This season will swing between 9-3 and 7-5. If they end 7-5, it will be an underacheivement. That falls on Shaw. 9-3? Personally, I don't think you could expect more than that at the beginning of the year, so if they finsih there. Shaw has done fine. I suppose now I get the Benjamin treatment. But I'm just trying to lay out a little bit of a reasoned approach. As I know you will - FIRE AWAY.  |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 7:44 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
lex24 wrote:
This season will swing between 9-3 and 7-5. If they end 7-5, it will be an underacheivement. No to be pedantic, but the season will end anywhere from 12-2 to 6-7.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 8:53 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
lex24 wrote:
3. Team readiness. WSU was an aberration. The team has always been ready to play and plays hard for him. Again, two keys.
Team readiness is much more than "playing hard." Our game plans against UW and ND in particular were spectacularly predictable, and thus easily foiled. You're right that Shaw will be here for a long time. It follows that Pep has to go, or that his role be modified. Who comes up with the game plan? Who calls the plays? Who is coaching up the QBs and WRs? No one has a clue what is going on behind our offense. The Andrew Luck Director of Offense -- what a joke. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 9:10 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
lex24 wrote:
What does he do well:
1. Recruit. Absolutely key. And so far I think we'd all agree he's been very strong here.
2. Philosophy. Shaw, I think, has the right philosophy offensively for Stanford - power football. The anti-spread if you will. Stanford wil never recruit the speed to play a spread. They can recruit the lineman to play power ball. Shaw I think sees that.
3. Team readiness. WSU was an aberration. The team has always been ready to play and plays hard for him. Again, two keys.
1) Recruit: Yes 2) Philosophy: That is what he's doing, but I think it has more to do with the fact that he was coaching in the pros and then tagged along with Harbaugh and realized it's what can work here. But this heavily crosses into game planning/play calling and the multiple jumbo sets with no wide-outs power runs at the end of the WSU game, setting up our failed drive and giving WSU another shot, were a pathetic reflection of Shaw turning "philosophy" into "dogma". 3) I think it was Shayne Skov that got our guys ready to play. Besides, you cannot say " always ready to play" after saying you will ignore the times they aren't ready to play as an "aberration".
Last edited 10/30/2012 11:40 AM by fischtank
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 9:24 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw CHEW ON THIS
HARBAUGH DEMOTED SHAW FROM OC TO A POSITION COACH, AND GAVE ROMAN THE OC RESPONSIBILITY. HARBAUGH TOOK ROMAN WITH HIM. THE 49ER OFFENSE IS STILL A POWER RUN GAME WITH MULTIPLE FORMATIONS, MOTION, AND CREATIVITY, CONSPICUOUS BY THEIR ABSENCE IN SHAW'S OFFENSE.
THE REASONS SHAW WAS LEFT BEHIND AFTER THE DEMOTION STARTED MANIFESTING THEMSELVES LAST YEAR, EVERYTIME WE GOT INTO A PRESSURE SITUATION AS WE CAME DOWN THE BACKSTRETCH, AND IN THE BOWL GAME. LUCK WAS THERE TO BAIL SHAW OUT.
THIS YEAR, NO LUCK, NO OFFENSE, NO CLUE. JUST STONEWALLING AND OBFUSCATION ABOUT THE QB POSITION, CLOCK MANAGEMENT, AND PERSONNEL DECISIONS.
THANK GOD FOR MASON AND SOME DEFENSIVE TALENT.
SHAW IS WHAT HE IS, JUST LIKE NUNES IS WHAT HE IS. SHAW NEEDS TO HIRE A FIRST RATE OC, PAY HIM $400-500k TO GET REAL TALENT AT THAT JOB, AND THEN SHAW NEEDS TO BRUSH UP ON HIS DEMEANOR AT PRESS CONFERENCES. HE'S A STIFF. WHERE'S THE PERSONALITY THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RECRUITING SUCCESS? OR IS HE REALLY THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN?
BTW, WE HAVE RATIONAL DISCUSSIONS ALL THE TIME HERE. YOUR PHONY MORAL HIGH GROUND IMPLICIT IN YOUR POST IS B.S. TYPICAL PREMIE STANCE. LEAD WITH YOUR CHIN AND THEN PRETEND IT'S OUR FAULT WE BEOTCH SLAP YOU, REMOTEY STYLE.
"...I thought something is brewing inside the head of this Coach. He sees something in me, some kind of raw talent that he can mold. But that's when I felt the handcuffs go on."
Jack Handy
Last edited 10/30/2012 9:56 AM by johnnyo53
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 9:55 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on ShawBUMP
NT
"...I thought something is brewing inside the head of this Coach. He sees something in me, some kind of raw talent that he can mold. But that's when I felt the handcuffs go on."
Jack Handy
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 9:59 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
like all managers Shaw needs to figure out what he's good at doing and what he's not good at doing (or not very interested in doing) and hire people to do the latter. From my observations he needs to do what others have suggested and hire a really good OC.
Eric
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 10:39 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
We're always rational! Just more animated and colorful. Haven't you seen RJ's russian novels of analysis? Sometimes it looks like Shaw is pulling a Milton Berle, and pulling out just enough to win (might explain Washington, but doesn't explain ND). I'm hoping that was the case in the WSU game. Of course that doesn't bode well for the Colorado game. If we see the same vanilla for the Oregon game, i.e., no play action, no formation shifts, etc., then I'm completely at a loss. I posted a question about the offensive line play on the premie board to Oline, Snapper, irishguru and Beeg Dawg. My main take away from the responses is that we are pulling our guards less and that the guards are less effective when they pull than they have been in the past. That is clearly making it tougher for Stepfan, and certainly limiting our offense. When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
---Hunter S. Thompson I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never wrong. ---Samuel Goldwyn |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 10:49 AM
I resemble that
I don't need DOC to state the obvious. The Fiasco Bowl is who we thought he was.
Unable to imagine or seize greatness in the moment.
My immunity to mediocrity is running dangerously low. Thunderdome is where we actually HAVE real conversations and that includes welcoming all French citizens to the tent. Plus, you get free water--boarding therapy from DOC and the professional insight of TC and DD.
I much prefer talking about firing an underperforming HC now rather than let it go for a decade or two. I won't be around long enough if we cross the Teevens-Harris Line of Mediocrity. The standards were raised by Harbaugh and should be maintained not explained away with sophistry as to Shaw's shortcomings.
Lex, I hope you continue to defend Shaw here because it makes Thunderdome more interesting during the week.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 11:06 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw CHEW ON THIS
What bugs me is that even after the apparent demotion, Shaw was allegedly responsible for red zone playcalling. I really have trouble believing that because his red zone decision making this year has not been good at all and deteriorated last season as well; we have too often been willing to send our shaky "ballerina" out there to try and make a field goal in situations where an aggressive riverboat gambler would have said, "4th and 2 on the 11. Hell, yeah, we are going for it." Cripes the Chipster knows when to take another card; Shaw will never double down and never hit a soft 17.
"I believe virtually everything I read. And I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone that doesn't believe anything." - David St. Hubbins
Last edited 10/30/2012 11:07 AM by jportster
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 11:07 AM
Binder full of Coordinators?
One of our inimitable advantages will be having players that can digest a bigger playbook than other schools. We need a mad genius that is able to push the envelope. On a somewhat related note, what I wouldn't give to see Fangio coaching this group on D?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...ffense/1659819/ |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 11:16 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
dpbrewster wrote: Sometimes it looks like Shaw is pulling a Milton Berle, and pulling out just enough to win (might explain Washington, but doesn't explain ND). I'm hoping that was the case in the WSU game. Of course that doesn't bode well for the Colorado game. If we see the same vanilla for the Oregon game, i.e., no play action, no formation shifts, etc., then I'm completely at a loss. It troubles me because if he really is doing that (i.e., doing just enough to win) against weak competition it's ridiculous. Good programs stomp weak opponents and get guys playing time and valuable game experience. If we were really holding back against WSU because somehow we don't want to tip our hand against OSU or OU then that's just dumb. Where's the killer instinct? We seem to have it on D not on O. Where is character and cruelty? "I believe virtually everything I read. And I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone that doesn't believe anything." - David St. Hubbins |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 11:33 AM
We're not...
holding back. This is the top effort from our brain trust, unfortunately.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 11:40 AM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
No, you'll get the Shawbot treatment. Most here are Benjamins.
"I believe virtually everything I read. And I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone that doesn't believe anything." - David St. Hubbins |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 11:52 AM
David Shaw: C@ck tease?
Possible for Kevin Hogan to take over as starting QB? Shaw: Anything is possible. # Stanford |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 12:12 PM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
We have to ,look back at Bowlsby. He was on his way out and didn't do a search for a coach. He put nothing into hiring a new coach because he had Shaw righ there and it was so easy to hand over the job to him as he was behind door # 3. If Shaw had not had Luck comming back, the program would have tanked last season. Then Shaw fiddle fadded around before naming his coaching staff. (I though he was going to coach all positions himself) Why? Because he didn't know any good asst coaches that were available. I believe that Willie Taggert would have done a far better job as our head coach and we should have gone after him. Too late now, we are where we are.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 12:36 PM
Junior high math:
I was doing some napkin scribbling trying to figure this out . . .  I didn't really understand why this wasn't making sense until I realized that since Nunes is a negative, Shaw/Nunes can't be rational at all, so the entire premise is bunk. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 12:49 PM
Re: Junior high math:
And Nottingham is evidently an imaginary number!
"I believe virtually everything I read. And I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone that doesn't believe anything." - David St. Hubbins |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 12:50 PM
New Math`
Nunes(.75*2012)+Hogan(.25*2012+2013+2014+.33*2015) >Nottingham(2012+2013+2014)>Hogan(2012+2013+ 2014)>Nunes(2012+2013) |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 1:25 PM
Re: Binder full of Coordinators?
It's an iPad.
I would trust a more interesting playbook to Madden.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 1:26 PM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
BINGO!! The wise one has spoken. BigRedRooter wrote: We have to ,look back at Bowlsby. He was on his way out and didn't do a search for a coach. He put nothing into hiring a new coach because he had Shaw righ there and it was so easy to hand over the job to him as he was behind door # 3. If Shaw had not had Luck comming back, the program would have tanked last season. Then Shaw fiddle fadded around before naming his coaching staff. (I though he was going to coach all positions himself) Why? Because he didn't know any good asst coaches that were available. I believe that Willie Taggert would have done a far better job as our head coach and we should have gone after him. Too late now, we are where we are. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 2:05 PM
Moral high ground? Give me a fing break.
johnnyo53 wrote: HARBAUGH DEMOTED SHAW FROM OC TO A POSITION COACH, AND GAVE ROMAN THE OC RESPONSIBILITY. HARBAUGH TOOK ROMAN WITH HIM. THE 49ER OFFENSE IS STILL A POWER RUN GAME WITH MULTIPLE FORMATIONS, MOTION, AND CREATIVITY, CONSPICUOUS BY THEIR ABSENCE IN SHAW'S OFFENSE.
THE REASONS SHAW WAS LEFT BEHIND AFTER THE DEMOTION STARTED MANIFESTING THEMSELVES LAST YEAR, EVERYTIME WE GOT INTO A PRESSURE SITUATION AS WE CAME DOWN THE BACKSTRETCH, AND IN THE BOWL GAME. LUCK WAS THERE TO BAIL SHAW OUT.
THIS YEAR, NO LUCK, NO OFFENSE, NO CLUE. JUST STONEWALLING AND OBFUSCATION ABOUT THE QB POSITION, CLOCK MANAGEMENT, AND PERSONNEL DECISIONS.
THANK GOD FOR MASON AND SOME DEFENSIVE TALENT.
SHAW IS WHAT HE IS, JUST LIKE NUNES IS WHAT HE IS. SHAW NEEDS TO HIRE A FIRST RATE OC, PAY HIM $400-500k TO GET REAL TALENT AT THAT JOB, AND THEN SHAW NEEDS TO BRUSH UP ON HIS DEMEANOR AT PRESS CONFERENCES. HE'S A STIFF. WHERE'S THE PERSONALITY THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RECRUITING SUCCESS? OR IS HE REALLY THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN?
BTW, WE HAVE RATIONAL DISCUSSIONS ALL THE TIME HERE. YOUR PHONY MORAL HIGH GROUND IMPLICIT IN YOUR POST IS B.S. TYPICAL PREMIE STANCE. LEAD WITH YOUR CHIN AND THEN PRETEND IT'S OUR FAULT WE BEOTCH SLAP YOU, REMOTEY STYLE. I didn't take the "moral high ground." Its a ******* football board not a bible class. I know you take shots here. Its why I posted here as opposed to the premium board. ***** slap all you want - I don't give a ****. In fact I said fire away. Or did you miss that?? Frankly I was just trying to list what I think he does well and what I think he doesnt do well. Hes gonna be the HC for the forseeable future whether you like it or not. So I'm hoping he gets better.
Last edited 10/30/2012 2:12 PM by lex24
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 2:07 PM
Re: How bout a rational discussion on Shaw
jportster wrote: No, you'll get the Shawbot treatment. Most here are Benjamins. Your right - I misspoke. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 2:08 PM
Re: Junior high math:
fischtank wrote: I was doing some napkin scribbling trying to figure this out . . .
I didn't really understand why this wasn't making sense until I realized that since Nunes is a negative, Shaw/Nunes can't be rational at all, so the entire premise is bunk. Thats good stuff. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 2:15 PM
Professional math. 6 players from last years offense in NFL ...
... and a 7th playing minor league baseball. We are what we are: a mediocre and fairly inexperienced offense. Bunch of new starters on O-line, a new mediocre QB, mediocre WRs with a good RB and good TEs. That all adds up to a below average offense even with Harbaugh or Roman at the helm. It could get better, but we shouldn't count on it. We are going to have tight games against OSU and UCLA and will need our defense to outplay their defense in Q4 to win.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 3:05 PM
Re: Professional math. 6 players from last years offense in NFL
All the more reason for creative play calling. It the process not the results that have most of us upset.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 4:25 PM
THE ONLY MATH I KNOW
CRAP+CRAP doesn't work.
"I ambushed you with a cup of coffee."
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 4:50 PM
A football program called Hope
NT
Last edited 10/30/2012 4:50 PM by Pasadena2000
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
- davidy2
- Gameday Standout
- 244 posts this site
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 5:03 PM
Re: David Shaw: C@ck tease?
Shaw was actually pretty tough on Nunes without throwing him under the bus. Made it sound like Nunes has to re-win the job in the remaining games. Got grim-faced when asked about Nottingham.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2012 8:17 PM
Re: THE ONLY MATH I KNOW
WE DON'T DO THESE MATHEMATICS AT STANFORD.
"I believe virtually everything I read. And I think that is what makes me more of a selective human than someone that doesn't believe anything." - David St. Hubbins |
|
Reply |
Quote |
