We all know what is going to happen this upcoming Saturday against Notre Dame to close out the 2021 Stanford Football season. Clubber Lang style “Pain”.
But what we don’t know is what will happen the coming days after the ND beat down. How will Shaw handle himself (because it is 100 percent his call) and subsequently his staff (which again I confidently assuming would be 100 percent his call).
Anyways as a fan, speculation is a right of passage. And here is my guesses/recommendations for what should/could go down:
1.) Muir should run (don’t walk) to the open Miami AD. Actually he should be doing a full on sprint. He needs to go. And higher ups should let him know he is on a shot clock. Friends of mine at UF are also saying there is a potential change coming at UF at the AD spot. I am not as certain. Regardless, Muir needs to go. I don’t know if there has been a survey for that on this board. But I would assume there would be nearly 100 percent agreement with that move. So no need to even list the reasons. We need new leadership, actually for the first time in my time with Stanford we need strong leadership. And we need it now! Additionally this should not be a move of creating a vacancy for Shaw to fill.
2.) I agree that Shaw needs to go as well, for us and for him. Can’t see a scenario where he coaches his way out of this. But I don’t see a scenario where he willingly makes that call at this point. I know him well. And I don’t even blame him. He is a competitor, despite the lack of outward emotion. And he isn’t going to go without a fight. He is going to look at his potentially returning offense and think it will be better next year. And it could and should be (barring massive transfer). Of course this is all on paper and not to suggest that we will be better in function next year. And kids will depart. But he isn’t crazy or overly optimistic for projecting that. He isn’t going to harakiri himself. Dream on.
3.) Lance Anderson is going to be demoted or fired. Both sides of the ball have been a disappointment. Squeri can have all the stats he wants. But usually when you have an offensive HC, you have a good offense. Offensive play calling HCs in the NFL get paid more, millions more, for a reason. But we have a situation where our offensive HC likes to play small ball and prefers to lean on the defense to win. Which is fine. But, it sets up an interesting situation where our team decline looks correlated to the decline of our defense. And it is. Because of how we structured our team to win. It is by design.
Which is fine. Most colleges don’t structure their teams that way. At one point nearly a decade ago when football was evolving only the Alabama/UGA/USC types could do think this style of football mainly because of others inability to do it. Stanford kind of had to do it because it fit with the personnel that it could most consistently could draw. Harbaugh designed that blueprint (which was right, even if he didn’t consciously make that choice). And Shaw logically and rightly continued that formula. But it is also amusing and ironic to see Shaw scramble to blame things on the defense (which willingly and consciously happens after every game by Shaw, even when we had good defenses and teams).
The difference is Harbaugh went out even after an 8-4 season and the first bowl game in nearly a decade to fire the defensive staff, particularly the DC Ron Lynn. And sought to get even better with Vic Fangio (probably the best defensive mind in all of football). Shaw conversely either doesn’t have the drawing power in the coaching circles, doesn’t see the need, or doesn’t have want to empower a dominant subordinate coach (despite the lack of a threat to his standing at Stanford). If you look at Shaw’s DCs, Tarver is good not great. Mason is massively overrated, but still solid. And Lance is my guy, so I am not going to say much except that he isn’t shown to be as good as either Tarver or Mason. I will say this for ranking these guys or any DC….players matter. And those first two guys had some dudes. Anderson’s deck is not as stacked.
Anyways, Anderson is not going to be the DC next year. And that is fine. I think Shaw likes to scapegoat the defense. He is an offensive guy by trade and by nature. It isn’t original mindset. The extreme at which he thinks defensive play is graded is comical relative to the grade inflation level and leniency to which he grades the offensive side of football or himself as the HC is ironic. But regardless the reality is if they are making changes, Anderson is out as the DC.
Personally I would move Anderson back to a position coach on the defensive staff. Anderson wears a lot of hats (too many). He has been a loyal worker and backbone to things that are vital to the program. Plus he is an incredibly nice human. He is an asset to Stanford and to Shaw. But we shall see how Shaw handles that situation. Just know if he tries to make an example of someone, letting go completely of Anderson would be an overcorrection IMO.
4.) Reynolds needs to go. I have heard a lot of hype over the years about him. But not a lot of production. Personally I would move Anderson back down to DL and jettison Reynolds. But regardless it seems that everyone wants Reynolds to go (almost as unanimous as Muir leaving). I do think it is not hard to totally look at statistical production of our DL and make that argument. But the truth is our OLBs are set to be the stat whores in this defense. And unless you have a freak like Solomon Thomas, Henry Anderson, or David Parry that is physically dominant, most of our DL are going to be table setters. But aside from stats and plays, you just don’t see development at the DL position. DWP is the same dude. He has been the same dude. And will continue to be the same dude. Ryan Johnson is awful and has been awful. Booker is OK, and he has just stayed at OK. Anyways the list goes on.
5.) We can do better than Sanders. I will just leave it at that.
6.) Akina is fine. But I am not overly impressed. He has been a good coach in the past. And he can be a good coach in the future, if he wants to. I am not overly impressed with our DB recruiting the past several cycles. We seem to just take a number of average guys with Akina. A lot of them actually. I do know he can coach. I would defer to Shaw heavily on this. But either way is fine with me. Hell Akina might want to retire. And to be honest, Akina seems to be coaching like he is semi-retired. Shaw can move on or put the squeeze on Akina.
7.) Alamar is meh to me. We have previously been dominant with spec teams with him. As we should be. I am surprised at our decline recently, since the positions and the phase of spec teams is pretty controllable and compartmentalized. But I will to ignore the recent trend. Plus this is very correctable.
8.) Getting over to offense, I can see Tavita being demoted. But really that doesn’t change anything. Dave wouldn’t be the first HFC to make a “change” for optics and not in function. Just can’t see Shaw making an admission of any major deficiency on the offensive side of the ball. Tavita is a protected coach. Shaw might not even do anything optically too.
9.) Don’t care what we do with our RB Coach. Maybe he is good. Maybe he isn’t. Has little impact.
10.). Stanford is dumber than I thought if we get rid of Kennedy. He is our best position coach by far.
11.) Our OL coach is TBD. I have heard high praise from people that work outside the program at different levels. And I trust their opinions. I think Carberry did a very job, better than we think. And my personal expectations is that Heffernan will superceed Carberry’s production.
12.) I often times forget that Morgan Turner is on the staff. But can’t complain about the current TE starter. Impressive kid and I will default to his production as an indication of what Turner is doing with his room. Now I don’t see a loaded room like it can and should be. But it is what it is right now.
13.) Strength Coach….we (Dave) should have thought long and hard before running off Turley. He masked a lot of our leadership issues. He also was a foundational piece of the program. I don’t see it being replaced, easily or with our current SC.
14.) I know the head trainer personally. He is outstanding. Sadly I have no idea what we were doing with the two previous temp hires before him. But I can guarantee that problem area that was self created is no longer an issue.
15.) Doyle is fine.
16.) Eubanks sucks. But anyone in football could have told anyone this. Ask any former coach that has moved on from Stanford football that has to “work” with him. It is always the same story.
Anyways, now the fluff time is over. There is no free ERW (eating, riding, and warming up). Everything matters. And I mean everything. Stanford (with or without Shaw) will be coaching almost every game from behind, even at the start of the game when it is 0-0. So again everything matters.
Will be curious to see how this all plays out. Sucks we are in this position. Unfortunately it was a conscious choice.
But what we don’t know is what will happen the coming days after the ND beat down. How will Shaw handle himself (because it is 100 percent his call) and subsequently his staff (which again I confidently assuming would be 100 percent his call).
Anyways as a fan, speculation is a right of passage. And here is my guesses/recommendations for what should/could go down:
1.) Muir should run (don’t walk) to the open Miami AD. Actually he should be doing a full on sprint. He needs to go. And higher ups should let him know he is on a shot clock. Friends of mine at UF are also saying there is a potential change coming at UF at the AD spot. I am not as certain. Regardless, Muir needs to go. I don’t know if there has been a survey for that on this board. But I would assume there would be nearly 100 percent agreement with that move. So no need to even list the reasons. We need new leadership, actually for the first time in my time with Stanford we need strong leadership. And we need it now! Additionally this should not be a move of creating a vacancy for Shaw to fill.
2.) I agree that Shaw needs to go as well, for us and for him. Can’t see a scenario where he coaches his way out of this. But I don’t see a scenario where he willingly makes that call at this point. I know him well. And I don’t even blame him. He is a competitor, despite the lack of outward emotion. And he isn’t going to go without a fight. He is going to look at his potentially returning offense and think it will be better next year. And it could and should be (barring massive transfer). Of course this is all on paper and not to suggest that we will be better in function next year. And kids will depart. But he isn’t crazy or overly optimistic for projecting that. He isn’t going to harakiri himself. Dream on.
3.) Lance Anderson is going to be demoted or fired. Both sides of the ball have been a disappointment. Squeri can have all the stats he wants. But usually when you have an offensive HC, you have a good offense. Offensive play calling HCs in the NFL get paid more, millions more, for a reason. But we have a situation where our offensive HC likes to play small ball and prefers to lean on the defense to win. Which is fine. But, it sets up an interesting situation where our team decline looks correlated to the decline of our defense. And it is. Because of how we structured our team to win. It is by design.
Which is fine. Most colleges don’t structure their teams that way. At one point nearly a decade ago when football was evolving only the Alabama/UGA/USC types could do think this style of football mainly because of others inability to do it. Stanford kind of had to do it because it fit with the personnel that it could most consistently could draw. Harbaugh designed that blueprint (which was right, even if he didn’t consciously make that choice). And Shaw logically and rightly continued that formula. But it is also amusing and ironic to see Shaw scramble to blame things on the defense (which willingly and consciously happens after every game by Shaw, even when we had good defenses and teams).
The difference is Harbaugh went out even after an 8-4 season and the first bowl game in nearly a decade to fire the defensive staff, particularly the DC Ron Lynn. And sought to get even better with Vic Fangio (probably the best defensive mind in all of football). Shaw conversely either doesn’t have the drawing power in the coaching circles, doesn’t see the need, or doesn’t have want to empower a dominant subordinate coach (despite the lack of a threat to his standing at Stanford). If you look at Shaw’s DCs, Tarver is good not great. Mason is massively overrated, but still solid. And Lance is my guy, so I am not going to say much except that he isn’t shown to be as good as either Tarver or Mason. I will say this for ranking these guys or any DC….players matter. And those first two guys had some dudes. Anderson’s deck is not as stacked.
Anyways, Anderson is not going to be the DC next year. And that is fine. I think Shaw likes to scapegoat the defense. He is an offensive guy by trade and by nature. It isn’t original mindset. The extreme at which he thinks defensive play is graded is comical relative to the grade inflation level and leniency to which he grades the offensive side of football or himself as the HC is ironic. But regardless the reality is if they are making changes, Anderson is out as the DC.
Personally I would move Anderson back to a position coach on the defensive staff. Anderson wears a lot of hats (too many). He has been a loyal worker and backbone to things that are vital to the program. Plus he is an incredibly nice human. He is an asset to Stanford and to Shaw. But we shall see how Shaw handles that situation. Just know if he tries to make an example of someone, letting go completely of Anderson would be an overcorrection IMO.
4.) Reynolds needs to go. I have heard a lot of hype over the years about him. But not a lot of production. Personally I would move Anderson back down to DL and jettison Reynolds. But regardless it seems that everyone wants Reynolds to go (almost as unanimous as Muir leaving). I do think it is not hard to totally look at statistical production of our DL and make that argument. But the truth is our OLBs are set to be the stat whores in this defense. And unless you have a freak like Solomon Thomas, Henry Anderson, or David Parry that is physically dominant, most of our DL are going to be table setters. But aside from stats and plays, you just don’t see development at the DL position. DWP is the same dude. He has been the same dude. And will continue to be the same dude. Ryan Johnson is awful and has been awful. Booker is OK, and he has just stayed at OK. Anyways the list goes on.
5.) We can do better than Sanders. I will just leave it at that.
6.) Akina is fine. But I am not overly impressed. He has been a good coach in the past. And he can be a good coach in the future, if he wants to. I am not overly impressed with our DB recruiting the past several cycles. We seem to just take a number of average guys with Akina. A lot of them actually. I do know he can coach. I would defer to Shaw heavily on this. But either way is fine with me. Hell Akina might want to retire. And to be honest, Akina seems to be coaching like he is semi-retired. Shaw can move on or put the squeeze on Akina.
7.) Alamar is meh to me. We have previously been dominant with spec teams with him. As we should be. I am surprised at our decline recently, since the positions and the phase of spec teams is pretty controllable and compartmentalized. But I will to ignore the recent trend. Plus this is very correctable.
8.) Getting over to offense, I can see Tavita being demoted. But really that doesn’t change anything. Dave wouldn’t be the first HFC to make a “change” for optics and not in function. Just can’t see Shaw making an admission of any major deficiency on the offensive side of the ball. Tavita is a protected coach. Shaw might not even do anything optically too.
9.) Don’t care what we do with our RB Coach. Maybe he is good. Maybe he isn’t. Has little impact.
10.). Stanford is dumber than I thought if we get rid of Kennedy. He is our best position coach by far.
11.) Our OL coach is TBD. I have heard high praise from people that work outside the program at different levels. And I trust their opinions. I think Carberry did a very job, better than we think. And my personal expectations is that Heffernan will superceed Carberry’s production.
12.) I often times forget that Morgan Turner is on the staff. But can’t complain about the current TE starter. Impressive kid and I will default to his production as an indication of what Turner is doing with his room. Now I don’t see a loaded room like it can and should be. But it is what it is right now.
13.) Strength Coach….we (Dave) should have thought long and hard before running off Turley. He masked a lot of our leadership issues. He also was a foundational piece of the program. I don’t see it being replaced, easily or with our current SC.
14.) I know the head trainer personally. He is outstanding. Sadly I have no idea what we were doing with the two previous temp hires before him. But I can guarantee that problem area that was self created is no longer an issue.
15.) Doyle is fine.
16.) Eubanks sucks. But anyone in football could have told anyone this. Ask any former coach that has moved on from Stanford football that has to “work” with him. It is always the same story.
Anyways, now the fluff time is over. There is no free ERW (eating, riding, and warming up). Everything matters. And I mean everything. Stanford (with or without Shaw) will be coaching almost every game from behind, even at the start of the game when it is 0-0. So again everything matters.
Will be curious to see how this all plays out. Sucks we are in this position. Unfortunately it was a conscious choice.
Last edited:
