Last year at the end of the day was not good enough

Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough (/thread-19888.html)

Pages: 1 2

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - Phogge - 06-16-2020

If it's all local then sign all the De La Salle seniors, install the Veer, dump Tavita and hire Ladoceur and win big. Mater Dei is the only school to beat them so one loss will be to Mater Dei North who plays in the Coliseum.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - BostonCard - 06-16-2020

Yeah, but what have you done for me lately?

As we say at Passover, "Dayenu".

BC

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - JohnR34231 - 06-17-2020

(06-16-2020, 02:45 PM)BobK Wrote: Years 6/7/8 we had 28 wins. Our top total since we’ll never over three yeasts except for previous Shaw seasons.

But I’ll give you some pop warner years when they played less games.

As we have noted before, once you have reached the pinnacle in college football you are expected to stay there. If you don't you are a bum or at best a has been. Also, merely good doesn't cut it.
One of the reasons Chris Petersen is no longer coaching at Washington.
Then again, I suppose you could argue that given what these coaches are paid, such expectations are reasonable.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - winflop - 06-17-2020

(06-15-2020, 11:35 AM)BostonCard Wrote:
(06-15-2020, 11:29 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Would it be too premature for me to say Tanner McKee will be the next QB to lead Stanford to a Rose Bowl?

You are quick to write Davis Mills off.

BC

I'm on board with the McKee comment, and it's not about Mills. It's about the swiss cheese defense

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - JohnR34231 - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 05:09 AM)winflop Wrote:
(06-15-2020, 11:35 AM)BostonCard Wrote:
(06-15-2020, 11:29 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Would it be too premature for me to say Tanner McKee will be the next QB to lead Stanford to a Rose Bowl?

You are quick to write Davis Mills off.

BC

I'm on board with the McKee comment, and it's not about Mills. It's about the swiss cheese defense

If Mills can stay healthy, I think the offense will be fine. The defense, well.....

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - SamuelMcF - 06-17-2020

Yeah, Swiss cheese might be a kind phrase for the defense if we’re being real. At the risk of totally jinxing it, there’s pretty much nowhere to go but up.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - BostonCard - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 09:02 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Yeah, Swiss cheese might be a kind phrase for the defense if we’re being real. At the risk of totally jinxing it, there’s pretty much nowhere to go but up.

A reminder that we are loosing two of our most experienced defensive linemen, and with them, any semblance of depth at the defensive line.

Other positions, I agree have nowhere to go but up.

BC

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - SamuelMcF - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 09:09 AM)BostonCard Wrote:
(06-17-2020, 09:02 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Yeah, Swiss cheese might be a kind phrase for the defense if we’re being real. At the risk of totally jinxing it, there’s pretty much nowhere to go but up.

A reminder that we are loosing two of our most experienced defensive linemen, and with them, any semblance of depth at the defensive line.

Other positions, I agree have nowhere to go but up.

BC

I wish you hadn't reminded me. Reactive instead of proactive recruiting means taking 2 DL in 2 years ('18 and '19) has totally gutted the position. It would've made a bit more sense had we not had 3 seniors leave. You simply can't rely on 5th year seniors to stay anymore, ESPECIALLY if they wouldn't be starting.

The same will happen at OLB in 2 years and safety and TE next year. It's not hard to see holes ahead of time, staff. It's really not.

Sad.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - BostonCard - 06-17-2020

In defense of the TE position group, it's not like we haven't recruited tight ends; it's just that the tight ends we've recruited haven't been the quality of who we've had in the past.

On the other hand, we simply haven't recruited enough bodies at OLB.

Safety we've at least recruited more lately, so they'll be young... but again, we'll have bodies. The position was also hurt by the Hector situation.

BC

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - Farm93 - 06-17-2020

(06-16-2020, 02:37 PM)gailtate Wrote:
(06-16-2020, 01:33 PM)Farm93 Wrote:
(06-15-2020, 03:44 PM)Phogge Wrote: Is Shaw bored?
I hate to point out the obvious but COVID19 is going to destroy recruiting for Stanford football, and potentially other Stanford teams too.

There are likely other forces at work here in 2020, but I believe COVID19 will be rather detrimental to the recruiting efforts that we just can't ignore.. From the staff's inability to fly to the homes of recruits, to recruits potentially not loving the idea of taking AP classes during a pandemic just for a chance at getting into Stanford, to a rather strong desire by players and parents to stay closer to home just in case the campus closes or their child gets COVID19.

My guess is the HS players in this 2020/2021 signing group will have a very strong bias towards local schools.

If Coach Shaw and the staff can secure a strong class (Top 20) given the COVID19 headwinds I will be really impressed.

Amazing. You've already concocted your apologies for the future of football and thrown in the whole athletic program to boot! Now it's all about Covid-19. Shaw's hubris, managerial myopia and cavalier recruiting are conveniently swept under the coronavirus rug? The decline of the program is empirical fact. Shaw inherited a treasure, had four great years out of his first five and has essentially been vesting-in-place ever since. No replenishment of the legacy he was endowed with -- ZERO -- has taken us where we are today. Somebody in the conference will win big when football resumes. Chances are it will NOT be Shaw's team. Pandemic or no pandemic, his best years are behind him. Look at the evidence.

The decline is a matter of perspective. Shaw's family has been around Stanford long enough to know that he does not need to apologize at all for his years as the head coach.

Were the last few years worse than the first 6 years? Yes

Odds that 2020 will be a good recruiting year for Stanford? Very close to zero. Not an excuse. Not a prediction of Shaw's future as coach. Just a reality if you look at the logistics of recruiting in this pandemic.

The SEC coaches can literally recruit by car and still spend every night at home.
Stanford coaches don't have that luxury. Worse, in a number of states, like Texas, a person coming from California had to quarantine for 14 days. That COVID19 restriction was in place in Texas for several weeks. Can we agree that type of health policy would make it rather hard for a CA-based coach to recruit Texas?

Now, at the actual games in 2020 Stanford will have some favorable advantages if COVID19 is a factor. It will be great for Stanford to play UW and UO on the road in whisper quiet venues. So 2020, the season, might be OK.

Still, no doubt in my mind that 2020/2021 the recruiting year could be very bad for Stanford because of the reasons I noted and a few other COVID related reasons that I hope don't impact the coaches or the recruits.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - SamuelMcF - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 01:19 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Odds that 2020 will be a good recruiting year for Stanford? Very close to zero. Not an excuse. Not a prediction of Shaw's future as coach. Just a reality if you look at the logistics of recruiting in this pandemic.

The SEC coaches can literally recruit by car and still spend every night at home.
Stanford coaches don't have that luxury. Worse, in a number of states, like Texas, a person coming from California had to quarantine for 14 days. That COVID19 restriction was in place in Texas for several weeks. Can we agree that type of health policy would make it rather hard for a CA-based coach to recruit Texas?

Nobody can recruit in person. The NCAA dead period was extended to July 31.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - winflop - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 09:02 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Yeah, Swiss cheese might be a kind phrase for the defense if we’re being real. At the risk of totally jinxing it, there’s pretty much nowhere to go but up.

I think the outsides (DE, OLB, CB) are solid. The interior (DT, ILB, S) is where I see a sieve

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - SamuelMcF - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 01:43 PM)winflop Wrote:
(06-17-2020, 09:02 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote: Yeah, Swiss cheese might be a kind phrase for the defense if we’re being real. At the risk of totally jinxing it, there’s pretty much nowhere to go but up.

I think the outsides (DE, OLB, CB) are solid. The interior (DT, ILB, S) is where I see a sieve

We're in a 2-4-5 nickel defense so often that "DE" vs. "DT" should barely even be a distinction. Thomas Booker is 300 pounds now, btw.

Miezan and Mangum-Farrar out for the year after game 1 totally destroyed the ILB room. (Walk-on Ryan Beecher played a significant amount of snaps because we wanted Sinclair to rS and there was nobody else). Add Sinclair with a year under his belt and that group should be better if healthy...at the very least having 4 capable-enough players to rotate should keep them fresh. And of course the new position coach!

Ultimately safety will probably be the worst offender IMO. That position group has been so horribly mismanaged and underdeveloped. Shoutout to "the best DB coach in CFB"!!!

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - gailtate - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 01:19 PM)Farm93 Wrote:
(06-16-2020, 02:37 PM)gailtate Wrote:
(06-16-2020, 01:33 PM)Farm93 Wrote:
(06-15-2020, 03:44 PM)Phogge Wrote: Is Shaw bored?
I hate to point out the obvious but COVID19 is going to destroy recruiting for Stanford football, and potentially other Stanford teams too.

There are likely other forces at work here in 2020, but I believe COVID19 will be rather detrimental to the recruiting efforts that we just can't ignore.. From the staff's inability to fly to the homes of recruits, to recruits potentially not loving the idea of taking AP classes during a pandemic just for a chance at getting into Stanford, to a rather strong desire by players and parents to stay closer to home just in case the campus closes or their child gets COVID19.

My guess is the HS players in this 2020/2021 signing group will have a very strong bias towards local schools.

If Coach Shaw and the staff can secure a strong class (Top 20) given the COVID19 headwinds I will be really impressed.

Amazing. You've already concocted your apologies for the future of football and thrown in the whole athletic program to boot! Now it's all about Covid-19. Shaw's hubris, managerial myopia and cavalier recruiting are conveniently swept under the coronavirus rug? The decline of the program is empirical fact. Shaw inherited a treasure, had four great years out of his first five and has essentially been vesting-in-place ever since. No replenishment of the legacy he was endowed with -- ZERO -- has taken us where we are today. Somebody in the conference will win big when football resumes. Chances are it will NOT be Shaw's team. Pandemic or no pandemic, his best years are behind him. Look at the evidence.
The decline is a matter of perspective. Shaw's family has been around Stanford long enough to know that he does not need to apologize at all for his years as the head coach.

Were the last few years worse than the first 6 years? Yes

Odds that 2020 will be a good recruiting year for Stanford? Very close to zero. Not an excuse. Not a prediction of Shaw's future as coach. Just a reality if you look at the logistics of recruiting in this pandemic.

The SEC coaches can literally recruit by car and still spend every night at home.
Stanford coaches don't have that luxury. Worse, in a number of states, like Texas, a person coming from California had to quarantine for 14 days. That COVID19 restriction was in place in Texas for several weeks. Can we agree that type of health policy would make it rather hard for a CA-based coach to recruit Texas?

Now, at the actual games in 2020 Stanford will have some favorable advantages if COVID19 is a factor. It will be great for Stanford to play UW and UO on the road in whisper quiet venues. So 2020, the season, might be OK.

Still, no doubt in my mind that 2020/2021 the recruiting year could be very bad for Stanford because of the reasons I noted and a few other COVID related reasons that I hope don't impact the coaches or the recruits.

Yes, it is a matter of perspective. Here's mine--derived from the last four years: Wins down, injuries up, no big-time bowls, no bowl at all last year, capped off by uninspired, complacent recruiting. Hardly a recipe for playing on New Year's Day, IMHO.

lex24 - lex24 - 06-17-2020

Lol. Remember Gerry Faust?

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - Phogge - 06-17-2020

I don't see how the safety position could be any worse this year. Reminds me of when Sean Wiser had to start because they didn't have anyone else. He practically gave away the Oregon game, 16-14 I think.

RE: Last year at the end of the day was not good enough - Farm93 - 06-17-2020

(06-17-2020, 01:43 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:
(06-17-2020, 01:19 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Odds that 2020 will be a good recruiting year for Stanford? Very close to zero. Not an excuse. Not a prediction of Shaw's future as coach. Just a reality if you look at the logistics of recruiting in this pandemic.

The SEC coaches can literally recruit by car and still spend every night at home.
Stanford coaches don't have that luxury. Worse, in a number of states, like Texas, a person coming from California had to quarantine for 14 days. That COVID19 restriction was in place in Texas for several weeks. Can we agree that type of health policy would make it rather hard for a CA-based coach to recruit Texas?

Nobody can recruit in person. The NCAA dead period was extended to July 31.

The Texas restrictions started just about the time the NCAA implemented an expansion of the dead period. However, there were a number of hotspot schools in MA, NY, CA and WA that had already were scrubbing in person visits before the NCAA action because of actions either in their state or against travel from their state. Boston College media types had a few pieces on COVID cancellations prior to the NCAA Dead Period announcement, for example.

I noted "that type of health policy would"...it was hypothetical and conditional to highlight just how tough recruiting during COVID will be for Stanford as CA is likely to have policies that are a bit more strict than AL, GA or TX.

If/When we get to the other side of this extended COVID dead period it will continue to be much harder to recruit players if the players or coaches need to get on a plane to meet. Also the parents are much more likely to appreciate a school within driving distance from home, just in case more COVID stuff happens.

I don't have a HS senior athlete, but I do have a HS senior. Many in his local school have embraced the value of a school driving distance from home just in case COVID forces a campus closure or, worse, they get COVID. A student with COVID could drive home with parents and have family help keep them healthy. A student a flight away would be stuck on campus and far from the family home.