[washingtonismoney]

That stubborn, clueless, smug, sure-never-to-try-anyone-but-Nunes jerk just won the Pac-12 coach of the year title for the second year in a row. I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say, I always knew you could, theoretically, do that.

(And, of course: BEAT UCLA.)

[washingtonismoney]

That stubborn, clueless, smug, sure-never-to-try-anyone-but-Nunes jerk just won the Pac-12 coach of the year title for the second year in a row. I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say, I always knew you could, theoretically, do that.

(And, of course: BEAT UCLA.)

[washingtonismoney]

The all-conference team features, as you'd expect, several Stanford players: http://pac-12.com/Sports/Football/Footba...unced.aspx

I'm a bit too lazy to list all of them, so I'll say the biggest surprise: Kevin Hogan, honorable mention. That's really something. Can't say I've heard of a comparable situation. (I have quibbles, of course: I think Jordan Richards has been better than Ed Reynolds, so I think it's an outrage that Richards is honorable mention and Reynolds is first team. Not that Reynolds has been bad or anything, of course...)

EDIT: re: coaching: the Pac-12 has had a really good year this year. I'm sure no one would've complained if the award went to Mike Riley, too. But, as we know from RGIII over Luck, the perception of late momentum matters a great deal. Recency bias, man.

[washingtonismoney]

The all-conference team features, as you'd expect, several Stanford players: http://pac-12.com/Sports/Football/Footba...unced.aspx

I'm a bit too lazy to list all of them, so I'll say the biggest surprise: Kevin Hogan, honorable mention. That's really something. Can't say I've heard of a comparable situation. (I have quibbles, of course: I think Jordan Richards has been better than Ed Reynolds, so I think it's an outrage that Richards is honorable mention and Reynolds is first team. Not that Reynolds has been bad or anything, of course...)

EDIT: re: coaching: the Pac-12 has had a really good year this year. I'm sure no one would've complained if the award went to Mike Riley, too. But, as we know from RGIII over Luck, the perception of late momentum matters a great deal. Recency bias, man.

[Oasis]

Garvin makes a good point about Mora.  UCLA was a doormat the last couple of years and with the same players he has got them in the championship game.  (I know Neuheisel did too, but only because the Figueroans were disqualified.)  Mora also made some pretty humorous comments this season about the Lower Figueroa area.  (Not to make light of fatal shootings.) 

But I think you can make a very strong case for Shaw, who saw a lot of talent depart last year and still brought us very close to the BCS pot of gold.  If we win Friday, Stanford can make a legitimate claim to being the best team in the conferece.  I didn't believe that in 2010 or 2011 after our Oregon games, even though we had Andrew, Coby, DeCastro and Martin.  Shaw's defense brought Kelly's flying circus low, which nobody else has done -- or is likely to do.  So good for us!

[Oasis]

Garvin makes a good point about Mora.  UCLA was a doormat the last couple of years and with the same players he has got them in the championship game.  (I know Neuheisel did too, but only because the Figueroans were disqualified.)  Mora also made some pretty humorous comments this season about the Lower Figueroa area.  (Not to make light of fatal shootings.) 

But I think you can make a very strong case for Shaw, who saw a lot of talent depart last year and still brought us very close to the BCS pot of gold.  If we win Friday, Stanford can make a legitimate claim to being the best team in the conferece.  I didn't believe that in 2010 or 2011 after our Oregon games, even though we had Andrew, Coby, DeCastro and Martin.  Shaw's defense brought Kelly's flying circus low, which nobody else has done -- or is likely to do.  So good for us!

[Cardinal96]

Well deserved.  I think our easy win over UCLA on Saturday sealed the vote.

[Cardinal96]

Well deserved.  I think our easy win over UCLA on Saturday sealed the vote.

[socalstanfan1]

My concern regarding Shaw entering this year (heck, even half way through the year) was that he would turn out to be another George Seifert, but in the college coaching ranks.  That is, a kind of care-taker coach who follows a truly great coach, and who can keep the machine running for a little while as the momentum winds down, but who is not a coach able to really take over an organization and do great things.  I think the jury will still be out for a couple of years on this I guess, but I'm starting to believe in Shaw a bit more.  Not because he has won the coach of the year award in consecutive years, but for a few other reasons: he did change QBs in mid-stream, making even a more daring move than going to Nottingham (who with an additional year in the program would presumably have some better knowledge of the offensive system) by moving to Hogan.  Also, Hogan's development itself has to be credited in large part to the coaching, which gives me a sense of confidence in Shaw & Co's ability to spot and develop talent; and of course his ability to bring in a great haul of players last year.  If Shaw can keep recruiting and developing great players, we should remain in competition for the Pac-12 crown for some time.  Whenever Kelly decides to head to the NFL, well, that won't hurt matters either. 

Let's raise a toast to Shaw. 

Cheers

[socalstanfan1]

My concern regarding Shaw entering this year (heck, even half way through the year) was that he would turn out to be another George Seifert, but in the college coaching ranks.  That is, a kind of care-taker coach who follows a truly great coach, and who can keep the machine running for a little while as the momentum winds down, but who is not a coach able to really take over an organization and do great things.  I think the jury will still be out for a couple of years on this I guess, but I'm starting to believe in Shaw a bit more.  Not because he has won the coach of the year award in consecutive years, but for a few other reasons: he did change QBs in mid-stream, making even a more daring move than going to Nottingham (who with an additional year in the program would presumably have some better knowledge of the offensive system) by moving to Hogan.  Also, Hogan's development itself has to be credited in large part to the coaching, which gives me a sense of confidence in Shaw & Co's ability to spot and develop talent; and of course his ability to bring in a great haul of players last year.  If Shaw can keep recruiting and developing great players, we should remain in competition for the Pac-12 crown for some time.  Whenever Kelly decides to head to the NFL, well, that won't hurt matters either. 

Let's raise a toast to Shaw. 

Cheers

[Bruce Wang]

http://www.indystar.com/usatoday/article...ar.com%7Cs

Best article on Shaw I've seen yet.  Gives you reasons to believe that Shaw wants to stay for the long haul.  The coaching carousel is always a risk at any program, but I think Shaw can project the greatest credibility for staying put and that helps with recruiting.

Frankly, I'm more worried about Derek Mason leaving than Shaw.  If Mason leaves, I hope it's for a job outside the Pac-12 or Big10.

My two cents is that Shaw deserves the Pac-12 coach of the year more than Mora.  He did more with less talent.  Mora inherited a 2009 recruiting class ranked 5th and a 2010 recruiting class ranked 8th. 

[Bruce Wang]

http://www.indystar.com/usatoday/article...ar.com%7Cs

Best article on Shaw I've seen yet.  Gives you reasons to believe that Shaw wants to stay for the long haul.  The coaching carousel is always a risk at any program, but I think Shaw can project the greatest credibility for staying put and that helps with recruiting.

Frankly, I'm more worried about Derek Mason leaving than Shaw.  If Mason leaves, I hope it's for a job outside the Pac-12 or Big10.

My two cents is that Shaw deserves the Pac-12 coach of the year more than Mora.  He did more with less talent.  Mora inherited a 2009 recruiting class ranked 5th and a 2010 recruiting class ranked 8th. 

[yvonne]

Mora also overrecruited and then cut players. This is great for building depth, but it's at the expense of kids' scholarships.

[yvonne]

Mora also overrecruited and then cut players. This is great for building depth, but it's at the expense of kids' scholarships.

[fullmetal]

At least a few UCLA players are upset that Mora didn't win that beauty contest.

Conference coaches vote on the awards. "I guess they based coach of the year off that [Oregon] game," Jones said.

Johnson figures there is still a way to right the situation.

"We win this game and go to the Rose Bowl," he said. "Win this game and people have to recognize what Coach Mora has done."

http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/fo...3738.story

[fullmetal]

At least a few UCLA players are upset that Mora didn't win that beauty contest.

Conference coaches vote on the awards. "I guess they based coach of the year off that [Oregon] game," Jones said.

Johnson figures there is still a way to right the situation.

"We win this game and go to the Rose Bowl," he said. "Win this game and people have to recognize what Coach Mora has done."

http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/fo...3738.story

[Kathy]

Sounds like they're using it for motivation.

[Kathy]

Sounds like they're using it for motivation.

[FarmBoy]

If an opportunity to go to the Rose Bowl isn't enough incentive to play your hardest, then there's something wrong with your team.

Mora, Riley and Shaw were all worthy candidates. I probably would have voted for Riley, myself. UCLA and OSU were both rebuilding, but OSU was coming off 3-9 and I'm sure has less "talent" than UCLA. Plus they won the head-to-head. Most Stanford fans (and pundits) were expecting 8-4 or 9-3.

[FarmBoy]

If an opportunity to go to the Rose Bowl isn't enough incentive to play your hardest, then there's something wrong with your team.

Mora, Riley and Shaw were all worthy candidates. I probably would have voted for Riley, myself. UCLA and OSU were both rebuilding, but OSU was coming off 3-9 and I'm sure has less "talent" than UCLA. Plus they won the head-to-head. Most Stanford fans (and pundits) were expecting 8-4 or 9-3.

[cardcoug]

Mora, Riley and Shaw were all worthy candidates. I probably would have voted for Riley, myself. UCLA and OSU were both rebuilding, but OSU was coming off 3-9 and I'm sure has less "talent" than UCLA. Plus they won the head-to-head. Most Stanford fans (and pundits) were expecting 8-4 or 9-3.

I agree with this, but I think something unique to Shaw is how he took what was supposed to be a rebuilding year and turned it into a rebuilding 7 weeks. The early season cardinal was a 7-5 team type team, and the team playing right now would probably be 12-0. He did an excellent job developing young talent, especially on the Oline and in the secondary. As a result, what we dreamt as a brobdingnagian success story for next year has already happened, and we're getting the "best team right now" line from pundits.

[cardcoug]

Mora, Riley and Shaw were all worthy candidates. I probably would have voted for Riley, myself. UCLA and OSU were both rebuilding, but OSU was coming off 3-9 and I'm sure has less "talent" than UCLA. Plus they won the head-to-head. Most Stanford fans (and pundits) were expecting 8-4 or 9-3.

I agree with this, but I think something unique to Shaw is how he took what was supposed to be a rebuilding year and turned it into a rebuilding 7 weeks. The early season cardinal was a 7-5 team type team, and the team playing right now would probably be 12-0. He did an excellent job developing young talent, especially on the Oline and in the secondary. As a result, what we dreamt as a brobdingnagian success story for next year has already happened, and we're getting the "best team right now" line from pundits.

[FarmBoy]

I just look back at the feedback Shaw was getting through the first 7 games of the season and it seems improbable that he could receive the coach of the year award. Aside from the U.SC win, he took a lot of flack for poor game planning, play selection, and personnel decisions at the QB position. Then he changes QBs, which may also have led to a more dynamic play selection, and suddenly he's a genius. Mora and Riley have received fairly universal support through the season, from what I've seen. But I guess we live in a "what have you done for me lately" world.

[FarmBoy]

I just look back at the feedback Shaw was getting through the first 7 games of the season and it seems improbable that he could receive the coach of the year award. Aside from the U.SC win, he took a lot of flack for poor game planning, play selection, and personnel decisions at the QB position. Then he changes QBs, which may also have led to a more dynamic play selection, and suddenly he's a genius. Mora and Riley have received fairly universal support through the season, from what I've seen. But I guess we live in a "what have you done for me lately" world.

[Roberton3]

I just look back at the feedback Shaw was getting through the first 7 games of the season and it seems improbable that he could receive the coach of the year award. Aside from the U.SC win, he took a lot of flack for poor game planning, play selection, and personnel decisions at the QB position. Then he changes QBs, which may also have led to a more dynamic play selection, and suddenly he's a genius. Mora and Riley have received fairly universal support through the season, from what I've seen. But I guess we live in a "what have you done for me lately" world.

Or perhaps the criticism during the first 7 games was just a wee bit overblown...

[Roberton3]

I just look back at the feedback Shaw was getting through the first 7 games of the season and it seems improbable that he could receive the coach of the year award. Aside from the U.SC win, he took a lot of flack for poor game planning, play selection, and personnel decisions at the QB position. Then he changes QBs, which may also have led to a more dynamic play selection, and suddenly he's a genius. Mora and Riley have received fairly universal support through the season, from what I've seen. But I guess we live in a "what have you done for me lately" world.

Or perhaps the criticism during the first 7 games was just a wee bit overblown...