[Mick]

Budda, your heart is in the right place (as is the case with everyone here), but your head isn't.

First, no one is asking for Shaw to be canned.  What many are asking for is that Shaw recognize that there is a BIG PROBLEM on the offensive side of the ball and remedy it.  Texas just installed a different OC this week after the embarrassment to ND (and ND is a great/complete team this year, unlike Northwestern).  Shaw should do the same. 

What we saw on Saturday was NOT an isolated event - but rather part and parcel of the fabric of Stanford's offense in the last 3 years.  Your eyes should tell you this, but in case you need numbers, here are some posted on the other site:

In the post Andrew Luck 42-games under Shaw, Stanford has scored 21 or fewer points 19 times (and are 8-11 in those games).  In two other games, Stanford's offense has generated fewer than 300 yards of total offense.  That means that in half the games since Andrew Luck left, Stanford's offense has been mediocre to terrible.  In that same 42 game stretch, Stanford's offense has scored 30+ points 15 times (11 of them are against Army, UC Davis, SJSU, Duke, Low APR U, Wazzu, Colorado, and OSU).  These are shockingly bad numbers, and in a vacuum every single Stanford fan would demand a change in the offense.  The only reason some are not is because Stanford has managed to win games, despite a shockingly bad offense.

This, of course, is due to the defense.  In that same 42 game stretch, when Stanford scores more than 21 points, it is 23-0!  Only twice since 2012 (42 games) has the defense allowed more than 28 points. That is remarkable. The 1999 defense allowed more than 28 points seven times in 12 games, and it went to the Rose Bowl.  In 31 out of our last 42 games, the defense has held the opponent to 20 or fewer.  That is just incredible. 

The numbers amply support what we all have seen with our eyes:  Stanford has won games despite its offense, not because of it.  Games have been lost due to a poor offense; and games have been won (with too close a margin) due to a poor offense.  And ask yourself this:  has Stanford been fun to watch the last few years?  [There is great visceral satisfaction/entertainment value in a dominant D - but the O has been agonizing to watch, even in many wins].

There are still those who think only about W/L record.  First, there is NO REASON that a great defense precludes a good (let alone great) offense.  Stanford should demand (at least) competence in both.  Moreover, focusing only on W/L record is myopic for program health, as this season will show, unless there is a change made on the offensive side of the ball.  This Stanford D may end up being good (or not), but there is no way it will be the dominant force we've seen in the past few years.  Any scintilla of a chance of that evaporated with the loss of Phillips in Q1 against NW.

So unless a change is made on O, then all those close Ws are going to turn into agonizing, embarrassing, and lifeless Ls.  And what transpires from there is easy to envision (20,000 fans in the stands in a crummy 2016 home schedule).  That is Buddy/Wlat ball.

This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed NOW.  Texas did it.  Stanford should, too.  I believe Shaw must step away from any offensive play calling responsibilities and be the CEO head coach.  If Stanford's offense continues the mediocrity  we've seen all too often the last few years, then at least we'll know who has to go (the OC).  But Shaw's meddling into the O has, at minimum, obscured any accountability for the putrid O.  That has to change. Now.  For the good of the program.

I think Teejers' analysis is right.  I'm really not liking the trend here, particularly without backs like Taylor and Gaffaney.

We scored six points against an unranked opponent.  That is a breathtaking level of futility, one not matched since Harbaugh's first year as coach...and Shaw's first year as OC.

I don't think Shaw should be fired, and I've never suggested that.  But I've always thought we needed the smartest OC available, an NFL level of OC, particularly since our players are so intellectually gifted...

[Mick]

Budda, your heart is in the right place (as is the case with everyone here), but your head isn't.

First, no one is asking for Shaw to be canned.  What many are asking for is that Shaw recognize that there is a BIG PROBLEM on the offensive side of the ball and remedy it.  Texas just installed a different OC this week after the embarrassment to ND (and ND is a great/complete team this year, unlike Northwestern).  Shaw should do the same. 

What we saw on Saturday was NOT an isolated event - but rather part and parcel of the fabric of Stanford's offense in the last 3 years.  Your eyes should tell you this, but in case you need numbers, here are some posted on the other site:

In the post Andrew Luck 42-games under Shaw, Stanford has scored 21 or fewer points 19 times (and are 8-11 in those games).  In two other games, Stanford's offense has generated fewer than 300 yards of total offense.  That means that in half the games since Andrew Luck left, Stanford's offense has been mediocre to terrible.  In that same 42 game stretch, Stanford's offense has scored 30+ points 15 times (11 of them are against Army, UC Davis, SJSU, Duke, Low APR U, Wazzu, Colorado, and OSU).  These are shockingly bad numbers, and in a vacuum every single Stanford fan would demand a change in the offense.  The only reason some are not is because Stanford has managed to win games, despite a shockingly bad offense.

This, of course, is due to the defense.  In that same 42 game stretch, when Stanford scores more than 21 points, it is 23-0!  Only twice since 2012 (42 games) has the defense allowed more than 28 points. That is remarkable. The 1999 defense allowed more than 28 points seven times in 12 games, and it went to the Rose Bowl.  In 31 out of our last 42 games, the defense has held the opponent to 20 or fewer.  That is just incredible. 

The numbers amply support what we all have seen with our eyes:  Stanford has won games despite its offense, not because of it.  Games have been lost due to a poor offense; and games have been won (with too close a margin) due to a poor offense.  And ask yourself this:  has Stanford been fun to watch the last few years?  [There is great visceral satisfaction/entertainment value in a dominant D - but the O has been agonizing to watch, even in many wins].

There are still those who think only about W/L record.  First, there is NO REASON that a great defense precludes a good (let alone great) offense.  Stanford should demand (at least) competence in both.  Moreover, focusing only on W/L record is myopic for program health, as this season will show, unless there is a change made on the offensive side of the ball.  This Stanford D may end up being good (or not), but there is no way it will be the dominant force we've seen in the past few years.  Any scintilla of a chance of that evaporated with the loss of Phillips in Q1 against NW.

So unless a change is made on O, then all those close Ws are going to turn into agonizing, embarrassing, and lifeless Ls.  And what transpires from there is easy to envision (20,000 fans in the stands in a crummy 2016 home schedule).  That is Buddy/Wlat ball.

This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed NOW.  Texas did it.  Stanford should, too.  I believe Shaw must step away from any offensive play calling responsibilities and be the CEO head coach.  If Stanford's offense continues the mediocrity  we've seen all too often the last few years, then at least we'll know who has to go (the OC).  But Shaw's meddling into the O has, at minimum, obscured any accountability for the putrid O.  That has to change. Now.  For the good of the program.

I think Teejers' analysis is right.  I'm really not liking the trend here, particularly without backs like Taylor and Gaffaney.

We scored six points against an unranked opponent.  That is a breathtaking level of futility, one not matched since Harbaugh's first year as coach...and Shaw's first year as OC.

I don't think Shaw should be fired, and I've never suggested that.  But I've always thought we needed the smartest OC available, an NFL level of OC, particularly since our players are so intellectually gifted...