[Embo]

Bowlsby did have a committee when he hired Harbaugh.  I have a friend, a former Stanford football player, who was on the committee who interviewed both Chow and JH.   And, according to my friend, there was no question who was going to get hired after those interviews.   I don\'t mean to suggest that the committee made the decision....simply that my friend knew after those interviews who he wanted to see hired and it wasn\'t Chow.  That was a very different time for Stanford football (and Bob Bowlsby) and I have no idea if Bowlsby would use the same approach now.

You might be mixing up two sets of interviews.  Chow was interviewed in 2004, by Leland, after Buddy was mercifully let go.  JH was interviewed in 2006, by Bowlsby, after Wlat was mercifully let go.

There was lots of invective hurled at our former AD during the time of the Chow interview.  Chow was attractive then because the USC offense was a machine, and his minority status added to the publicity.  What really p***ed us off at the other board was not the decision, but the process.  Most weren\'t annoyed that Chow was skipped over - there were lots of questions whether Chow could recruit, or whether he had that desire to put in crazy hours that head coaches were notorious for.  No, it was the dog and pony show Leland was conducting.  A committee?  It didn\'t matter that Chow\'s interview with the committee was reportedly uncomfortable.  We all knew that Wlat was a Friend of Ted and that\'s all that counted.  

Chow was bitter about being passed over - his initial front runner status was public knowledge, and he told Sports Illustrated that he had been told by Stanford, "You\'re our guy", and when Wlat became available, Chow said he was told "by a third level employee" rather than Leland that he wouldn\'t be hired.  Most of us on the other board believed Chow - since Mike Riley expressed his annoyance three years prior that he only learned he had been passed over for the Stanford job in 2002 when reporters told him Buddy had been hired.

(As you can guess, I\'m happy and confident with our current AD and his selection process.  We\'ve come a long way as Stanford football fans.  There are no "We\'re not paying market rates" statements and no crony hires.)

[Embo]

Bowlsby did have a committee when he hired Harbaugh.  I have a friend, a former Stanford football player, who was on the committee who interviewed both Chow and JH.   And, according to my friend, there was no question who was going to get hired after those interviews.   I don\'t mean to suggest that the committee made the decision....simply that my friend knew after those interviews who he wanted to see hired and it wasn\'t Chow.  That was a very different time for Stanford football (and Bob Bowlsby) and I have no idea if Bowlsby would use the same approach now.

You might be mixing up two sets of interviews.  Chow was interviewed in 2004, by Leland, after Buddy was mercifully let go.  JH was interviewed in 2006, by Bowlsby, after Wlat was mercifully let go.

There was lots of invective hurled at our former AD during the time of the Chow interview.  Chow was attractive then because the USC offense was a machine, and his minority status added to the publicity.  What really p***ed us off at the other board was not the decision, but the process.  Most weren\'t annoyed that Chow was skipped over - there were lots of questions whether Chow could recruit, or whether he had that desire to put in crazy hours that head coaches were notorious for.  No, it was the dog and pony show Leland was conducting.  A committee?  It didn\'t matter that Chow\'s interview with the committee was reportedly uncomfortable.  We all knew that Wlat was a Friend of Ted and that\'s all that counted.  

Chow was bitter about being passed over - his initial front runner status was public knowledge, and he told Sports Illustrated that he had been told by Stanford, "You\'re our guy", and when Wlat became available, Chow said he was told "by a third level employee" rather than Leland that he wouldn\'t be hired.  Most of us on the other board believed Chow - since Mike Riley expressed his annoyance three years prior that he only learned he had been passed over for the Stanford job in 2002 when reporters told him Buddy had been hired.

(As you can guess, I\'m happy and confident with our current AD and his selection process.  We\'ve come a long way as Stanford football fans.  There are no "We\'re not paying market rates" statements and no crony hires.)