10-29-2014, 12:34 PM
I don't get this "you are either for him or against him" mentality about Shaw. I started this thread thinking there were two pretty good examples to share that demonstrate some coaches who are embracing new ideas that maybe go outside their comfort zone. Why does any suggestion that Shaw can do a little better or benefit from going outside his, turn into this exercise in defensiveness? Who knows, maybe he has done some things already that weren't that comfortable for him.
Change and ability to adapt or evolve obviously has different meanings for different people, but I don't see anybody calling for Shaw's head or otherwise criticizing him (on this board at least) on anything close to the level of Donahue. All I'd like to see is a new OC who brings new ideas into the program, that can be given the room to succeed or fail on his own merits. Is this some kind of outlier position of significance among the Stanford fan base, or in any way unreasonable?
Change and ability to adapt or evolve obviously has different meanings for different people, but I don't see anybody calling for Shaw's head or otherwise criticizing him (on this board at least) on anything close to the level of Donahue. All I'd like to see is a new OC who brings new ideas into the program, that can be given the room to succeed or fail on his own merits. Is this some kind of outlier position of significance among the Stanford fan base, or in any way unreasonable?