Is Sherrone Moore going to be David Shaw 2.0?
Full Disclosure- I'd love to have Coach Moore take over as HC. I've also been a David Shaw fan, in part, because he went to high school with my brother at Rochester Adams.
If Michigan goes with Coach Moore, I started last night about what Michigan could learn from Shaw's run at Stanford. It's a similar situation- popular OC takes over as Harbaugh goes to the pros. Shaw did have the advantage of having Andrew Luck at QB for his first season as HC while Michigan's coach next year will be starting over from scratch.
Shaw had 8 winning season, 3 Pac 10 Championships and was 4 x Pac 10 coach of the year before the wheels fell off the program. Watching his teams at their peak, they still had that "Harbaugh edge" to them. I'm not entirely sure what happened to their program but it sounds like the combination of high academic standards and Stanford not being quite as up to date on the changing landscape in recruiting did him in.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:18 AM ^
Right, but more often than not, those coaches get their first HC job at smaller schools with less pressure, where they have time to learn on the job. It happens, but it’s less common to get your first HC job at a Michigan, OSU, Alabama, etc. I think the faction of the fanbase that is worried about just turning it over to Moore would have felt a lot better if Moore had 3-4 successful seasons at some middling Mac team that they could look to as reassurance that Moore knows how to be the HC of a program, as opposed to filling in for 3-4 hours on Gameday. That said, there are a number of success stories of guys who hit it out of the park on their first try, so I’m optimistic.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:33 AM ^
If Moore wasn’t ready to be Michigan’s coach, Shaw would actually be a good candidate to replace Harbaugh today. Would I want Shaw as Michigan’s coach - maybe, maybe not - but you could do worse.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:42 AM ^
At Stanford in the end, Shaw looked like he was done coaching. He's not 'old' in coaching terms, but not everyone wants to spend their entire adult life working an extremely intense job like that.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:07 AM ^
Shut your whore mouth! Seriously, though, he would be a terrible candidate. He really did not impress across his tenure. Coming in to lead to 2-3 losses and leaving in 4-5 years isn't appealing at all. Or, he can stay for 12 and completely tank the program.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:37 AM ^
As long as Moore uses headsets and doesn't clap while his QB is concussed, Moore should be fine.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:38 AM ^
I've been thinking about that question for some time given that the writing has been on the wall for a while now. I think there's some fundamental differences between the Stanford situation and the Michigan situation, and of course between David Shaw and Sherrone Moore.
For several years, Shaw kept Stanford at maybe 95% of where Harbaugh had them. In Michigan's scenario that'd be a fairly frequent diet of 11-12 win seasons. But there is of course a wild card here, which is that Stanford isn't playing and defining itself vs a team like Ohio State. Ohio State responds to failure by 'going nuclear'. And failure to them means not being a top 4 team in the country. So that's a brutal bar for Michigan to clear and Moore is in the same boat as Harbaugh on that count.
I think it'd be a difficult situation for anyone because after 15-0 the only way is down. Anything other than another national title will be interpreted as 'the program is slowly slipping'.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:36 AM ^
I don't think so. Even Nick Saban at Alabama couldn't put up a national title every year. No one said he was slipping.
I can't imagine there's any semi-rational portion of this fanbase that thinks the program is crumbling if we fail to win back to back national titles. Fact is, this past season was nothing less than magical. Teams don't just win the national title with as little talent as we we were fielding. It literally just doesn't happen.
So there simply can't be any expectation of repeating with another national title in 2024. Heck, I can't imagine we'll win another national title in the next 10 years. I'll be shocked if it happens.
Slowly slipping would be what Juwan's been doing with the basketball program. The team starts losing more games each season. More and more fundamentals fall off. Play gets more and more sloppy. Effort decreases each year. Etc.
THAT would be the program slipping. If Moore can consistently win 10+ games per season and beat Ohio State at least once every 3-4 four years and win the conference championship, he'll have a job here for life.
Fact is, we really aren't that dominant of a program over our history. We certainly don't recruit talent like the rest of the top teams in the country, nor do we have an NIL program worth anything in the current landscape. The only reason expectations were sky high starting in 2015 was literally because HARBAUGH. Hiring Harbaugh was the equivalent of hiring a Nick Saban or Pete Caroll. You expect championships merely by virtue of who the coach is, regardless of the program historically.
Sherrone Moore should come in with NONE of those expectations because he's never ran a program before in his life. Anyone expecting Moore to be the next greatest coach since sliced bread is delusional at best. He might be really great, he might be average, and he might be terrible. We simply have no idea yet. Not to mention the fact that as of right now we're losing almost our entire O-Line, our two starting WRs in a room of extremely average WRs to begin with, the best running back in program history, one of if not the greatest QB in program history who's possible replacements have hardly thrown a single pass in college, and quite possibly the best DC in all of college football. Moore will have a rebuild to manage with Ohio State looming, and Oregon, USC, and Washington joining the conference, and having to put together a staff and find a capable QB, all while debuing as a rookie head coach. That's not a recipe for success any way you slice it and therefore can't possibly come with herculian expectations like winning a national title.
So anyone who claims that failure to win another national title is the program "slowly slipping" is going to be a bona fide lunatic.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:46 AM ^
Michigan is a program that is almost always in the top 25 but not that regularly in the top 5. The good news is we are entering an era when you just need to be in the top 12 to have a shot. People's expectations being set to the past 3 seasons are weird because a.) we have never consistently been that program and b.) we don't need to be to win titles anymore
January 25th, 2024 at 11:52 AM ^
I think people might be underestimating the challenges facing whoever Michigan's next coach is. If Harbaugh snatches Minter and Herbert away, good luck to Moore—he's gonna need it.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:20 PM ^
This is an amazing analysis, best on the thread. Kudos, sweet mitch!
January 25th, 2024 at 12:54 PM ^
I didn't say the national title has to occur *every year*, but Alabama with Saban has been 'in the running' pretty much every year. Now that is remarkable, but Swinney at Clemson and Smart at Georgia had similar runs. So it's certainly possible. Is it where Michigan historically has been? Obviously not.
But is it where Michigan has been the last three seasons ? Absolutely. If Michigan loses to Ohio State in Columbus this year and next year in Ann Arbor and gets 9-10 wins in those seasons, there absolutely will be a perception Michigan has taken a step back even if those would be historically within the range of 'solid' Michigan seasons.
I could leave out the total W number even, any successive losses to Ohio State will generate criticism and negativity. That's just how it is at Michigan, and there's a big difference between national champions Michigan 2024 and "perhaps that's just who we are" Michigan of 2015. Harbaugh has shown it can be done. Maybe he's a unicorn of a coach, but every future Michigan season will be measured against a standard that includes the 2021-23 seasons in terms of what is viewed as 'good' at Michigan.
January 25th, 2024 at 1:07 PM ^
Well, I think you made an important point when you separated out the W/L vs. OSU. That criterion almost exists separately from overall W/L in terms of judging the success or failure of a Michigan season. You're correct that 9-10 wins is in the historical range of solid Michigan seasons. Or, to flip it around, 2-3 losses, since the 13-game season (including the bowl) wasn't a thing until relatively recently.
What wasn't part of history in the 70s, 80s, 90s? Frequent losing streaks to OSU. To my mind, a season like, say, 1995 (9-4) was more successful than any of the 10-3 seasons under Harbaugh. And that is simply because we beat a really good OSU team, and avoided a 2-game losing streak to them in the process.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:59 PM ^
I agree with both of you. Yes, anyone who claims the program is slipping because they don't win it all again next year is nuts. I mean, is the playoff in the realm of possibility? I think so, because in the new landscape of college football, 10-2 will likely get you in, especially with as tough as our schedule looks like it will be. But with all the roster turnover, expecting a high seed (and high likelihood of winning it) would be totally unreasonable.
And yet, idiots on ESPN, Yahoo, and various other places (including the feelingsball people on this board) will claim the program is slipping... just wait.
January 25th, 2024 at 1:37 PM ^
Nah, I'm not going back to losing to OSU most of the time, and losing our 2/3 toughest games every year.
If he can't maintain what's been built, which is competing for a championship every year, maybe not win but compete, you fire him. Finishing top 5 in the conference is not what the goal should be. If Moore can't do it, don't even hire him.
I don't want to go back to being an above average B1G team who is more of less dominated by OSU all the time. That's a shitty deal. OSU taking a step back has pretty much just been losing to Michigan. I don't see why we should be cool losing to OSU most years and then losing to other teams as well.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:39 AM ^
I think there are parallels, but Michigan is still an easier place to win than Stanford, which was not a football school when Harbaugh got there. Presumably, it should be easier for Moore to maintain Harbaugh's success than it was for Shaw.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:43 AM ^
Michigan is an easier place to win, which is why the expectation of what you win is much higher. It's a double-edged sword. Stanford doesn't have to beat an Ohio State to define a season as a good one.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:55 AM ^
I mean they did have USC. And USC in that time was a pretty good program.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:14 AM ^
No they weren't. USC finished innthe top 10 twice during shaw's tenure. The were not a good team by any stretch. The pac 12 was very weak when shaw was winning those titles.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:48 PM ^
They played Oregon and Notre Dame every year. Oregon was almost always a top 10 team.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:56 PM ^
Stanford didn't go into a season thinking 'we gotta beat USC this year or else this season is a L'. If you won 9+ games at Stanford, they considered it a sensational season. At Michigan 9 wins and a L vs OSU gets you "Is coach on the hot seat next year?" threads.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:41 AM ^
I was actually thinking more Lincoln Riley taking over from Bob Stoops, hopefully with more loyalty.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:41 AM ^
OP, from the bottom of my heart, thank you for doing the research on this one and not presenting Shaw's Stanford tenure as slow decomposition (implying a negative slope from year one) or a couple of years with the "Harbaugh guys" and then dismal results. (Variations of both assertions have been made in MGoBlog threads, including this one.)
- - -
When you analyze Shaw at Stanford, you have to first consider the Stanford football environment (more demanding academic standards, less engaged alums, fewer of them, even fewer local fans, etc.). Three losses at Stanford is not the same as three at Michigan.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:41 AM ^
I hope not.
Shaw had a thing that worked . . . until it didn't. He did not adapt beyond that and Stanford became irrelevant.
Also, Stanford under Shaw was 1990s Wisconsin, a program that was good and consistent, but a program that was never going to be a match for the big boys in college football. Stanford never got a sniff at a National Championship.
I would hope that Sherrone would be more flexible and dynamic that Shaw was, and understand the advantages that he has at Michigan and leverage them.
Harbaugh proved that you can win at the highest level at Michigan (there was considerable doubt about this). Now Sherrone needs to keep that going.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:42 AM ^
I think this gets at the core of the debate of Shaw vs Moore.
Will Moore be capable of adapting in order to win at the highest level? Shaw merely saved the template Harbaugh left and used it until the template broke. Once it broke, he clearly didn't know what else to do.
If Moore is capable of adapting and learning and changing as needed to maintain a dominant program, then he should do fine. If the only thing he can do is copy what he saw Harbaugh do then we're all in trouble.
It's like someone who can follow a recipe vs someone who actually knows how to cook. Take away the recipe and the first person is totally lost and won't know what to do. Take away the recipe from someone who actually knows how to cook and they'll adapt as needed and the dish will still come out great.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:43 PM ^
In fairness to Shaw, the Harbaugh template aligned well with who could be recruited to play at Stanford. When it broke, I don't know how much he could have done to fix that.
Maybe he could have tried something else, ala Wisconsin. It may have worked, it may not have worked (we don't even know if it will work for Wisconsin). We will never know.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:51 AM ^
Shaw's Stanford teams would've made the expanded CFP 5-6 times in his first 8 seasons, man
what is your expectation for Michigan?
Also "worked until it didn't" is such an idiotic thing to hold against someone, it is true for every coach who does anything but retire on top. Bill Belichick was great in New England until he wasn't, must be a shitty coach.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:43 AM ^
A simple question. Which gettable coach would you rather have? Cannot think of any.
I would go further. How many coaches are out with better odds of success at UM? Maybe 4.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:53 AM ^
When you look at the amount of money Michigan was going to throw at Harbaugh to stay, there are many more "gettable" coaches than people realize. It would open some eyes if Michigan chose to pursue it.
DeBoer was not going to go anywhere . . . until Alabama called. Alabama did not need to look at just up-and-coming coaches, they could go after already-there coaches.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:00 AM ^
UM is not Alabama. I can see a few coaches that would go to Alabama in a second but would not come here. Though, I think DeBoer would have come to UM.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:24 AM ^
It was discussed on WTKA this morning that DeBoer did not sign a contract extension at Washington after the CFP Championship game. Furthermore, it is alleged that UW had that contract extension for a month but DeBoer did not sign it. Did DeBoer have any prior knowledge that Jim would jump to the NFL and he'd be in line for the HC job at Michigan? We may never know the answer. I find this a very interesting piece of news.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:50 AM ^
This is an interesting time for active coaches in college football. Of all the greats from the past 20 years, only two are really still coaching right now:
- Pete Caroll - no longer coaching in college, ain't coming back
- Nick Saban - no longer coaching, just retired
- Jim Harbaugh - no longer coaching in college, ain't coming back
- Jimbo Fisher - not currently coaching, just got fired
- Urban Meyer - no longer coaching, probably won't ever again
- Kirby Smart - still coaching, never leaving Georgia
- Dabo Swinney - still coaching, never leaving Clemson
So of the 7 coaches with national titles in the last 20 years or so, only two are still coaching in college football. Which means there's only two home run hires and taking a chance on literally anyone else.
It'll be interesting to see how the new playoff format plays out and if national titles get more spread out or if they continue to concentrate with Alabama, Georgia, and Clemson.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:45 PM ^
Alabama is not looking so great right now . . .
January 25th, 2024 at 1:30 PM ^
I don't think Dabo's in the category of "home run hire" these days. But, your point is both fair and accurate.
And - as this plays out - an interesting chat - perhaps when some folks are visiting Ann Arbor - perhaps on a walk between Schembechler Hall and the Law Quad - might be - "Yeah - I've wondered the Michigan difference is too. Those teams that play on Sundays - they must have liked what they saw in Ann Arbor - since they hired our head coach and are putting a lot of our players - just like you - into the league. Is that something you'd be interested in doing?"
January 25th, 2024 at 10:44 AM ^
Been wondering this myself. Hard to know; Michigan does have the advantage of its history, but also has some of the same high academic standards, and has been seemingly slower to adapt.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:46 AM ^
Also concerned if Minter leaves. It was the 'Baltimore Defense' that ultimately pushed Harbaugh over the top at Michigan.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:54 AM ^
Yep. When we became College Ravens we became college champions.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:10 AM ^
A small distinction, if I may - "When we became the College Ravens DEFENSE we became champions."
My hope is the ties the Harbaugh family has to Michigan - will provide a continued foundation and path for young coaches with NFL experience to "do a stint" in Ann Arbor - and infuse Michigan's schemes with NFL'esque approaches - on both offense and defense.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:51 AM ^
Exactly. We certainly didn't win because of our offense LOL. I think the most important aspect of Moore's coaching tenure will be if he can maintain the Baltimore defense without Minter.
January 25th, 2024 at 1:35 PM ^
Don't get me wrong. The offense did good things too. And - those back to back Joe Moore awards noted the impact of the OL.
The defense gets stops - and, those stops mean the offense doesn't have to score a TD on every possession.
As a point of reference - that last B1G conference game of the season - called The Game. Well, a quick bit of trivia. In the second half of the last three games combined - how many times was Michigan forced to punt? I believe the answer is - once - one (1) punt in the second half of the three games combined.
The bigger issue in Columbus - IMO, is not scoring - it's getting stops.
I love Michigan's D - and, hope they don't change a thing.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:44 AM ^
His record may turn out to be similar but there is very little parallel between Shaw at Stanford pre-NIL, and Moore at UM with NIL and 12 team playoffs. The only thing they have in common is they both followed Harbaugh.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:55 AM ^
And that other thing, which is why this is such a lazy analogy.
January 25th, 2024 at 11:00 AM ^
You mean they were both offensive coordinators?...
January 25th, 2024 at 11:02 AM ^
Yeah, that.
January 25th, 2024 at 12:55 PM ^
Yup. Funny how many times I’ve seen Moore compared to…David Shaw, Lovie Smith and Marcus Freeman.
Precious few comps with Dan Lanning, Kirby Smart, Dabo, Fisch, etc.
Implicit bias is alive and well!
January 25th, 2024 at 10:46 AM ^
Edit: 🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️
January 25th, 2024 at 10:46 AM ^
Is the monkey his uncle?
January 25th, 2024 at 10:50 AM ^
I hope so!
January 25th, 2024 at 10:51 AM ^
Gee, he’s black and he’s following JJH. What more do you need to know?
/s
January 25th, 2024 at 10:53 AM ^
I genuinely hope everyone here understands the uphill battle of being Stanfords coach and the success Shaw had.
January 25th, 2024 at 10:54 AM ^
Stanford is not Michigan. Why compare these two when you could compare Moore to the last similar transition at Michigan like Moeller or Carr?
Sherrone Moore is a good recruiter. The only thing we haven't seen him do is hire staff. Who he hires to fill gaps in the next few days will probably be a good indication of what Moore will be able to do here. If he promotes entirely from within, then he's probably closer to Shaw. If he goes out and hires the best OC (or Co-OC) to help our offense adapt to the new look of the roster and hires an experienced DC, then he might be closer to Moeller or Carr.
Also, it's interesting that Carr trailed off so much at the end of his career similar to Shaw. Maybe that's just what tenured coaches do.