KSU vs WSU

[Flatlandcoug]

There are folks on here that believe that Paul Wulff was the architect of the worst football teams in college football history and that no coach has ever had to face the challenges that Leach faced when he took over the WSU job. It's often said that no other program was as bad as WSU was when Leach was hired.

My go-to story of a team that went from terrible to great is KSU. I personally feel that no coach has ever done a greater job than Bill Snyder has done at Kansas State. I've been told that KSU was a lot better off than WSU by a lot of measures, but none have actually been presented. From what I've seen, the only way that the KSU job in 1989 was better than the WSU job in 2012 is that the Big 8 featured a lot of terrible teams at the time and it wasn't that hard to win. Of course, that makes KSU's 0-21-1 record in Stan Parrish's last two years all the more damning.

In the six years prior to Snyder taking over, KSU went 9-55-2. They finished winless twice. They went 3-40-1 in the last four seasons before Snyder took over. Those three wins came against 1-10 Missouri, 3-8 KU and 1-AA Western Illinois. In the two seasons before Snyder took over KSU, the Wildcats were outscored by an average of 14-40. Between 1983 and 1988, KSU lost to 1-AA teams four times. Of their 21 losses under Stan Parrish, 10 were against teams with losing records.

As bad as Wulff was at WSU and as much as he needed to be fired, I just can't see how anyone could say that KSU in 1988 was in better shape than WSU. This isn't a puff piece trying to make Paul Wulff look good but I'm curious to see what positive things that someone can say about KSU in December 1988 (or from 1983 to 1988) to suggest that KSU wasn't the biggest dumpster fire in the history of college football when Snyder took over.

 

[Cougatron]

There are folks on here that believe that Paul Wulff was the architect of the worst football teams in college football history .

Kansas State - Pre Snyder

1988 - PS/G: 15.5 (98th of 105) 40.7 (103rd of 105)
1987 - PS/G: 12.3 (102nd of 104) 38.3 (101st of 104)
1986 - PS/G: 12.2 (102nd of 105) PA/G: 31.2 (98th of 105)
1985 - PS/G: 9.2 (110th of 110) 26.8 (82nd of 110)


Wulff

2011 - PS/G: 29.8 (45th of 120) - PA/G: 31.8 (95th of 120)
2010 - PS/G: 19.6 (106th of 120) - 35.8 (111th of 120)
2009 - PS/G: 12.0 (119th of 120) PA/G: 38.5 (118th of 120)
2008 - PS/G: 12.7 (119th of 120) 43.8 (119th of 120)

As you can see from a National level it was extremely similar
THE only difference being the increase in ppg 4 years in for 2011 WSU,

When you have to go back in time 30 years to find a similar program in terms of bad that is a BIG BIG problem.

 

[froropmkr72]

There are folks on here that believe that Paul Wulff was the architect of the worst football teams in college football history and that no coach has ever had to face the challenges that Leach faced when he took over the WSU job. It's often said that no other program was as bad as WSU was when Leach was hired.

My go-to story of a team that went from terrible to great is KSU. I personally feel that no coach has ever done a greater job than Bill Snyder has done at Kansas State. I've been told that KSU was a lot better off than WSU by a lot of measures, but none have actually been presented. From what I've seen, the only way that the KSU job in 1989 was better than the WSU job in 2012 is that the Big 8 featured a lot of terrible teams at the time and it wasn't that hard to win. Of course, that makes KSU's 0-21-1 record in Stan Parrish's last two years all the more damning.

In the six years prior to Snyder taking over, KSU went 9-55-2. They finished winless twice. They went 3-40-1 in the last four seasons before Snyder took over. Those three wins came against 1-10 Missouri, 3-8 KU and 1-AA Western Illinois. In the two seasons before Snyder took over KSU, the Wildcats were outscored by an average of 14-40. Between 1983 and 1988, KSU lost to 1-AA teams four times. Of their 21 losses under Stan Parrish, 10 were against teams with losing records.

As bad as Wulff was at WSU and as much as he needed to be fired, I just can't see how anyone could say that KSU in 1988 was in better shape than WSU. This isn't a puff piece trying to make Paul Wulff look good but I'm curious to see what positive things that someone can say about KSU in December 1988 (or from 1983 to 1988) to suggest that KSU wasn't the biggest dumpster fire in the history of college football when Snyder took over.

According to this http://cjonline.com/sports/2014-08-...transformed-kansas-state-and-entire-community Poor Stan was a victim of poor facilities and might of been successful if given the support Snyder had

 

[Cougatron]

Really good article fro here are some interesting things...

"with an average attendance of 20,975 in the 1988 season to watch an unexciting and unsuccessful product on the field"

WSU Attendance in 2010 - 24,532

"It was enough to scare K-State into pumping resources into its facilities, including a new press box to replace the one infamously known as a 25-year-old temporary structure."

Old Press Box.....New Press Box

“It leaked terribly so if there was much more than a drizzle it would drip on your workspace,” Janssen said of the press area and coaches booths. “Windows would frost over so it was tough to see out of. For the guys in the upper level, there was a spiral staircase and if you weighed over 230 you were going to have a tough time getting up and down.

One of the things I learned from him is it’s not where you start from, it’s your rate of improvement every day compared to your competition.”

WSU has the 2nd best rate of improvement over the previous 4 years in comparison to the other new Pac-12 coaches

 

[wazzucougs96]

Oh hey another flatlandcoug K-State post, neat!

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Oh hey another flatlandcoug K-State post, neat!

I mentioned it because I always hear how bad Wulff was (and he was bad) but I don't think people fully appreciate how incredibly bad KSU was. Perspective is always a good thing.

 

[Coug1990]

I mentioned it because I always hear how bad Wulff was (and he was bad) but I don't think people fully appreciate how incredibly bad KSU was. Perspective is always a good thing.

You also think that Snyder is an all-time great coach. Why then, are you holding Leach to a standard only a few could attain? You are always going to complain then. It would be like trashing every coach that is not Bear Bryant. What happens if Leach is just Don James or Mike Price and your trashing him just because...

The Big 8 was terrible when Snyder took over, as only 50% were above .500. The P12 was loaded when Leach took over and consistently is one of the best conferences in football with the majority of it's teams over .500. The Big 8 played seven conference games. The P12 plays 9. There were little expectations of KSU and Snyder. There have been huge expectations of Leach from day one. For a losing progam, KSU was ready to listen how to win. For a losing program, WSU was not. Many players and fans thought WSU was already successful. I could go on, but why should I?

 

[Flatlandcoug]

You also think that Snyder is an all-time great coach. Why then, are you holding Leach to a standard only a few could attain? You are always going to complain then. It would be like trashing every coach that is not Bear Bryant. What happens if Leach is just Don James or Mike Price and your trashing him just because...

The Big 8 was terrible when Snyder took over, as only 50% were above .500. The P12 was loaded when Leach took over and consistently is one of the best conferences in football with the majority of it's teams over .500. The Big 8 played seven conference games. The P12 plays 9. There were little expectations of KSU and Snyder. There have been huge expectations of Leach from day one. For a losing progam, KSU was ready to listen how to win. For a losing program, WSU was not. Many players thought they had already been successful.I could go on, but why should I?

Wow......you just projected an awful lot onto me. I've always said that I would be happy with WSU having a down year every couple years as long as we are good every few years too. I'd like to see us get to the point where the good years are actually good and the bad years are more 5-7 and less 3-9. I won't freak out at the occasional 3-9 season if we have a good season the year before where we graduate a lot of talent. BTW, your finishing comment makes zero sense. WSU was already spending millions of dollars before Leach stepped onto campus. KSU didn't do their first stadium upgrade under Snyder until his fourth year. They were bitching about how bad things were but didn't have the money or fan interest to do anything about it. WSU was way ahead of KSU in terms of facilities upgrades when comparing the two situations.

I've already acknowledged that Snyder's path to success was easier than Leach's path in terms of the level of competition. I think we started in a better spot but understand that we had tougher opponents. Honestly, if we hadn't choked against CSU, 2013 would be a season that settled people down. A real world winning record without the need for moral victories would have been huge. You may not think that one game is important, but the reality is that if we had won one more game in 2006 or 2007, Doba would have not been let go. A bowl game in either season would have saved his job. The criticisms of Leach from most of us are less about how bad our team is but more about the little things that we keep doing wrong. If he can't get that fixed, all the talent in the world won't change things.

Just remember that at the end of the day, the next time you are whining about rough things have been.......others have had it worse. Duke, Rutgers, KSU, KU, Northwestern, Cal, Oregon State and others have all went through stretches that were as bad (or worse) than what we went through. Most of them experienced fairly quick success when they got the right guy on the sidelines. Sometimes, it took a few tries. I don't want to experience the decades long misery that some of those schools have gone through and hope that Leach is the right guy.

 

[Coug1990]

Wow......you just projected an awful lot onto me. I've always said that I would be happy with WSU having a down year every couple years as long as we are good every few years too. I'd like to see us get to the point where the good years are actually good and the bad years are more 5-7 and less 3-9. I won't freak out at the occasional 3-9 season if we have a good season the year before where we graduate a lot of talent. BTW, your finishing comment makes zero sense. WSU was already spending millions of dollars before Leach stepped onto campus. KSU didn't do their first stadium upgrade under Snyder until his fourth year. They were bitching about how bad things were but didn't have the money or fan interest to do anything about it. WSU was way ahead of KSU in terms of facilities upgrades when comparing the two situations.

I've already acknowledged that Snyder's path to success was easier than Leach's path in terms of the level of competition. I think we started in a better spot but understand that we had tougher opponents. Honestly, if we hadn't choked against CSU, 2013 would be a season that settled people down. A real world winning record without the need for moral victories would have been huge. You may not think that one game is important, but the reality is that if we had won one more game in 2006 or 2007, Doba would have not been let go. A bowl game in either season would have saved his job. The criticisms of Leach from most of us are less about how bad our team is but more about the little things that we keep doing wrong. If he can't get that fixed, all the talent in the world won't change things.

Just remember that at the end of the day, the next time you are whining about rough things have been.......others have had it worse. Duke, Rutgers, KSU, KU, Northwestern, Cal, Oregon State and others have all went through stretches that were as bad (or worse) than what we went through. Most of them experienced fairly quick success when they got the right guy on the sidelines. Sometimes, it took a few tries. I don't want to experience the decades long misery that some of those schools have gone through and hope that Leach is the right guy.

No I'm not projecting anything. You talk out of both sides of your mouth. Why do you think that Ed, Sponge, Chinook and you have been the only ones arguing with the rest of us?

The rest of you posts goes counter to everything I have read about KSU, including the article linked in this thread. So, who am I going to believe? The guy that says 99% bad about Leach and 1% good and tells me he is solidly in Leach's corner? Or, every article that I have read for the last two decades.

I know, it's a tough one...

 

[dgibbons]

There are folks on here that believe that Paul Wulff was the architect of the worst football teams in college football history and that no coach has ever had to face the challenges that Leach faced when he took over the WSU job. It's often said that no other program was as bad as WSU was when Leach was hired.

My go-to story of a team that went from terrible to great is KSU. I personally feel that no coach has ever done a greater job than Bill Snyder has done at Kansas State. I've been told that KSU was a lot better off than WSU by a lot of measures, but none have actually been presented. From what I've seen, the only way that the KSU job in 1989 was better than the WSU job in 2012 is that the Big 8 featured a lot of terrible teams at the time and it wasn't that hard to win. Of course, that makes KSU's 0-21-1 record in Stan Parrish's last two years all the more damning.

In the six years prior to Snyder taking over, KSU went 9-55-2. They finished winless twice. They went 3-40-1 in the last four seasons before Snyder took over. Those three wins came against 1-10 Missouri, 3-8 KU and 1-AA Western Illinois. In the two seasons before Snyder took over KSU, the Wildcats were outscored by an average of 14-40. Between 1983 and 1988, KSU lost to 1-AA teams four times. Of their 21 losses under Stan Parrish, 10 were against teams with losing records.

As bad as Wulff was at WSU and as much as he needed to be fired, I just can't see how anyone could say that KSU in 1988 was in better shape than WSU. This isn't a puff piece trying to make Paul Wulff look good but I'm curious to see what positive things that someone can say about KSU in December 1988 (or from 1983 to 1988) to suggest that KSU wasn't the biggest dumpster fire in the history of college football when Snyder took over.

At least KSU was smart enough to get rid of the worst coach in its history as soon as it did.

 

[wulffui]

Stan Parrish got another chance, though.

Hopefully that warms a few cockles.

 

[chipdouglas]

Oddly enough, I was in Manhattan KS - and Pullman WA - this week. Like Pullman, there is nothing in Manhattan and not much to sell recruits/fans on... and yet they succeed in spite of that.

We look at K-State's (and Kansas') success in football/basketball and just take it for what it is because each has been good at one sport for awhile. But when you visit, you realize it would actually be much easier to explain away their failures than their successes; i.e., why isn't Kansas a joke at basketball and K-State a joke at football?

No reason to think a Leach can't do it if a Snyder and a Self can do it in John Deere USA.

P.S. Have to say, I haven't been back to Pullman in 5 years but so much has changed... stadium looks great. Now just need to upgrade those heinous high school-y north stands.

 

[OscarTheGrouch]

FYI:

Snyder's conference records in years 1-4 (no bowl games):

0-7
2-5
4-3
2-5

It's not like the turnaround was immediate.

 

[Coug1990]

Oddly enough, I was in Manhattan KS - and Pullman WA - this week. Like Pullman, there is nothing in Manhattan and not much to sell recruits/fans on... and yet they succeed in spite of that.

We look at K-State's (and Kansas') success in football/basketball and just take it for what it is because each has been good at one sport for awhile. But when you visit, you realize it would actually be much easier to explain away their failures than their successes; i.e., why isn't Kansas a joke at basketball and K-State a joke at football?

No reason to think a Leach can't do it if a Snyder and a Self can do it in John Deere USA.

P.S. Have to say, I haven't been back to Pullman in 5 years but so much has changed... stadium looks great. Now just need to upgrade those heinous high school-y north stands.

Damn it man. We got rid of the porta-potties. What more do you need?

 

[Flatlandcoug]

No I'm not projecting anything. You talk out of both sides of your mouth. Why do you think that Ed, Sponge, Chinook and you have been the only ones arguing with the rest of us?

The rest of you posts goes counter to everything I have read about KSU, including the article linked in this thread. So, who am I going to believe? The guy that says 99% bad about Leach and 1% good and tells me he is solidly in Leach's corner? Or, every article that I have read for the last two decades.

I know, it's a tough one...

Talking out both sides of my mouth? First, the major point of this thread is that contrary to all the chicken littles around here, there are places that had it worse than WSU had it under Wulff. 2008 and 2009 were pretty damn bad and nobody denies it, but at least things were "trending" in the right direction under Wulff. By the way, you expend a lot of energy talking about positive trends for Leach, but anytime someone mentions that WSU improved the record for three straight years under Wulff, people spew BS about low bars and pretend like it was an aberration.

Then you post this.....
For a losing progam, KSU was ready to listen how to win. For a losing program, WSU was not. Many players and fans thought WSU was already successful. I could go on, but why should I?

What the hell does that mean? Wulff was fired in 2011 because the vast majority of fans (and everyone that mattered) knew that he wasn't successful. Just because a handful of people were pissed doesn't mean that we thought 4-8 was a good thing. It was a step in the right direction but it wasn't enough. KSU's leadership was similar to where WSU's leadership is today and we hope that means good things for us. That doesn't mean that things weren't a hell of a lot worse there. I've lived in Kansas for 20+ years and work with KSU grads. The guy who owns my company attended KSU in the dark times and used to talk about how none of the students gave a crap about football and most didn't go to games. You pulling a few assumptions from an article does not give you any idea of what it was like to be a KSU fan. I guarantee that they disagree with your assumptions about how things were. You know how I know? Because I've talked to them.

Again, this thread was not intended to be high praise for Wulff. Being better than Stan Parrish is like the state of Alabama being proud that they are better than Mississippi. I still wouldn't want to live there. It just gets old hearing the old, "derpity derp we've got it so bad 'cuz Wulff sucks!" repeated ad nauseum. You may think that I talk about both sides of my mouth but I think that too many people on this board hunker down and type in ignorance because it doesn't fit the narrative that they are stuck on. The day we quit making stupid mistakes is the day we start winning games. It's got nothing to do with Wulff and it's got little to do with talent. It's got a lot to do with making tackles, converting field goals and catching the god damned punt when you are supposed to.

 

[kayak15]

Flat, thank you for your post. It is good to keep things in perspective. I had completely forgotten the old days, the days when KSU was termed the "mildcats". The earlier years when KSU was top of the heap on the bottom ten list. When only ranked 8th or 9th on same list was a sign of improvement. If KSU can rise like a phoenix then why not WSU?

We are clawing our way out of the hole we found ourselves in. It is essential to realize a problem. It is essential to understand the underlying basis of the problem. Who exactly caused that scenario is mostly of interest to historians. I couldn't give a rat's ass about who did that and who failed to do this. I find history interesting but it is only of value in the wisdom it brings. We can all look back now and see the various elements that put us in the hole- OL, speed, coaching and you name it. We all know the problem, a struggling football program. The current staff seems to understand why the program struggled and is addressing it. The improvement has not been at the speed that we would want but that is understandable. When we were two years old we wanted our stuff and we wanted it now and threw a tantrum when we couldn't have it. We are not two years old any more and should not act like we are.

I wish people could cease arguing about who caused this or that. That is not the most important issue, the underlying problems and dealing with them are. Most of the coaching comparisons are not worth the electricity it takes to bring them up on my desktop and 99% of them are repetitive, inconclusive and just frustrating. As Archie Bunker used to say, "CEASE!".

 

[wazzucougs96]

I mentioned it because I always hear how bad Wulff was (and he was bad) but I don't think people fully appreciate how incredibly bad KSU was. Perspective is always a good thing.

And I made my post to point out just how many times you have attempted to drive this square peg into that round hole.

 

[wazzucougs96]

Oddly enough, I was in Manhattan KS - and Pullman WA - this week. Like Pullman, there is nothing in Manhattan and not much to sell recruits/fans on... and yet they succeed in spite of that.

We look at K-State's (and Kansas') success in football/basketball and just take it for what it is because each has been good at one sport for awhile. But when you visit, you realize it would actually be much easier to explain away their failures than their successes; i.e., why isn't Kansas a joke at basketball and K-State a joke at football?

No reason to think a Leach can't do it if a Snyder and a Self can do it in John Deere USA.

P.S. Have to say, I haven't been back to Pullman in 5 years but so much has changed... stadium looks great. Now just need to upgrade those heinous high school-y north stands.

Kansas' basketball tradition is deeply rooted with the damn inventor of the game.

 

[Coug1990]

Talking out both sides of my mouth? First, the major point of this thread is that contrary to all the chicken littles around here, there are places that had it worse than WSU had it under Wulff. 2008 and 2009 were pretty damn bad and nobody denies it, but at least things were "trending" in the right direction under Wulff. By the way, you expend a lot of energy talking about positive trends for Leach, but anytime someone mentions that WSU improved the record for three straight years under Wulff, people spew BS about low bars and pretend like it was an aberration.

Then you post this.....
For a losing progam, KSU was ready to listen how to win. For a losing program, WSU was not. Many players and fans thought WSU was already successful. I could go on, but why should I?

What the hell does that mean? Wulff was fired in 2011 because the vast majority of fans (and everyone that mattered) knew that he wasn't successful. Just because a handful of people were pissed doesn't mean that we thought 4-8 was a good thing. It was a step in the right direction but it wasn't enough. KSU's leadership was similar to where WSU's leadership is today and we hope that means good things for us. That doesn't mean that things weren't a hell of a lot worse there. I've lived in Kansas for 20+ years and work with KSU grads. The guy who owns my company attended KSU in the dark times and used to talk about how none of the students gave a crap about football and most didn't go to games. You pulling a few assumptions from an article does not give you any idea of what it was like to be a KSU fan. I guarantee that they disagree with your assumptions about how things were. You know how I know? Because I've talked to them.

Again, this thread was not intended to be high praise for Wulff. Being better than Stan Parrish is like the state of Alabama being proud that they are better than Mississippi. I still wouldn't want to live there. It just gets old hearing the old, "derpity derp we've got it so bad 'cuz Wulff sucks!" repeated ad nauseum. You may think that I talk about both sides of my mouth but I think that too many people on this board hunker down and type in ignorance because it doesn't fit the narrative that they are stuck on. The day we quit making stupid mistakes is the day we start winning games. It's got nothing to do with Wulff and it's got little to do with talent. It's got a lot to do with making tackles, converting field goals and catching the god damned punt when you are supposed to.

I am not ignorant, but I believe some of your statements are. You assume that you are correct and everyone else on this board types in ignorance because it does not fit our narrative. How arrogant. Yes, everyone else is wrong but you.

As someone pointed out, you use the same example over and over as proof that you are the one that is right. It appears that you don't understand why people don't see it your way. But, people have given you dozens and dozens of examples that show otherwise. Who is so stuck on their narrative? The few with one example of a narrative or the many with numerous examples.

So, you have lived in Kansas and that is the reason why you understand KSU. I live in Washington, have talked to WSU fans, have been among them every single day living here in Washington. Maybe you just don't know as much as you think you do about WSU living over 1500 miles away in Kansas.

 

[Cougatron]

but at least things were "trending" in the right direction under Wulff.

Wulff was fired in 2011 because the vast majority of fans (and everyone that mattered) knew that he wasn't successful. Just because a handful of people were pissed

It just gets old hearing the old, "derpity derp we've got it so bad 'cuz Wulff sucks!" repeated ad nauseum.

Was Wulff's tenure worse than Dobas? the answer is yes. It was worse in wins. It was worse in recruiting rankings, and that's not trending in the right direction.

Is Leach's tenure better than Wulff's? the answer is yes. It is better in wins, and it is better in recruiting rankings, and it is trending in the right direction.

Look at the hypocritical statement you just made. "The vast majority of fans knew he wasn't successful....then "just because a handful of people were pissed"

Just shut up already. Wulff tanked the program. It's obvious he did, and now we are getting out of it.

You will hear about Wulff sucking for the rest of your life because he was THE WORST coach in our history. There is no changing that. He is the worst of all time, and you will hear about him till you die.

You will also hear about him till every last blundering fingerprint he had on the program is finally scrubbed clean.

The impact of the 2011 class is still felt today. There are only 2 contributors from that class that will be appearing in the 2015 in a meaningful way. Paulo, and Dom Williams.

That 2011 class is supposed to be our RS seniors this year. We have 2 that could make it.
Last year that class was our senior class and how many DBs were in that class? Only 1.

So yeah Wulff will still be talked about because his "impact" still resonates with the program.

From the perception of a team that was a doormat he helped build, to the roster management failures, to the poor recruiting.

When he left the building his stench remained...and you will hear about that smell until it is gone....but the ghost of that smell...oh that is eternal.

 

[YakiCoug]

Damn it man. We got rid of the porta-potties. What more do you need?

Ah, the infamous porta-potties! I can see why a few here still cling to the past.

 

[spongebob11]

Was Wulff's tenure worse than Dobas? the answer is yes. It was worse in wins. It was worse in recruiting rankings, and that's not trending in the right direction.

Is Leach's tenure better than Wulff's? the answer is yes. It is better in wins, and it is better in recruiting rankings, and it is trending in the right direction.

Look at the hypocritical statement you just made. "The vast majority of fans knew he wasn't successful....then "just because a handful of people were pissed"

Just shut up already. Wulff tanked the program. It's obvious he did, and now we are getting out of it.

You will hear about Wulff sucking for the rest of your life because he was THE WORST coach in our history. There is no changing that. He is the worst of all time, and you will hear about him till you die.

You will also hear about him till every last blundering fingerprint he had on the program is finally scrubbed clean.

The impact of the 2011 class is still felt today. There are only 2 contributors from that class that will be appearing in the 2015 in a meaningful way. Paulo, and Dom Williams.

That 2011 class is supposed to be our RS seniors this year. We have 2 that could make it.
Last year that class was our senior class and how many DBs were in that class? Only 1.

So yeah Wulff will still be talked about because his "impact" still resonates with the program.

From the perception of a team that was a doormat he helped build, to the roster management failures, to the poor recruiting.

When he left the building his stench remained...and you will hear about that smell until it is gone....but the ghost of that smell...oh that is eternal.

It's time for Leach to put up or shut up. I too am tired of the Wulff blaming in yr 4. Wulff had nothing to do with the disaster that was special teams last yr.

Of course the recruiting is supposed to be better than Wulff. He is the worst coach in NCAA history afterall...so the fact that we are even comparing Leach to Wulff is reason for pause.

How anybody can think 3-9 is trending in the right direction after firing 3 coaches off the"best staff we ever had" and hiring a DC who has never been a DC before is either drinking the Kool Aid or smoking rocks.

 

[wulffui]

It's time for Leach to put up or shut up. I too am tired of the Wulff blaming in yr 4. Wulff had nothing to do with the disaster that was special teams last yr.

Of course the recruiting is supposed to be better than Wulff. He is the worst coach in NCAA history afterall...so the fact that we are even comparing Leach to Wulff is reason for pause.

How anybody can think 3-9 is trending in the right direction after firing 3 coaches off the"best staff we ever had" and hiring a DC who has never been a DC before is either drinking the Kool Aid or smoking rocks.

It's only you guys "comparing" Leach to Wulff. The rest of us are just having a rational discussion on how Wulff's failings have affected what Leach has tried to do up to this point.

 

[Cougatron]

It's time for Leach to put up or shut up. I too am tired of the Wulff blaming in yr 4. Wulff had nothing to do with the disaster that was special teams last yr.

Of course the recruiting is supposed to be better than Wulff. He is the worst coach in NCAA history afterall...so the fact that we are even comparing Leach to Wulff is reason for pause.

How anybody can think 3-9 is trending in the right direction after firing 3 coaches off the"best staff we ever had" and hiring a DC who has never been a DC before is either drinking the Kool Aid or smoking rocks.

Last year the areas we were weak were exposed and that's not bad. That's good because then you can fix them. Everyone said we were ahead of schedule in 2013. In 2014 our Freshmen/Lack of depth was exposed in the secondary, and our poor special teams were exposed.

So Leach makes adjustments after the season and we move forward.

ESPN just said we were a spoiler to win the Pac - 12 North, Outland Trophy watch list announced for OL and that's not trending forward? While you are fixated on a 3-9 season other people see where our future is headed...and it's the right direction.

 

[spongebob11]

It's only you guys "comparing" Leach to Wulff. The rest of us are just having a rational discussion on how Wulff's failings have affected what Leach has tried to do up to this point.

Oh really?

Here is a quote just several msg's above yours by Tron:

"Is Leach's tenure better than Wulff's? the answer is yes. It is better in wins, and it is better in recruiting rankings, and it is trending in the right direction."

Sorry...but that is comparing Leach to Wulff.

 

[wulffui]

Oh really?

Here is a quote just several msg's above yours by Tron:

"Is Leach's tenure better than Wulff's? the answer is yes. It is better in wins, and it is better in recruiting rankings, and it is trending in the right direction."

Sorry...but that is comparing Wulff to Leach.

So, the "comparison"... is that's there's no comparing the two by tangible measures, because one is clearly better?

Agree.

 

[CougEd]

Was Wulff's tenure worse than Dobas? the answer is yes. It was worse in wins. It was worse in recruiting rankings, and that's not trending in the right direction.

Is Leach's tenure better than Wulff's? the answer is yes. It is better in wins, and it is better in recruiting rankings, and it is trending in the right direction.

Look at the hypocritical statement you just made. "The vast majority of fans knew he wasn't successful....then "just because a handful of people were pissed"

Just shut up already. Wulff tanked the program. It's obvious he did, and now we are getting out of it.

You will hear about Wulff sucking for the rest of your life because he was THE WORST coach in our history. There is no changing that. He is the worst of all time, and you will hear about him till you die.

You will also hear about him till every last blundering fingerprint he had on the program is finally scrubbed clean.

The impact of the 2011 class is still felt today. There are only 2 contributors from that class that will be appearing in the 2015 in a meaningful way. Paulo, and Dom Williams.

That 2011 class is supposed to be our RS seniors this year. We have 2 that could make it.
Last year that class was our senior class and how many DBs were in that class? Only 1.

So yeah Wulff will still be talked about because his "impact" still resonates with the program.

From the perception of a team that was a doormat he helped build, to the roster management failures, to the poor recruiting.

When he left the building his stench remained...and you will hear about that smell until it is gone....but the ghost of that smell...oh that is eternal.

Tron...since you are a numbers guy....and you mentioned the doba versus wulff comparison in terms of recruiting. Not trying to get totally in on that debate, but you always throw out recruiting rankings, in which I am like Mike Leach and scoff at them. So what should have been the basis of the 2008 season, the 2004 and 2005 class which came off the Holiday bowl and a year removed from the Holiday Bowl had a total of 48 kids in the two classes. From 2004 which had 27, 17 never saw a minute of playing time. Not even sure many saw three semesters at WSU. 7 from that class were done by the end of 2007. So the seven who saw PT, 4 were JC players, one was Bumpus,, 1 got booted because of alcohol and one quit before his senior season. Despite All those rankings, all those stars, all of which you point to numbers, they had three players left in 2008 from that class. Four. Say that again. Four. Four players from a class of 27 kids on the heels of a 3 season thirty win streak. And the four? Matt E and the best I can say is he was limited at best. He was not a Pac 10 DT. You had Michael Graise, a 220 pound DE, who put on a total of 5 pounds in 5 years, Michael Willis and he had a bum shoulder and Gary rogers who had zero experience.

So what happened the following year? They took 21 kids. 9 never played. In two classes following 30 wins you had 48 kids, and 26 never saw the field. Of the remaining 12 in that class, 3 used up their eligibility. That means in 2008 they had 9 players. Alfred, Ahmu, Eppele, Gibson,Evans, Stripling, Tardy and Trent. Ahmu was always hurt, but was a Pc 10 talent. 13 players out of 48. And you really want to talk about "stars" and rankings?

 

[dgibbons]

Tron...since you are a numbers guy....and you mentioned the doba versus wulff comparison in terms of recruiting. Not trying to get totally in on that debate, but you always throw out recruiting rankings, in which I am like Mike Leach and scoff at them. So what should have been the basis of the 2008 season, the 2004 and 2005 class which came off the Holiday bowl and a year removed from the Holiday Bowl had a total of 48 kids in the two classes. From 2004 which had 27, 17 never saw a minute of playing time. Not even sure many saw three semesters at WSU. 7 from that class were done by the end of 2007. So the seven who saw PT, 4 were JC players, one was Bumpus,, 1 got booted because of alcohol and one quit before his senior season. Despite All those rankings, all those stars, all of which you point to numbers, they had three players left in 2008 from that class. Four. Say that again. Four. Four players from a class of 27 kids on the heels of a 3 season thirty win streak. And the four? Matt E and the best I can say is he was limited at best. He was not a Pac 10 DT. You had Michael Graise, a 220 pound DE, who put on a total of 5 pounds in 5 years, Michael Willis and he had a bum shoulder and Gary rogers who had zero experience.

So what happened the following year? They took 21 kids. 9 never played. In two classes following 30 wins you had 48 kids, and 26 never saw the field. Of the remaining 12 in that class, 3 used up their eligibility. That means in 2008 they had 9 players. Alfred, Ahmu, Eppele, Gibson,Evans, Stripling, Tardy and Trent. Ahmu was always hurt, but was a Pc 10 talent. 13 players out of 48. And you really want to talk about "stars" and rankings?

And Wulff followed up Doba's recruiting with straight garbage. But, he spent four years overselling it.

Do you have a point?

 

[Cougatron]

Oh really?

Here is a quote just several msg's above yours by Tron:

"Is Leach's tenure better than Wulff's? the answer is yes. It is better in wins, and it is better in recruiting rankings, and it is trending in the right direction."

Sorry...but that is comparing Leach to Wulff.

I've compared Leach to Walden, To Price, and to Wulff. I've compared him to the other Pac-12 coaches that came in when he did in terms of 3 year program growth from their predecessors.

Wulff is brought up to show the transition from where we were at to where we are now as a program.

What a tiny handful of people don't like on here is people wanted to believe the total complete bs Wulff was selling them, or they felt he should have been given more time, or they like him, or whatever the reason and they try to overstate the complete failure he was, When they do that I then show them how bad he really was. And they get more defensive. That's always how it goes.

When people accept and admit that Wulff was one of the worst BCS coaches in the history of the BCS, did tremendous damage to the program, recruited in the bottom of entire country and THAT was what Leach was handed then we won't really have a problem will we?

But when people refuse to accept the truth and reality of where we were then how on earth can they measure progress. When they don't have an actual real grasp on the starting point there is no way to understand where we are at.

I'll take it 1 step further and show you how absolutely stupid a misguided starting point is for expectations.

Wulff was the greatest coach we ever had!!! He was incredible. So many winning seasons. We beat so many pac 12 teams before why isn't Leach winning the Pac 12? he left us with oh so much incredible talent!!. I mean we had a two deep with 44 NFL draft picks every kid wanted to play for WSU, our stands were always completely packed! Why is he not winning the Pac 12 north?!!?!

Now... to look at this in REALITY.

Wulff was the worst coach in our entire history. (fact his win record was the worst). He was not incredible. We had zero winning seasons. We beat 4 pac 12 teams. he left us with recruiting classes that averaged in the bottom quarter of the entire FBS Only 3 players were drafted. Only 1 spent more than half the time with Wulff. Most kids did not want to play for WSU because they thought of it as a joke program our fans bailed and refuse to come back till we win.

When you are in denial about the truth complaining about Leach is ridiculous. It's in every true WSU's fan interest to get behind him.

 

[Cougatron]

Tron...since you are a numbers guy...

Yeah I am a numbers guy. And with whatever short comings Doba had in 2004/5 he still found a way to produce 5-6 win seasons.

It wasn't until 2008,2009, and 2010 that our NEW standard for excellence was set by Wulff with a high of 2 games.

For 3 years Paul Wulff couldn't win more games TOTAL than Doba had in his last year? In fact Wulff never ever won more games then doba did in his last year.
THAT IS HOW BAD WULFF WAS.

It took leach 2 years to pass that mark, and also to match the TOTAL wins Wulff had over 4 years.

 

[spongebob11]

Yeah I am a numbers guy. And with whatever short comings Doba had in 2004/5 he still found a way to produce 5-6 win seasons.

It wasn't until 2008,2009, and 2010 that our NEW standard for excellence was set by Wulff with a high of 2 games.

For 3 years Paul Wulff couldn't win more games TOTAL than Doba had in his last year? In fact Wulff never ever won more games then doba did in his last year.
THAT IS HOW BAD WULFF WAS.

It took leach 2 years to pass that mark, and also to match the TOTAL wins Wulff had over 4 years.

The sad part is, that we are actually comparing Leach to Wulff here. You would think it would be a no brainer to win more games than he did.

One thing he did not do is win more games in year 3 versus what Wulff did in his final yr(with a backup QB) which got him fired.

That is not good, no matter what kind of stats you want to spin a story with.

 

[CougEd]

Yeah I am a numbers guy. And with whatever short comings Doba had in 2004/5 he still found a way to produce 5-6 win seasons.

It wasn't until 2008,2009, and 2010 that our NEW standard for excellence was set by Wulff with a high of 2 games.

For 3 years Paul Wulff couldn't win more games TOTAL than Doba had in his last year? In fact Wulff never ever won more games then doba did in his last year.
THAT IS HOW BAD WULFF WAS.

It took leach 2 years to pass that mark, and also to match the TOTAL wins Wulff had over 4 years.

Yes, you are correct, he won with the most experienced QB in the school history in 2007. The wheels already already started to fall off. 53-10, 52-7, 48 to Arizona, 47 to USC, 42 to Wisconsin. Can you imagine what those schores would have been if Brink wasn't around to kill clock on his side of the ball by getting first downs?

So his "wins" were a result of earlier recruiting classes and JC filler. But back to the original discussion since you got somewhat side tracked. You consistently quote recruiting rankings. How do those numbers "jive"? What do they mean when over 50% of your class never step on the field, after thre 10 win seasons.

 

[Cougatron]

The sad part is, that we are actually comparing Leach to Wulff here. You would think it would be a no brainer to win more games than he did.

One thing he did not do is win more games in year 3 versus what Wulff did in his final yr(with a backup QB) which got him fired.

That is not good, no matter what kind of stats you want to spin a story with.

College football programs structure and roster affect the following years. When you tank a program like Wulff did it's not an easy recovery no matter the coach.

That's why I said find me a coach that magically turned around a program in the BCS era with the results Wulff pumped out. Bill Snyder was brought up and then I showed people that during Wulff's tenure it was similar in national rankings to when Snyder took over.

That's the reality we are fighting against. Yes the special teams suuuuucked last year. And Leach didn't waste any time getting rid of Russell. He cares just as much as everybody else.

Defense was sucking even though 5 freshmen played in the secondary? DC/Secondary coach gets the axe.

Leach is a headman that doesn't ignore problems he addresses them head on and that is awesome. That's exactly what we need. There was no part of the rebuild that was going to be flawless. Not for a school like us, competing against the competition we face, and with the prior results.

Leach's first task in my opinion was to get the offense where he wanted it. It makes sense because this is where he spends most of his time and it's his signature and background.

The defense is the next project. And bringing in two strong recruiters Leach is focusing on building the roster on that side much like he did the offense.

He started the offense build bringing in 12 lineman.

He's started the defense rebuild bringing in 7 DBs and for 2016

Same kind of rebuild idea load up then get that in good shape. Bring in young energetic coaches and move forward.

I think the Special teams was the big surprise to him and hopefully Mele will be better than Russell.

 

[Cougatron]

So his "wins" were a result of earlier recruiting classes and JC filler. But back to the original discussion since you got somewhat side tracked. You consistently quote recruiting rankings. How do those numbers "jive"? What do they mean when over 50% of your class never step on the field, after thre 10 win seasons.

Sorry that Paul Wulff didn't know what the hell he was doing in a transition to take the few good pieces he could work with and do something with them instead of 2 wins 1 wins 2 wins.

That's on him and him alone.

Leach took whatever Wulff left him and made 3 6 3.

If Wulff had known what the hell to do he wouldn't have completely thrown the program in the gutter and THEN try to make something happen. He also wouldn't have been fired from USF and he also wouldn't be coaching team USA with the other architect of program hell Dan Hawkins .

 

[YakiCoug]

Sorry that Paul Wulff didn't know what the hell he was doing in a transition to take the few good pieces he could work with and do something with them instead of 2 wins 1 wins 2 wins.

That's on him and him alone.

Leach took whatever Wulff left him and made 3 6 3.

If Wulff had known what the hell to do he wouldn't have completely thrown the program in the gutter and THEN try to make something happen. He also wouldn't have been fired from USF and he also wouldn't be coaching team USA with the other architect of program hell Dan Hawkins .

Do you mean this "veteran coach on the college and NFL levels"?

http://usafootball.com/blogs/u.s.-n...rings-decades-of-experience-at-highest-levels

 

[wulffui]

The sad part is, that we are actually comparing Leach to Wulff here. You would think it would be a no brainer to win more games than he did.

One thing he did not do is win more games in year 3 versus what Wulff did in his final yr(with a backup QB) which got him fired.

That is not good, no matter what kind of stats you want to spin a story with.

Winning four games in year four didn't get Wulff fired. Winning nine games in four years did.

 

[spongebob11]

Sorry that Paul Wulff didn't know what the hell he was doing in a transition to take the few good pieces he could work with and do something with them instead of 2 wins 1 wins 2 wins.

That's on him and him alone.

Leach took whatever Wulff left him and made 3 6 3.

If Wulff had known what the hell to do he wouldn't have completely thrown the program in the gutter and THEN try to make something happen. He also wouldn't have been fired from USF and he also wouldn't be coaching team USA with the other architect of program hell Dan Hawkins .

But you just said college football structure and roster affects the following years. So when you look at that 2004 class, which was our highest rated class ever, you can see where the wheels begin to fall off the bus.

And that is also a case study on why you shouldn't pay much ATTN to recruiting rankings...especially in Pullman.

Also, I'm not talking about a total turn around. I do expect Leach to finish with a better record than Wulff's final yr.

He did not do that 2 out of 3 yrs...and as we have been told many times on this board, you are what your record says you are.

 

[spongebob11]

Winning four games in year four didn't get Wulff fired. Winning nine games in four years did.

OK..whatever. I still expect Leach to do better than 4 games with a crappy coach and a backup qb.

 

[Cougatron]

But you just said college football structure and roster affects the following years. So when you look at that 2004 class, which was our highest rated class ever, you can see where the wheels begin to fall off the bus.

2004 class could only affect the 2008/2009 at max. Where was that at fault in 2010? It wasn't. That was more of Wulff screwing things up, I'm not saying Wulff was rich when he took over.
He took over a 5 win team on average, but he could have made it better in 4 years in SOME way, but he never did.

And that is also a case study on why you shouldn't pay much ATTN to recruiting rankings...especially in Pullman.

No you need to pay attention to recruiting rankings, because while that class had misses it also had people like Bumpus in there. The important things like grades and other things also become a factor. Doba was from the old school Academic gamble way we used to do things, and in the new higher academic standard era he screwed some things up for sure. that's why we fell off, but Wulff took us to the grave and then wiggled the corpse at the end.

Also, I'm not talking about a total turn around. I do expect Leach to finish with a better record than Wulff's final yr.

We will more than likely win more than 4 games.

He did not do that 2 out of 3 yrs...and as we have been told many times on this board, you are what your record says you are.

Yeah and WSU is still a bottom program, but we are moving out of that as evident by the strong OL, getting to the post season, the progressively improved offensive numbers, the overall roster talent level increase, and with people like ESPN even acknowledging we could be a spoiler for the Pac 12 North. We are 1/3 done with a rebuild and hopefully will have the 2/3-3/3 done next year.

 

[12375CAT]

It is only a matter of time

until

Pirate stomps the (rest of the) P12 into the ground!