Leach is #1!!!
- Thread starter CougPatrol
- Start date
Lists are lists, and winning solves everything. With that said, lots of WSU / Leach ties on there.
Not at all. As I was saying in my earlier post, not every job starts in the same place when a coach takes over. Only Mike London and Leach took over losing programs. But, even before London took over, Virginia had gone to 5 bowl games in 8 years. Leach is the only one who took over a dumpster fire.
Sure Leach is way overpaid, and has way too much job security, (we can't even considering firing the guy for another 3-4 years). Leach had to be lured to take over a shitsandwich of a program, and after Wulff, Moos was in panic mode. We all were. Leach had us by the short and curlies.
Also, no one says it is easy to win in Pullman. Getting WSU to 6 wins and a bowl with a team loaded with Wulff recruits was a major coaching accomplishment. However, things were supposed to get better as Leach recruits displaced Wulff's recruits, it hasn't. No one is predicting "big things" in 2015, despite the fact that most Wulff recruits are gone. Most conceded it is another rebuilding year. The fact is there remains a dearth of Pac-12 talent on this team, especially on defense That it troubling to anyone who isn't a leech. Let's hope that we start seeing, in numbers, players talented enough to win games in the Pac-12 this season, or 2016 will be relegated to yet another rebuilding year, with an overpaid coach we can't afford to sack until 2018, at the earliest.
None of us should have had delusions of grandeur following the Wulff years, but if you would have surveyed Cougar fans immediately after the hiring of Leach and asked them what the next 3 years would look like, what do u think the predictions would have looked like?
The first 2 years were on par, but last year surprised me; particularly the losses to Rutgers, Nevada and Cal.
I agree with Tron to an extent. Leach shouldn't be exempt from feeling some pressure this year. We can't roll out the worst special teams AND a horrid defense again in year 4 without some questions and concerns.
The first 2 years were on par, but last year surprised me; particularly the losses to Rutgers, Nevada and Cal.
I agree with Tron to an extent. Leach shouldn't be exempt from feeling some pressure this year. We can't roll out the worst special teams AND a horrid defense again in year 4 without some questions and concerns.
Patience, my friends, patience. We cannot expect Leach or anyone else to take over the worst program in FBS and instantly add talent and experience. Accumulation of adequate talent has required a lot of work and time to convince said players to sign up to the crap sandwich with the assurance that better times are coming. That is steadily happening. We now have classes of three star prospects with the occasional four star where before the classes were generally two star "diamonds-in-the-rough" types who usually turned out to be slightly shiny rocks. The two star kids the staff occasionally bring in have me thinking they see something no one else does. Experience speaks for itself time wise.
That being said I think we are closer to a reasonable degree of success than most realize. The Rutgers, Nevada and Cal games would have been in the winning column with any modest degree of Special Team's performance. If there had been such modest/mediocre performance we would have had a 6-6 record. Nothing to write home about but would have lead to a minor bowl game and pleased and mollified the peanut gallery. Last year's offense was rolling up yards like crazy. Red zone efficiency was problematic. I expect this year's offense to continue the trend. Maybe not record breaking stuff like Halliday, Mayle and the group put up but certainly more than adequate. Defense and Special Teams can't help getting better, can they? That is a pretty low bar. Hell, the bar is laying in the dust and ants and spiders are hopping over it. Now, I do not see a nine win or more season but with any improvement in Defense and Special Teams a 6-6 or 7-5 record is conceivable. Maybe I am just guzzling the KoolAid again but I don't think so.
Leach is the most overpaid coach in America and we should start thinking about canning him? I do not think so. Have a bit of patience. We're getting there. Not as quick as we would like but progress is steadily being made.
That being said I think we are closer to a reasonable degree of success than most realize. The Rutgers, Nevada and Cal games would have been in the winning column with any modest degree of Special Team's performance. If there had been such modest/mediocre performance we would have had a 6-6 record. Nothing to write home about but would have lead to a minor bowl game and pleased and mollified the peanut gallery. Last year's offense was rolling up yards like crazy. Red zone efficiency was problematic. I expect this year's offense to continue the trend. Maybe not record breaking stuff like Halliday, Mayle and the group put up but certainly more than adequate. Defense and Special Teams can't help getting better, can they? That is a pretty low bar. Hell, the bar is laying in the dust and ants and spiders are hopping over it. Now, I do not see a nine win or more season but with any improvement in Defense and Special Teams a 6-6 or 7-5 record is conceivable. Maybe I am just guzzling the KoolAid again but I don't think so.
Leach is the most overpaid coach in America and we should start thinking about canning him? I do not think so. Have a bit of patience. We're getting there. Not as quick as we would like but progress is steadily being made.
Whoa, nobody said anything about firing him. I just want well coached special teams and improvements overall.
One more ingredient for the pot here....We all can think of cases where the same coach, sometimes even at the same school, simply stops being effective. Or, when they come back, they just can't capture the same magic. Snyder at KSU seems to have picked up where he left off, but JRob II was a failure at SC. It may be possible that Lubbock won't work in Pullman. It is possible, for whatever reason, that what ML did at TT cannot or will not be duplicated at wazzu. Whether it's the different location, the changing game, or just that ML has changed, it is not logically impossible that he simply won't work out. I for one still don't think that is likely, but I have to admit, that it is more likely now in my mind than it was when he was hired.
Again, I'll open the can of worms. How long for patience?
Just give me a year we should expect Mike Leach-led teams to be competitive game-in and game out. Not winning conference titles, but in the game every week, vying for bowl spots.
I can be patient but there has to be a date when that 'just be patient' thinking ends. With all the talk about the "coug loser" mentality of the past, I don't see a whole lot of difference between perpetually being 'patient'. That's the same house with a different coat of paint.
I was disturbed by the fact that arguably THE most important hire for Leach was D coordinator....and he whiffed on that one. Hope he has it right now.
If you'd been told when he was hired that by the end of year two, you'd have a bowl team, with a win in the Coliseum, you'd have said that was par? Because of our rich bowl history, or our masterful record against USC? Maybe all the five star recruits he was left?
This post was edited on 4/18 11:50 AM by wulffui
We've gone from getting blitzed 10 times a year, and being competitive twice, and people lauding that as progress, to being competitive 10 games a year, and getting blitzed twice, and people treating that as the bellwether of imminent failure.
OK.
That said, by all measures, this off season has been as bad off the field as last season was on. I think the coaching moves were handled poorly, and the subsequent recruiting hemorrhage was an F- scenario. This year's single commit isn't showing rapid turnaround, either. And looking at the schedule, pretty much everyone marks Rutgers as a "must win"- but it's stupid to go cross country in game two, and I'd mark it as a likely loss- this program is terrible at scheduling to create momentum.
This post was edited on 4/18 12:19 PM by wulffui
OK.
That said, by all measures, this off season has been as bad off the field as last season was on. I think the coaching moves were handled poorly, and the subsequent recruiting hemorrhage was an F- scenario. This year's single commit isn't showing rapid turnaround, either. And looking at the schedule, pretty much everyone marks Rutgers as a "must win"- but it's stupid to go cross country in game two, and I'd mark it as a likely loss- this program is terrible at scheduling to create momentum.
This post was edited on 4/18 12:19 PM by wulffui
Nobody I know is treating Leach like an imminent failure. 2013 was a nice improvement, but the bowl meant nothing to me. We lost in ugly fashion and finished with a losing record.
Coaches are evaluated on a sliding scale. Year 2 showed improvement, year 3 showed regression. If we bounce back this year, even if the record doesn't reflect it, with a competitive team pointed in the right direction, we'll be satisfied. If we lose to Rutgers, Wyoming, Cal and Colorado, the seat gets very warm.
Coaches are evaluated on a sliding scale. Year 2 showed improvement, year 3 showed regression. If we bounce back this year, even if the record doesn't reflect it, with a competitive team pointed in the right direction, we'll be satisfied. If we lose to Rutgers, Wyoming, Cal and Colorado, the seat gets very warm.
Yeah, they need to win games they're supposed to win- another 3-9 shouldn't get rolled over, by any stretch. And it's pretty easy to see a scenario where Leach has set up the DC and ST coaches as the fall guys if they toss another 3-9. But just upgrading to "well below average" at both of those positions would have been worth two wins.
But I don't like @Rutgers, week two. Probably a 10 am game, cross country, against a bowl team from the Big Ten. This team could use momentum to start a year, and they get @Auburn, @BYU, and a road game against a MW team who had focused on you all offseason the way you focused on your opponent right before them.
I don't want big, intersectional games at this stage of the program- I want 3-0, with the dregs of the Sun Belt, so that you can tune an offense built on precision and timing than most, and take that forward into your conference schedule- it would work better than taking tough, injury laden losses for a program who has historically been lacking in depth.
But I don't like @Rutgers, week two. Probably a 10 am game, cross country, against a bowl team from the Big Ten. This team could use momentum to start a year, and they get @Auburn, @BYU, and a road game against a MW team who had focused on you all offseason the way you focused on your opponent right before them.
I don't want big, intersectional games at this stage of the program- I want 3-0, with the dregs of the Sun Belt, so that you can tune an offense built on precision and timing than most, and take that forward into your conference schedule- it would work better than taking tough, injury laden losses for a program who has historically been lacking in depth.
Leach has not lived up to expectations and the rest of the country has been aware of it. He has made bad decisions concerning coaching assistants and he still may be doing it. He hired an O line coach with no real experience playing or coaching at that position. He hired a receivers coach who is used to throwing passes rather than running routes and receiving passes It seems that he believes that X's and O's may be more important than hands on coaching.. He made a terrible decision to turn over the QB job to a player who was/is not a leader and who panicked in tough times and who was not accepted by the team as a leader. So be it ,i believe that he will succeed this year due to haveing better defensive coaches and more leadership at the QB position whether it be any of the three contenders.i really believe that the cougs will make a bowl this year and actually win the bowl game.Leach is a great offensive coach but has made bad personnel and playing time decisions.. I like the other new coaches and i think that better leadership,a better defense, and improved QB play will translate to success on the field. it is interesting to note that he has staff people with experience helping with on the O line and WR 's. So maybe they will have good coaching there as well.I see 7-8 wins this season,believe it or not.
My eyes are wide open about what Leach is and is not able to do, and he still has not yet earned his paycheck. As I said in another thread, I'm done with the Leach personality worship until he earns it back.
But like others here have said, zero respect is paid in this article to the fact that he was tasked with resurrecting a program that was at the low of all program lows... and for a program that started low. WSU in the late Doba/full-Woof era was NOT a D1 program.
If he had taken over EWU's roster and gone 7-20 against the 2nd best conference in CFB, he'd be hailed as a hero. Instead, they act like he took the reins at UCLA and got abused.
I'm shocked though that Iowa's coach is getting over $4 mil!? It is really strange how coaches can have all-time eras, and then follow them up with historic lows...
But like others here have said, zero respect is paid in this article to the fact that he was tasked with resurrecting a program that was at the low of all program lows... and for a program that started low. WSU in the late Doba/full-Woof era was NOT a D1 program.
If he had taken over EWU's roster and gone 7-20 against the 2nd best conference in CFB, he'd be hailed as a hero. Instead, they act like he took the reins at UCLA and got abused.
I'm shocked though that Iowa's coach is getting over $4 mil!? It is really strange how coaches can have all-time eras, and then follow them up with historic lows...
Pete Carroll wiffed on his first two o-line coaches in Seattle. He whiffed on his first OC in Seattle as well. A lot of coaches, including coaches that have won national championships have whiffed on coaches. It really is not all that uncommon. Leach also had it tougher than most, as he put together a staff from scratch. Most coaches are hired from other universities and have a staff they bring with them.
You need 3 guys to run the 34. A nose guard, a pass rushing linebacker and a big hitting safety. Breske took over and WSU had 2 of the 3. Then one graduated and wasn't replaced. So then he had 1 of 3. Then the last one graduated and he had 0 of 3. They weren't able to either coach up the guys left over from the previous regime, land the talent needed to play well immediately or get the guys they did land coached up and matured in time. He got fired.
Part of the problem when taking over a team that's been awful is that there just isn't a magic wand in the WSU athletic department you can wave and voila! You replace good players with bad players or young players and everything still works! Nope.
If Breske was fired because he was a poor coach or the boss didn't like his scheme, fine. If he was fired because he didn't have the talent necessary to run the defense, is that entirely his fault?
If you're gonna run a 34 defense with the huge blitz package available to you, it would help if you had kids in the program long enough to learn it and enough talent maturing in the program to step in when kids leave. Otherwise, meet the new boss same as the old boss.
Part of the problem when taking over a team that's been awful is that there just isn't a magic wand in the WSU athletic department you can wave and voila! You replace good players with bad players or young players and everything still works! Nope.
If Breske was fired because he was a poor coach or the boss didn't like his scheme, fine. If he was fired because he didn't have the talent necessary to run the defense, is that entirely his fault?
If you're gonna run a 34 defense with the huge blitz package available to you, it would help if you had kids in the program long enough to learn it and enough talent maturing in the program to step in when kids leave. Otherwise, meet the new boss same as the old boss.
Yes, this. I think people do not really understand how hard it is to change the culture of losing. I am not just talking about football, but all sports.
I think it is more that he didn't have the talent, but I can't say for sure. WSU was better when Deone Bucannon was playing too. But, I believe that Leach thought the team needed to be shaken up. Firing two coaches will do that.
CP: Nobody I know of is advocating Leach's imminent termination. I was referring to SoCal's comment, "an overpaid coach we can't afford to sack until 2018". There have been other posts like this referring to his perceived abilities and length of contract with overtones of "how long before we can replace him." Have not paid enough attention to remember whether these posts came from the same poster or posters but they have been out there.
SC: Good post. I think we are all waiting to see if Leach's return to football resembles Robinson's or Bill Snyder's. Time has passed and things are changed. Will Leach alter his approach whether he likes it or not remains to be seen as well as his future success.
Observer: Good questions. "How long for patience?" and isn't this just putting lipstick on the "loveable Coug loser" mentality?
Second question first. No I don't think see it that way. The "loveable Coug loser" expects failure with a glimmer of hope for the lucky catching lightening in a bottle on occasion. I suspect that most of us now expect times to get better and are willing to wait with varying degrees of patience for success to arrive. "Coug losers" expect failure and accept it. We don't.
"Give me a year." O.K., but with stipulations. Who knows what the future will bring regarding injuries, flunk-outs, expulsions for various reasons and other factors. There is no date I or anyone else can set, only a probability. That noted, I expect this coming season to feature competitive games against all but the upper echelon of opponents. Lets say eight games competitive and four games outclassed. Next year, 2016, Maybe nine games competitive. If the trend continues we should be at least competitive, if not successful, in all or all but one or maybe two within two or three years. Improvement is not linear so there will surely be outliers and flukes. Since you asked for a year I would say 2017 could be expected to be the year that we would be quite successful and compete for a major level bowl. This is just off the top of my bald and empty head and the numerous variables involved renders it pretty damn refutable. As, I am sure, someone will happily oblige.
SC: Good post. I think we are all waiting to see if Leach's return to football resembles Robinson's or Bill Snyder's. Time has passed and things are changed. Will Leach alter his approach whether he likes it or not remains to be seen as well as his future success.
Observer: Good questions. "How long for patience?" and isn't this just putting lipstick on the "loveable Coug loser" mentality?
Second question first. No I don't think see it that way. The "loveable Coug loser" expects failure with a glimmer of hope for the lucky catching lightening in a bottle on occasion. I suspect that most of us now expect times to get better and are willing to wait with varying degrees of patience for success to arrive. "Coug losers" expect failure and accept it. We don't.
"Give me a year." O.K., but with stipulations. Who knows what the future will bring regarding injuries, flunk-outs, expulsions for various reasons and other factors. There is no date I or anyone else can set, only a probability. That noted, I expect this coming season to feature competitive games against all but the upper echelon of opponents. Lets say eight games competitive and four games outclassed. Next year, 2016, Maybe nine games competitive. If the trend continues we should be at least competitive, if not successful, in all or all but one or maybe two within two or three years. Improvement is not linear so there will surely be outliers and flukes. Since you asked for a year I would say 2017 could be expected to be the year that we would be quite successful and compete for a major level bowl. This is just off the top of my bald and empty head and the numerous variables involved renders it pretty damn refutable. As, I am sure, someone will happily oblige.
Biggs raised several good points. Here is the one for which I have some comments:
"If Breske was fired because he was a poor coach or the boss didn't like his scheme, fine. If he was fired because he didn't have the talent necessary to run the defense, is that entirely his fault?"
No, it is not entirely his fault. But it is substantially his fault. Why? Because he was apparently no asset when it came to recruiting; because he did not seem to be much of an asset when it came to coaching up those who he had; and because he was the leader of the defense, and if he could not get either the coaching or recruiting done, he needed to find a way for others to get it done.
The recruiting part is self-explanatory.
The "coaching up" aspect is crucial, especially when you can't/won't be an asset in recruiting. If the only problem was that our LB's were slow, then I could lay a bit less responsibility on Breske. But in the opening game of last season, our LB unit was consistently mentally slow to react, except when they over-reacted and took themselves out of plays. That situation got only marginally better over the course of the season, and the number of minor injuries in that unit seemed to pretty much cancel out what ever improvement in coaching was being implemented. There were too many injuries at DB for me to draw a lot of conclusions about whether the DB's were benefitting from being "coached up", though if they were making progress last year, it should be obvious in comparing this spring to last spring.
Finally, and this is IMO the most important, nobody can do everything. Nobody has equal abilities at everything. But it is the job of the leader to put the square peg in the square hole, so that the people most able to get specific things done are doing those things. Breske did not show me that he was able to do that. And while you can be a great staff assistant coach without that ability, you can't be a great coordinator.
"If Breske was fired because he was a poor coach or the boss didn't like his scheme, fine. If he was fired because he didn't have the talent necessary to run the defense, is that entirely his fault?"
No, it is not entirely his fault. But it is substantially his fault. Why? Because he was apparently no asset when it came to recruiting; because he did not seem to be much of an asset when it came to coaching up those who he had; and because he was the leader of the defense, and if he could not get either the coaching or recruiting done, he needed to find a way for others to get it done.
The recruiting part is self-explanatory.
The "coaching up" aspect is crucial, especially when you can't/won't be an asset in recruiting. If the only problem was that our LB's were slow, then I could lay a bit less responsibility on Breske. But in the opening game of last season, our LB unit was consistently mentally slow to react, except when they over-reacted and took themselves out of plays. That situation got only marginally better over the course of the season, and the number of minor injuries in that unit seemed to pretty much cancel out what ever improvement in coaching was being implemented. There were too many injuries at DB for me to draw a lot of conclusions about whether the DB's were benefitting from being "coached up", though if they were making progress last year, it should be obvious in comparing this spring to last spring.
Finally, and this is IMO the most important, nobody can do everything. Nobody has equal abilities at everything. But it is the job of the leader to put the square peg in the square hole, so that the people most able to get specific things done are doing those things. Breske did not show me that he was able to do that. And while you can be a great staff assistant coach without that ability, you can't be a great coordinator.
CougParol
Like some others on here were so far hitched to the last coaches wagon, this stuff is somehow their redemption.
Really wish the history of posts was still an option on this site. The trend of his posts would shine a big light on his redemption/agenda.
Like some others on here were so far hitched to the last coaches wagon, this stuff is somehow their redemption.
Really wish the history of posts was still an option on this site. The trend of his posts would shine a big light on his redemption/agenda.
Until a Leach-led WSU team wins, Patrol and other Wulffies whose butts were scorched toward the end of 6 and 40 - a time they all were screeching for a 5th year for The Turd - will continue with threads like this one. And Patrol simply needs the attention, which is why I hesitated to take part in this whine fest.
You're absolutely right. Until a WSU team wins, I will continue to whine....and your continued obsession with Paul Wulff is puzzling.
Not sure what's happened to you over the past few years, but you're definitely off. Hope things are OK on the home front.
I was merely stating a fact, not calling for Leach to be fired. The last thing I want is Leach to be fired. Firing him for anything but "for cause," would utterly devastate the program, more so than the baffoon did.
Put your heart down for a second, and put on your business hat. We/others probably could have gotten Leach for less and not given him so much job security. Let's not forget major programs were not knocking on Leach's door. He didn't have a job for nearly two years and got no buy out from TT. Illinois was "not interested." This wasn't because of Leach's coaching, but his reputation for being difficult, and he sued his employer, generally a no no in the coaching world, if you want to get another job. Moos wanted to court, not bargain, it is all water under the bridge now. I don't even blame Moos, we were all in a panic. Leach was a GREAT hire, but he also got a fanastic deal too. 7 years and a 5 year roll over, that's sweet for him ... very dangerous for us.
This is business. As a Coug, if there ever comes a time to fire a coach, I want our AD/president to be able to do so as immediately and cheaply as possible. We all hope Leach can turn the program around, but if he can't, and we still suck in 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 (you pick the year,) then what? We have two options. Make Leach a 5-year lame duck (which will seriously harm recruiting forseveral years) or pay him a boat load of cash (several million), we don't have, and then hire his replacement on a shoe string budget. Neither option is at all good for WSU.
The fact is all Cougs, with half a mind, hope and pray that Leach can work miracles, because the other options are a nightmare, because of his contract.
Almost hilariously, the single article I found critical of the idea of a "Leach to Illinois" notes that he's not a salt of the earth, bedrock type of guy, like the (at the time) recent, massively successful Big Ten hires... Bret Bielema, and Brady Hoke. But they're still killing it at Wisconsin and Michigan, right?
The article is about as good as Illini football.
The article is about as good as Illini football.
I doubt that Moos could have gotten him for both less money and less job security. It's possible that Leach would have taken less, but that's not what Moos offered. There was no panic, at all. Moos went to Key West before he even fired Wulff.
