ADVERTISEMENT

Optimism about this football season....

ttowncoug

Hall Of Fame
Sep 9, 2001
4,834
851
113
Key themes:
1. Improved/experience talent. (experience plus JC transfers)
2. Level headed, quality QB. (I think Halliday's attitude and his risk taking took a toll).
3. New coaches, a shift towards "positivity " and teaching.
4. Lots of new QB's in the north.
 
After all the years of continuous losing juxtaposed with endless reasons for optimism, I will be optimistic AFTER we start winning again.

I still have a hangover from last year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chinookpirate
Key themes:
1. Improved/experience talent. (experience plus JC transfers)
2. Level headed, quality QB. (I think Halliday's attitude and his risk taking took a toll).
3. New coaches, a shift towards "positivity " and teaching.
4. Lots of new QB's in the north.

5. Favorable schedule. No USC, an CU is back and scheduled for late in the season.
 
Key themes:
1. Improved/experience talent. (experience plus JC transfers)
2. Level headed, quality QB. (I think Halliday's attitude and his risk taking took a toll).
3. New coaches, a shift towards "positivity " and teaching.
4. Lots of new QB's in the north.

I think #2 will be huge. I rewatched Auburn vs. WSU from 2013 and Halliday's decision making was hideous. I would add an average kicker would do wonders for confidence and PPG.
 
Quick glance at the schedule and here's how I see it playing out assuming no injuries along the way.

PSU W (should be a good tune up game)
at Rutgers L (I want to pick the Cougs in this game but we lost to them last year and this year its in NJ)
Wyoming W (Winning this game won't tell us much but losing it could mean a long season)
at Cal L (teams are fairly even but its at Cal and they have the better QB for now)
at Oregon L (Cant pick us to beat Oregon until I see it happen..especially AT Oregon)
OSU W (Not sure how good OSU will be this season but we had recent success against them... )
at UA W (See OSU comment. Had to throw in one away game victory. We tend to get a least one/season)
Stanford L (Their D is still too good)
ASU L (ASU has too much offensive fire power for our young secondary to keep up for 60 min.)
at UCLA L (Could be a close game but at this point in season UCLA should have a QB... defense is solid)
Colorado W (Teams are close but its a home game so I like the Cougs)
at UW *Toss Up* (We might be the better team this season but its a rivalry game and in Seattle... )

In other words I see us going into the Apple Cup with a chance to become bowl eligible. I guess that means I am optimistic that we will improve on last season. We won't be favored in too many games and we have yet to show that we can win "winnable" games consistently.
 
It's hard to believe that we are starting year 4 with CML, and that we are still young and inexperienced. I too think that the QB spot will be a strength. And I know that the coaches are also high on Bender. So it's not just about Falk. Just crazy how much time it takes to "come back". Do the Arizona's really have that big of an edge in personnel that they can rebound within a couple of years? And here we are 4 years in and still getting started?
 
It's hard to believe that we are starting year 4 with CML, and that we are still young and inexperienced. I too think that the QB spot will be a strength. And I know that the coaches are also high on Bender. So it's not just about Falk. Just crazy how much time it takes to "come back". Do the Arizona's really have that big of an edge in personnel that they can rebound within a couple of years? And here we are 4 years in and still getting started?
The Arizona's didn't have to rebound. They both were underperforming, but were still going to bowl games.
 
I think #2 will be huge. I rewatched Auburn vs. WSU from 2013 and Halliday's decision making was hideous. I would add an average kicker would do wonders for confidence and PPG.

I recently rewatched last year's Oregon-WSU game. Halliday got away with a couple when Oregon dropped some Pick Sixes, and he was really stinking it up before he got hurt in the USC game.
 
I see Cal improved. Their QB is a first rounds. Stanford should be good. I can see Oregon taking a dropping without Mariotta. UW lost a ton, QB position in flux. Oregon St., new coach, new QB....they could be the team that steps back for a season or two.
 
Quick glance at the schedule and here's how I see it playing out assuming no injuries along the way.

PSU W (should be a good tune up game)
at Rutgers L (I want to pick the Cougs in this game but we lost to them last year and this year its in NJ)
Wyoming W (Winning this game won't tell us much but losing it could mean a long season)
at Cal L (teams are fairly even but its at Cal and they have the better QB for now)
at Oregon L (Cant pick us to beat Oregon until I see it happen..especially AT Oregon)
OSU W (Not sure how good OSU will be this season but we had recent success against them... )
at UA W (See OSU comment. Had to throw in one away game victory. We tend to get a least one/season)
Stanford L (Their D is still too good)
ASU L (ASU has too much offensive fire power for our young secondary to keep up for 60 min.)
at UCLA L (Could be a close game but at this point in season UCLA should have a QB... defense is solid)
Colorado W (Teams are close but its a home game so I like the Cougs)
at UW *Toss Up* (We might be the better team this season but its a rivalry game and in Seattle... )

In other words I see us going into the Apple Cup with a chance to become bowl eligible. I guess that means I am optimistic that we will improve on last season. We won't be favored in too many games and we have yet to show that we can win "winnable" games consistently.
Stanford lost virtually their entire defense.
 
I recently rewatched last year's Oregon-WSU game. Halliday got away with a couple when Oregon dropped some Pick Sixes, and he was really stinking it up before he got hurt in the USC game.
I was more concerned watching our receivers just KILL Falk in both the SC and UW games, dropping first downs, TD's right in their hands- does Falk put that much more heat on the ball, because the drops just looked "not ready".
 
Optimism? The lines. Both of them.

I watched two separate days of spring practices and both lines have legit size, athleticism and numbers. Beyond that though, there seemed to be a group confidence I can't explain. A swagger. It's something I haven't seen in a long time around here.

We all know it starts in the trenches... if we have that solved, Vegas could be weeping at year end when it comes to WSU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeFingLeach
I see Cal improved. Their QB is a first rounds. Stanford should be good. I can see Oregon taking a dropping without Mariotta. UW lost a ton, QB position in flux. Oregon St., new coach, new QB....they could be the team that steps back for a season or two.

Why do you call Goff a first rounder? He's a good college QB. He doesn't have a huge arm, he's accurate, but he's thin. The roster says he's 6-4, but I doubt it. He'll get the "system" tag.
 
Not sure how many wins we'll have, but I think our team will be quite a bit better overall. An improved defense and special teams will offset whatever learning curve the offense has while breaking in a new(ish) QB.

I see Oregon taking a major step back. They'll still be a good team, but I can see them losing 4 games this season.
 
Well the things that make me optimistic are...

The OL is all back and they did extremely well.
The WR we have Cracraft/Marks/Dom Williams all back. Calvin Green, Robert Lewis, Lienthal etc. all look really promising
The RBs - Wicks and Morrow are back add in Keith Harrington and it's one of the best backfields we've had in a while (yes I know we don't run much, but it's not just the rushing yards... Morrow had 460 yards receiving.
The QB - Falk threw for 5 tds in his first start against a Pac-12 opponent. That is an excellent starting point. He won't be perfect, but he won't be bad either.

Defensively
DL - Vaeo, Barber, Paulo, Eukale all get to step into being leaders add in Tapa, Coates, JC Jeremy Mitchell and it looks to be a strong unit.
LBs - Allison, Pelluer, Palacio/McLennen all are back add in Luvu, Leniu, and it looks stronger.
DBs - Charleston White / Lemora / Hameed were the only redeeming things coming back, But Porter Pippins and Dotson/Roach will be better. Add in the JCs Broughton / Luani and it should be much better...I mean it was already bad nowhere to go but up for this group.

Special Teams
New Kicker. That's something..no idea if our coverage is going to improve, but if this kicker is just marginally better well that could win us a game (see cal last year)

I think we could start 4-0 this year if everything clicks.
Lose to Oregon 4-1
Beat Oregon State 5-1
beat Arizona 6-1
Lose to Stanford 6-2
Beat ASU 7-2
Beat Colorado 8-2
Beat Washington 9-2

My most optimistic view is we go 9-2
My Least optimistic view is we go 4-7
Using the average of the two 6 wins is more than likely the outcome.
.
 
Well the things that make me optimistic are...

The OL is all back and they did extremely well.
The WR we have Cracraft/Marks/Dom Williams all back. Calvin Green, Robert Lewis, Lienthal etc. all look really promising
The RBs - Wicks and Morrow are back add in Keith Harrington and it's one of the best backfields we've had in a while (yes I know we don't run much, but it's not just the rushing yards... Morrow had 460 yards receiving.
The QB - Falk threw for 5 tds in his first start against a Pac-12 opponent. That is an excellent starting point. He won't be perfect, but he won't be bad either.

Defensively
DL - Vaeo, Barber, Paulo, Eukale all get to step into being leaders add in Tapa, Coates, JC Jeremy Mitchell and it looks to be a strong unit.
LBs - Allison, Pelluer, Palacio/McLennen all are back add in Luvu, Leniu, and it looks stronger.
DBs - Charleston White / Lemora / Hameed were the only redeeming things coming back, But Porter Pippins and Dotson/Roach will be better. Add in the JCs Broughton / Luani and it should be much better...I mean it was already bad nowhere to go but up for this group.

Special Teams
New Kicker. That's something..no idea if our coverage is going to improve, but if this kicker is just marginally better well that could win us a game (see cal last year)

I think we could start 4-0 this year if everything clicks.
Lose to Oregon 4-1
Beat Oregon State 5-1
beat Arizona 6-1
Lose to Stanford 6-2
Beat ASU 7-2
Beat Colorado 8-2
Beat Washington 9-2

My most optimistic view is we go 9-2
My Least optimistic view is we go 4-7
Using the average of the two 6 wins is more than likely the outcome.
.
I get why you think we will beat UW on the road. I see beating OSU as well. Arizona? Did they lose players I was not aware of? ASU? Same question.
 
I get why you think we will beat UW on the road. I see beating OSU as well. Arizona? Did they lose players I was not aware of? ASU? Same question.

We already beat Arizona in their house. If we did it once we can do it again. ASU lost Taylor Kelly, and I wonder about the Bercovici he seemed incredibly lucky, and if Kelly could go down then he might as well. I think it bodes well we are playing them late in the year because I see them getting beat up

Texas A&M has Chevis as DC now and that guy makes mean defenses (See LSU) they are going to be very physical.

Also that game is in Houston. It's not neutral. It's going to be crazy loud in a place that most of A&M can get to. Some of their starters are going out that game. I'm calling it now. Remember Oregon when they played LSU? It's not going to be a fun game for them.

USC...well we know they can hurt people first hand.
UCLA - not that mean of a team but they can be tough to play
Utah - Another physical team
Oregon - Going to wear you out.

It all points to them going in really beat up. ASU is a good team, but starting off against A&M may have them wishing they hadn't. I expect ASU to walk in to Pullman beat up.
 
Last edited:
Key themes:
1. Improved/experience talent. (experience plus JC transfers)
2. Level headed, quality QB. (I think Halliday's attitude and his risk taking took a toll).
3. New coaches, a shift towards "positivity " and teaching.
4. Lots of new QB's in the north.

If our defense continues its slide, it doesn't matter how how good offense will be or how positive the coaches are. Let's not forget that the QB you all are pissing on threw for 734 yards 6 TDs, 0 INTs 0 TOs, completing 70% of his passes and we lost. We lost our two best players on D. If the JC guys coming in aren't an major upgrade, heaven help us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: random soul
We already beat Arizona in their house. If we did it once we can do it again. ASU lost Taylor Kelly, and I wonder about the Bercovici he seemed incredibly lucky, and if Kelly could go down then he might as well. I think it bodes well we are playing them late in the year because I see them getting beat up

Texas A&M has Chevis as DC now and that guy makes mean defenses (See LSU) they are going to be very physical.

Also that game is in Houston. It's not neutral. It's going to be crazy loud in a place that most of A&M can get to. Some of their starters are going out that game. I'm calling it now. Remember Oregon when they played LSU? It's not going to be a fun game for them.

USC...well we know they can hurt people first hand.
UCLA - not that mean of a team but they can be tough to play
Utah - Another physical team
Oregon - Going to wear you out.

It all points to them going in really beat up. ASU is a good team, but starting off against A&M may have them wishing they hadn't. I expect ASU to walk in to Pullman beat up.
Starting with Arizona, we lost to them more recently in our house. They have aQB that can actually make plays now. Two years ago we played a guy who was not a threat to pass the ball.
 
Well the things that make me optimistic are...

The OL is all back and they did extremely well.
The WR we have Cracraft/Marks/Dom Williams all back. Calvin Green, Robert Lewis, Lienthal etc. all look really promising
The RBs - Wicks and Morrow are back add in Keith Harrington and it's one of the best backfields we've had in a while (yes I know we don't run much, but it's not just the rushing yards... Morrow had 460 yards receiving.
The QB - Falk threw for 5 tds in his first start against a Pac-12 opponent. That is an excellent starting point. He won't be perfect, but he won't be bad either.

Defensively
DL - Vaeo, Barber, Paulo, Eukale all get to step into being leaders add in Tapa, Coates, JC Jeremy Mitchell and it looks to be a strong unit.
LBs - Allison, Pelluer, Palacio/McLennen all are back add in Luvu, Leniu, and it looks stronger.
DBs - Charleston White / Lemora / Hameed were the only redeeming things coming back, But Porter Pippins and Dotson/Roach will be better. Add in the JCs Broughton / Luani and it should be much better...I mean it was already bad nowhere to go but up for this group.

Special Teams
New Kicker. That's something..no idea if our coverage is going to improve, but if this kicker is just marginally better well that could win us a game (see cal last year)

I think we could start 4-0 this year if everything clicks.
Lose to Oregon 4-1
Beat Oregon State 5-1
beat Arizona 6-1
Lose to Stanford 6-2
Beat ASU 7-2
Beat Colorado 8-2
Beat Washington 9-2

My most optimistic view is we go 9-2
My Least optimistic view is we go 4-7
Using the average of the two 6 wins is more than likely the outcome.
.
We have a better shot at home against a reloading Stanford team than Arizona on the road IMO.
 
Starting with Arizona, we lost to them more recently in our house. They have aQB that can actually make plays now. Two years ago we played a guy who was not a threat to pass the ball.

They got up on us 24 - 0 last year. the other 3 quarters we out scored them 37-35. We had a habit of getting way behind early. and while we did overcome that against Utah, Arizona isn't a team you can do that with.

I expect us to play much better.
 
They got up on us 24 - 0 last year. the other 3 quarters we out scored them 37-35. We had a habit of getting way behind early. and while we did overcome that against Utah, Arizona isn't a team you can do that with.

I expect us to play much better.
Isn't that similar to the "Hawaii" game? Wasn't that game over at the end of the first first quarter and we sort of played better when they put in their scrubs?
 
Why do you call Goff a first rounder? He's a good college QB. He doesn't have a huge arm, he's accurate, but he's thin. The roster says he's 6-4, but I doubt it. He'll get the "system" tag.
I would shocked if he isn't a top ten pick. He had "it" as a freshman and has gotten better and better. I haven't even looked at draft projections (as early as its is) yet but I would wager that he is among the top two projected QB's in the draft.
 
Isn't that similar to the "Hawaii" game? Wasn't that game over at the end of the first first quarter and we sort of played better when they put in their scrubs?
Only cosmetically, cause a 10 win Arizona team isn't the same as a bad WAC team.

Both awful losses, though. Certain you could find those for every coach in our program history, though.
 
Isn't that similar to the "Hawaii" game? Wasn't that game over at the end of the first first quarter and we sort of played better when they put in their scrubs?

No Ed. It wasn't like the Hawaii game. Hawaii was a team that finished 6-6 who would lose to UNLV, and Idaho. We lost to a 10-4 Arizona team.

Similar in the fact that we let them get up early, different in that 1 team was mediocre and the other won a BCS south title.
 
I guess I have similar conclusions to many of you, but for different reasons.

When it comes to the D, I start with injuries. We had a revolving door at DB and almost a full season of LB's playing crippled. No wonder our DL did not look as good as we thought; they were backed up by guys who were either green or not able to play at full speed. That perspective alone suggests that our D will be better this year, especially when you look at all the D backs who got experience. Some were not good enough to play, but others were starting to look acceptable before joining the revolving door of injuries. I can only think of one or two other years in the past 40 that are somewhat comparable from an injury standpoint for the back 7 or 8 on D. On top of all that, I did not think that Breske was fully PAC ready, despite his years in the game. Sure, the injuries made him look bad...but even with no injuries, he was not a great D coordinator.

My next comparison point is "special" teams. The worst I've seen at WSU, overall, in the 46 years that I have been paying attention. We may not be great at special teams this year. But we will be a darned sight better than last year.

I think we will drop off a bit at QB. Bound to happen with the experience differential. But we've never had a bad year when we returned all 5 O linemen, and I wouldn't be surprised if no team in the PAC has ever had a bad year with all 5 O line starters coming back. Just that factor alone suggests to me that we will be at least as good this year as last. Perhaps a little different; maybe more able to run occasionally, and with an even moderately competent kicker, we probably go for it on 4th down less often. Similar at WR, and probably a touch better at RB. All in all, we might be better on O, but certainly won't be worse.

Those are my major views. Not crimson colored glasses, but some reason for optimism and likely a better season.
 
Experts (Google it) say Goff (cal) is one of the top qbs in college. Bleacher report had a piece
 
Quick glance at the schedule and here's how I see it playing out assuming no injuries along the way.

PSU W (should be a good tune up game)
at Rutgers L (I want to pick the Cougs in this game but we lost to them last year and this year its in NJ)
Wyoming W (Winning this game won't tell us much but losing it could mean a long season)
at Cal L (teams are fairly even but its at Cal and they have the better QB for now)
at Oregon L (Cant pick us to beat Oregon until I see it happen..especially AT Oregon)
OSU W (Not sure how good OSU will be this season but we had recent success against them... )
at UA W (See OSU comment. Had to throw in one away game victory. We tend to get a least one/season)
Stanford L (Their D is still too good)
ASU L (ASU has too much offensive fire power for our young secondary to keep up for 60 min.)
at UCLA L (Could be a close game but at this point in season UCLA should have a QB... defense is solid)
Colorado W (Teams are close but its a home game so I like the Cougs)
at UW *Toss Up* (We might be the better team this season but its a rivalry game and in Seattle... )

In other words I see us going into the Apple Cup with a chance to become bowl eligible. I guess that means I am optimistic that we will improve on last season. We won't be favored in too many games and we have yet to show that we can win "winnable" games consistently.
BECAUSE we play Rutgers on the road, I am getting more and more optimistic we win that game. I'll go on record that it is a W for us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mariner_Rick
The Arizona's didn't have to rebound. They both were underperforming, but were still going to bowl games.

Actually, Arizona finished 4-8 in 2011 when Stoops was fired. They were at the end of a three year slide from 8 wins down to 4 wins. ASU failed to make it to bowl games in 2009 & 2010. They did make a bowl game in 2011 and lost......and they fired their coach. ASU was the more stable situation but when your best season from 2008 to 2011 was the year that you didn't make a bowl game.......you weren't in that good of a spot. To suggest that their new coaches haven't done tremendous jobs is ignoring reality.

As far as WSU goes, I'm optimistic about this season. Lots of upperclassmen on both lines, great receivers, a QB that we can work with, and a battle tested secondary that will look better this year (even if they still aren't all that good). I agree with many of the comments above but I have to say that the Rutgers game is going to be the linchpin for our entire season. It's dangerous to put too much emphasis on one game, but if we lose to Rutgers, I can't forsee us making a bowl game in 2015. Rutgers would be the 9th best team in the Pac-12 (at best) and if we can't beat them, even on the road, it's hard to imagine WSU going 4-5 against the rest of our schedule. It would certainly make the California game a must win game. If we are sitting at 3-3 at the midpoint of the season with Arizona, Stanford, ASU, UCLA, CU and UW remaining, it would be hard to plan on getting more than two wins. I think we beat both Cal and Rutgers and shock the football world and start 5-1.

The other reason for optimism is the schedule. We get CU on the schedule and miss Utah. I would not want to play a pissed off Ute team this year. Rutgers is going to be a good test but any bowl team needs to head into a game against them feeling like they should win. They went 2-5 in the regular season against bowl teams last year. OSU and UW are going to struggle. Cal has to prove that they can win after finishing 1-6 last season. For all of their improvement, the Bears were two plays away from 3-9. Lots of winnable games if we get it together.

W - Portland State is an easy win. 4+ TD margin of victory.
W - Rutgers is a road game and I think we get revenge. Blown coverage on the first play of the game and a muffed punt return cost us that game.
W - Wyoming will be confident coming into the game but I think the two creampuffs will hurt them. They are going to be blown away by our offense.
W - Cal has a difficult early schedule with a sneaky tough SDSU team early followed by a road game against Texas that features a physically gifted team with something to prove. We get a week off before them. I think we come out rested and blast them.
L- Oregon is going to beat us. I think we give them a tough fight in the first half (like we've done so often) but they score 21 points in the third quarter to blow the game open.
W - Oregon State is going to have a brutal start to the season. Michigan with Harbaugh as coach is going to pummel them. Stanford is going to wear on them physically. They get a week off and have to play an Arizona team that is going to run them ragged. If we just play football, we should handle them easily to reach 5-1.
L - Arizona loses some important pieces but I'll be surprised if we pull off the upset. They toyed with us last year.
W - Stanford is my upset special for the Cougs. This is the year where everyone starts to question David Shaw. I say the Cardinal finish 7-5 again with us being one of their losses.
L - ASU is going to roll us. They have things humming right now. They do have a brutal schedule with Texas A&M, USC, UCLA, Utah, and Oregon on the slate before us. They could be the best 4-4 team in the country heading into our game. I figure their either rolling along with confidence or desperate with something to prove. Either way, I'm not excited about this game. One bit of historical news on the series with them is outside of the debacle in 2013, we normally play them tough in Pullman.
L - UCLA on the road late in the season is a recipe for disaster for the Cougs. They'll have things figured out and we'll be wearing down. It's hard to remember the days when we owned the Bruins. From 1994 to 2007, WSU went 9-3 against the Bruins. with one stretch at 6-1. Ahhhh, the good ol' days. This will be our sixth straight loss in the series.
W - Colorado is going to get better, but they haven't been a good football team in a while. We'll be beat up but they'll be even more beat up. I see them starting out 4-0 but going 1-6 heading into our game. If this was in Boulder, I might give them the advantage.
W - UW was dumped in a bad place by Sarkisian. They just lost most of their better players and got stuck with a tough schedule to boot. Sacramento State is the only legitimate cupcake on their schedule. OSU is their next weakest opponent. I think that they are going to be 3-8 and melting down when we play them. 2-9 or 1-10 are unlikely but not out of the question.

The above look puts us at 8-4 (5-4). I would expect us to be behind Oregon, USC, UCLA, ASU, Arizona and Utah. If a Pac-12 team makes the CFB playoff, that puts us in Las Vegas for a bowl game. There would be nothing wrong with that.
 
Actually, Arizona finished 4-8 in 2011 when Stoops was fired. They were at the end of a three year slide from 8 wins down to 4 wins. ASU failed to make it to bowl games in 2009 & 2010. They did make a bowl game in 2011 and lost......and they fired their coach. ASU was the more stable situation but when your best season from 2008 to 2011 was the year that you didn't make a bowl game.......you weren't in that good of a spot. To suggest that their new coaches haven't done tremendous jobs is ignoring reality.

Yeah, Arizona didn't make a bowl in 2011. But, they made a bowl in 2008, 2009 and 2010. After Stoops was fired midseason (1-5), they did finish the season on a winning note, even beating ASU in Tempe. But, why let facts get in the way? Regarding three year slide, huh? 8 wins, 7 wins then 4. Not slide, they fell off a cliff in 2011 when the team fell apart. The talent was there. The team still knew what it took to compete, they just stopped listening to the messenger.

At ASU, they went to a bowl game the year Erickson was fired. It was another team that was full of talent that dropped off a cliff when the team tuned Erickson out. In five years, ASU was 21-24 (31-31 overall) in conference with two bowl games.

Erickson was fired for a reason. He was not good enough anymore. No, they were not in a great spot. But, they really were not in that bad a spot either. Erickson recruited relatively well. The team was not lacking for talent, it just underperformed.

I don't believe anyone is saying that Rodriguez and Graham haven't done tremendous jobs. What people are saying is that they both took over programs that did not need to be completely overhauled. They took over programs that had underperformed and were ready to take off.
 
Key themes:
1. Improved/experience talent. (experience plus JC transfers)
2. Level headed, quality QB. (I think Halliday's attitude and his risk taking took a toll).
3. New coaches, a shift towards "positivity " and teaching.
4. Lots of new QB's in the north.

#'s 1 & 3...meh. I've been hearing that for a decade. Amazing how you can get "more experienced" every year for 10 years and still not be "experienced".

I'll be pleasantly surprised with a 6 win bowl team this year. Realistically, I'm gearing up for a 4 win team.
 
Yeah, Arizona didn't make a bowl in 2011. But, they made a bowl in 2008, 2009 and 2010. After Stoops was fired midseason (1-5), they did finish the season on a winning note, even beating ASU in Tempe. But, why let facts get in the way? Regarding three year slide, huh? 8 wins, 7 wins then 4. Not slide, they fell off a cliff in 2011 when the team fell apart. The talent was there. The team still knew what it took to compete, they just stopped listening to the messenger.

At ASU, they went to a bowl game the year Erickson was fired. It was another team that was full of talent that dropped off a cliff when the team tuned Erickson out. In five years, ASU was 21-24 (31-31 overall) in conference with two bowl games.

Erickson was fired for a reason. He was not good enough anymore. No, they were not in a great spot. But, they really were not in that bad a spot either. Erickson recruited relatively well. The team was not lacking for talent, it just underperformed.

I don't believe anyone is saying that Rodriguez and Graham haven't done tremendous jobs. What people are saying is that they both took over programs that did not need to be completely overhauled. They took over programs that had underperformed and were ready to take off.

That '11 Arizona team had a brutal schedule. They played #9 Ok St, #6 Stanford & #10 Oregon in consecutive weeks, followed by a 10-2 (would have been ranked if not for sanctions) USC team before Stoops was fired.

Before last season, I had been saying I didn't think Rich Rod had done a remarkably better job than Stoops. I thought Stoops would probably keep UA around a 7-8 win team, and that's what they'd been under RR. Last year's 10-4 was a step forward, but we'll have to see if they build on that, or drop back to being a 7-8 win team again.
 
Yeah, Arizona didn't make a bowl in 2011. But, they made a bowl in 2008, 2009 and 2010. After Stoops was fired midseason (1-5), they did finish the season on a winning note, even beating ASU in Tempe. But, why let facts get in the way? Regarding three year slide, huh? 8 wins, 7 wins then 4. Not slide, they fell off a cliff in 2011 when the team fell apart. The talent was there. The team still knew what it took to compete, they just stopped listening to the messenger.

At ASU, they went to a bowl game the year Erickson was fired. It was another team that was full of talent that dropped off a cliff when the team tuned Erickson out. In five years, ASU was 21-24 (31-31 overall) in conference with two bowl games.

Erickson was fired for a reason. He was not good enough anymore. No, they were not in a great spot. But, they really were not in that bad a spot either. Erickson recruited relatively well. The team was not lacking for talent, it just underperformed.

I don't believe anyone is saying that Rodriguez and Graham haven't done tremendous jobs. What people are saying is that they both took over programs that did not need to be completely overhauled. They took over programs that had underperformed and were ready to take off.

Exactly, why let facts get in the way. You said that they were still bowling when the new coaches took over. Arizona wasn't in a bowl game in 2011 and ASU had only been to one bowl game in four years (a game where they got crushed by BSU). When I said that Arizona was in a slide, there are different ways to measure it. In terms of raw wins, they dropped every year. In terms of points scored, Arizona outscored their opponents by 199 points in 2008, that dropped to 45 in 2009, slightly raised to 72 in 2010 before falling off the map in 2011 and being outscored by 56. They peaked in 2008 and it was a slide downhill from there. You can pretend that things were fine if that supports your narrative, but Stoops got fired because he wasn't getting the job done and it wasn't even close. There is no doubt that Erickson tuned out as 2011 went on. Given the struggles up to that point though, what's to say that they didn't struggle because they simply sucked? When you look at the late season losing streak in 2011, it was against UCLA (with Neuheisal trying to save his job), WSU in the snow, Arizona (a team they struggled with in the prior year), Cal (who crushed them in 2010) and BSU, who was just plain better. That late season streak could happen to any mediocre team regardless of the coach.

The issue that I have with how you are looking at this is that it reflects the poisonous culture that we have at WSU. The narrative that you are presenting, which is repeated all to often is this: When we struggle, it's because we lack the talent to compete against other teams. When other teams struggle, it's because their coaches tuned out or weren't getting things done. The real truth about sports is that there are a couple hundred truly talented athletes that go to about 20 different schools. There are a thousand guys that are all pretty decent to varying levels that get shared by the next 50 schools and then there are the guys who end up at the smaller schools. We fall in the middle of the group of the thousand other guys. When you look back at older recruiting classes (say 2012), you see WSU has about the same number of 3 star guys as half of our conference. ASU, UW, Cal and Utah did get a couple extra 4 star guys compared to us which does make a small difference, but as a whole, the differences are not that significant. The key is whether or not you have the head coach to leverage the talent you have. When a team is running efficiently, the small talent differences only become relevant when you are playing elite opponents where the number of elite players overwhelm your ability to compensate.

If it really comes down to talent, OSU should never had their run of success of 9+ wins, WSU should never have had 3 straight 10 win seasons and Arizona shouldn't have been playing in the Pac-12 championship game last year. We have enough talent and a good enough coach to make a bowl game this year. If we fail to make a bowl game.......ugh.
 
#'s 1 & 3...meh. I've been hearing that for a decade. Amazing how you can get "more experienced" every year for 10 years and still not be "experienced".

I'll be pleasantly surprised with a 6 win bowl team this year. Realistically, I'm gearing up for a 4 win team.
In regards to your crystal ball, I'm kinda in your territory. Between 4-6 wins is what I'm "gearing up for". But then when I look at Flats post above, going game by game, the only game I really question is the Stanford game he has as a W for us. So that would make a 7 win season for WSU… So I guess I'm more 5 wins as our bottom and I'll be OK with it. Bowling, and I'm ecstatic. I'm afraid 4 will be a bit of a let down.

But again, as the season ramps up, seeing how our competitors come out of the box will tell a lot about how THEY have improved or not. I could easily go back to 4 wins being "ok". I just can't forget that our competitors are trying to improve just as much as we are. So from an analytical point of view, if the PAC 12 as a whole improves (WSU included), we will stay in the same spot. We have to improve and someone stay stagnant or slide. Bringing up a program is has so many things going against it.

WSU has to keep it's nose to the grindstone, be unemotional about bad plays and bad games and persevere… Something we haven't done in quite a while. WSU has to also be unemotional about the good plays… Otherwise games like CSU will continue to happen. Between the ears is still our biggest hurdle, IMHO.
 
No Ed. It wasn't like the Hawaii game. Hawaii was a team that finished 6-6 who would lose to UNLV, and Idaho. We lost to a 10-4 Arizona team.

Similar in the fact that we let them get up early, different in that 1 team was mediocre and the other won a BCS south title.
Similar to the Stanford game then? When we made it 38-21ish in garbage time?

What is kinda hilarious is you make mention falling down 24-0 to Arizona and then after that we beat them 37-35. You do get how many points that is in total, right?
 
Only cosmetically, cause a 10 win Arizona team isn't the same as a bad WAC team.

Both awful losses, though. Certain you could find those for every coach in our program history, though.
What about Stanford when the final score was 38-24? Weren't those points scored in "garbage time"?
 
In regards to your crystal ball, I'm kinda in your territory. Between 4-6 wins is what I'm "gearing up for". But then when I look at Flats post above, going game by game, the only game I really question is the Stanford game he has as a W for us. So that would make a 7 win season for WSU… So I guess I'm more 5 wins as our bottom and I'll be OK with it. Bowling, and I'm ecstatic. I'm afraid 4 will be a bit of a let down.

But again, as the season ramps up, seeing how our competitors come out of the box will tell a lot about how THEY have improved or not. I could easily go back to 4 wins being "ok". I just can't forget that our competitors are trying to improve just as much as we are. So from an analytical point of view, if the PAC 12 as a whole improves (WSU included), we will stay in the same spot. We have to improve and someone stay stagnant or slide. Bringing up a program is has so many things going against it.

WSU has to keep it's nose to the grindstone, be unemotional about bad plays and bad games and persevere… Something we haven't done in quite a while. WSU has to also be unemotional about the good plays… Otherwise games like CSU will continue to happen. Between the ears is still our biggest hurdle, IMHO.

I'm just kind of done thinking we're better than programs that aren't really that bad.

Rutgers is a better program than we are. We're playing at their house.

Cal was better than us last year and we play them at their house.

The only sure fire wins I see are PSU & Wyoming. Oregon St could be a mess, so I could see that one. Then, we "should" get either CU or UW, but I don't know about both.

So, I'll set the over/under at 4.5. I'd be real happy (and surprised) with 6, "meh" with 5, and "time to find a way out of this contract" with 4.
 
I'm just kind of done thinking we're better than programs that aren't really that bad.

Rutgers is a better program than we are. We're playing at their house.

Cal was better than us last year and we play them at their house.

The only sure fire wins I see are PSU & Wyoming. Oregon St could be a mess, so I could see that one. Then, we "should" get either CU or UW, but I don't know about both.

So, I'll set the over/under at 4.5. I'd be real happy (and surprised) with 6, "meh" with 5, and "time to find a way out of this contract" with 4.
Yeah, the thing about the contract? I just posted on another thread… We have CML, AT LEAST, through 2017 possibly through 2018. His roll-over contract is through 2019. I can see us buying out a year, possibly 2 but that's all. We can all be pissed if we want if certain outcomes don't happen. Or we can enjoy the ride or whatever else in-between. But we aren't getting out of any contract any time soon.
 
I'm just kind of done thinking we're better than programs that aren't really that bad.

Rutgers is a better program than we are. We're playing at their house.

Cal was better than us last year and we play them at their house.

The only sure fire wins I see are PSU & Wyoming. Oregon St could be a mess, so I could see that one. Then, we "should" get either CU or UW, but I don't know about both.

So, I'll set the over/under at 4.5. I'd be real happy (and surprised) with 6, "meh" with 5, and "time to find a way out of this contract" with 4.

The sad truth is that at the end of the day, you are what your record says. (I didn't make that one up....I stole it). Even though I feel that we should have beaten Rutgers and I know that a chipshot field goal would have beaten Cal, I have to agree that outside of our own message boards, I wouldn't expect anyone else to feel the same way. I'm hoping that at some point, Leach proves to be the coach that Mike Price was. Take a bunch of guys and make them believe in themselves to the point where they don't give away the ones that they have the potential to win. Price could never completely eliminate it, but he reduced it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT