You wanna know why WSU is struggling???
- Thread starter BiggsCoug
- Start date
Sure, right. Purge the roster. The second order of business, rebuild the roster never happened.
You know who disagrees with you? Whoever covers USF.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...florida-football-2015-preview-schedule-roster
Wow. If that isn't a detailed analysis of a complete blow-up, I don't know what is. And all in one year, basically.
He failed to purge far enough, fast enough, then failed to secure full recruiting classes. Everybody knows this... well, almost everyone it seems.
So, your assertion is that, as a college football head coach, Paul Wulff literally couldn't cross a single item off his "coaches to-do list"?
Actually Wulffui...is there something you know about Barrington and JA that Wulff should have known about before allowing them on campus? First, there wasn't a lot to purge. Over half the recruiting classes didn't make it that far.
No, that's the job of the guys who get paid six figures to determine if they've got "future drug dealers", "steals from teammates", or "PED offender" in their personality, BEFORE they decide to make them part of their team. It's not my job. Especially a team where you had to purge bad apples, as- apparently- job one.
If you've got to throw out bad apples, you can't go planting bad seeds.
Yeah but who cares who he recruits against if he can find players? I am sorry, Tuel, Halliday, Cooper, Williams, Long, Williams, Fullington, rogers are not luck.
Here, you keep saying things were left in good shape, or better shape when Doba, left.,...here is the foundation of the team and your statement...Go back and read about the 2004 class. Look at the first 12 names, Baird, Bell, Bruhn, Brackenridge, Bumpus, Collins, Dillon, Donovan, Matt E, ESTES, Graise, Hamel. The next 14 had Roof and Rowland, Vicker and Ward on it. I think of those 14, 2 might have been around in 2008. 2005 was a bonanza, you had Ahmu (always hurt) Alfred (very good player) Eppelle (???), Evans ( good player) Gibson, Hicks, Stripling, Trent. The DT's in that class were Ahmu, Tarkington, and Townsend, in which two were not around in 08 or 09. But it was one better than what they got in 2004 which was none. 2006 you had 20 some kids, Turpin in the only DT. And he was booted for "academic reasons". That class had Hannam, Ivory, Mattingly, and Turpin that played. The first 10 players listed in 2007, Blackledge, Ayers(injured and never played) Feagin, and Fischnect, Frietag was hurt as well. And BJ Guerra. Out of the next 12 Higgins, Aire Justice, Giles, Lesuma, Lobster, Chima, Pellum, Roxas, and Jeshua played. WSU had Lesuma and giles for two years. Lesuma was hurt in 2008 fall camp. Pellum was kicked out of school. Jeshua quit. Aire Justin got booted for PED's. You know how many Dt's in 2007? One.
So when I say Bill Doba was the architect of the disaster that happened, I said it before I knew who the head coach was going to be. An dI wish he was around in 2008.
I knew it was going to be problematic that we had no quality DT's with any experience at all. While DT has always been a problematic area for WSU, it was really pronounced after the three year run. So yes I fully know Doba was a very good defensive coach. I love the man, but at the same time I can be honest and point to the failings.
Last edited:
Again, you tell me how that is determined? You tell me how that information is to be garnered then I will concede your complaint is valid.
Why does Leach have a policy of no smoking yet he has players get kicked off because of that? You are totally unrealistic. If you could point me to prior legal action taken against the two players, or if you can tell me how they are to obtain that info, then I will buy off on your complaint. Do you really believe even if there was something that happened that the high school coaches will disclose that?
It's pretty well know that Barrington was a grade risk and Atofau was a character risk.
Not luck. More like luck of the draw. Blair Bomber, Brandon Golden, Arthur Burns, and the large number of guys that didn't even make it to campus tell us even more about Wulff's magic eye for talent.
Ed- do you seriously not understand that Wulff compromised on anything and everything to fill out a class? There were obviously character risks, just like there were obviously grade risks and obviously talent risks.
They doubled their touchdowns scored from 11 to 22. If you look at Wulff's trendline at WSU, he was able to secure year over year trends in both 2010 and 2011. I have no doubt that given another year, they would have seen further improvements. WSU went from 12 ppg in 2009, to 19 ppg in 2010 to 30 ppg in 2011. The problem at WSU was that our defense didn't get better against teams that mattered and we lost too many games. Defensively, USF regressed and gave up 50 more yards per game. I'm not sure if that is his fault. His team scored 25% more points and gained 20% more yards. That's substantial. Given that they were in the toilet, they still have a way to go. If he could have done that again, they would have been up to about 22 ppg which would have jumped them 10 spots. If he could duplicate his "success" at WSU on the offensive side of the ball, USF would jump to around 26 ppg, which would jump them 30 spots.
What's ironic about anyone critiquing Wulff's work at WSU on this board is that there is a high probability that the very same poster is preaching patience for Leach. There's a word that starts with the letter "H" that applies in that situation. Why does Leach need infinite time at WSU to accomplish anything while Wulff is a failure at USF with 20% or better improvements in production in year one? I don't think he was perfect at USF and frankly, don't know much about their situation, but given that they were about dead last, it seems like many of the same issues that have plagued WSU might be in play there. What's it say about Leach that WSU scored 10 ppg less in year one at WSU?
There's this word that starts with B and ends with owl, that Leach was able to accomplish his second year on the job. Wulff never sniffed it. That's a reason for patience.
As for your H word, you keep saying that Leach should be evaluated on his own, then keep comparing him to Wulff.
This idea that the team was in shambles when Wulff took over is complete and utter nonsense. Every team has players that smoke pot or do other drugs. It is a red herring. It does not keep a team from winning. The most successful team in the conference, Oregon, has had more players caught using marijuana than players did under either Wulff or Doba.
It is just used by people trying to excuse Wulff for just how bad he was. Again, his incompetence has made Doba look worse than he was. His incompetence has made Leach's rebuild take longer than it would otherwise.
It is just used by people trying to excuse Wulff for just how bad he was. Again, his incompetence has made Doba look worse than he was. His incompetence has made Leach's rebuild take longer than it would otherwise.
It also had a lot of parallels to Wulff's fourth year. The four victories that Wulff apologists talk about how the program was improving were but a mirage. Beating a FCS team, one and two win teams, plus the one decent win was against a team in free fall that had quit on it's coach.
Except you are not honest. You continually praise one and trash the other. You cherry pick so much I thought you were a farmer.
Actually, I agree 100% that a bowl game appearance (or lack thereof) is why Wulff needed to be fired. My comment about Wulff at USF was that I felt bad that he got canned even though the team improved in the area he was responsible for. I don't remember WSU firing it's staff in 2012 when we failed to make a bowl game and the team regressed significantly. It was a bad deal for him. That doesn't change anything about his time at WSU. He improved but after four years, he still failed to win enough.
But, as the writer in that article pointed out, they really did not improve when you look at the statistics within the statistics. They regressed, especially as the season went along. Again, why do you Wulff apologists always make excuses for him? Nothing is ever his fault.
There is no red herring. I don't care about the pot issue. I care about lack of QB and a lack of DT's specifically. That is what made things looks bad. You can call it an excuse. Here is the bottom line. I don't differ much from you. I have said Leach gets five years to get his players in and the depth built up. Wulff was fired. He is gone. No, I don't think even if Leach took over in 2008 they go bowling on 08 or 09, or even 10. You can go player by player and you can't point to players who were actually on the field that were better than what Wullf inherited. I would be happy to concede the 2008 oline that Wulff inherited was either on par or better than what Leach inherited. There are two problems. Four turned into two in a hurry. Then injuries mounted. Rowland quit, Lesuma hurt his back before the season started, Ayers and Frietag were hurt as well. Other than that, I can't think of one position. Take that back. Running back. And neither coach inherited a game breaker.
Sure I am cherry picking. I would be happy to go line by line and compare the conorris Adkins, Hamels and the like with the Brandon Goldens, Matt Simons etc.
Who said I am praising him? I am just pointing out the fact he recruited better than Doba. And if there needs to be a villain it is Rawlins first, Sterk second, Doba third then Wulff.
And I think Wulff was justified in getting the time he got. And I think if Leach didn't come to Pullman they would have been better off with continuity to keep Wulff for year five as it was shown his four wins were very close to being 6. And if he didn't win with his recruits then go in another direction. But he was fired, as was Breske and others and Doba. But you want to point the picture how this lays at the lap of Wulff. You have determined a rebuild with the most historic coaches (Leach) of the last 15 years takes five years. That has been acknowledged. But you point to a health of a program in 2008 yet the shear numbers don't bare that out.
So I can use names like Cooper and Buchanon and you can look to Ahmu and Chima. Hannam was a freshman All Pac 10 player, although he was the only freshman in the conference to start, or I can look at Jake Rogers and Fullington, or we can look at the disasters each had. And there were enough. Yet the difference is Doba had three straight ten win seasons to recruit as the back drop.
I agree. The "stable mucking" was an after the fact justification for the incompetence on the field.
Because it has to be. Otherwise you have to admit epic failure. It can't be Wulff's fault that WSU's winning percentage with Wulff was worse than SMU in the four years after the death sentence and worse than Marshall in the four years after the plane crash.
More excuses and cherry picking. You more than anyone else has defended Wulff....by far. So many people time and time again have taken apart what you have written. I used to spend hours doing research and taking you apart. Still, it didn't matter. The more myself, DGibs, Biggs, Fab5 and others would destroy your arguments, the louder you would shout the same old, same old.
Do you know that even today, more than a decade since the last Rosebowl appearance that Leach still uses that as a recruiting tool?
There is team after team in the Pros and College that have had multiple drug problems. Heck, Nebraska started winning National Championships when they went after problem players. We all know that at the height of Don James uw run they had multiple serious arrests that he and Norm Maleng ignored.
You can't pick apart a thing with regards to recruiting. It is now history and it is played out. And yes, I will defend Wulff when people continue to trash him.
You know how many threads I have started about Wulff in the time he has been gone? Maybe one. You know how many threads I started about Doba since he has been gone? None.
The proof in terms of recruiting is in the pudding. Feel free to go line by line, player by player.
Why? Seriously, why defend Wulff? He was the worst football coach in school history. Why bother defending him? His recruiting has already been picked apart. 9-40 is where Wulff's recruiting got him. And why is "not starting" threads any different from "defending Wulff"?
The only thing significant here is the desperation to defend The Turd every step of the way.
There you go saying people lie on message boards again. On what planet do people lie on msg boards?
Are you from Mars or something?
I am just trying to understand why you think one would lie on a msg board about something as insignificant as football...to people that are anonymous..that will likely never meet!
Maybe not a direct statement but I would assume most high school coaches would give some sort of indication if they believed there were off field issues or a potential risk. Having a grow operation as the first indicator of off field issues seems a little far fetched.
