So while I've watched people debate expectations on here and other sites I wanted to take some time to show what happened at WSU and Where it is today.
So first up is explaining the 4/5 year cycle of class structure.
Basically the class you recruit today (2016) for the most part won't really come to fruition UNTIL about 4 years down the line meaning (2019-2020) the reason this is important is it plays an important role in the future of the program. Now of course there are certain anomalies like Freshmen playing and Jucos to patch up a lack of depth, but ideally a program would want to start only upper classmen and every year after graduations start a new level of upper classmen.
The reason why this is ideal is because Juniors/Seniors are physically bigger (strength & conditioning), experience they've seen some live action and know what to expect.
Recruiting plays an important role in your level of play in the future, and here is how things were going for us.
Back when Wulff started in 2008 he inherited a team that may or may not have been on a competitive pac 12 level. The rankings say they were, but I myself will even give some concessions that perhaps they weren't.
But the issue isn't just about what he was handed, but what he did with what was handed and what he recruited while he was here for the future.
That is pretty much what all coaches should be graded on. What have you done with what you were given, and where are you taking us in the future?
Wulff obviously made a lot of errors in managing what he was given fielding some very bad teams, but his recruiting was also very poor leaving big holes in certain areas and also the overall talent level. Yes there were a few gems. A travis long, a d buc, etc. But when less than 10% of the over 100+ kids brought in are considered Pac-12 caliber that is very poor for the future.
So what are the long term ramifications of poor recruiting?
Let's say everyone in the Pac 12 is recruiting Pac 12 caliber player BUT you. And this goes on for 4 years.
What happens is that even when you start to correct this and start bringing in Pac 12 players you still are fighting an uphill battle. Allow me to explain.
2008 - 10% Pac-12
2009 - 10% Pac 12
2010 - 10% Pac 12
2011 - 10% Pac 12
Now in 2012 season you are starting the 2008 class as upper classmen (10% Pac 12)
vs
Opponents upper classmen that are %90 Pac 12
Now you can bring in some jucos and start some freshmen but still that may bring you up to 40% Pac 12. Still playing 90% Pac 12 teams.
Coaching scheme etc play a factor, but really you shouldn't do well. It's foolish for people to expect you to do well. This is something that A LOT of people don't get. Because the games are in the present, but the pieces were picked 4 years prior.
Now as you bring in players. Let's say
2012 class 50% Pac 12
2013 class 90% Pac 12
2014 class 90% Pac 12
2015 class 90% Pac 12
In the 2013 season you still are being reloaded with the next class 2009 upper classmen as your new senior class. So no matter what you are still fighting against the past. Because the reload is bringing in still not adequate talent. So you start more freshmen and more jucos to get by.
This process will continue UNTIL you get to the 4/5th year of your 1st true class. In Leach's case class of 2013. Which 4 years later will be ready at 2016.
Not until then will you start 90% pac 12 upper classmen vs 90% pac 12 upper classmen. until that happens you are always reloaded by the previous staff. That's why you constantly hear the phrase "We are a young team". We will always be a young team working in freshmen over and over again until we have the talent that matches the competition.
Now coaching is a part of it, but still a disadvantage is constantly thrown at you every single year. This is why so many bad programs stay down for so long. People don't understand that 4 years of bad recruiting turns into 8 years total of setback.
