ADVERTISEMENT

And Yet Our “Fans” Continue To Question Leach

Twitter, and to a lesser extent boards like these, give every idiot a platform. Absent Twitter, nobody would give a shit what this public servant who knows nothing about college football or the realities of market wages therein would have to say. Even with Twitter, very few give a shit.
 
Stop beating on a straw man. No one is talking about canning Leach. People are talking about changes to improve his weaknesses in recruiting, offensive predictability, defense and developing staff stability. That is it. However, there is are a group of fans, including you, who treat any and all criticisms of Leach like it is treason, North Korean styles. It is time to grown up, unless you are beating the Dawgs regularly and winning championships you are open to fair criticism. 11-2 is great, but no one compares 2002 with 1997 for one reason -- even Rose Bowl run is diminished by a tight Husky loss.

Honestly, are you hoping Lake sucks so the playing field is more level. Son, completion is about beating teams at their best, not catching them when they are down to cover up your own failings.

Son ? Here betting I have multiple years on you. However nice redirect attempt ,kid. The tweet I copied specifically said Leach was the equivalent of Wulff and should be fired. Hell Jim Moore wrote a column specially saying Leach should be fired after the AC. But somehow "no one" is talking about firing Leach. The straw man is you turn that into that I am saying any and all legit criticism of Leach is off limits. Find where I have ever said that and we can discuss. ( you won't).

Leach should be criticized for not finding a legitimate replacement for Grinch. That bit him in the ass this year and eventually it will lead to the end of his run at WSU if he does not get it right.

As far as the Husky stuff you wrote, honestly had to read it a couple of times to even try to figure out what point you were trying to make as compared to what I wrote. But fine it would be great to beat UW when they are good. My point has always consistently been, that for whatever reason UW has not only been good they have played better on offense in the AC then they do the rest of season. I attribute that to Pete .
 
  • Like
Reactions: royhobbs2
I think there are better comparisons but people nowadays seem to be pretty quick to start insinuating racial undertones when a comparison is made about players, coaches, etc. It’s annoying.

Probably the times we live in and the lack of awareness at a minimum. There are no similarities between Lake and Taggart. They have two different resumes. One can eliminate the differences and marry the similarities.

For example, if they both coached at the same school, there would be less likelihood for some (myself included) to think that there was similarities in looks. If both were qualified assistants but didn't appear to have head coach mentality, I could see that as well. There is NOTHING similar to each coach and their resumes. NOTHING.
 
Willie Taggart was the biggest bust in P5 football this year as a first year HC at Florida State.

Jimmy Lake will be the biggest bust in P5 football next year as a first year HC at Washington.

Theres your similarity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: froropmkr72
Damn those fans who aspire for the Cougs to win the Pac-12 and beat the Dawgs. You aren't real Cougars. Real Cougars are resigned to the fact that neither is possible, they accept the annual beat down, the guarantee of being undermanned and that ultimately coming up short is inevitable.
You can aspire to whatever you want, but those things will always be rare occurrences for WSU. Aspirations won't change reality. Only $$$$$$$$$$$ can change that.
 
This is big boy football. Nick Saban gets questioned when he blows out a team by 50 and some fans wondered why he called a draw play late in the game .
Big Boy football is played by very few schools in CFB. It requires a level of support that is not an option for 90% of schools in D1 football. WSU is most definitely NOT one of those schools. Hoping, wishing, or praying for that to be true will not make it so.
 
You can aspire to whatever you want, but those things will always be rare occurrences for WSU. Aspirations won't change reality. Only $$$$$$$$$$$ can change that.
a good example is wsu not being able to financially hold on to a coaching staff. Kind of easy for bigger richer rival schools to cripple Leach's program by just offering them more money.
 
Willie Taggart was the biggest bust in P5 football this year as a first year HC at Florida State.

Jimmy Lake will be the biggest bust in P5 football next year as a first year HC at Washington.

Theres your similarity.

You know, Tracy Claeys will be a bust just like Ralph Friedgen.
 
Probably the times we live in and the lack of awareness at a minimum. There are no similarities between Lake and Taggart. They have two different resumes. One can eliminate the differences and marry the similarities.

For example, if they both coached at the same school, there would be less likelihood for some (myself included) to think that there was similarities in looks. If both were qualified assistants but didn't appear to have head coach mentality, I could see that as well. There is NOTHING similar to each coach and their resumes. NOTHING.
There is the obvious Paul Wulff connection.

Lake was coached by Wulff and they later committed NCAA violations together as coaches at EWU.
Taggart hired Wulff as OC at USF and fired him after one year. Not sure if Lake was used as reference. Harbaugh supposedly was.
FSU apparently was the first time Taggart fired. Lake already fired twice, once by UW (a 10 loss season with loss in Apple Cup) and for being part of Owen 16 in 2008 with Detroit Lions. Yes, the Lions were worse than UW and WSU that year. (Jason Hanson still the kicker for the Lions and he was at WSU with Bill Doba. So maybe Owen 16 for the 2008 Lions was also Doba's fault?)
 
There is the obvious Paul Wulff connection.

Lake was coached by Wulff and they later committed NCAA violations together as coaches at EWU.
Taggart hired Wulff as OC at USF and fired him after one year. Not sure if Lake was used as reference. Harbaugh supposedly was.
FSU apparently was the first time Taggart fired. Lake already fired twice, once by UW (a 10 loss season with loss in Apple Cup) and for being part of Owen 16 in 2008 with Detroit Lions. Yes, the Lions were worse than UW and WSU that year. (Jason Hanson still the kicker for the Lions and he was at WSU with Bill Doba. So maybe Owen 16 for the 2008 Lions was also Doba's fault?)

Now that is some good research.
 
The 1998 Rose Bowl puts that decade in the conversation but there was a lot of disappointment in that decade. Three good seasons and seven bad seasons. Five seasons with 4 wins or less. Was that really a great decade?

The 80's featured five bowl eligible seasons but the five other seasons were pretty mediocre. If they had 12 game seasons and the number of bowl games we have today, that decade would most likely feature the most wins in program history.

With 100% hindsight it is amazing that Price had zero options in 1993 (a much better team than the 2019 team) after Mike Pattinson went down, or somebody better than Chad Davis in 1994. Or that Menkenbaum especially Birnbaum just completely sucked - he got more reps with the 1997 team than Gordon or Minshew did the previous years before they became starters. Leaf or Bledsoe leaving wasn't a complete shock like Hilinski's death.

A 12th game in the 1980s would have meant more conference games and more losses for WSU - not 8 more wins. Pac12 was still playing 7 conference games and occasionally 8 games. Walden was already chalking up wins against the worst part of the Pac10 (OSU, Cal and UO - Cal was horrible in the 1980s). Adding in more games vs Colorado wouldn't have worked - they scored 31 points in 3 games vs Colorado in 1980s. And they split vs Utah in 2 games in the 1980s. 4 of the Walden years they had Idaho and Montana State FCS/Div IAA gimme's.
 
With 100% hindsight it is amazing that Price had zero options in 1993 (a much better team than the 2019 team) after Mike Pattinson went down, or somebody better than Chad Davis in 1994. Or that Menkenbaum especially Birnbaum just completely sucked - he got more reps with the 1997 team than Gordon or Minshew did the previous years before they became starters. Leaf or Bledsoe leaving wasn't a complete shock like Hilinski's death.

A 12th game in the 1980s would have meant more conference games and more losses for WSU - not 8 more wins. Pac12 was still playing 7 conference games and occasionally 8 games. Walden was already chalking up wins against the worst part of the Pac10 (OSU, Cal and UO - Cal was horrible in the 1980s). Adding in more games vs Colorado wouldn't have worked - they scored 31 points in 3 games vs Colorado in 1980s. And they split vs Utah in 2 games in the 1980s. 4 of the Walden years they had Idaho and Montana State FCS/Div IAA gimme's.

It took Price ten years to recruit well enough to be better than one deep. And sometimes not even one deep.
 
With 100% hindsight it is amazing that Price had zero options in 1993 (a much better team than the 2019 team) after Mike Pattinson went down, or somebody better than Chad Davis in 1994. Or that Menkenbaum especially Birnbaum just completely sucked - he got more reps with the 1997 team than Gordon or Minshew did the previous years before they became starters. Leaf or Bledsoe leaving wasn't a complete shock like Hilinski's death.

A 12th game in the 1980s would have meant more conference games and more losses for WSU - not 8 more wins. Pac12 was still playing 7 conference games and occasionally 8 games. Walden was already chalking up wins against the worst part of the Pac10 (OSU, Cal and UO - Cal was horrible in the 1980s). Adding in more games vs Colorado wouldn't have worked - they scored 31 points in 3 games vs Colorado in 1980s. And they split vs Utah in 2 games in the 1980s. 4 of the Walden years they had Idaho and Montana State FCS/Div IAA gimme's.

Agree that the lack of QB depth for WSU from 1993 to 1999 was amazingly bad.

In my comment about the wins in the 80's, don't forget that we were bowl eligible in 1983 (7-4), 1984 (6-5) and 1989 (6-5) but didn't get to go bowling. So, we would have had 13 more opportunities to get 8 more wins in that decade. Plus, the Pac-12 didn't exist until 2011, so we would have been scheduling teams other than CU and Utah and as you mentioned, we played them already (went 2-3 against them FWIW). Also, don't forget that at the beginning of the 80's, we were still playing some games in Spokane and USC still wouldn't play us in Pullman at all until 1984 (first game in Pullman in 28 years). Couple that with the extra practices that our teams would have gotten in playing in bowl games and it's easy to imagine that decade playing out differently if they had the extra opportunities. To be fair though, it could have just meant 13 more losses......
 
Stop beating on a straw man. No one is talking about canning Leach. People are talking about changes to improve his weaknesses in recruiting, offensive predictability, defense and developing staff stability. That is it. However, there is are a group of fans, including you, who treat any and all criticisms of Leach like it is treason, North Korean styles. It is time to grown up, unless you are beating the Dawgs regularly and winning championships you are open to fair criticism. 11-2 is great, but no one compares 2002 with 1997 for one reason -- even Rose Bowl run is diminished by a tight Husky loss.

Honestly, are you hoping Lake sucks so the playing field is more level. Son, completion is about beating teams at their best, not catching them when they are down to cover up your own failings.
please, you have been bitching about Leach since day 1. you want a different coach admit it and move on because leach isnt going to change his approach to please you
 
I'm stealing this information from someone on Facebook, but thought that some might find this interesting:

Counting success by # of wins is not necessarily valid given that the number of games played every year over the past century-ish has been variable. Here is the breakdown by win%:

1900s: 40W, 20L - 66.67%
1910s: 36W, 23L - 61.02%
1920s: 47W, 37L - 55.95%
1930s: 51W, 42L - 54.84%
1940s: 29W, 43L - 40.28%
1950s: 42W, 53L - 44.21%
1960s: 34W, 66L - 34%
1970s: 40W, 70L - 36.36%
1980s: 53W, 59L - 47.32%
1990s: 53W, 61L - 46.49%
2000s: 53W, 63L - 45.69%
2010s: 61W, 65L - 48.41%

Comparison of coaches who were at WSU for at least five seasons
Hollingberry (17 seasons): 91W, 63L - 59.09%
Sabo (5 seasons): 17W, 29L - 36.96%
Sutherland (7 seasons): 38W, 40L - 48.72%
Sweeney (8 seasons): 26W, 60L - 30.23%
Walden (9 seasons): 43W, 57L - 43%
Price (14 seasons): 83W, 78L - 51.55%
Doba (5 seasons): 31W, 29L - 51.67%
Leach (8 seasons): 55W, 47L - 53.92%

Earlier, I had suggested that the 80's would have competed with the current decade in number of wins if they had the extra opportunities. Based on win percentage, the 80's would have likely finished with 59 or 60 wins given the extra opportunities to play. Hollingberry is clearly the winningest coach in WSU history, but given the passage of time, it's hard to say how he compares directly to Leach. Leach is clearly the best coach that we've had since Babe though.....but we already knew that.

Of course, the list above shows how statistics can lie. I respect Doba as a person, but he is only #3 on the list above because Price left him a great team in 2003. If I were rating the coaches in that list, he would be 5th or 6th and once you included coaches that were around for less than 5 years, he would drop further.
 
I'm stealing this information from someone on Facebook, but thought that some might find this interesting:

Counting success by # of wins is not necessarily valid given that the number of games played every year over the past century-ish has been variable. Here is the breakdown by win%:

1900s: 40W, 20L - 66.67%
1910s: 36W, 23L - 61.02%
1920s: 47W, 37L - 55.95%
1930s: 51W, 42L - 54.84%
1940s: 29W, 43L - 40.28%
1950s: 42W, 53L - 44.21%
1960s: 34W, 66L - 34%
1970s: 40W, 70L - 36.36%
1980s: 53W, 59L - 47.32%
1990s: 53W, 61L - 46.49%
2000s: 53W, 63L - 45.69%
2010s: 61W, 65L - 48.41%

Comparison of coaches who were at WSU for at least five seasons
Hollingberry (17 seasons): 91W, 63L - 59.09%
Sabo (5 seasons): 17W, 29L - 36.96%
Sutherland (7 seasons): 38W, 40L - 48.72%
Sweeney (8 seasons): 26W, 60L - 30.23%
Walden (9 seasons): 43W, 57L - 43%
Price (14 seasons): 83W, 78L - 51.55%
Doba (5 seasons): 31W, 29L - 51.67%
Leach (8 seasons): 55W, 47L - 53.92%

Earlier, I had suggested that the 80's would have competed with the current decade in number of wins if they had the extra opportunities. Based on win percentage, the 80's would have likely finished with 59 or 60 wins given the extra opportunities to play. Hollingberry is clearly the winningest coach in WSU history, but given the passage of time, it's hard to say how he compares directly to Leach. Leach is clearly the best coach that we've had since Babe though.....but we already knew that.

Of course, the list above shows how statistics can lie. I respect Doba as a person, but he is only #3 on the list above because Price left him a great team in 2003. If I were rating the coaches in that list, he would be 5th or 6th and once you included coaches that were around for less than 5 years, he would drop further.

I would suspect if we had the same scheduling structure today that we had in the 80's and even 90's we would see some things change. Take 83 for example, throw in PSU instead of Michigan on the road, which was a 20-17 loss. Take 84, a 6-5 team that played at Tenn and Ohio State. Put in Idaho State and Northern Colo. Oh, and don't have the biggest fluke play almost ever in the UCLA game and they are 8-2-1.
 
Last edited:
It's too early to say Lake is a bad hire. He was the right hire for the circumstance. We'll see in 4 years.
 
It took Price ten years to recruit well enough to be better than one deep. And sometimes not even one deep.

Of course it would take a guy from Weber State at a very tough school to recruit to gain cred and get those classes and did so once he got to the Rose Bowl.
 
With 100% hindsight it is amazing that Price had zero options in 1993 (a much better team than the 2019 team) after Mike Pattinson went down, or somebody better than Chad Davis in 1994. Or that Menkenbaum especially Birnbaum just completely sucked - he got more reps with the 1997 team than Gordon or Minshew did the previous years before they became starters. Leaf or Bledsoe leaving wasn't a complete shock like Hilinski's death.

A 12th game in the 1980s would have meant more conference games and more losses for WSU - not 8 more wins. Pac12 was still playing 7 conference games and occasionally 8 games. Walden was already chalking up wins against the worst part of the Pac10 (OSU, Cal and UO - Cal was horrible in the 1980s). Adding in more games vs Colorado wouldn't have worked - they scored 31 points in 3 games vs Colorado in 1980s. And they split vs Utah in 2 games in the 1980s. 4 of the Walden years they had Idaho and Montana State FCS/Div IAA gimme's.

It makes 100% sense why he lacked depth after Pattinson got hurt . If you are a recruit in the 91 class, and you are highly capable, do you really want to sit behind Bledsoe for three years ? If you are a 92 recruit, do you want to sit behind him for two years.

Back then they didn’t have yearvaround qb training for high school kids. They weren’t ready like Trevor Lawrence was ready as a true freshman .

The other capable option already left town in Aaron Garcia .

Akili Smith picked SDSU over the Cougs. Plummer at ASU picked WSU and was ready to sign with us until Bruce Snyder got Plunner to take a trip mid January . If we had our system today Plummer would have signed in December of 92.
 
Of course it would take a guy from Weber State at a very tough school to recruit to gain cred and get those classes and did so once he got to the Rose Bowl.

Right. Because eye for talented the number one pick in the draft didn’t count.
 
please, you have been bitching about Leach since day 1. you want a different coach admit it and move on because leach isnt going to change his approach to please you

You are right, but it wasn't quite day 1. I bitched about Leach, starting with the inexplicable losses to FCS teams, followed by the sub par recruiting, general intransigence, get run by the Dawgs, over and over and over. I'm also not a big fan of his quick to blame others, slow to shoulder responsibility, attitude. I was concerned that Leach wasn't up for the challenge of resurrecting the program after the mess Wulff left. I seriously underestimated his abilities. I thought he had gotten in over his head. The TT he inherited was nothing like what he faced at WSU. I was flat wrong on that. Since, I have repeatedly stated that he is one of, if not the best, X and Os coaches in the business. The man got us to a bowl with Wulff's recruits is proof of that. That was a 1 or 2 win team with Price at the helm. That wasn't even a average Mountain West team personnel-wise

Ultimately, because of his irreplaceable football mind, I want Leach to stay. Being a competitive perpetual "also ran" is far better than hiring the wrong coach. Any new hire runs that risk, particularly in Pullman. But I also dream of the Cougs winning the Pac-12. I experienced it twice. I liked it. No, I loved it. The difference in playing in the tier 1 bowl vs tier 2 is absolutely night and day. I want it to happen again. Because of his mind, Leach clearly has the potential to accomplish it, but I don't see it happening without some introspection and change. 20 years of Air Raid history is strong evidence of that. So no, if and when Leach leaves, I won't shed a tear, because the next coach might, and that is a big "might," have the formula, or adaptability, to get us there, which Leach on his current course seems to lack.

Now, longtimecoug, or someone, explain your criticism adverse devotion to a career competitive "also ran" coach, that has made getting owned by the Huskies an annual event. Geez, no one wet their pants when posters pointed out Mike Price's many failings, in particular the inconsistency, and lack of field generalship. Is it because Leach devotees can't respond with the retort "Rose Bowl." Well whose fault is that?
 
I think some people are talking about firing Leach. He makes them uncomfortable. They can’t handle that.

Who exactly? Names? Are there people who don't think Leach is the "be all and end all?" Absolutely. It is the Leach cult of personality folks, who spin anything that isn't devotion, as why do you want Leach fired. God, look at the grief Biggs got by pointing out that the most successful coaches live and breathe football 24/7/365, and Leach should consider less vacation. This is a coach who has been own by the Dawgs like no other in school history.

The problem is the potential for coaching greatest (winning championships) is recognized by all, and some, including me, are frustrated, with his apparent rinse and repeat attitude. There is the reason why Leach is front and center of the countless "air raid" retrospectives, he is it master and consider a servant. And each retrospective ends ... if he can't get over the hump with it, who can? For which there is no answer.

I for one could care less what offense Leach uses, so long as I'm in Pasadena New Years day after beating the Dawgs. But it seems that getting over the hump with the Air Raid is his vision quest, and it appears to be holding him back. I dream of Leach coming up the new "raid" offense, taking a fresh look at offense and spreading the field, putting that mind of his to work coming up with new schemes. The spread under Price went from two back - under center QB, to one back, shot gun. Why is the Air Raid sacrosanct?
 
So the offense from 2018 worked perfectly and the team went 11-2, but between 2018 and 2019 the offense "went stale, needs to be a new air raid, is holding him back"...…………..not buying it.
 
Who exactly? Names? Are there people who don't think Leach is the "be all and end all?" Absolutely. It is the Leach cult of personality folks, who spin anything that isn't devotion, as why do you want Leach fired. God, look at the grief Biggs got by pointing out that the most successful coaches live and breathe football 24/7/365, and Leach should consider less vacation. This is a coach who has been own by the Dawgs like no other in school history.

The problem is the potential for coaching greatest (winning championships) is recognized by all, and some, including me, are frustrated, with his apparent rinse and repeat attitude. There is the reason why Leach is front and center of the countless "air raid" retrospectives, he is it master and consider a servant. And each retrospective ends ... if he can't get over the hump with it, who can? For which there is no answer.

I for one could care less what offense Leach uses, so long as I'm in Pasadena New Years day after beating the Dawgs. But it seems that getting over the hump with the Air Raid is his vision quest, and it appears to be holding him back. I dream of Leach coming up the new "raid" offense, taking a fresh look at offense and spreading the field, putting that mind of his to work coming up with new schemes. The spread under Price went from two back - under center QB, to one back, shot gun. Why is the Air Raid sacrosanct?

Biggs is one of the people I was thinking of. Ed is another, but will deny it. Sponge for sure. And of course there are the hoards of people on Facebook and Twitter after a loss. The uncomfortable part is that he's shown you don't have to have played college football be a college football coach and a winning one at that. You don't have to have run-pass balance to win. You don't have to do things the same way everybody else does because someone said so.

Leach adjusts the offense all the time. There was an H-back set in 2012, and we just saw it again where Borghi got stuffed on the first drive in the bowl. The fullback lead was back for the bowl too. There was the 7 OL set. There was the inverted wishbone. The Big Gulp. The shovel pass was added around 2016. The middle screen was a staple in 2015 and not seen since. This year there was an adjustment to the route tree where the receiver runs the drag then curls back about 150 degrees to an empty spot in the zone. Some of it comes and goes based on personnel and match ups.
 
Biggs is one of the people I was thinking of. Ed is another, but will deny it. Sponge for sure. And of course there are the hoards of people on Facebook and Twitter after a loss. The uncomfortable part is that he's shown you don't have to have played college football be a college football coach and a winning one at that. You don't have to have run-pass balance to win. You don't have to do things the same way everybody else does because someone said so.

Leach adjusts the offense all the time. There was an H-back set in 2012, and we just saw it again where Borghi got stuffed on the first drive in the bowl. The fullback lead was back for the bowl too. There was the 7 OL set. There was the inverted wishbone. The Big Gulp. The shovel pass was added around 2016. The middle screen was a staple in 2015 and not seen since. This year there was an adjustment to the route tree where the receiver runs the drag then curls back about 150 degrees to an empty spot in the zone. Some of it comes and goes based on personnel and match ups.
Not going to call out any names. But regarding the AR getting stale, PERFECT response. We get 11 wins and everyone is happy. Less than 6 months later and it's stale. lol. OK.

CML doesn't make changes? I responded to something similar a while back but DGib was much more articulate in his response than I. He changes things up quite a bit. I used the shuffle. It was successful one year and then reporters asked about it and CML went on and on at a press conference about how a previous QB couldn't throw a shuffle pass to save his life.

The success of those changes might be the true beef for some of these people complaining. Or the changes aren't significant enough? Hard to tell. But the initial complaint is not very accurate or articulate.
 
Last edited:
Biggs is one of the people I was thinking of. Ed is another, but will deny it. Sponge for sure. And of course there are the hoards of people on Facebook and Twitter after a loss. The uncomfortable part is that he's shown you don't have to have played college football be a college football coach and a winning one at that. You don't have to have run-pass balance to win. You don't have to do things the same way everybody else does because someone said so.

Leach adjusts the offense all the time. There was an H-back set in 2012, and we just saw it again where Borghi got stuffed on the first drive in the bowl. The fullback lead was back for the bowl too. There was the 7 OL set. There was the inverted wishbone. The Big Gulp. The shovel pass was added around 2016. The middle screen was a staple in 2015 and not seen since. This year there was an adjustment to the route tree where the receiver runs the drag then curls back about 150 degrees to an empty spot in the zone. Some of it comes and goes based on personnel and match ups.


Biggs, Sponge and Ed, "but they would deny it." You might as well throw me in there, and everyone who is sick and tire of the Huskies kicking our arses. 7 straight double digit losses. As for 95man2's assertion that every was "all right" last year, 11-2 and everyone is happy. What! No it wasn't. It was a bitter sweet season. It brought home the sobering fact that best Cougar team under Leach, with a once in a generation QB, lost by double digits, at home to the Dawgs, that the chance we will ever get back to the promised land, with Leach, are slim.

Let's be clear, the minimizing of the importance of actually beating the Huskies, in football, is very new. It is recent and sad construct of Leach first fans, obfuscating the fact that no Cougar coach has fared worse in our most important annual game. I could understand it happening to Wulff, the man was worse than incompetent, he was corrosive, but it happening to a coach the calibre of Leach is mind blowing. Its worse, Jimmie Lake has provided us a bulletin board full of disdain for the air raid, and we still keep firing blanks. 11-2 has an * attached.

Isolated gimmick plays and sets, and trying to exploit gaps in pass coverage by running center screens (shovel pass) et al, isn't a change in offensive scheme, even you called it "adjustments." which it is. That isn't what we, the non-Leach above all crowd, are talking about. Adding some of the following: the RP option, six man lines, both wide and tight gaps, fullback leads, roll outs, QB draws, etc etc on a regular basis, to try to keep defenses off balance throughout a season is a scheme change.

No, we don't need a more diverse offense against teams with weak pass defenses. In fact, running in those instances would only slow the us down. But, we must, to be ready. For what? Every year there are games when you need versatility on offense to counter a quality pass defense/coverages, and we can't, like the Apple Cups. There is a reason why a coach like Leach, who frankly can out coach someone like Mike Price, using half a brain, has always been the bridesmaid. He has no plan B, its "the napkin" or nothing. Because of that you get video game numbers against ordinary opponents, but key game, and Apple Cups wins, have been elusive. Elusive despite the fact that 9 Pac-12 teams have won their division and played in the Championship game since Leach took over. Only Cal, OSU, teams that have struggled, and the one dimensional Cougs, who have had success, but shot blanks on offense at key times, have not.
 
"11-2 and everyone is happy. What! No it wasn't. It was a bitter sweet season."

That's freaking ridiculous. I doubt even Alabama fans would type that.

:rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: NMBRCRNCHR
Biggs, Sponge and Ed, "but they would deny it." You might as well throw me in there, and everyone who is sick and tire of the Huskies kicking our arses. 7 straight double digit losses. As for 95man2's assertion that every was "all right" last year, 11-2 and everyone is happy. What! No it wasn't. It was a bitter sweet season. It brought home the sobering fact that best Cougar team under Leach, with a once in a generation QB, lost by double digits, at home to the Dawgs, that the chance we will ever get back to the promised land, with Leach, are slim.

Let's be clear, the minimizing of the importance of actually beating the Huskies, in football, is very new. It is recent and sad construct of Leach first fans, obfuscating the fact that no Cougar coach has fared worse in our most important annual game. I could understand it happening to Wulff, the man was worse than incompetent, he was corrosive, but it happening to a coach the calibre of Leach is mind blowing. Its worse, Jimmie Lake has provided us a bulletin board full of disdain for the air raid, and we still keep firing blanks. 11-2 has an * attached.

Isolated gimmick plays and sets, and trying to exploit gaps in pass coverage by running center screens (shovel pass) et al, isn't a change in offensive scheme, even you called it "adjustments." which it is. That isn't what we, the non-Leach above all crowd, are talking about. Adding some of the following: the RP option, six man lines, both wide and tight gaps, fullback leads, roll outs, QB draws, etc etc on a regular basis, to try to keep defenses off balance throughout a season is a scheme change.

No, we don't need a more diverse offense against teams with weak pass defenses. In fact, running in those instances would only slow the us down. But, we must, to be ready. For what? Every year there are games when you need versatility on offense to counter a quality pass defense/coverages, and we can't, like the Apple Cups. There is a reason why a coach like Leach, who frankly can out coach someone like Mike Price, using half a brain, has always been the bridesmaid. He has no plan B, its "the napkin" or nothing. Because of that you get video game numbers against ordinary opponents, but key game, and Apple Cups wins, have been elusive. Elusive despite the fact that 9 Pac-12 teams have won their division and played in the Championship game since Leach took over. Only Cal, OSU, teams that have struggled, and the one dimensional Cougs, who have had success, but shot blanks on offense at key times, have not.

I said Ed would deny it.

And they tried QB draws this year. Gordon kept tripping over his own feet. Like 95 said, some people don’t recognize adjustments to the offense when they don’t work. But, adjustments are made all the time.

I’d also like to know what your definition of “key games” is because Leach has won a lot of them. The AC, obviously not. Last year Oregon and Stanford were top 25 wins. 2017 USC was a huge win. Beating Oregon in double OT in Eugene in 2015 was a huge win.
 
Last edited:
Quick aside: anyone been to "Die hard cougs" lately? Hows the fire Leach debate there? I imagine its a dumpster fire - thats our collection of GRCC fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: royhobbs2
Quick aside: anyone been to "Die hard cougs" lately? Hows the fire Leach debate there? I imagine its a dumpster fire - thats our collection of GRCC fans.

Those are mostly casual fans over there, although Torey Hunter and Steve Broussard are active posters.
 
Those are mostly casual fans over there, although Torey Hunter and Steve Broussard are active posters.
Not even sure what casual fan means. Fan being a shortened version of fanatic makes “casual fan” something of an oxymoron. Besides what would be the opposite of a casual fan? A formal fan?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT