Another Portal Entry
- Thread starter WASH ST A&M FAN
- Start date
Kids want to play. Hard to blame them. The fact that it often doesn't work out for them doesn't mean that shouldn't try to find a better spot. I guess the jury is out but I doubt that we are being hurt by this. Does it help a team to have a disgruntled player stalking the sidelines?
The cope is real. Apparently we didn't want him anyway.
He was a Rolo recruit and it's not like our outside receivers are so amazing he'd never work his way into the rotation. This transfer is pretty surprising. I've heard Rolo doesn't have the respect of the locker room. Similar to rumblings I heard about Ernie Kent (but dismissed at the time).
Honest question, how many more scholarship kids hit the portal before fall camp? I'm guessing we see at least 2.
We'll see if it is this way in a few years. Leach didn't have the respect of the locker room with Wulff recruits either.
If my sources are correct, Rolo doesn't have the respect of Rolo's recruits either.
I’ve heard similar inferences.
Leach ran a disciplined consistent ship.
Rolo is more wishy washy and trying to bring in a census approach.
Rolo's approach on culture is very different. He wants to be more of a "players" team. How long it takes to gel is a key question.
In my opinion, Rolo is more like Erickson. Leach is Leach.
Leach ran a disciplined consistent ship.
Rolo is more wishy washy and trying to bring in a census approach.
Rolo's approach on culture is very different. He wants to be more of a "players" team. How long it takes to gel is a key question.
In my opinion, Rolo is more like Erickson. Leach is Leach.
Last edited:
Team was also coming off of 9-40 from the previous regime. So their lives became much more challenging.
Not sure if he is picking non committed players or if some of it is due to not getting a college experience their first year, not playing , not seeing what campus life is like . Going to WSU this past season is like attending a community college . We will see what 2022 brings us.
I'm of the opinion kids today can pick up on a phony really quick, definitely quicker than the fan base at large. Leach was very something he pretended not to be and, while he wasn't everyone's cup of tea, it was hard to hold a grudge against him. Leach didn't think college kids should be paid, he hated the transfer portal, and brought a shape up or ship up ultimatum. None of which are popular with the youths in theory. But Leach was predictable, had a reason for everything he did, and gave a ton of freedom to his players within his rules.
Rolovich doesn't seem to have a clear philosophy or idea of what he's trying to accomplish on a given day and how that fits into the ultimate goal of preparing a team to win. He feels comfortable with the run and shoot, so he has an offensive plan. But what is he doing to make sure the team is ready to go? Did he use spring practice reps to give the lion share to a consistent group of WR's and QB's to build chemistry? No. Is he planning on expanding his rotation to keep his receivers fresh over a 12 game season? No. Is he recruiting fewer WR's to ensure most of his recruits don't transfer because they realize they won't play? No.
He tells his players he loves them and they are a family in one breath. The next he says the transfer portal is great and players who aren't happy should see if they can find a better situation elsewhere. What functional family tells members to find a new one? He applauds the activism of his players and talks about social responsibility and platform and then when his players take a stand, nukes them. He celebrates his teams effort in the fall and in the spring he says the team didn't finish in the fall. This after he declared we wouldn't be accepting a bowl bid we hadn't qualified for yet.
Rumor is Rolo was asked if he'd rather be loved of feared. Rolo responded, "I'd like to be both". Sorry for the Michael Scott reference. Erickson, Price, and Leach all had defined philosophies: Erickson was win at all cost, Price was a scrappy underdog and Leach valued consistency. Rolo doesn't seem to have a philosophy to build his program on. I think that holds us back. I also think we'll see more than our fair share of kids hit the portal.
Price was 43 when he got the WSU job. Rolovich was 41. It's a fair comparison.
Price ran around dressed like a Duck hunter his first couple years. By the time the Gesser era Mike Price matured, he wasn't doing that kind of stuff
Water balloon scrimmages are fun. But after a few 2 win seasons, Rolovich is going to have the revelation or not that being everybody's favorite uncle isn't as satisfying as winning. Price figured it out after getting his brains beat in a few times.
Etown, I guess I see it a bit differently. Observer, you are right that Rolo will modify his approach with more experience (we all do that), but that does not imply that what he is doing now is wrong.
This is going to be a longer post, so anyone who doesn't want to spend 3-4 minutes should simply skip it and go on.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, particularly if you were trying to learn as you grew. At this point I'd summarize the two extremes in terms of leadership approach as the Command and Control approach (which in many respects was consistent with Leach) vs. the more Laissez Faire approach (Erickson is an example) as follows. Rolo is between the two, from what I can see:
Command and control relies on firm rules. How many rules and what they pertain to varies with the leader. In general the rules are black and white, though in real life the leader ends up making exceptions on occasion. The amount of behavior flexibility available to the subordinates so long as they are within the firm rules also varies, and is usually more a function of the leader's personality than of any specific management goal. This is by far the easiest way to manage, and I've known a LOT of managers (by far the majority) who had the most comfort with this approach...sometimes simply because it is easier and can be made to appear to be more consistent, and sometimes because the leader is somewhat lazy and does not want to be bothered with the added work that goes with the Laissez Faire model. It also lets the leader pass the buck on behavior enforcement to the rules and his/her subordinate's adherence to those rules. It permits a leader whose skill set in developing people is weak to get the most output out of the subordinates with the least effort by the leader (and I'm not being snarky about that; it is an advantage for most leaders to take this approach for this very reason).
Laissez Faire relies on a combination of example, shared expectations, loyalty to the leader and peer pressure. In general, the more highly trained and motivated the subordinates, the better they respond to this. Untrained or minimally motivated individuals do not do well in this framework, unless the peer pressure element is significant. This is a more difficult management task and requires more time investment by the leader as well as a more diverse and fully developed skill set on the part of the leader. In the example of a football team, what we used to call "senior leadership" (peer pressure) is critical for Laissez Faire to work. It is actually more important to kick attitude problem individuals out of the tribe in a Laissez Faire model than in a Command and Control model, because you can't get the peer pressure to work if you have bad apples in the barrel.
Now, to discuss Rolo... I have to start by recognizing that we have not had a "normal" seasonal cycle to watch him work at WSU because of the covid disruptions. As a result, there is all kinds of speculation going on in terms of trying to figure out what he is doing, and why. Most of us simply don't have a clue. The advent of the portal and what it has meant this year and will mean to the future also is something that many posters on this board don't seem to understand (I can't claim that I fully understand it yet, either).
Rolo's job, as with any leader, can be split roughly between strategy and tactics. In a somewhat oversimplified football sense, I think of that as O and D personnel & game planning vs. position coaching. In-game adjustments are usually a mix of the two. Both strategy and tactics are important. In the immortal words of Biggs, "Coaching Matters". But strategic coaching (where Rolo needs to spend most of his time) is not the same thing as position coaching, and the team needs to do both. Most of planning falls into the strategic side of the ledger.
I laugh when I see people wetting their pants about portal activity. While there are some exceptions, I think it is mostly good for the P5 and also mostly good for the players...IF THEY USE IT WISELY. If there is a group for whom it is less good, it is the G5, since most people leaving P5 programs do so because they were not going to get PT and are borderline to get PT in the G5. Hence, the G5 does not get a ton of benefit from P5 refugees. On the flip side, if you prove out to be an FCS star, are you going to go to G5 or P5? If you are really a FCS star, you probably could do either...and most seem to be going to the P5. The portal is good for kids who use it wisely. If they are a walk on, with no scholarship at risk, and can find a place to go at a lower level program where they can get PT, then why not? We've had several walk-ons hit the portal. In virtually every case it looked like PT was the issue. Let's say you were a scholarship player but were buried on the depth chart and could clearly see that there were too many guys ahead of you for you to ever see the field. If you are willing to drop to FCS, and have a program who wants you (this assumes you don't carry a lot of baggage), then the portal also makes sense. But to renounce your scholarship & enter the portal with no clear destination? That is NOT using the portal wisely. I went into this lengthy discussion of the portal in order to suggest that Rolo understands the portal and its implications, probably better than most posters on this board. If he didn't, I'd be concerned.
Finally, I see Rolo as being near the middle of the spectrum, but on the Laissez Faire side. He understands that he needs peer pressure...it is critical for his coaching model to work...and in fact he had it at Hawaii, so I have to conclude that he knows how to build it. That means he understands that sometimes an attitude problem kid needs to leave, and the portal has made that much easier than it used to be to make that happen. We've seen that happen a few times already, along with others who were seeking PT or (in a few cases) had their feelings hurt because they had to produce in order to play, and they had never experienced that before college. I'm not sure that those guys will learn the necessary lesson in time to help their career, but it is a life lesson that they need to learn.
All of this explains why he can tell his players that he loves them in one breath, and in the next breath tell them that the portal fulfills a purpose that fits some people. He did not applaud social responsibility and then nuke his players for being socially responsible; instead, he applauded the reasons for social responsibility while trying to explain that personal responsibility can sometimes conflict with social responsibility, and it takes a mature view of the situation to understand that. A couple of players did not understand that message and felt nuked, but when I went back over the whole situation it looked pretty clear to me that Rolo tried to explain reality to a couple of kids who did not want to understand reality. I can't fault Rolo for that. I've also appreciated that Rolo does not get all strident (Don James) or huffy (Mike Leach) when he receives criticism, whether from transferring players, parents, or the media. He behaves like an adult. Finally, I can relate to wanting to be both loved and feared. Most top leaders receive elements of both, depending upon the circumstances. I am not close enough to the program to know to what extent Rolo is generally loved but feared when someone has let the team down. Give us all a year and I suspect we'll have a much clearer picture.
This is going to be a longer post, so anyone who doesn't want to spend 3-4 minutes should simply skip it and go on.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, particularly if you were trying to learn as you grew. At this point I'd summarize the two extremes in terms of leadership approach as the Command and Control approach (which in many respects was consistent with Leach) vs. the more Laissez Faire approach (Erickson is an example) as follows. Rolo is between the two, from what I can see:
Command and control relies on firm rules. How many rules and what they pertain to varies with the leader. In general the rules are black and white, though in real life the leader ends up making exceptions on occasion. The amount of behavior flexibility available to the subordinates so long as they are within the firm rules also varies, and is usually more a function of the leader's personality than of any specific management goal. This is by far the easiest way to manage, and I've known a LOT of managers (by far the majority) who had the most comfort with this approach...sometimes simply because it is easier and can be made to appear to be more consistent, and sometimes because the leader is somewhat lazy and does not want to be bothered with the added work that goes with the Laissez Faire model. It also lets the leader pass the buck on behavior enforcement to the rules and his/her subordinate's adherence to those rules. It permits a leader whose skill set in developing people is weak to get the most output out of the subordinates with the least effort by the leader (and I'm not being snarky about that; it is an advantage for most leaders to take this approach for this very reason).
Laissez Faire relies on a combination of example, shared expectations, loyalty to the leader and peer pressure. In general, the more highly trained and motivated the subordinates, the better they respond to this. Untrained or minimally motivated individuals do not do well in this framework, unless the peer pressure element is significant. This is a more difficult management task and requires more time investment by the leader as well as a more diverse and fully developed skill set on the part of the leader. In the example of a football team, what we used to call "senior leadership" (peer pressure) is critical for Laissez Faire to work. It is actually more important to kick attitude problem individuals out of the tribe in a Laissez Faire model than in a Command and Control model, because you can't get the peer pressure to work if you have bad apples in the barrel.
Now, to discuss Rolo... I have to start by recognizing that we have not had a "normal" seasonal cycle to watch him work at WSU because of the covid disruptions. As a result, there is all kinds of speculation going on in terms of trying to figure out what he is doing, and why. Most of us simply don't have a clue. The advent of the portal and what it has meant this year and will mean to the future also is something that many posters on this board don't seem to understand (I can't claim that I fully understand it yet, either).
Rolo's job, as with any leader, can be split roughly between strategy and tactics. In a somewhat oversimplified football sense, I think of that as O and D personnel & game planning vs. position coaching. In-game adjustments are usually a mix of the two. Both strategy and tactics are important. In the immortal words of Biggs, "Coaching Matters". But strategic coaching (where Rolo needs to spend most of his time) is not the same thing as position coaching, and the team needs to do both. Most of planning falls into the strategic side of the ledger.
I laugh when I see people wetting their pants about portal activity. While there are some exceptions, I think it is mostly good for the P5 and also mostly good for the players...IF THEY USE IT WISELY. If there is a group for whom it is less good, it is the G5, since most people leaving P5 programs do so because they were not going to get PT and are borderline to get PT in the G5. Hence, the G5 does not get a ton of benefit from P5 refugees. On the flip side, if you prove out to be an FCS star, are you going to go to G5 or P5? If you are really a FCS star, you probably could do either...and most seem to be going to the P5. The portal is good for kids who use it wisely. If they are a walk on, with no scholarship at risk, and can find a place to go at a lower level program where they can get PT, then why not? We've had several walk-ons hit the portal. In virtually every case it looked like PT was the issue. Let's say you were a scholarship player but were buried on the depth chart and could clearly see that there were too many guys ahead of you for you to ever see the field. If you are willing to drop to FCS, and have a program who wants you (this assumes you don't carry a lot of baggage), then the portal also makes sense. But to renounce your scholarship & enter the portal with no clear destination? That is NOT using the portal wisely. I went into this lengthy discussion of the portal in order to suggest that Rolo understands the portal and its implications, probably better than most posters on this board. If he didn't, I'd be concerned.
Finally, I see Rolo as being near the middle of the spectrum, but on the Laissez Faire side. He understands that he needs peer pressure...it is critical for his coaching model to work...and in fact he had it at Hawaii, so I have to conclude that he knows how to build it. That means he understands that sometimes an attitude problem kid needs to leave, and the portal has made that much easier than it used to be to make that happen. We've seen that happen a few times already, along with others who were seeking PT or (in a few cases) had their feelings hurt because they had to produce in order to play, and they had never experienced that before college. I'm not sure that those guys will learn the necessary lesson in time to help their career, but it is a life lesson that they need to learn.
All of this explains why he can tell his players that he loves them in one breath, and in the next breath tell them that the portal fulfills a purpose that fits some people. He did not applaud social responsibility and then nuke his players for being socially responsible; instead, he applauded the reasons for social responsibility while trying to explain that personal responsibility can sometimes conflict with social responsibility, and it takes a mature view of the situation to understand that. A couple of players did not understand that message and felt nuked, but when I went back over the whole situation it looked pretty clear to me that Rolo tried to explain reality to a couple of kids who did not want to understand reality. I can't fault Rolo for that. I've also appreciated that Rolo does not get all strident (Don James) or huffy (Mike Leach) when he receives criticism, whether from transferring players, parents, or the media. He behaves like an adult. Finally, I can relate to wanting to be both loved and feared. Most top leaders receive elements of both, depending upon the circumstances. I am not close enough to the program to know to what extent Rolo is generally loved but feared when someone has let the team down. Give us all a year and I suspect we'll have a much clearer picture.
I really don't know how you evaluate him or any coach that took over a program two weeks before covid hit. They didn't have a spring to evaluate kids in spring practice. Were kids able to really lift they normally would? Did they learn the play book. How much time did they see their coaches?
As for kids transferring out, kids were 1000 miles away from home, nothing really to do, games were cancled after warm ups. Just a nightmare situation.
Rolo may suck, who knows. Having kids transfer???? Leach had probably had 10 kids transfer out of the 14 class without sniffing the field. He only recruited 19 kids that year. I think there were three contributors from that class.
Crazy, a lot to your post and most I do agree with. The part my little brain can't reconcile is the want to be both loved and feared...to me that sounds wishy washy, not wanting to commit to one style or another. In my reality, that is a cop out.
Do you have girls ? I very much want to be loved by them but I want the fear in God in them if they were to take hard drugs . The two aren’t mutually exclusive .
I understand your point, and without some context I have to agree that it doesn't make sense.
My context is that a leader that is admired and for whom we feel some level of affection can still be feared if we've screwed up and are not looking forward to the consequences. Even loved leaders can be feared when the consequences of a foul up can be severe. Eisenhower was loved & respected by many of his men but really only feared at the field grade officer level. Patton was loved by many of his men but feared when they failed to perform at all levels, from buck private to general staff. Both were superb generals who served the country well, but when the concept of being both loved and feared comes up, I suspect that you think of Patton before you think of Eisenhower.
First off, thank you for a fantastic response.
One of my core assumptions is that WSU is one of the most difficult jobs in both football and basketball. I'm trying to determine if he's exceptional as a FB coach because winning as often as he loses typically requires a really good coach here. I'm not sold on the early returns. Whether we like this or not, he's been in Pullman and in charge of the program for almost a year and a half.
The loved or feared question isn't about how people actually see you, it's how you want to be perceived if given the choice between the two. Each have positives and negatives but you need to embrace the strengths and weaknesses of your philosophy. For what it's worth, I think Dickert knows who he is and what he's trying to do. I'm not worried about our defense as a result. Rolo not so much.
I hope I'm wrong. I hope Rolo has the best results of a HFC in school history and ends up with a statue out of Martin stadium. I'm not going to complain about the program if we go to a bowl every year and we win more than we lose. But this feels like the program is headed back into the cellar in record time and I'm not going to put a positive spin on the collapse.
You are choosing to be feared rather than loved. It's clear in your mind. This is a good thing. There are some parents who want their kids to feel loved regardless of what they do. They offer unconditional acceptance regardless of a kids actions. That's clear in their mind. Again, it's going to lead to consistent messaging.
If your motivation is to be loved by your kids and have them scared to cross you, that's going to lead to some seriously mixed messages.
I think you summed up exactly how I feel about Cougar football right now, etown.
I'm not buying it. If so, why did so many 5th and 6th year seniors come back for another year? Why didn't Borghi go somewhere else? Lucas is a first round draft pick, he could have transferred to a ton of schools. Change is hard every time there is a new head coach. I have no doubt that some took it hard, but in the end these kids just want to play.
Agreed. In damn near any American company in 2021 10% turnover would get you an atta boy. The portal has basically turned college football into an open labor market. If you have <9 kids entering the portal you are fine. We may be sniffing that but not significantly over.
Kids are fine with whatever leadership style works - as long as the expectations of performance and consequences of their choices/action are clearly communicated and consistently applied.
"headed back into the cellar in record time" tells me that you lack perspective on the situation. Paul Wulff in 2008 was "headed back into the cellar in record time". Going 1-3 with your losses to the three of the best teams in the conference in a pandemic marred season is meaningless. Rolovich hasn't wowed me and I don't know where we are going to end up with him, but painting his performance as Wulffian in nature with a comment like that just says that you need to take a breath and relax.
You can't fool us. You are assuming he had the locker room to begin with!!!!! You can take your un-fact checked misinformation and disinformation and shove it!!!! Exclamation points!!!!
I think we’re headed more to the mediocre middle. A function of two things: the teams that should be good in the Pac12 finally reshaping their programs to be successful, and losing a guy like Leach. Rolo better carve out a niche in some way or we’ll just be another 3 OOC and 3 conference win team for the foreseeable future.
Man, I just don't get all the negative vibes and bedwetting around here. Borghi and McIntosh are gonna shred defenses and as long as the Coug D can limit blowouts (which I think the players are in place to make that happen) we have as good a chance for a bowl as anybody. See a lot of thing to be hopeful about this fall.
Now that's a position I can understand. I definitely fear that Rolovich is going to be mediocre more than I fear that he's going to be terrible.
What does give me some confidence is that he was able to get 10 wins out of Hawaii in his final season with only one clunker among the losses. He took a team that Norm Chow had buried and made them respectable in short order. He played the game and he knows what it takes to win. Will that transfer to WSU in a meaningful way? I don't know, but I think all of the talk that makes him sound like the second coming of Paul Wulff is misplaced.
Chugs, I have to question whether the other PAC teams are universally reshaping their teams to be successful. I don't see Helton doing that. Clay got some breaks last year, and the fallout from the various race-related issues that were highlighted last year has also helped PAC recruiting vs. the south and southeast, so SC has benefitted some there as well. But Clay is still Clay. A mediocre coach can win at SC, but that is not the same thing as reshaping the team to be successful. Certainly I can be wrong, but I don't see Jimmy Lake as a brilliant head coach. Stanford's goal seems to be sustained respectability rather than a championship. UCLA is UCLA; lots of potential but seldom do they manage to put it all together. ASU, Colorado, Ariz, Cal and OSU are what they are, with occasional good things coming from their programs but also their share of frustration. Yes, Leach was definitely a good coach. But Rolo beat two of the aforementioned teams in his last year at Hawaii, and that is probably as good a proof statement about a lower division HC as you will find. I don't have a crystal ball, but if I were handicapping the coming season based on what we know, I'd be (and am) relatively optimistic.
The anti-Rolo sentiment expressed on this thread is nothing other than a preemptive "I told you so" response to those who celebrated Leach moving on to MSU.
Is Rolo going to be up to the task of keeping WSU at a consistent 7-9 win program? Considering how few WSU coaches have been able to accomplish that in our programs history, the money-line points to no, unfortunately. With that said, there is absolutely no evidence of cracks in the foundation at this point in time. The Rolo hire was widely applauded throughout the college football world. He was liked, respected, and considered to have the type of personality that would resonate well with WSU's culture and unique recruiting challenges.
If you were to remove the names of Leach and Rolo and write up an unbiased summary of each coach's program management; transfers, quotes, interviews, media/fan perspective, and perceived player acceptance of the coaches, Rolo would be universally regarded to be the better coaching hire, and it's not even close.
It's understandable to be fearful that Rolo won't work out. Most of our coaching hires over the past several decades haven't. But if you're trying to read the tea leaves about Rolo today, based on what you think you know or hear during a crazy COVID 19 bubble year, you're completely misguided.
Here's a blurb written about Leach and Mississippi State 6 months ago.
A list of the Mississippi State players that have left Leach’s program, and it is lengthy one.
Transfers
Anytime a coach comes in with program-changing concepts to the level of Leach’s offensive system, roster turnover is expected. However, this has been a slow-developing process since the start of the season.
Mike Leach will get time to bring in the right players for his system in Starkville, and deservedly so. But it is certainly rare to see such an exodus of players from one program in such a short time span.
Is Rolo going to be up to the task of keeping WSU at a consistent 7-9 win program? Considering how few WSU coaches have been able to accomplish that in our programs history, the money-line points to no, unfortunately. With that said, there is absolutely no evidence of cracks in the foundation at this point in time. The Rolo hire was widely applauded throughout the college football world. He was liked, respected, and considered to have the type of personality that would resonate well with WSU's culture and unique recruiting challenges.
If you were to remove the names of Leach and Rolo and write up an unbiased summary of each coach's program management; transfers, quotes, interviews, media/fan perspective, and perceived player acceptance of the coaches, Rolo would be universally regarded to be the better coaching hire, and it's not even close.
It's understandable to be fearful that Rolo won't work out. Most of our coaching hires over the past several decades haven't. But if you're trying to read the tea leaves about Rolo today, based on what you think you know or hear during a crazy COVID 19 bubble year, you're completely misguided.
Here's a blurb written about Leach and Mississippi State 6 months ago.
A list of the Mississippi State players that have left Leach’s program, and it is lengthy one.
Transfers
- Stewart Reese
- Keytaon Thompson
- Brevyn Jones
- Jarrian Jones
- Fabien Lovett
- Javorrius Selmon
- Garrett Shrader
- Jalen Myden
- Tre Lawson
- Tyrell Shavers
- Kareem Walker
- Nick Pendley
- Jamari Stewart
- Tyler Williams
- Kylin Hill
- Marcus Murphy
- Nathan Pickering
Anytime a coach comes in with program-changing concepts to the level of Leach’s offensive system, roster turnover is expected. However, this has been a slow-developing process since the start of the season.
Mike Leach will get time to bring in the right players for his system in Starkville, and deservedly so. But it is certainly rare to see such an exodus of players from one program in such a short time span.
What was Leach’s occ and in conference record in 2019? I believe we were 3-0 and 3-6. Not sure he wouldn’t have done the same if he was here in 2020 and they played a full season . There was a talent drain on defense and he really didn’t have leader at qb . Nor one that was particularly accurate and had lots of year of practice experience (lots of reps in practice )
I fear that too, but to say that it's because of something that any of us have seen or heard during the past 12 COVID months is ludicrous. We're applying our learned pessimism surrounding new WSU coaches who succeed previous winning coaches.
Rolo has done absolutely nothing to make any of us "fearful" about the future. He's said the right things, he's upbeat, he's seemingly very grateful and appreciative of the P12 coaching opportunity. Unfortunately, because we have some players who are opting out and transferring from the program, message board fans have decided that it's because Rolo is toxic.
I am not sure more than two or three people wanted Leach gone . I will say in hindsight he was ready to leave and rekindle the batteries with a new challenge . As great as things broke in 18 he had a 180 reaction in 19. He wasn’t enjoying coaching , or didn’t appear that way. For him personally I hope he feels invigorated and is ready for the challenge he faces.
8 years in Pullman is a long time. particularly when you and your family prefer to live in another region of the country. Then you factor in the warts that were showing with regard to P12 conference leadership, and his decision to take an opportunity in the best division in the best conference in all of college football made a lot of sense. At least to me it did.
I don't mind people expressing concerns about Rolo not being up to the task, but for them to imply that they're "hearing" or seeing troubling things over the past 12 months is completely off base.
The defense will be the strength of this team. If the QB can manage the game and not be a turnover/3 and out machine they will be fine- and that shouldn’t be hard when you can hand it to Borghi and McIntosh. Stay ahead of the chains and defenses have to respect the run. Makes life a lot easier for the QB. In the absence of catastrophic injuries this should be a 7+ win team and with a much improved defense should be competitive in even the toughest of games.
Patrol, you bring up a good point...one that I have not seen a lot. I agree that the leadership crisis in the PAC league office (and I don't think using the word "crisis" is hyperbole) may very well have been an element in Leach's thinking. Not the primary element, but how do you ignore that the conference has tarnished its name brand in multiple revenue-impacting ways, while doing almost nothing about abysmal, zero accountability officiating?
CML made his choice for his own set of reasons. I agree with Ed that a new, re-kindling challenge may have also been a piece of it. But the league situation certainly was no inducement to stay put.
I see it similarly. The D should be no worse than the middle of the league, and has a chance to be a spot or two better than that. We should have a solid running attack. Those two things...all by themselves, even if the passing game is just mediocre...should be at least 6 wins. If the offense produces some explosive plays without having to give up too many turnovers to get them, then we are at least 7 wins.
I hate to get drawn into an endless back and forth diatribe full of "red flags", "what I'm hearing", or "concerns". Those things are pretty natural and are part and parcel of any coaching regime. I go back with Coug football far before the onset of internet boards. Back to the days when most info came from columns by Harry Missledine and Dutch Schultz, along with any random group of fans gathered around "shooting the bleep", so to speak.
I can tell you there hasn't been a coach in that time, from Bert Clark onward, that I haven't seem/heard "concerns about". It's to be expected. Part of being a "fan who cares", I suppose?
What I find absurd is the skewing of ANY event pretty much automatically into the most negative connotation by certain posters.
A player, buried on the depth charts decides to go into the portal and it's a "further sign that something's rotten in Denmark". Anything that happens, is taken in the worst possible way. Demeaning little nicknames like "the hat" are used to undercut the stature of the head coach.
It gets old.
Predicting a collapse of the program to the cellar of the conference in record time and comparing Rolovich to Ernie Kent in any way, is just agenda based, no matter what counter argument is given. Is there some crushing need to be at the forefront of criticism on any and every detail, just so one can trumpet "I told you so" if the worst case scenario comes to pass?
I have made it abundantly clear to my closest circle of Coug friends that I think the jury is still way out on Rolovich as our HC.
At the same time, I like the guy. He has done a metric shet-ton of solid things in the community and with so-called Coug Nation that show him to be a real decent guy. They kind of person you hope will succeed at his job.....running the program and winning games.
As I said, to me the jury is still out on whether or not he will be as successful as we need him to be. But I want to judge that fairly, based on real seasons, with adequate prep time and sufficient numbers of players not sidelined due to Covid, etc.
This year is probably going to be a disappointment to some? I don't wear Crimson colored glasses any more. I'm a realist. I want to see real steps in a positive direction for the program in what is REALLY "year one". Disagree or not. Debate what real steps in a positive direction might mean to each individual (pt probably varies greatly).
But PLEASE quit the bullbleep agenda driven sniping.
I can tell you there hasn't been a coach in that time, from Bert Clark onward, that I haven't seem/heard "concerns about". It's to be expected. Part of being a "fan who cares", I suppose?
What I find absurd is the skewing of ANY event pretty much automatically into the most negative connotation by certain posters.
A player, buried on the depth charts decides to go into the portal and it's a "further sign that something's rotten in Denmark". Anything that happens, is taken in the worst possible way. Demeaning little nicknames like "the hat" are used to undercut the stature of the head coach.
It gets old.
Predicting a collapse of the program to the cellar of the conference in record time and comparing Rolovich to Ernie Kent in any way, is just agenda based, no matter what counter argument is given. Is there some crushing need to be at the forefront of criticism on any and every detail, just so one can trumpet "I told you so" if the worst case scenario comes to pass?
I have made it abundantly clear to my closest circle of Coug friends that I think the jury is still way out on Rolovich as our HC.
At the same time, I like the guy. He has done a metric shet-ton of solid things in the community and with so-called Coug Nation that show him to be a real decent guy. They kind of person you hope will succeed at his job.....running the program and winning games.
As I said, to me the jury is still out on whether or not he will be as successful as we need him to be. But I want to judge that fairly, based on real seasons, with adequate prep time and sufficient numbers of players not sidelined due to Covid, etc.
This year is probably going to be a disappointment to some? I don't wear Crimson colored glasses any more. I'm a realist. I want to see real steps in a positive direction for the program in what is REALLY "year one". Disagree or not. Debate what real steps in a positive direction might mean to each individual (pt probably varies greatly).
But PLEASE quit the bullbleep agenda driven sniping.
If we can all agree that this *should* be a 7 win team and that 5 or fewer wins would be considered a failure. I'll quietly go about my business. I fear the Doba effect where the program slides into the 4-5 win range and is trending in the wrong direction while fans stick their head into the ground insisting we are so close.
I get that Rolovich is a likeable guy. It's natural to want him to succeed. Again, I want him to do so as well. But I'm concerned. Probably because I know that I'll spend my Saturdays this fall pissed off if we lose. If it happens, it happens. What I won't take well is an adjustment of expectations by supporters telling us it was unrealistic to expect a 6-7 win season and a 4-5 win season is as good as we could expect given what was inherited.
I don’t dislike Rolo at all and in fact I’ve heard from people that did work with the program they/players really enjoyed him quite a bit and much more so than Leach. I think Leach’s niche proved to be a selling point that was highly advantageous to WSU. One that Rolo will need as well to stand out among other teams in our conference and division in performance and recruiting.
I think you can pretty easily determine the quality of a team based off of their recruiting, development (scheme work/lifting), and in game coaching. Recruiting is a wash as of now. Physically we don’t look like years past. And in game coaching was a big WTF last year. Is a lot of that due to Covids effects? Probably..but this isn’t really a spot where you can use that excuse and have people care.
All while programs like Oregon are becoming consistent and UCLA, OSU, ASU, even CAL are raising their floors.
I really liked the Rolo hire, it’s just things need to get moving positively or there is a chance it will be much harder to sustain 7-8 wins seasons.
I think you can pretty easily determine the quality of a team based off of their recruiting, development (scheme work/lifting), and in game coaching. Recruiting is a wash as of now. Physically we don’t look like years past. And in game coaching was a big WTF last year. Is a lot of that due to Covids effects? Probably..but this isn’t really a spot where you can use that excuse and have people care.
All while programs like Oregon are becoming consistent and UCLA, OSU, ASU, even CAL are raising their floors.
I really liked the Rolo hire, it’s just things need to get moving positively or there is a chance it will be much harder to sustain 7-8 wins seasons.
