Are we still be in denial

[Cougsocal]

Regarding the real problem?

Yes we are young, but we have been perpetually young since 2008. That may be because our recruiting has been dreadful. There is a ton of attrition when kids signed aren't P-12 calibre. Look at Colorado! They are very young too and have been since they joined the conference. Why is that? Bad players. The gurus have not been impressed with Leach's efforts. They could be spot on.

If I am wrong, and we have real talent on the sidelines, the 100+ kids that Leach as bought into the program will will lay a beat down on Rutgers and Wyoming. That is what talented teams from power conferences do when they have just utterly embarrassed themselves, the conference, the fans and the school and have the chance to redeem themselves against mediocre to weak opponents. Honestly, if you can't bring your "A" game after losing to a Big Sky bottom feeder, "young" isn't the problem. Talent is the problem.

If we lose to Rutgers, lose or struggle to beat Wyoming, we are in the middle of the nightmare scenerio -- a coach who can't get it done, who we can't replaced anytime soon.

I just hope I'm very wrong. But after watching one bad team after another over the last decade, I'm just not seeing a talent shift.

 

[Coug95man2]

Regarding the real problem?

Yes we are young, but we have been perpetually young since 2008. That may be because our recruiting has been dreadful. There is a ton of attrition when kids signed aren't P-12 calibre. Look at Colorado! They are very young too and have been since they joined the conference. Why is that? Bad players. The gurus have not been impressed with Leach's efforts. They could be spot on.

If I am wrong, and we have real talent on the sidelines, the 100+ kids that Leach as bought into the program will will lay a beat down on Rutgers and Wyoming. That is what talented teams from power conferences do when they have just utterly embarrassed themselves, the conference, the fans and the school and have the chance to redeem themselves against mediocre to weak opponents. Honestly, if you can't bring your "A" game after losing to a Big Sky bottom feeder, "young" isn't the problem. Talent is the problem.

If we lose to Rutgers, lose or struggle to beat Wyoming, we are in the middle of the nightmare scenerio -- a coach who can't get it done, who we can't replaced anytime soon.

I just hope I'm very wrong. But after watching one bad team after another over the last decade, I'm just not seeing a talent shift.

And what if we struggle against Rutgers, regardless of winning or losing? It seems like you've outlined an extreme situation on both sides. But what if we get our act together against Rutgers and just barely win? What if we barely lose?

 

[Cougsocal]

If we barely beat Rutgers and Wyoming, we still have a major talent problem. Let's not forget that the worst coach and worst recruiter we ever had was able to beat the snot out of Idaho State in game one of year four followed by UNLV, before losing to SDST. If we can't be clearly better than that, in year 4 of the Leach era, like it or not, you have to wonder if we improved at all in the last four years. Considering that Leach has demonstrated that with talent he can win consistently in a power conference, losing to PSU suggests a talent issue, not an coaching problem. Leach was even able to coach up Wulff's kids to a bowl game -- the guy can coach. But where is the evidence he can recruit west coast talent?

 

[Coug1990]

If we barely beat Rutgers and Wyoming, we still have a major talent problem. Let's not forget that the worst coach and worst recruiter we ever had was able to beat the snot out of Idaho State in game one of year four followed by UNLV, before losing to SDST. If we can't be clearly better than that, in year 4 of the Leach era, like it or not, you have to wonder if we improved at all in the last four years. Considering that Leach has demonstrated that with talent he can win consistently in a power conference, losing to PSU suggests a talent issue, not an coaching problem. Leach was even able to coach up Wulff's kids to a bowl game -- the guy can coach. But where is the evidence he can recruit west coast talent?

Losing to PSU was a leadership problem, not a talent problem. WSU dominated most statistical categories and should have won this game going away.

But, when they got punched in the mouth, they did what WSU teams have been doing for seven years. Someone, and it needs to be a player, needs to take leadership and calm down the team when it goes through a tough time.

This is what happened. WSU dominated the first half, but did not put PSU away. WSU ran up and down the field and PSU could do nothing. But, they allowed PSU to hang around.

Second half starts and PSU comes out pumped up. They make plays. Instead of just shutting them down, which they could, they panicked. For some players, the moment was too big for them and they made mistakes. The players that the moment was not too big, saw what was happening with some of their teammates and tried to do too much. Now, you have everyone going their own direction and we saw the result.

 

[Coug95man2]

If we barely beat Rutgers and Wyoming, we still have a major talent problem. Let's not forget that the worst coach and worst recruiter we ever had was able to beat the snot out of Idaho State in game one of year four followed by UNLV, before losing to SDST. If we can't be clearly better than that, in year 4 of the Leach era, like it or not, you have to wonder if we improved at all in the last four years. Considering that Leach has demonstrated that with talent he can win consistently in a power conference, losing to PSU suggests a talent issue, not an coaching problem. Leach was even able to coach up Wulff's kids to a bowl game -- the guy can coach. But where is the evidence he can recruit west coast talent?

So a month ago, a "W" was the only statistic needed. CML needed to prove himself with wins. NOW, it's how he wins, it's by how much, it's by some other statistic(s)? Kind of a double standard, isn't it? The whole "moving the goalpost" kinda thing? At first it's just about the wins. Now, because we lost a game we shouldn't have, it's about how they win? Sorry. Don't buy it. You have never been happy with Moos (Your continual regurgitation of how Moos isn't investing in Track specifically but other sports as well). You've been pretty cold concerning CML. To you, "the chickens have come home to roost" and you can't let this go by without sticking as many pins in this tire as possible. Nega-Nelly spouting "Told you so".
But to your original question, no. I don't know anyone that was in "denial" on this board, let along still in denial. I(we) just don't react to stuff prior to them happening. We wait for this season to start before we react. We wait for the first game to happen before we react. You're crystal ball might be in perfect working order (and if it is, obviously you are much better than all the rest of us) but I will speak only for myself to say, my crystal ball isn't worth a nickel so I'll continue to wait for games to be played, for the season to be played, before I shout from the rooftops that the sky is falling.

 

[CougEd]

Losing to PSU was a leadership problem, not a talent problem. WSU dominated most statistical categories and should have won this game going away.

But, when they got punched in the mouth, they did what WSU teams have been doing for seven years. Someone, and it needs to be a player, needs to take leadership and calm down the team when it goes through a tough time.

This is what happened. WSU dominated the first half, but did not put PSU away. WSU ran up and down the field and PSU could do nothing. But, they allowed PSU to hang around.

Second half starts and PSU comes out pumped up. They make plays. Instead of just shutting them down, which they could, they panicked. For some players, the moment was too big for them and they made mistakes. The players that the moment was not too big, saw what was happening with some of their teammates and tried to do too much. Now, you have everyone going their own direction and we saw the result.

1990...it may not be a "talent problem", but our talent on defense couldn't stop the run. They couldn't get off the blocks of a team that has 25 less scholies, and may end up dropping their football program.

What tells us that Destiny is a talent at this point? That is the concerning thing? They look great in the uni. I am sure they run great 40 times, bench a ton of weight. But what good does that do when they ram the ball down your throat?

 

[CougEd]

So a month ago, a "W" was the only statistic needed. CML needed to prove himself with wins. NOW, it's how he wins, it's by how much, it's by some other statistic(s)? Kind of a double standard, isn't it? The whole "moving the goalpost" kinda thing? At first it's just about the wins. Now, because we lost a game we shouldn't have, it's about how they win? Sorry. Don't buy it. You have never been happy with Moos (Your continual regurgitation of how Moos isn't investing in Track specifically but other sports as well). You've been pretty cold concerning CML. To you, "the chickens have come home to roost" and you can't let this go by without sticking as many pins in this tire as possible. Nega-Nelly spouting "Told you so".
But to your original question, no. I don't know anyone that was in "denial" on this board, let along still in denial. I(we) just don't react to stuff prior to them happening. We wait for this season to start before we react. We wait for the first game to happen before we react. You're crystal ball might be in perfect working order (and if it is, obviously you are much better than all the rest of us) but I will speak only for myself to say, my crystal ball isn't worth a nickel so I'll continue to wait for games to be played, for the season to be played, before I shout from the rooftops that the sky is falling.

There is denial when you blame a loss on weather. If weather is a problem for this offense, we are running the wrong offense. How about the truth. They lost to a far inferior team talent wise. It had nothing to do with the weather,but had to do with heart.

 

[wulffui]

1990...it may not be a "talent problem", but our talent on defense couldn't stop the run. They couldn't get off the blocks of a team that has 25 less scholies, and may end up dropping their football program.

What tells us that Destiny is a talent at this point? That is the concerning thing? They look great in the uni. I am sure they run great 40 times, bench a ton of weight. But what good does that do when they ram the ball down your throat?

Here's the thing- they shut down PSU in the first half, cold. There was no question who the more talented team was, and Vaeao looked plenty good.

Then, in the second half, the other team comes out and makes a minimal adjustment... and suddenly we're powerless to stop them? Were they different guys?

That big a disparity suggests a coaching issue more than a talent issue.

 

[wazzucougs96]

Someone suggested that PSU to WSU this year was comprable to WSU to Utah last year, and it made a ton of sense. Utah got up big early, rested on their laurels, and were unable to recover when the Cougar comeback began. That is basically what happened to WSU on Saturday.

 

[CougEd]

Here's the thing- they shut down PSU in the first half, cold. There was no question who the more talented team was, and Vaeao looked plenty good.

Then, in the second half, the other team comes out and makes a minimal adjustment... and suddenly we're powerless to stop them? Were they different guys?

That big a disparity suggests a coaching issue more than a talent issue.

We have had coaching issues or 11 years now.

 

[CougPatrol]

Someone suggested that PSU to WSU this year was comprable to WSU to Utah last year, and it made a ton of sense. Utah got up big early, rested on their laurels, and were unable to recover when the Cougar comeback began. That is basically what happened to WSU on Saturday.

That's an excellent analogy, as we had no business beating Utah last season.

 

[Coug1990]

1990...it may not be a "talent problem", but our talent on defense couldn't stop the run. They couldn't get off the blocks of a team that has 25 less scholies, and may end up dropping their football program.

What tells us that Destiny is a talent at this point? That is the concerning thing? They look great in the uni. I am sure they run great 40 times, bench a ton of weight. But what good does that do when they ram the ball down your throat?

This happened last season. The Cougars got pushed all around on the field and were physically manhandled playing against Nevada. Two weeks later, the Cougar were the more physical team playing Oregon, the team that was in the National Championship game and had several lineman drafted.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Honestly, Im not surprised at all with the talent on the roster. You've got a mishmash of youth and vets, prob all about the same talent level.

What I am surprised about is the lack of leadership and toughness.

I've debated CJ Mizell for years and Im not looking to drudge up old debates. However, we all know CJ would fight someone. His own coach, the other team, didn't matter. He wasn't afraid to put up his hands and hit back or even hit first. He was angry. WSU has no one like that on the roster now. They're all soft. The pussification of WSU football has arrived with the FOB building. Send them back to Bohler Gym until they stop peeing down their leg when they have to hit someone.

 

[Cougatron]

Honestly, Im not surprised at all with the talent on the roster. You've got a mishmash of youth and vets, prob all about the same talent level.

What I am surprised about is the lack of leadership and toughness.

I've debated CJ Mizell for years and Im not looking to drudge up old debates. However, we all know CJ would fight someone. His own coach, the other team, didn't matter. He wasn't afraid to put up his hands and hit back or even hit first. He was angry. WSU has no one like that on the roster now. They're all soft. The pussification of WSU football has arrived with the FOB building. Send them back to Bohler Gym until they stop peeing down their leg when they have to hit someone.

You bring up a good point. It's as if we don't have an edge to us. We need to have that chip on our shoulder edge where we have something to prove. Maybe that's why they didn't play well against Portland State. They thought they could just mail it in, but Portland State came out with something to prove.

 

[CougEd]

You bring up a good point. It's as if we don't have an edge to us. We need to have that chip on our shoulder edge where we have something to prove. Maybe that's why they didn't play well against Portland State. They thought they could just mail it in, but Portland State came out with something to prove.

Truth be told, that is the most depressing thing about it. WSU hasn't had a winning season since 2003. That is 11 seasons. They were 3-9 last year, and if they don't think they have something to prove, then clearly they might not get it.

 

[BiggsCoug]

You bring up a good point. It's as if we don't have an edge to us. We need to have that chip on our shoulder edge where we have something to prove. Maybe that's why they didn't play well against Portland State. They thought they could just mail it in, but Portland State came out with something to prove.

PSU wanted it more. They tried harder, fought harder, coached better, top to bottom they wanted to win more than WSU. WSU, and its wealth of 11 bowl games in 100 years.

Piss f*cking poor.

 

[CougPatrol]

I've never understood the logic behind the "if Leach can't win here, who can," comments.

Oregon State was rebuilt from the ashes. Ole Miss and Mississippi St were seemingly never going to compete in the SEC. Duke was the laughing stock of the ACC for years. Northwestern was the laughing stock of the entire NCAA, and Minnesota wasn't far behind. Baylor and TCU were minions for decades.

Power 5 conference jobs are tough to come by. There's another Urban Meyer, Chip Kelly, Art Briles, Jerry Kill, etc. waiting for their shot. We're due to catch a break.

 

[Cougatron]

I've never understood the logic behind the "if Leach can't win here, who can," comments.

Oregon State was rebuilt from the ashes. Ole Miss and Mississippi St were seemingly never going to compete in the SEC. Duke was the laughing stock of the ACC for years. Northwestern was the laughing stock of the entire NCAA, and Minnesota wasn't far behind. Baylor and TCU were minions for decades.

Power 5 conference jobs are tough to come by. There's another Urban Meyer, Chip Kelly, Art Briles, Jerry Kill, etc. waiting for their shot. We're due to catch a break.

WSU is not a destination job for anybody, and people need to wake up to that reality.

1. It's the remote outpost in all the Power 5
2. It's one of the hardest places to recruit to.
3. The competition is fierce. Oregon, Stanford, UW, Cal in the north, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State in the south.
4. Our fan base won't show up for games / leave at halftime (and don't give me that bs excuse we'll show up if we win.) That's our logo on the field. That's our house. That's our fellow students playing. That should be enough for the students to support them, but they don't. Doesn't matter if it's Portland State or Alabama. Doesn't matter if it's raining or snowing... people want the players to play through that, but won't hold themselves to that same standard. Martin has no home field advantage whatsoever. It's called a home field advantage because of the advantage the fans bring by cheering for the team. We don't have that.
5. The only reason we got Leach was because of money that we can pay now, and after watching him struggle up here who the hell would want to take this dead end job.

As all the area farmers know...you reap what you sow.

We didn't sow a damn thing. The Pac-12 gave us a check which we used to buy facilities and a coach, but the field of cougar football was bad due to 10 years of neglect and terrible support, and a building and big name coach wasn't going to fix that. We have to come to the reality to fix our own culture first if we want to start winning games.

The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.

Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.

Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

Now reading those statements which one are we?
We're losers. Our fans acts like losers. Our program acts like losers.

No coach can change that. We have to change that as a culture, and until we do...expect losing. Doesn't matter who it is. They will struggle because our culture is quicksand.

 

[chinookpirate]

And what if we struggle against Rutgers, regardless of winning or losing? It seems like you've outlined an extreme situation on both sides. But what if we get our act together against Rutgers and just barely win? What if we barely lose?

If we lose to Rutgers we are still losers and will remain so until we win.

winning games is the primary component to a winning season. stringing together winning seasons is what determines a winning program. it's not that hard. Stop trying to overthink this.

 

[Coug95man2]

There is denial when you blame a loss on weather. If weather is a problem for this offense, we are running the wrong offense. How about the truth. They lost to a far inferior team talent wise. It had nothing to do with the weather,but had to do with heart.

A hand full of people have used that. I don't know that, that is denial but just a plain excuse. You'll have to explain in detail how you'd define that as denial rather than just a plain ol excuse. Because if they were inferior, what exactly are we (they, he, whomever) in denial about?

 

[BiggsCoug]

WSU is not a destination job for anybody, and people need to wake up to that reality.

1. It's the remote outpost in all the Power 5
2. It's one of the hardest places to recruit to.
3. The competition is fierce. Oregon, Stanford, UW, Cal in the north, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State in the south.
4. Our fan base won't show up for games / leave at halftime (and don't give me that bs excuse we'll show up if we win.) That's our logo on the field. That's our house. That's our fellow students playing. That should be enough for the students to support them, but they don't. Doesn't matter if it's Portland State or Alabama. Doesn't matter if it's raining or snowing... people want the players to play through that, but won't hold themselves to that same standard. Martin has no home field advantage whatsoever. It's called a home field advantage because of the advantage the fans bring by cheering for the team. We don't have that.
5. The only reason we got Leach was because of money that we can pay now, and after watching him struggle up here who the hell would want to take this dead end job.

As all the area farmers know...you reap what you sow.

We didn't sow a damn thing. The Pac-12 gave us a check which we used to buy facilities and a coach, but the field of cougar football was bad due to 10 years of neglect and terrible support, and a building and big name coach wasn't going to fix that. We have to come to the reality to fix our own culture first if we want to start winning games.

The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.

Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.

Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

Now reading those statements which one are we?
We're losers. Our fans acts like losers. Our program acts like losers.

No coach can change that. We have to change that as a culture, and until we do...expect losing. Doesn't matter who it is. They will struggle because our culture is quicksand.

WSU is a destination job. You couldn't be more wrong. There are 2.5 million reasons that support my belief.

The head coaching job at WSU creates generational wealth whoever takes the job.

 

[Cougsocal]

Honestly, Im not surprised at all with the talent on the roster. You've got a mishmash of youth and vets, prob all about the same talent level.

What I am surprised about is the lack of leadership and toughness.

I've debated CJ Mizell for years and Im not looking to drudge up old debates. However, we all know CJ would fight someone. His own coach, the other team, didn't matter. He wasn't afraid to put up his hands and hit back or even hit first. He was angry. WSU has no one like that on the roster now. They're all soft. The pussification of WSU football has arrived with the FOB building. Send them back to Bohler Gym until they stop peeing down their leg when they have to hit someone.

Interesting. Wulff faced the same situation against an equally bad Montana State team, but CJ made the plays to turn a loss into a win. We didn't have a CJ calibre player out there against PSU.

There is soft and then there is soft. How soft do you have to be to get run over literally by a bad Big Sky team? I don't think it is purely a talent issue, clearly this is not a tough team, but a super soft p-12 calibre team, beats a Big Sky bottom feeder, don't they?

After the "we got run over by a moped," game in 1982, the Cougs came back the next week and beat the #5 team in the country. Rutgers will be a test not only of our true talent level, and our metal . A weakness in either or both and we are screwed.

 

[wazzucougs96]

WSU is not a destination job for anybody, and people need to wake up to that reality.

1. It's the remote outpost in all the Power 5
2. It's one of the hardest places to recruit to.
3. The competition is fierce. Oregon, Stanford, UW, Cal in the north, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State in the south.
4. Our fan base won't show up for games / leave at halftime (and don't give me that bs excuse we'll show up if we win.) That's our logo on the field. That's our house. That's our fellow students playing. That should be enough for the students to support them, but they don't. Doesn't matter if it's Portland State or Alabama. Doesn't matter if it's raining or snowing... people want the players to play through that, but won't hold themselves to that same standard. Martin has no home field advantage whatsoever. It's called a home field advantage because of the advantage the fans bring by cheering for the team. We don't have that.
5. The only reason we got Leach was because of money that we can pay now, and after watching him struggle up here who the hell would want to take this dead end job.

As all the area farmers know...you reap what you sow.

We didn't sow a damn thing. The Pac-12 gave us a check which we used to buy facilities and a coach, but the field of cougar football was bad due to 10 years of neglect and terrible support, and a building and big name coach wasn't going to fix that. We have to come to the reality to fix our own culture first if we want to start winning games.

The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.

Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.

Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

Now reading those statements which one are we?
We're losers. Our fans acts like losers. Our program acts like losers.

No coach can change that. We have to change that as a culture, and until we do...expect losing. Doesn't matter who it is. They will struggle because our culture is quicksand.

1) $2.5MM makes it a destination job for many coaches outside that top tier of jobs.

2) It doesn't have to be a destination job to land the next hot coaching prospect.

The idea that we will never get anyone better than Leach is moronic, because Leach is basically Doba at this point.

 

[MRICoug]

I have said before, and I will say again, players need to first respect Martin and buy into the fact that an opposing team has no business coming into our house and taking our stuff. Maybe they need to earn this right to wear the logo all over again? I am not sure the answer, but there needs to be a focus on defensing your home turf from any and all comers.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Interesting. Wulff faced the same situation against an equally bad Montana State team, but CJ made the plays to turn a loss into a win. We didn't have a CJ calibre player out there against PSU.

There is soft and then there is soft. How soft do you have to be to get run over literally by a bad Big Sky team? I don't think it is purely a talent issue, clearly this is not a tough team, but a super soft p-12 calibre team, beats a Big Sky bottom feeder, don't they?

After the "we got run over by a moped," game in 1982, the Cougs came back the next week and beat the #5 team in the country. Rutgers will be a test not only of our true talent level, and our metal . A weakness in either or both and we are screwed.

They are pretty soft. Yes, I believe a pretty soft PAC 12 team with some costly turnovers can lose to a bad Big Sky team. Especially if that Big Sky team is playing inspired football and just wants it more.

Leach has to coach "want to" this week. Shoot, every week. Every practice needs to start and end with some kind of drill that pits kids against each other and forces them to compete and fight. To show everyone on the team how tough they are. If it were my program, I'd have the coaches square off too. Show me who is gonna fight to be on my staff.

 

[chinookpirate]

I have said before, and I will say again, players need to first respect Martin and buy into the fact that an opposing team has no business coming into our house and taking our stuff. Maybe they need to earn this right to wear the logo all over again? I am not sure the answer, but there needs to be a focus on defensing your home turf from any and all comers.

maybe we should STOP having the players visualizing 'defending home' before playing games in Martin. It could be the #1 problem.

 

[StyleKnight]

If you can gather yourselfs fly across country and beat a team that you lost to at home last year without Conor Halliday and dumbed down offense for Falk you will have more than righted the ship. You know you are underdogs even with our entire secondary in jail correct?

 

[chinookpirate]

Yes.

 

[425cougfan]

They are pretty soft. Yes, I believe a pretty soft PAC 12 team with some costly turnovers can lose to a bad Big Sky team. Especially if that Big Sky team is playing inspired football and just wants it more.

Leach has to coach "want to" this week. Shoot, every week. Every practice needs to start and end with some kind of drill that pits kids against each other and forces them to compete and fight. To show everyone on the team how tough they are. If it were my program, I'd have the coaches square off too. Show me who is gonna fight to be on my staff.

At least in past years -- and I'd have to think this one, too -- the staff did a lot of "bull in the ring" that had players, including skill players, of roughly equal size go at each other and try to shove the other guy out of the ring. Pretty sure that, among other things, fed into the "Leach is a meanie" narrative among some in the media who don't get it.

 

[achilles#]

I think part of your problem is some of the shine has come off the air raid offense.

Baylor has been pretty unstoppable running this, but most of the other recent teams that put up big numbers with it, no longer are, and/or are sort of transitioning away from it and trying different spins... West Virginia, Oklahoma State, even A&M in a way.

You see some of them like A&M use Manziel mobile qb's inserted into an air raid system (and they have a freshman who may be a better runner than Manziel now - Kyler Murray).

Oklahoma has kind of sucked with the Air Raid for a long time.

Just my impression, I haven't studied the issue in depth. But you have a coach who is totally married to the thing. And some of the innovations Leach/Mummy made have been incorporated into spread offenses as well.

Look the kind of athletes that stop spread offenses are also ideal for stopping the air raid. It's not like playing Alabama, Stanford, or Wisconsin with a gigantic talented offensive line that can run block and sends one or two guys to the NFL ever year, along with the latest stud tailback.

I just don't think there is a personnel issue for a defense playing against an air raid as opposed to a spread offense. Wisconsin is a totally different kettle of fish, Washington State not so much.

Anyway I am from a long way off in SEC country. I'm a Leach fan (though he has made some dumb gameday decisions the past few years), but my impression is the Air Raid may have been "figured" out.

(Wanted to add I fear systems with running qb's. My team, South Carolina, has played a number of teams that use Air Raid systems the past few years. They really don't do too well, at least as opposed to teams with running qb's. And I'd really rather play Alabama than Auburn as far as what their offense will do to our defense.)

I think it is possible for it to incorporate some things like Holgorsen has done at times at West Virginia. My belief is that future versions of it will resemble a spread and depend on the qb to be a runner. At that point why differentiate between a spread and air raid though?

Leach seems like he has taken some baby steps in this direction, but he won't bite the bullet. Plus he doesn't seem to have had qb's with enough athleticism to go that route anyway (Tuel was more athletic than Halliday but that isn't saying much). No idea about Falk at this point I've only seen him play about two games.

 

[CougEd]

WSU is not a destination job for anybody, and people need to wake up to that reality.

1. It's the remote outpost in all the Power 5
2. It's one of the hardest places to recruit to.
3. The competition is fierce. Oregon, Stanford, UW, Cal in the north, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State in the south.
4. Our fan base won't show up for games / leave at halftime (and don't give me that bs excuse we'll show up if we win.) That's our logo on the field. That's our house. That's our fellow students playing. That should be enough for the students to support them, but they don't. Doesn't matter if it's Portland State or Alabama. Doesn't matter if it's raining or snowing... people want the players to play through that, but won't hold themselves to that same standard. Martin has no home field advantage whatsoever. It's called a home field advantage because of the advantage the fans bring by cheering for the team. We don't have that.
5. The only reason we got Leach was because of money that we can pay now, and after watching him struggle up here who the hell would want to take this dead end job.

As all the area farmers know...you reap what you sow.

We didn't sow a damn thing. The Pac-12 gave us a check which we used to buy facilities and a coach, but the field of cougar football was bad due to 10 years of neglect and terrible support, and a building and big name coach wasn't going to fix that. We have to come to the reality to fix our own culture first if we want to start winning games.

The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.

Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.

Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

Now reading those statements which one are we?
We're losers. Our fans acts like losers. Our program acts like losers.

No coach can change that. We have to change that as a culture, and until we do...expect losing. Doesn't matter who it is. They will struggle because our culture is quicksand.

While I 100% agree with your assessment, where was this support and rage earlier?
The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.
Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.
Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

WSU is not a destination job for anybody, and people need to wake up to that reality.

1. It's the remote outpost in all the Power 5
2. It's one of the hardest places to recruit to.
3. The competition is fierce. Oregon, Stanford, UW, Cal in the north, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State in the south.
4. Our fan base won't show up for games / leave at halftime (and don't give me that bs excuse we'll show up if we win.) That's our logo on the field. That's our house. That's our fellow students playing. That should be enough for the students to support them, but they don't. Doesn't matter if it's Portland State or Alabama. Doesn't matter if it's raining or snowing... people want the players to play through that, but won't hold themselves to that same standard. Martin has no home field advantage whatsoever. It's called a home field advantage because of the advantage the fans bring by cheering for the team. We don't have that.
5. The only reason we got Leach was because of money that we can pay now, and after watching him struggle up here who the hell would want to take this dead end job.

As all the area farmers know...you reap what you sow.

We didn't sow a damn thing. The Pac-12 gave us a check which we used to buy facilities and a coach, but the field of cougar football was bad due to 10 years of neglect and terrible support, and a building and big name coach wasn't going to fix that. We have to come to the reality to fix our own culture first if we want to start winning games.

The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.

Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.

Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

Now reading those statements which one are we?
We're losers. Our fans acts like losers. Our program acts like losers.

No coach can change that. We have to change that as a culture, and until we do...expect losing. Doesn't matter who it is. They will struggle because our culture is quicksand.

Tron while I agree with your impassioned speech, I find it so hypocritical it is hard for me to take it serious. Especially the following quote calling out the fans-"The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers."

That is exactly what you did. That is exactly what you stood by and watched on this board.

 

[Cougatron]

That is exactly what you did. That is exactly what you stood by and watched on this board.

No Ed it's not. I still will be doing what I've always done, but I am sick and tired of the shitty students acting like shitty students. I do my part. They aren't doing theirs, and their part is important.

You said earlier...no heart...people said no energy... everybody knows that the heart and energy of EVERY SINGLE home crowd is the student section. **** these students. **** them.

 

[Coug95man2]

No Ed it's not. I still will be doing what I've always done, but I am sick and tired of the shitty students acting like shitty students. I do my part. They aren't doing theirs, and their part is important.

You said earlier...no heart...people said no energy... everybody knows that the heart and energy of EVERY SINGLE home crowd is the student section. **** these students. **** them.

Come on, Tron. WSU also has the largest Student section in the PAC. Think about this. We give students 50 yard line seats… Why in the world would we do this? Because we can't SELL them. Don't blame this on students. There were a bunch that showed up, there were a bunch that left at half. But the foundational issue isn't them.

 

[Cougsocal]

WSU is not a destination job for anybody, and people need to wake up to that reality.

1. It's the remote outpost in all the Power 5
2. It's one of the hardest places to recruit to.
3. The competition is fierce. Oregon, Stanford, UW, Cal in the north, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State in the south.
4. Our fan base won't show up for games / leave at halftime (and don't give me that bs excuse we'll show up if we win.) That's our logo on the field. That's our house. That's our fellow students playing. That should be enough for the students to support them, but they don't. Doesn't matter if it's Portland State or Alabama. Doesn't matter if it's raining or snowing... people want the players to play through that, but won't hold themselves to that same standard. Martin has no home field advantage whatsoever. It's called a home field advantage because of the advantage the fans bring by cheering for the team. We don't have that.
5. The only reason we got Leach was because of money that we can pay now, and after watching him struggle up here who the hell would want to take this dead end job.

As all the area farmers know...you reap what you sow.

We didn't sow a damn thing. The Pac-12 gave us a check which we used to buy facilities and a coach, but the field of cougar football was bad due to 10 years of neglect and terrible support, and a building and big name coach wasn't going to fix that. We have to come to the reality to fix our own culture first if we want to start winning games.

The culture right now is...I'll wait for you to bring me something before I care, and yet I'll cry and complain when you don't. That's WSU. And that's the attitude of losers.

Losers wait for success to be brought to them and sit around wondering why it hasn't happened yet and blame the world for not bringing it.

Winners go out and take success. They relish the opportunity to go out and show people what they are made of, and they don't care about the problem at hand big or small. They fight to the end, and they never give up.

Now reading those statements which one are we?
We're losers. Our fans acts like losers. Our program acts like losers.

No coach can change that. We have to change that as a culture, and until we do...expect losing. Doesn't matter who it is. They will struggle because our culture is quicksand.

Come on Tron. Yeah apathy and empty stands doesn't shelp. With the exception of 1994 (5 true sellouts in 6 games), that is the battle we face at WSU every year. However, Price was able to recruit 4 Rose Bowl calibre/contender teams despite it. Walden recruited 1, possible 2, but for the Rypien affair. It can be done. Is it easy, hell no. We recruit and will always, from the P-12 leftovers. But there is a lot of talent in that leftover pool (i.e. Boise State). Some have problems, some are overlooked, some have hearts bigger than their bodies. You need to sift that talent from chaff to be successful. The idea that you throw 150 million at the program, and all of a sudden the 5 star kids will heading to Pullman was never realistic. At best you hope that it can help make up the minds of a couple kids. USC won national championships under Carroll with the worst stadium, in the worst area, with the worst facilities in the conference. Kiffin demanded major up grades and got them. Is USC any better now?

For all the money Oregon has spent, and all the games they have won over the last decade, their recruiting has consistently been rated only #4 in the conference, per Rivals. What they do much better than us, frankly better than anyone, is find the right players for their systems. That is why they are national contenders without top notch recruiting.

Imagine if Mike Price, instead of recruiting Jason Gesser, went after and got Jeremy Stevens, where would we/he have been. These recruiting decisions are critical for programs like WSU. At our level we don't evaluate between good and better, but good and not good enough. Leach's problems lie in the fact that he has been unable to sift through the chaff well enough to find enough difference makers.

This failing has nothing to do with $$$, location and attendance, but everything to do with proper management of a long struggling program.

Now if we go out and kick Rutger, Wyos and Cal's arse, Leach will have proven me flat wrong in this area. I will happily stand corrected. Nothing would please me more than to say we are a talented football team.

 

[BiggsCoug]

Come on Tron. Yeah apathy and empty stands doesn't shelp. With the exception of 1994 (5 true sellouts in 6 games), that is the battle we face at WSU every year. However, Price was able to recruit 4 Rose Bowl calibre/contender teams despite it. Walden recruited 1, possible 2, but for the Rypien affair. It can be done. Is it easy, hell no. We recruit and will always, from the P-12 leftovers. But there is a lot of talent in that leftover pool (i.e. Boise State). Some have problems, some are overlooked, some have hearts bigger than their bodies. You need to sift that talent from chaff to be successful. The idea that you throw 150 million at the program, and all of a sudden the 5 star kids will heading to Pullman was never realistic. At best you hope that it can help make up the minds of a couple kids. USC won national championships under Carroll with the worst stadium, in the worst area, with the worst facilities in the conference. Kiffin demanded major up grades and got them. Is USC any better now?

For all the money Oregon has spent, and all the games they have won over the last decade, their recruiting has consistently been rated only #4 in the conference, per Rivals. What they do much better than us, frankly better than anyone, is find the right players for their systems. That is why they are national contenders without top notch recruiting.

Imagine if Mike Price, instead of recruiting Jason Gesser, went after and got Jeremy Stevens, where would we/he have been. These recruiting decisions are critical for programs like WSU. At our level we don't evaluate between good and better, but good and not good enough. Leach's problems lie in the fact that he has been unable to sift through the chaff well enough to find enough difference makers.

This failing has nothing to do with $$$, location and attendance, but everything to do with proper management of a long struggling program.

Now if we go out and kick Rutger, Wyos and Cal's arse, Leach will have proven me flat wrong in this area. I will happily stand corrected. Nothing would please me more than to say we are a talented football team.

The problem with recruiting isn't the talent. I think you can get good talent to WSU, Price proved that you can take that talent to the Rose Bowl.

The problem is getting the kids to stay. The talent WSU gets needs more cooking. SC may get a guy that is a 5 star kid and is ready from day 1 to go. WSU doesn't get that guy. WSU gets a kid that needs to be coached up and built up over YEARS. Get a kid into Leach's offense for 4 years and see what happens. Get some defensive players into the same scheme for 4 years and see what happens. Get everyone into a good strength program and see what happens.

The revolving door hurts WSU. You're always playing a mishmash of youth and vets. You'll never be able to really run advanced schemes because of the youth. That limits what your vets can do. You'll never really be able to muscle a team because you'll have too many youthful players that just don't have the time in the weight room yet.

I'd be willing to bet that WSU probably needs to hit at 70% retention to really make it go. 14 out of 20 high school players have to make it 4 or 5 years.

Also, how WSU isn't a destination on the West Coast for JC players is beyond me. WSU should have a reputation of plug and play for JC kids going back 30 years now. They don't.

 

[MRICoug]

I think part of your problem is some of the shine has come off the air raid offense.

Baylor has been pretty unstoppable running this, but most of the other recent teams that put up big numbers with it, no longer are, and/or are sort of transitioning away from it and trying different spins... West Virginia, Oklahoma State, even A&M in a way.

You see some of them like A&M use Manziel mobile qb's inserted into an air raid system (and they have a freshman who may be a better runner than Manziel now - Kyler Murray).

Oklahoma has kind of sucked with the Air Raid for a long time.

Just my impression, I haven't studied the issue in depth. But you have a coach who is totally married to the thing. And some of the innovations Leach/Mummy made have been incorporated into spread offenses as well.

Look the kind of athletes that stop spread offenses are also ideal for stopping the air raid. It's not like playing Alabama, Stanford, or Wisconsin with a gigantic talented offensive line that can run block and sends one or two guys to the NFL ever year, along with the latest stud tailback.

I just don't think there is a personnel issue for a defense playing against an air raid as opposed to a spread offense. Wisconsin is a totally different kettle of fish, Washington State not so much.

Anyway I am from a long way off in SEC country. I'm a Leach fan (though he has made some dumb gameday decisions the past few years), but my impression is the Air Raid may have been "figured" out.

(Wanted to add I fear systems with running qb's. My team, South Carolina, has played a number of teams that use Air Raid systems the past few years. They really don't do too well, at least as opposed to teams with running qb's. And I'd really rather play Alabama than Auburn as far as what their offense will do to our defense.)

I think it is possible for it to incorporate some things like Holgorsen has done at times at West Virginia. My belief is that future versions of it will resemble a spread and depend on the qb to be a runner. At that point why differentiate between a spread and air raid though?

Leach seems like he has taken some baby steps in this direction, but he won't bite the bullet. Plus he doesn't seem to have had qb's with enough athleticism to go that route anyway (Tuel was more athletic than Halliday but that isn't saying much). No idea about Falk at this point I've only seen him play about two games.

Oklahoma stopped using it and has been mediocre since, and is putting it back in. Half the Big12 is currently using some form of it. The bigger problem I see is that there has been a lack of innovation in the Leach version for a while. He will fiddle with stuff, but generally looks at things the same way he did at Valdosta State of KY.

 

[CougEd]

No Ed it's not. I still will be doing what I've always done, but I am sick and tired of the shitty students acting like shitty students. I do my part. They aren't doing theirs, and their part is important.

You said earlier...no heart...people said no energy... everybody knows that the heart and energy of EVERY SINGLE home crowd is the student section. **** these students. **** them.

Crappy students, crappy fans. On one hand you say you won't support a "bad" product, now you are pissed because students won't?

 

[Cougatron]

Come on, Tron. WSU also has the largest Student section in the PAC. Think about this. We give students 50 yard line seats… Why in the world would we do this? Because we can't SELL them. Don't blame this on students. There were a bunch that showed up, there were a bunch that left at half. But the foundational issue isn't them.

Because they are the largest and have the attitude they do is all the more reason why the foundation problem is with them

 

[Coug95man2]

Because they are the largest and have the attitude they do is all the more reason why the foundation problem is with them

Don't misinterpret me. They aren't the largest population, Tron. They are the smallest PAC12 student population, as I recall. But the smallest population has to fill the most seats in the PAC. And their attitude is just a reflection of what they see across the field.

 

[CougEd]

The problem with recruiting isn't the talent. I think you can get good talent to WSU, Price proved that you can take that talent to the Rose Bowl.

The problem is getting the kids to stay. The talent WSU gets needs more cooking. SC may get a guy that is a 5 star kid and is ready from day 1 to go. WSU doesn't get that guy. WSU gets a kid that needs to be coached up and built up over YEARS. Get a kid into Leach's offense for 4 years and see what happens. Get some defensive players into the same scheme for 4 years and see what happens. Get everyone into a good strength program and see what happens.

The revolving door hurts WSU. You're always playing a mishmash of youth and vets. You'll never be able to really run advanced schemes because of the youth. That limits what your vets can do. You'll never really be able to muscle a team because you'll have too many youthful players that just don't have the time in the weight room yet.

I'd be willing to bet that WSU probably needs to hit at 70% retention to really make it go. 14 out of 20 high school players have to make it 4 or 5 years.

Also, how WSU isn't a destination on the West Coast for JC players is beyond me. WSU should have a reputation of plug and play for JC kids going back 30 years now. They don't.

I was thinking about this the other day. It is not just about kids who has the right number of stars, and the right offers from the right schools, but some kids who have the right make up. I think in terms of size, numbers, speed Leach's kids probably have the right numbers in many respects.

But I haven't seen yet, and yet is the operative word, Billy Newman, Leon Bender, Chad eaton and even CJ Mizel as Biggs pointed out. Where is Chris Jackson? We need a player on DEFENSE that will stand up and make a play. We need a defensive player like Leon who spoke his mind and called UCLA what they were at the time...soft.

Honestly, as much as Leon did not like the weather in Pullman, do you think he would ever let his players not play with intensity because it was cold and rainy?

I am not sure in the 3-3-5 it allows for that defensive player to stand out. Who is going stand out in this defense? Who is that edge rusher that is going to put heat on the passer? Who is going to stuff the run?

I think Leach envisioned the 3-4 as his savior defense because of what the Steelers and teams like that did with the defense. Plus, I am sure for his offense the ability to drop 8 into coverage gives his offense the most difficult of time. But we don't blitz from every different angle, we do sell out to stop the run. Our game plan Saturday seemed to be a mirror image of what Breske ran against Rutgers.

Because they are the largest and have the attitude they do is all the more reason why the foundation problem is with them

There is a solution..BTW. You know, back in the horse and buggy days when I watched Walden led teams, the students had the north side of the stadium, from end line to end line except the last 10 rows and that was paid admission.

The solution? Well how many students do you think is necessary to show their section 70% capacity? Someone sponsor a year tuition waiver to one lucky entrant, and that drawing happens in the 8 minute make of the fourth quarter. You have to be present to win!