Coaching vs. Talent?

[PeteTheChop]

Heard a long discussion on ESPN radio over the weekend about the significance of talent and coaching in major college football.

One of the hosts was saying he has talked to a number of Division I head coaches who've told him it's much more about the "Jimmy's and Joe's" than the X's and O's. In other words, successful recruiting is the foundation of building and maintaining a winning program.

To that way of thinking, Mike Leach seems to have recruited very well judging from WSU's 13-5 conference record over the past two seasons and three bowl trips since 2013.

By all accounts, the football facilities have improved greatly in Pullman since Leach arrived. So was it lack of recruiting success that derailed his predecessors? Would Paul Wulff and Bill Doba have won a bunch more ballgames and been in the hunt for conference titles if they managed to bring in the horses like CML?

Hopefully Leach retires in the Palouse, but if not, is a Grade A recruiter what WSU needs to target for the next coach?

 

[Flatlandcoug]

It's really a combination of both. There is a certain baseline of talent that you have to have in order to be competitive at the Pac-12 level. Leach has done better than Wulff in that regard. What's interesting is that our actual "ranking" according to rivals, Leach isn't tearing up the world. We've normally been ranked below #50 by Rivals under Leach. That's far better than the incredibly low ratings that we had under Wulff.

Regardless, WSU still consistently rates below the teams that we have beaten in the past two years, so it's not just about the Jimmy and Joes regardless of what you read. Going back to my first couple sentences, our struggles in the first three years under Leach tells you that while you can win with "lesser" talent, you have to have a certain level of ability to pull off those wins.

So, WSU needs to find that guy who can spot the guys who will grow into the players he needs and has the ability to get them to play at the highest level possible but also be innovative enough to outwit his competition.

 

[CougPatrol]

I think analysts and message board fans fail to connect the two points. You obviously need to recruit talented players, and coaching needs be fundamentally sound; but in my opinion, the most overlooked data point when judging coaches is how effective they are at identifying and recruiting kids that fit THEIR systems.

This is where Leach excels. He has his own evaluation criteria for QBs, OL, WRs, DBs, and RBs. Every year, time and time again, there are dozens of programs who struggle despite having highly regarded recruiting classes. In our league, ASU and UCLA are good examples. Their rosters are littered with well regarded players, but their systems have no structure.

Leach and the air raid may have a ceiling in terms of knocking off elite teams, but we also have a huge advantage over *many* programs we face, in that we recruit, practice, and play to our unique and structured system. If you line up against Leach without a clear identity as far as what you want to do, we have a great chance of winning.

That's the common link between Portland State, Eastern WA, Boise, Colorado, UW, etc. Those programs, even the FCS schools, had solid systems that they weren't going to deviate from.

 

[Coug90]

None of it matters if you run a gimmicky offense though

 

[SaveFerris]

I think analysts and message board fans fail to connect the two points. You obviously need to recruit talented players, and coaching needs be fundamentally sound; but in my opinion, the most overlooked data point when judging coaches is how effective they are at identifying and recruiting kids that fit THEIR systems.

This is where Leach excels. He has his own evaluation criteria for QBs, OL, WRs, DBs, and RBs. Every year, time and time again, there are dozens of programs who struggle despite having highly regarded recruiting classes. In our league, ASU and UCLA are good examples. Their rosters are littered with well regarded players, but their systems have no structure.

Leach and the air raid may have a ceiling in terms of knocking off elite teams, but we also have a huge advantage over *many* programs we face, in that we recruit, practice, and play to our unique and structured system. If you line up against Leach without a clear identity as far as what you want to do, we have a great chance of winning.

That's the common link between Portland State, Eastern WA, Boise, Colorado, UW, etc. Those programs, even the FCS schools, had solid systems that they weren't going to deviate from.

Practice is part of the 'coaching' element but I also don't think you can overlook the importance of all aspects of preparation. We also are getting to the point where there are enough players who can take it upon themselves to lead that preparation. Something crucial with present rules on the amount of time for official practices.

 

[Cougatron]

I've thought a little bit about the next step coach, and I expect it to be a similar situation with Belloti to Chip Kelly.

In a lot of ways Leach is kind of like our Bellotti. Now Bellotti did take over a team that was better than most coming off Brooks taking them to the Rose Bowl, but Brooks was not a consistent coach.

Leach is pretty consistent. Although we had to go through the growing pains we've had two 8 win regular seasons. I see us being a decent team for a while and getting a few 10 win seasons probably with a little bit of down time in a tough year, but Leach will get us to where we are a pretty good program. Not an elite program, but a program that can compete.

We still have a ways to go to build some things up. Probably another 3 years and another solid "this might be the year" run with a Senior QB. It might be Hilinski, it might be Neville. Who knows. Leach will find somebody. We'll know it, and we'll watch them grow as we've watched Falk and we will have another great run probably going higher.

The next coach will be the Elite pick I think. With a program with a reputation as a good program it will be an attractive job for people to come. They know we have players. It will probably be someone from an Air Raid esque tree. A Kevin Sumlin maybe when things go another direction at Texas A&M. It could be Someone from the Baylor tree, or Someone from the Holgerson tree. Some up and comer will get a shot in Pullman when Leach is done, and they will hopefully take us to the next level.

When Leach came here WSU was not a desirable job for a well known coach/respected coach. It was a step up job, a project in the gutter after Wulff. Wulff's problem was he wasn't ready to compete in the Pac-12. He had no reputation. We had been bad for a while, and we were perceived as a doormat. He reinforced that 10000%.

Leach has made us a wild team. A fun offense to play in, a team that likes to steal wins from name program, and a program on the rise. Our identity is growing, and the next coach will be the one to add the exclamation point, but you don't get exclamation point coaches to come to places like WSU. As much as I love the place it's remote, out of the way, a difficult to build something at. Hence the 9 bowls in 100 years before Leach came here. Now he's taken us to 3.

Think about that. In our history Leach accounts for 25% of our bowl history. Price is 41 2/3% Walden, Ericson, Holinberry, Doba each with 81/3%

That's how little consistent success we've had in 100 years. Leach who has been here only 5 years is our 2nd most Bowl berths coach in 100 years.

So right now we are in good hands. We need to develop more consistency, more depth, and another solid run to the rose bowl. Leach will get us there, but the coach after him will be the one who will be given the foundation to a program that really could be something special in the Pac-12 north. Yes Oregon, Stanford, UW will be good, but a new contender will be joining.

 

[PeteTheChop]

When Leach came here WSU was not a desirable job for a well known coach/respected coach. It was a step up job, a project in the gutter after Wulff. Wulff's problem was he wasn't ready to compete in the Pac-12. He had no reputation. We had been bad for a while, and we were perceived as a doormat. He reinforced that 10000%.

Coach Walden told a friend of mine before the 2011 season that Coach Wulff would have the Cougs among the top 3-4 teams in the Pac-12 within a two-year window, but I guess it's difficult for an AD to stand pat when someone like Mike Leach is available.

Bottom line, CML was a terrific hire by Bill Moos.

 

[brettcraycraft51]

Coach Walden told a friend of mine before the 2011 season that Coach Wulff would have the Cougs among the top 3-4 teams in the Pac-12 within a two-year window, but I guess it's difficult for an AD to stand pat when someone like Mike Leach is available.

Bottom line, CML was a terrific hire by Bill Moos.

oh lord...

 

[dgibbons]

Heard a long discussion on ESPN radio over the weekend about the significance of talent and coaching in major college football.

One of the hosts was saying he has talked to a number of Division I head coaches who've told him it's much more about the "Jimmy's and Joe's" than the X's and O's. In other words, successful recruiting is the foundation of building and maintaining a winning program.

To that way of thinking, Mike Leach seems to have recruited very well judging from WSU's 13-5 conference record over the past two seasons and three bowl trips since 2013.

By all accounts, the football facilities have improved greatly in Pullman since Leach arrived. So was it lack of recruiting success that derailed his predecessors? Would Paul Wulff and Bill Doba have won a bunch more ballgames and been in the hunt for conference titles if they managed to bring in the horses like CML?

Hopefully Leach retires in the Palouse, but if not, is a Grade A recruiter what WSU needs to target for the next coach?

Wulff could not recruit and could not coach. Doba could coach but not recruit.

At WSU we need someone that runs a system and gets the most out of the talent we do get to Pullman. For both football and basketball. Obviously the coach must be able to recruit. But we're not going to make it on talent alone (Kiffin at SC, Sarkisian, Ed O during his Ole Miss days).

 

[dgibbons]

Coach Walden told a friend of mine before the 2011 season that Coach Wulff would have the Cougs among the top 3-4 teams in the Pac-12 within a two-year window, but I guess it's difficult for an AD to stand pat when someone like Mike Leach is available.

Bottom line, CML was a terrific hire by Bill Moos.

Of course he did. Walden predicted that Florida would beat Ohio State back in 2006. Football genius. Just ignore his W-L record.

 

[Coug90]

I've thought a little bit about the next step coach, and I expect it to be a similar situation with Belloti to Chip Kelly.

In a lot of ways Leach is kind of like our Bellotti. Now Bellotti did take over a team that was better than most coming off Brooks taking them to the Rose Bowl, but Brooks was not a consistent coach.

Leach is pretty consistent. Although we had to go through the growing pains we've had two 8 win regular seasons. I see us being a decent team for a while and getting a few 10 win seasons probably with a little bit of down time in a tough year, but Leach will get us to where we are a pretty good program. Not an elite program, but a program that can compete.

We still have a ways to go to build some things up. Probably another 3 years and another solid "this might be the year" run with a Senior QB. It might be Hilinski, it might be Neville. Who knows. Leach will find somebody. We'll know it, and we'll watch them grow as we've watched Falk and we will have another great run probably going higher.

The next coach will be the Elite pick I think. With a program with a reputation as a good program it will be an attractive job for people to come. They know we have players. It will probably be someone from an Air Raid esque tree. A Kevin Sumlin maybe when things go another direction at Texas A&M. It could be Someone from the Baylor tree, or Someone from the Holgerson tree. Some up and comer will get a shot in Pullman when Leach is done, and they will hopefully take us to the next level.

When Leach came here WSU was not a desirable job for a well known coach/respected coach. It was a step up job, a project in the gutter after Wulff. Wulff's problem was he wasn't ready to compete in the Pac-12. He had no reputation. We had been bad for a while, and we were perceived as a doormat. He reinforced that 10000%.

Leach has made us a wild team. A fun offense to play in, a team that likes to steal wins from name program, and a program on the rise. Our identity is growing, and the next coach will be the one to add the exclamation point, but you don't get exclamation point coaches to come to places like WSU. As much as I love the place it's remote, out of the way, a difficult to build something at. Hence the 9 bowls in 100 years before Leach came here. Now he's taken us to 3.

Think about that. In our history Leach accounts for 25% of our bowl history. Price is 41 2/3% Walden, Ericson, Holinberry, Doba each with 81/3%

That's how little consistent success we've had in 100 years. Leach who has been here only 5 years is our 2nd most Bowl berths coach in 100 years.

So right now we are in good hands. We need to develop more consistency, more depth, and another solid run to the rose bowl. Leach will get us there, but the coach after him will be the one who will be given the foundation to a program that really could be something special in the Pac-12 north. Yes Oregon, Stanford, UW will be good, but a new contender will be joining.

What about Harrell? Any chance he might be head coach material when Leach is ready to head back to The Keys? I don't know much about him but seems he's fairly highly thought of. I would think he has head coach aspirations? Honest question, curious about your thoughts.

 

[425cougfan]

This guy is just screwing with us. Look at his post history -- he shows up once in a while and posts about crap like Wulff returning to WSU (posted in 2015), renovating Joe Albi for use with WSU football, etc.

 

[SCglory]

It's really a combination of both. There is a certain baseline of talent that you have to have in order to be competitive at the Pac-12 level. Leach has done better than Wulff in that regard. What's interesting is that our actual "ranking" according to rivals, Leach isn't tearing up the world. We've normally been ranked below #50 by Rivals under Leach. That's far better than the incredibly low ratings that we had under Wulff.

Regardless, WSU still consistently rates below the teams that we have beaten in the past two years, so it's not just about the Jimmy and Joes regardless of what you read. Going back to my first couple sentences, our struggles in the first three years under Leach tells you that while you can win with "lesser" talent, you have to have a certain level of ability to pull off those wins.

So, WSU needs to find that guy who can spot the guys who will grow into the players he needs and has the ability to get them to play at the highest level possible but also be innovative enough to outwit his competition.

Agree. the "vs" in the OP's thread is misplaced. It's a "both/and" proposition. Given the number of bowls available, and given the number of teams, I think it's reasonable that, in a given year, the top 5 or 6 teams in the P12 will go bowling. Some years more, and perhaps some years fewer. I also think it reasonable to expect that WSU will be in that group the vast majority of years, no matter what happened with Walden, Price, Sweeney, or Hollinbery was here.

 

[achilles#]

The next coach will be the Elite pick I think. With a program with a reputation as a good program it will be an attractive job for people to come. They know we have players. It will probably be someone from an Air Raid esque tree. A Kevin Sumlin maybe when things go another direction at Texas A&M. It could be Someone from the Baylor tree, or Someone from the Holgerson tree. Some up and comer will get a shot in Pullman when Leach is done, and they will hopefully take us to the next level.

I've been a Leach fan for more than a decade now. But in a way I think he is kind of his own roadblock now, at least as far as offense goes.

Look the Air Raid is a very effective offense when you run it right. You can take guys with lesser athletic ability and beat teams with better.

But as far as I can tell, only one Air Raid team has ever won the National Championship. That was Oklahoma and that was fairly early in the history of the Air Raid. Everyone since has been the usual pro set (though what that means is Alabama, Southern Cal, and LSU/FSU one year each) or a spread offense.

Leach's buddy Holgorsen has moved to some kind of hybrid spread/Air Raid offense. One that has some similarities to Baylor's. And while Briles was a scum bucket, Baylor has had some of the most dynamic offenses in the P5 in recent years.

It hasn't been remarked on much, but Alabama is no longer a Pro Set team. Sure I Formation with a lead blocker is in the playbook and they use it, but they are a lot closer to Meyer's Ohio State than what Saban ran for his first Alabama championship. And I don't think they are going back to the old system.

Anyway if there is anything Leach's Air Raid can do that Briles' system couldn't, I really don't know what that would be.

I think five years from now or so, you are going to see a whole lot of spread offenses, with a very few Pro Set teams. The spread offenses are going to be pretty varied from all out passing, to Ohio State's hybrid power system, to Gus Malzahn/Rich Rod type run systems.

The Pro Set teams are going to be historical powers that have no problem recruiting elite offensive linemen (like Stanford and Southern Cal), or from areas where they produce elite offensive linemen if nothing else (Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota). Though honestly even those teams would be better off running some form of Ohio State's offense.

My two cents anyway. And this post was pretty long, but rhetorically does anyone think Petrino is going back to Ryan Mallett type qb's after having coached Jackson for a year? I'm sure he would if that was the best option on his roster, but I'm fairly certain he is going to be recruiting dual threats from now on, unless college football changes again.

Anyway I still think Leach is brilliant. But right now I think Bob Stitt is the best offensive mind in the game, though odds are no major ever picks him up. Stitt's offense can look totally different game to game, let alone season to season. Only thing all of them have in common is moving the ball and scoring.

Leach is obviously invested in a system he helped bring into being. But things have moved on, and if he doesn't... well as someone said he's reached his plateau at WSU.

 

[Cougsocal]

I think analysts and message board fans fail to connect the two points. You obviously need to recruit talented players, and coaching needs be fundamentally sound; but in my opinion, the most overlooked data point when judging coaches is how effective they are at identifying and recruiting kids that fit THEIR systems.

This is where Leach excels. He has his own evaluation criteria for QBs, OL, WRs, DBs, and RBs. Every year, time and time again, there are dozens of programs who struggle despite having highly regarded recruiting classes. In our league, ASU and UCLA are good examples. Their rosters are littered with well regarded players, but their systems have no structure.

Leach and the air raid may have a ceiling in terms of knocking off elite teams, but we also have a huge advantage over *many* programs we face, in that we recruit, practice, and play to our unique and structured system. If you line up against Leach without a clear identity as far as what you want to do, we have a great chance of winning.

That's the common link between Portland State, Eastern WA, Boise, Colorado, UW, etc. Those programs, even the FCS schools, had solid systems that they weren't going to deviate from.

The more talent you have the more systems you can it fit in. Where we recruit, finding kids that can play in our system becomes far more important. At the UCLA level, if you lose it is coaching or injuries, not a poor system fit issue.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

I've been a Leach fan for more than a decade now. But in a way I think he is kind of his own roadblock now, at least as far as offense goes.

Look the Air Raid is a very effective offense when you run it right. You can take guys with lesser athletic ability and beat teams with better.

But as far as I can tell, only one Air Raid team has ever won the National Championship. That was Oklahoma and that was fairly early in the history of the Air Raid. Everyone since has been the usual pro set (though what that means is Alabama, Southern Cal, and LSU/FSU one year each) or a spread offense.

Leach's buddy Holgorsen has moved to some kind of hybrid spread/Air Raid offense. One that has some similarities to Baylor's. And while Briles was a scum bucket, Baylor has had some of the most dynamic offenses in the P5 in recent years.

It hasn't been remarked on much, but Alabama is no longer a Pro Set team. Sure I Formation with a lead blocker is in the playbook and they use it, but they are a lot closer to Meyer's Ohio State than what Saban ran for his first Alabama championship. And I don't think they are going back to the old system.

Anyway if there is anything Leach's Air Raid can do that Briles' system couldn't, I really don't know what that would be.

I think five years from now or so, you are going to see a whole lot of spread offenses, with a very few Pro Set teams. The spread offenses are going to be pretty varied from all out passing, to Ohio State's hybrid power system, to Gus Malzahn/Rich Rod type run systems.

The Pro Set teams are going to be historical powers that have no problem recruiting elite offensive linemen (like Stanford and Southern Cal), or from areas where they produce elite offensive linemen if nothing else (Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota). Though honestly even those teams would be better off running some form of Ohio State's offense.

My two cents anyway. And this post was pretty long, but rhetorically does anyone think Petrino is going back to Ryan Mallett type qb's after having coached Jackson for a year? I'm sure he would if that was the best option on his roster, but I'm fairly certain he is going to be recruiting dual threats from now on, unless college football changes again.

Anyway I still think Leach is brilliant. But right now I think Bob Stitt is the best offensive mind in the game, though odds are no major ever picks him up. Stitt's offense can look totally different game to game, let alone season to season. Only thing all of them have in common is moving the ball and scoring.

Leach is obviously invested in a system he helped bring into being. But things have moved on, and if he doesn't... well as someone said he's reached his plateau at WSU.

The version of the air raid ran by OU was very different than that ran by Leach. Narrower splits and far more run oriented than anything Leach does. A lot of the concepts were there though.

 

[HHusky]

None of it matters if you run a gimmicky offense though

That's what the Oregon search committee has apparently concluded. Too bad. I was hoping they'd hire Lincoln Riley and we'd never be troubled by them again.