Don't want Leach to Leave, but not afraid if he does

[Cougsocal]

Nothing would make me happier than for Mike Leach to stay, and finally get over that hump with the Cougs. The guy is one of the great college football minds, and with a little less intransigence, he is more than capable. But if he wants to bolt for a change of scenery, it no longer scares me. Old Bill Doba scared me, even a manikin could win at Eastern, Paul Wulff, had me expecting the worst.

Sure any coaching hire has an element of hit and miss, and this isn't like 2002, where even a mediocre coach can step in with our talent and win 9 games. I anticipate we will experience a transitional down period. However, our facilities are great. The admin now accepts the idea that we must pay serious money for coaching talent. Any coach who is a serious candidate, won't be overly impressed with talent and coaching he must compete against. The Pac-12 just isn't a "have's and have not" conference anymore, like other power 5 conferences. WSU isn't perceived potential career suicide destination. We just hired an up and coming BB coach, Greeny just pull off a Volleyball reload and and our soccer team as proven to be just too big and fast for most elite teams to match up with.

I'm great with more old reliable, but I'm also excited about a fresh new take on winning in the Pac-12.

Thoughts?

 

[froropmkr72]

Nothing would make me happier than for Mike Leach to stay, and finally get over that hump with the Cougs. The guy is one of the great college football minds, and with a little less intransigence, he is more than capable. But if he wants to bolt for a change of scenery, it no longer scares me. Old Bill Doba scared me, even a manikin could win at Eastern, Paul Wulff, had me expecting the worst.

Sure any coaching hire has an element of hit and miss, and this isn't like 2002, where even a mediocre coach can step in with our talent and win 9 games. I anticipate we will experience a transitional down period. However, our facilities are great. The admin now accepts the idea that we must pay serious money for coaching talent. Any coach who is a serious candidate, won't be overly impressed with talent and coaching he must compete against. The Pac-12 just isn't a "have's and have not" conference anymore, like other power 5 conferences. WSU isn't perceived potential career suicide destination. We just hired an up and coming BB coach, Greeny just pull off a Volleyball reload and and our soccer team as proven to be just too big and fast for most elite teams to match up with.

I'm great with more old reliable, but I'm also excited about a fresh new take on winning in the Pac-12.

Thoughts?

I was there last year with being OK about a new coaching staff now that things have been more established. With all the assistant coached being hired at much higher salary...how could it be perceived as a "career killer". Maybe "come to Pullman...do a really good job recruiting and coaching and THEN someone is going to have to hire you at a much greater salary in order that you stop kicking their ass". Look for the current trend to continue.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Nothing would make me happier than for Mike Leach to stay, and finally get over that hump with the Cougs. The guy is one of the great college football minds, and with a little less intransigence, he is more than capable. But if he wants to bolt for a change of scenery, it no longer scares me. Old Bill Doba scared me, even a manikin could win at Eastern, Paul Wulff, had me expecting the worst.

Sure any coaching hire has an element of hit and miss, and this isn't like 2002, where even a mediocre coach can step in with our talent and win 9 games. I anticipate we will experience a transitional down period. However, our facilities are great. The admin now accepts the idea that we must pay serious money for coaching talent. Any coach who is a serious candidate, won't be overly impressed with talent and coaching he must compete against. The Pac-12 just isn't a "have's and have not" conference anymore, like other power 5 conferences. WSU isn't perceived potential career suicide destination. We just hired an up and coming BB coach, Greeny just pull off a Volleyball reload and and our soccer team as proven to be just too big and fast for most elite teams to match up with.

I'm great with more old reliable, but I'm also excited about a fresh new take on winning in the Pac-12.

Thoughts?

I dont have the time now to validate this, but my beleief is that what Leach has done here is extra ordinary and that asking to capture lightning in a bottle twice is a tall order.

Leach wins because he doesnt follow the blueprint and play by the "rules" of college football. He recruits a different set of kids, coaches a different set of skills, plays a different kind of game.

Our next coach more than likely come in and try to compete with our conference foes as if its a level playing field. "We're gonna go toe to toe and kick their teeth in!" Price had intermittent success doing that, but the valleys were long and wide between winning seasons, and imho you cant build a successful program having a winning season sandwiched between 3 losing seasons because you have to wait for a senior laden class.

 

[425cougfan]

I'm coming off as the biggest Leach fan in the world on this and other boards, as if he has no flaws, and it's more nuanced than that ... won't get into it now, but it's more complex with Leach and my satisfaction with what he's done and my sense of what he can achieve in the future.

That said, I think we'll likely have some real challenges if he leaves, especially if we don't bring in a coach who has a clear plan for exploiting inefficiencies in recruiting and for using a system that lets him win with lower absolute talent levels. I am frustrated by some of his faults at times, but what he has done isn't appreciated enough, either.

We have OK facilities and can pay our coach a market wage, but that just gets us in the game as something above a black hole. All other P5 schools have facilities as good as ours or better even if we get the IPF done. We don't have enough money to prevent other schools from poaching assistants, which I think has been a huge drag on the program and would be for any coach we may get. We also don't have the money for significant recruiting staff and other aspects of a big recruiting budget, all while we have virtually no natural recruiting home territory and are in a location many recruits don't want to go to. All of this stuff will stay the same even if we pay the head coach a market wage and have facilities that currently can be argued are conference average.

I hate writing all that stuff, but it's reality.

 

[CougEd]

I dont have the time now to validate this, but my beleief is that what Leach has done here is extra ordinary and that asking to capture lightning in a bottle twice is a tall order.

Leach wins because he doesnt follow the blueprint and play by the "rules" of college football. He recruits a different set of kids, coaches a different set of skills, plays a different kind of game.

Our next coach more than likely come in and try to compete with our conference foes as if its a level playing field. "We're gonna go toe to toe and kick their teeth in!" Price had intermittent success doing that, but the valleys were long and wide between winning seasons, and imho you cant build a successful program having a winning season sandwiched between 3 losing seasons because you have to wait for a senior laden class.

I'm coming off as the biggest Leach fan in the world on this and other boards, as if he has no flaws, and it's more nuanced than that ... won't get into it now, but it's more complex with Leach and my satisfaction with what he's done and my sense of what he can achieve in the future.

That said, I think we'll likely have some real challenges if he leaves, especially if we don't bring in a coach who has a clear plan for exploiting inefficiencies in recruiting and for using a system that lets him win with lower absolute talent levels. I am frustrated by some of his faults at times, but what he has done isn't appreciated enough, either.

We have OK facilities and can pay our coach a market wage, but that just gets us in the game as something above a black hole. All other P5 schools have facilities as good as ours or better even if we get the IPF done. We don't have enough money to prevent other schools from poaching assistants, which I think has been a huge drag on the program and would be for any coach we may get. We also don't have the money for significant recruiting staff and other aspects of a big recruiting budget, all while we have virtually no natural recruiting home territory and are in a location many recruits don't want to go to. All of this stuff will stay the same even if we pay the head coach a market wage and have facilities that currently can be argued are conference average.

I hate writing all that stuff, but it's reality.

Just because someone runs the Air Raid doesn't mean they will be successful running it. Do you think Kliff would be successful at WSU? Would he be able to do more with less? Does he have the same recruiting philosophy?

It is problematic if Leach leaves. And you are correct that is a reality.

 

[chipdouglas]

Sure any coaching hire has an element of hit and miss, and this isn't like 2002, where even a mediocre coach can step in with our talent and win 9 games. I anticipate we will experience a transitional down period.

I believe the history of Cougar football could be described as a "transitional down period"

 

[froropmkr72]

Just because someone runs the Air Raid doesn't mean they will be successful running it. Do you think Kliff would be successful at WSU? Would he be able to do more with less? Does he have the same recruiting philosophy?

It is problematic if Leach leaves. And you are correct that is a reality.

Not necessarily. Why have other coaches of the air raid been successful in winning games? Just because others haven't been "purists" as ML has puts it...hasn't meant that they haven't been successful in their offense.

 

[HHusky]

My two cents:

1. Leach has been figured out and doesn't want to change; if he stays, you may be enthusiastically supporting his departure in a few years.

2. All kinds of coaches run air raid schemes combined with much more balanced offenses.

3. The air raid isn't the only game in town anyway. When you say you have to do go air raid because the playing field isn't level, you ignore the ways in which it is a more level playing field than it was in the old days.

Anyway, if Leach wins a championship or even continues to contend for championships doing it his way, I'll be perfectly comfortable saying I was wrong. I'll also be surprised.

 

[NMBRCRNCHR]

Figured out numbnuts? Yeah, those 11 teams really had it figured out 12 months ago...u r a joke, thanks for playing

 

[HHusky]

Figured out numbnuts? Yeah, those 11 teams really had it figured out 12 months ago...u r a joke, thanks for playing

Well, this is disappointing.

 

[duoz56]

My two cents:

1. Leach has been figured out and doesn't want to change; if he stays, you may be enthusiastically supporting his departure in a few years.

2. All kinds of coaches run air raid schemes combined with much more balanced offenses.

3. The air raid isn't the only game in town anyway. When you say you have to do go air raid because the playing field isn't level, you ignore the ways in which it is a more level playing field than it was in the old days.

Anyway, if Leach wins a championship or even continues to contend for championships doing it his way, I'll be perfectly comfortable saying I was wrong. I'll also be surprised.

Figured out??? They averaged almost 40 points a game this season.

 

[425cougfan]

Not necessarily. Why have other coaches of the air raid been successful in winning games? Just because others haven't been "purists" as ML has puts it...hasn't meant that they haven't been successful in their offense.

I know you're just referring to offense here. In terms of head coaching results, results have been mixed ... no other P5 head coach in anything other than a completely loaded situation has won big with the Air Raid or a close variant. Dykes and Kingsbury both failed despite having better situations, especially the former. Dykes was in a pretty good recruiting spot at Cal (before they locked down academic requirements) and couldn't win even with Goff and pretty decent talent overall. Kingsbury had one decent year with Tuberville's players and then was lousy despite being in a good position to recruit (due to his relative fame and reputation) and despite having good QBs, including Mahomes. Holgorsen did pretty well at West Virginia, at a level pretty similar to what Leach has done recently, but had some mediocre years, didn't win any titles, and lost most of his bowl games. To me, the experience of those guys, especially Kingsbury and Dykes, cuts against just thinking we can take anyone from the Leach tree, plug him in, and be fine. Riley has done well with a ton of talent and in a great situation.

 

[HHusky]

Figured out??? They averaged almost 40 points a game this season.

The Cal, Utah and Washington game tapes are available to everyone. The high water mark against any of them for the past two seasons was 28 points against Utah in 2018.

 

[SaveFerris]

My two cents:

1. Leach has been figured out and doesn't want to change; if he stays, you may be enthusiastically supporting his departure in a few years.

2. All kinds of coaches run air raid schemes combined with much more balanced offenses.

3. The air raid isn't the only game in town anyway. When you say you have to do go air raid because the playing field isn't level, you ignore the ways in which it is a more level playing field than it was in the old days.

Anyway, if Leach wins a championship or even continues to contend for championships doing it his way, I'll be perfectly comfortable saying I was wrong. I'll also be surprised.

We get Lake has Leach figured out. David Shaw acknowledged last year they had prepared since the previous year for WSU and they still lost at home and again this year. Oregon needed a last second field to beat WSU at home this year after losing multiple years in a row.

Certain teams matchup well against other teams. The UW has WSU's number, Cal/Wilcox as well, but under Leach we have good records over the last 4 years against Stanford, Oregon, and Utah. I think you are weighting the UW's success far too heavily in terms of Leach being "figured out".

By the way that's actually part of the problem for the conference. We beat each other up and end up with nobody looking like a CFP team.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

CML is among the best at what he does. Given that he figured a lot of it out himself, I resist the urge to call him "stubborn", since that implies that I can evaluate the pro's and con's better than he can...which seems highly unlikely. It would be hard to find someone as successfully creative, so when he resists doing what the conventional wisdom calls for, I'm good with it. I hope that Mike decides to retire here, and at this point I'd give that possibility about 60-70% odds. While he is here we will score points and we will have an O line that provides time to check through a couple of receivers before throwing...every year. The major variables on offense will be whether we have a QB whose judgment leads to more or less interceptions, because net turn over results matter a lot; how mobile the QB is when the pocket eventually breaks down and how good of decisions he makes on the run, because that also matters; and how willing our QB is to use the run to its best effect...something we have not done well IMHO. On D we need a group that can get stops and get takeaways. Bend but don't break is OK if we have some bodies that can get a goal line stop and average near to two turn overs per game. Kicking & punting have been a problem when we don't have a proven incumbent, and in this area I think CML has adapted to being willing to put more resources into "kicking insurance".

CML needs a good DC. He also needs someone effective to run special teams. When he has both, it is hard to picture less than 8 wins, and the upside is greater than the downside.

 

[SaveFerris]

Nothing would make me happier than for Mike Leach to stay, and finally get over that hump with the Cougs. The guy is one of the great college football minds, and with a little less intransigence, he is more than capable. But if he wants to bolt for a change of scenery, it no longer scares me. Old Bill Doba scared me, even a manikin could win at Eastern, Paul Wulff, had me expecting the worst.

Sure any coaching hire has an element of hit and miss, and this isn't like 2002, where even a mediocre coach can step in with our talent and win 9 games. I anticipate we will experience a transitional down period. However, our facilities are great. The admin now accepts the idea that we must pay serious money for coaching talent. Any coach who is a serious candidate, won't be overly impressed with talent and coaching he must compete against. The Pac-12 just isn't a "have's and have not" conference anymore, like other power 5 conferences. WSU isn't perceived potential career suicide destination. We just hired an up and coming BB coach, Greeny just pull off a Volleyball reload and and our soccer team as proven to be just too big and fast for most elite teams to match up with.

I'm great with more old reliable, but I'm also excited about a fresh new take on winning in the Pac-12.

Thoughts?

Warts and all Leach is a perfect fit for WSU. We were able to hire him because of those warts. We are in a much better position to maintain the competitive level we have reached under Leach than we were when Price left but we still face relatively unique and signficant challenges. I wouldn't say I'm scared about Leach leaving but I still maintain winning at WSU is heavily weighted on the coaches ability to overcome the inherent challenges especially when one of the biggest we can't change. Pullman isn't becoming a destination any time soon.

 

[Cougsocal]

I dont have the time now to validate this, but my beleief is that what Leach has done here is extra ordinary and that asking to capture lightning in a bottle twice is a tall order.

Leach wins because he doesn't follow the blueprint and play by the "rules" of college football. He recruits a different set of kids, coaches a different set of skills, plays a different kind of game.

Our next coach more than likely come in and try to compete with our conference foes as if its a level playing field. "We're gonna go toe to toe and kick their teeth in!" Price had intermittent success doing that, but the valleys were long and wide between winning seasons, and imho you cant build a successful program having a winning season sandwiched between 3 losing seasons because you have to wait for a senior laden class.

Price valleys were deep, very deep. Frankly, as a football mind, he was not at Leach's level. But with bare bone facilities, a shoe string budget and 1 year contracts for assistants, he was, eventually, able to recruit a team so talented, so deep, we started the season as favorite, and won the Pac-10 when the conference was playing much better ball, sent USC to the Orange, and 8 of 10 teams were bowl eligible. Now imagine if we had a AD at that time spending money on the program like a drunken sailor, as oppose to his Shylock-like reality, what might he/we have accomplished.

While Price's successes were intermittent, he did win championships with the deck completely stacked against him. So, I am less than convinced that Mike Leach, with the upgrades we now have, is the only coach who can win in Pullman, particularly now that the Pac-12 is the "Big East" of big time college ball. That said, with the talent we now have, which is essentially top 50 recruiting, lower division Pac-12, I don't think many coaches, other than Leach, could come in and win. If that is your fear, it is well founded. When Price's recruiting ebbed to this level, which it did, we were 3-8 calibre. However, when the firing buzz started, Price seemed to ratchet up his recruiting game considerably. Price demonstrates that Top 25 recruiting is possible in Pullman, he did it three times. Quality recruiting, a spread offense, a speed defense, anchor by quality DTs, proved enough to compete with the very best.

 

[froropmkr72]

I know you're just referring to offense here. In terms of head coaching results, results have been mixed ... no other P5 head coach in anything other than a completely loaded situation has won big with the Air Raid or a close variant. Dykes and Kingsbury both failed despite having better situations, especially the former. Dykes was in a pretty good recruiting spot at Cal (before they locked down academic requirements) and couldn't win even with Goff and pretty decent talent overall. Kingsbury had one decent year with Tuberville's players and then was lousy despite being in a good position to recruit (due to his relative fame and reputation) and despite having good QBs, including Mahomes. Holgorsen did pretty well at West Virginia, at a level pretty similar to what Leach has done recently, but had some mediocre years, didn't win any titles, and lost most of his bowl games. To me, the experience of those guys, especially Kingsbury and Dykes, cuts against just thinking we can take anyone from the Leach tree, plug him in, and be fine. Riley has done well with a ton of talent and in a great situation.

I didn't say that. You did make a good case against taking someone from his coaching tree though.

 

[CougEd]

I dont have the time now to validate this, but my beleief is that what Leach has done here is extra ordinary and that asking to capture lightning in a bottle twice is a tall order.

Leach wins because he doesnt follow the blueprint and play by the "rules" of college football. He recruits a different set of kids, coaches a different set of skills, plays a different kind of game.

Our next coach more than likely come in and try to compete with our conference foes as if its a level playing field. "We're gonna go toe to toe and kick their teeth in!" Price had intermittent success doing that, but the valleys were long and wide between winning seasons, and imho you cant build a successful program having a winning season sandwiched between 3 losing seasons because you have to wait for a senior laden class.

Bleed totally different time. In 93 when we went 5-6 - what if we had three cupcakes like we do now. What if we don't have Michigan in 93, what if we don't play Tenn in 1994. The record in those three years would be 8-3, 6-5, 8-3. If we don't play number 5 CU in 96, we are at least 6-5. Couple that with two players leaving early at QB to the NFL draft, with no portal and to get a Minshew or a Gubrud. It is a different era.

Probably the biggest difference is being able to fix your mistakes along the oline now that we are playing big boy football. What if Leach coached under the premise we honor all scholarships, and if a mistake is made there is no way to rid ourselves of the dead weight. That plus not having to recruit a TE is allows Leach to extend more scholarships and not be hamstrung if the kids don't turn out. From 14-18 Leach recruited 18 lineman, 5 made it, 13 never played. Fortunately he didn't have to keep the 13 that weren't ready to play for whatever the reason.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

The Cal, Utah and Washington game tapes are available to everyone. The high water mark against any of them for the past two seasons was 28 points against Utah in 2018.

Interesting time frame since Leach has been here 7 years. Cherry pick much?

 

[royhobbs2]

you are in for much pain with Jimmy Lake replacing CP.

 

[CougPatrol]

The Cal, Utah and Washington game tapes are available to everyone. The high water mark against any of them for the past two seasons was 28 points against Utah in 2018.

I don't disagree with the data in your post, but the teams you're mentioning deserve a little more credit.

Over the past 2 season, WSU is 1-1 against Cal and Utah, and 0-2 against UW. Those 3 programs represent the best defenses in the P12, and in 2018 and 2019 (likely), UW & Utah are the conference champs.

So yes, if the other 8 teams in our conference recruit and learn to play defense at the level Utah, Cal, and UW do, then Leach and WSU would be in trouble. The reality though is that there is a significant drop-off defensively within the conference. WSU, in the most recent matchups, ran up and down the field against Oregon, USC, Stanford, UCLA, OSU, Colorado, and the Arizona schools.

So while there are things about Leach's system that aggravate the Hell out of me and give me pause, I think it's also fair to assume that next season will be more of the same for WSU if Leach returns. We'll have home games against rebuilding Utah and Oregon programs, we get Cal at home, UW at home, and ASU at home. Road games vs. Stanford, Oregon State, Colorado, and UCLA don't appear to be particularly daunting. Not saying we'll win them all, but THEY shouldn't be overly excited to face Leach given how they've fared against him recently.

 

[RDHADS]

My two cents:

1. Leach has been figured out and doesn't want to change; if he stays, you may be enthusiastically supporting his departure in a few years.

2. All kinds of coaches run air raid schemes combined with much more balanced offenses.

3. The air raid isn't the only game in town anyway. When you say you have to do go air raid because the playing field isn't level, you ignore the ways in which it is a more level playing field than it was in the old days.

Anyway, if Leach wins a championship or even continues to contend for championships doing it his way, I'll be perfectly comfortable saying I was wrong. I'll also be surprised.

 

[RDHADS]

I remember back in 2000, Leach's first year at Tech when it was said he was figured out. He went 7-4 I think. East Carolina beat him in the Houston.com bowl.

Leach is an excellent unconventional coach but talent plays abig role. Some years he is able to squeeze more out of what he has than other years.

Sometimes you just get beat. General Pickett was asked why Lee lost at Gettysburg. He said he always thought the yankees has something to do with it.

 

[etowncoug]

Bleed totally different time. In 93 when we went 5-6 - what if we had three cupcakes like we do now. What if we don't have Michigan in 93, what if we don't play Tenn in 1994. The record in those three years would be 8-3, 6-5, 8-3. If we don't play number 5 CU in 96, we are at least 6-5. Couple that with two players leaving early at QB to the NFL draft, with no portal and to get a Minshew or a Gubrud. It is a different era.

Probably the biggest difference is being able to fix your mistakes along the oline now that we are playing big boy football. What if Leach coached under the premise we honor all scholarships, and if a mistake is made there is no way to rid ourselves of the dead weight. That plus not having to recruit a TE is allows Leach to extend more scholarships and not be hamstrung if the kids don't turn out. From 14-18 Leach recruited 18 lineman, 5 made it, 13 never played. Fortunately he didn't have to keep the 13 that weren't ready to play for whatever the reason.

You keep pushing the false narrative about Price honoring scholarships and Leach running lineman off. This is wrong. Leach actually recruits enough lineman to make sure the position group succeeds. Price didn't. Price chose to recruit scores of jumbo athletes every year, some became OL, others TE's, and still more ended up on the DL. Plenty of these kids disappeared from the roster each year, and I won't lie about knowing the circumstances.

Also Leach has played more than 5 lineman from those classes. I counted 11, not including Brian Greene, a walk on who earned his way onto the two deep.

 

[CougEd]

I don't disagree with the data in your post, but the teams you're mentioning deserve a little more credit.

Over the past 2 season, WSU is 1-1 against Cal and Utah, and 0-2 against UW. Those 3 programs represent the best defenses in the P12, and in 2018 and 2019 (likely), UW & Utah are the conference champs.

So yes, if the other 8 teams in our conference recruit and learn to play defense at the level Utah, Cal, and UW do, then Leach and WSU would be in trouble. The reality though is that there is a significant drop-off defensively within the conference. WSU, in the most recent matchups, ran up and down the field against Oregon, USC, Stanford, UCLA, OSU, Colorado, and the Arizona schools.

So while there are things about Leach's system that aggravate the Hell out of me and give me pause, I think it's also fair to assume that next season will be more of the same for WSU if Leach returns. We'll have home games against rebuilding Utah and Oregon programs, we get Cal at home, UW at home, and ASU at home. Road games vs. Stanford, Oregon State, Colorado, and UCLA don't appear to be particularly daunting. Not saying we'll win them all, but THEY shouldn't be overly excited to face Leach given how they've fared against him recently.

Here may be the problem. Rocky Long was the first to rush three in our first game in the Leach era. It was he, not Lake that had the key to defending the Mike Leach air raid.

The formula is out there, and as Biggs said ASU and Utah are starting to get it dialed in. What Lake and Wilcox have figured out is that the slot receiver, the Brandon Arc and River Cracraft are vital to this offense. I said before the year Arc was going to be our most indispensable player. And our offense ground to a halt when he went out during three games.

I know people say the swing pass is like a long hand off. No it isn't. It doesn't account for the linebacker drops. The linebackers could drop into coverage 100% of the time, and they would have guessed pass correctly 90% of the time.

Yogi Roth nailed it. He didn't just say the lb's for UW were dropping into their normal zones, but dropping into the depths of where WSU likes to throw it. There is no play action that keeps the linebacker drops honest.

There was a reason Jeff Tuel looked confused in 2012 when they played BYU because there was no place to throw. I have seen that same look on our QB's in all the Apple Cups, and most of the Cal games with Wilcox there.

The other thing UW does really well with that three man line is attack the center. They jump a gap and the center is always turned. Leach would be wise to close down that gap when he plays the uw so a double team can come right away and keep a clean pocket.

 

[NMBRCRNCHR]

We had the formula dialed for this years apple cup. Brink explains it on Furness' show. We were patient and took what mutts were giving those first two drives, with 5min+ of possession each. After that, it seemed like AG was pressing, trying to win with one pass...wheels fell off

 

[CougEd]

You keep pushing the false narrative about Price honoring scholarships and Leach running lineman off. This is wrong. Leach actually recruits enough lineman to make sure the position group succeeds. Price didn't. Price chose to recruit scores of jumbo athletes every year, some became OL, others TE's, and still more ended up on the DL. Plenty of these kids disappeared from the roster each year, and I won't lie about knowing the circumstances.

Also Leach has played more than 5 lineman from those classes. I counted 11, not including Brian Greene, a walk on who earned his way onto the two deep.

If Leach keeps 13 of those kids trust me he couldn't recycle and get new lineman in. Leach has found a way to have available slots every year for 5 kids. Yaki it is not a narrative. It is big boy football. Remember the slogan doing it the right way. It was about being morally righteous while others would do things to win.

 

[kougkurt]

If Leach keeps 13 of those kids trust me he couldn't recycle and get new lineman in. Leach has found a way to have available slots every year for 5 kids. Yaki it is not a narrative. It is big boy football. Remember the slogan doing it the right way. It was about being morally righteous while others would do things to win.

Did you say Yaki

 

[SaveFerris]

Here may be the problem. Rocky Long was the first to rush three in our first game in the Leach era. It was he, not Lake that had the key to defending the Mike Leach air raid.

The formula is out there, and as Biggs said ASU and Utah are starting to get it dialed in. What Lake and Wilcox have figured out is that the slot receiver, the Brandon Arc and River Cracraft are vital to this offense. I said before the year Arc was going to be our most indispensable player. And our offense ground to a halt when he went out during three games.

I know people say the swing pass is like a long hand off. No it isn't. It doesn't account for the linebacker drops. The linebackers could drop into coverage 100% of the time, and they would have guessed pass correctly 90% of the time.

Yogi Roth nailed it. He didn't just say the lb's for UW were dropping into their normal zones, but dropping into the depths of where WSU likes to throw it. There is no play action that keeps the linebacker drops honest.

There was a reason Jeff Tuel looked confused in 2012 when they played BYU because there was no place to throw. I have seen that same look on our QB's in all the Apple Cups, and most of the Cal games with Wilcox there.

The other thing UW does really well with that three man line is attack the center. They jump a gap and the center is always turned. Leach would be wise to close down that gap when he plays the uw so a double team can come right away and keep a clean pocket.

What's stopping Oregon and Stanford if the formula has been out there for 7 years? Why can't Lake seem to figure out Stanford?

 

[etowncoug]

If Leach keeps 13 of those kids trust me he couldn't recycle and get new lineman in. Leach has found a way to have available slots every year for 5 kids. Yaki it is not a narrative. It is big boy football. Remember the slogan doing it the right way. It was about being morally righteous while others would do things to win.

When you recruit 4-5 lineman a year, kids are going to decide to leave because they are getting beaten out by kids behind them. Kids who realize they will never see the field have a way of transferring in search of playing time elsewhere. Price needed to beg kids to stick around so he could field a full two deep.

 

[couginphx]

Price valleys were deep, very deep. Frankly, as a football mind, he was not at Leach's level. But with bare bone facilities, a shoe string budget and 1 year contracts for assistants, he was, eventually, able to recruit a team so talented, so deep, we started the season as favorite, and won the Pac-10 when the conference was playing much better ball, sent USC to the Orange, and 8 of 10 teams were bowl eligible. Now imagine if we had a AD at that time spending money on the program like a drunken sailor, as oppose to his Shylock-like reality, what might he/we have accomplished.

While Price's successes were intermittent, he did win championships with the deck completely stacked against him. So, I am less than convinced that Mike Leach, with the upgrades we now have, is the only coach who can win in Pullman, particularly now that the Pac-12 is the "Big East" of big time college ball. That said, with the talent we now have, which is essentially top 50 recruiting, lower division Pac-12, I don't think many coaches, other than Leach, could come in and win. If that is your fear, it is well founded. When Price's recruiting ebbed to this level, which it did, we were 3-8 calibre. However, when the firing buzz started, Price seemed to ratchet up his recruiting game considerably. Price demonstrates that Top 25 recruiting is possible in Pullman, he did it three times. Quality recruiting, a spread offense, a speed defense, anchor by quality DTs, proved enough to compete with the very best.

100%

 

[chipdouglas]

1. Leach has been figured out and doesn't want to change; if he stays, you may be enthusiastically supporting his departure in a few years.

• Figured out: he went 11-2 last year and his best ever season @Tech was around the decade mark
• Departure: you forget we had Paul Wulff immediately before him - don't count on a groundswell

2. All kinds of coaches run air raid schemes combined with much more balanced offenses.

Agreed.

3. When you say you have to do go air raid because the playing field isn't level, you ignore the ways in which it is a more level playing field than it was in the old days.

This is like saying "you can actually have a lot of fun at the casino with $10 these days" as if that gets us to the minimum buy-in for the high stakes poker game the rest of y'all are playing.

 

[DaUwillRiseAgain]

• Figured out: he went 11-2 last year and his best ever season @Tech was around the decade mark
• Departure: you forget we had Paul Wulff immediately before him - don't count on a groundswell

Agreed.

This is like saying "you can actually have a lot of fun at the casino with $10 these days" as if that gets us to the minimum buy-in for the high stakes poker game the rest of y'all are playing.

Yeah the "Leach has been figured out" crowd doesn't make any sense. As you said he went 11-2 last year. One close loss to USC away from winning the Pac 12 and possibly being in the playoff.

The sad reality for Washington State is you won't get better when Mike Leach leaves. You will get worse just as you were worse before he got to Pullman. Enjoy this ride. You will have criticisms. There will be head scratcher losses. However you will have great wins and an exciting team that will go to bowl games almost every year. Imagine someone telling you that you would dominate Oregon like you have recently? Pray he stays because it will get worse when he leaves. You won't be Paul Wulff bad, but Bill Doba level is about what you can expect.

 

[Glad Cougar]

I don't want Leach to leave but assuming WSU pays a Leach-like salary to the next coach, we shouldn't expect to be at a Bill Doba level.

Glad Cougar

 

[FnuLnu]

Here may be the problem. Rocky Long was the first to rush three in our first game in the Leach era. It was he, not Lake that had the key to defending the Mike Leach air raid.

Rocky Long hasnt faced Leach and WSU

 

[BSpike76]

Rocky Long hasnt faced Leach and WSU

It was Bronco Mendenhall. Rocky, Bronco easy to confuse.

 

[CougEd]

Rocky Long hasnt faced Leach and WSU

Correct...meant to say Bronco Mendenhall

 

[CougEd]

What's stopping Oregon and Stanford if the formula has been out there for 7 years? Why can't Lake seem to figure out Stanford?

14, 10, 13, 14, 17, 13, 15....If UW scores 16 or more they are 6-1. I don't attribute it to dumb luck.

Oregon and Stanford...no idea why they haven't other than maybe they just can't play zone. Maybe the DC's are just more comfortable playing zone.

Why Lake can'tn figure out Stanford? For one, he can't predict a pass 90% of the time. Plus their offensive line beats up the UW defensive line. They have a TE to help block or go out in the intermediate routes. While Stanford is nota diverse offense, or explosive, they do make the linebackers play up and back, and side to side.

 

[HHusky]

What's stopping Oregon and Stanford if the formula has been out there for 7 years? Why can't Lake seem to figure out Stanford?

Stanford has averaged about 20 points a game against the Huskies over the past 4 seasons. Maybe Lake has figured out Stanford.