Why does this not seem to apply to the sports press as well? Their tendency more and more (not just talking about Leach press conferences here) is to ask thinly veiled or sarcastic questions intended to incite some kind of elevated response. When asking questions, they have the benefit of 20:20 hindsight, and seem to get a pass at asking any question (relevant, irrelevant, obvious, or "idiotic") they want of a coach that hasn't come down yet off an emotional roller coaster. Leach's answer doesn't bother me a bit. (I much prefer it to the typical PC, evasive "coachspeak" you get from a lot of coaches.)
Heartbreaking, but...
- Thread starter CougPatrol
- Start date
Why does this not seem to apply to the sports press as well? Their tendency more and more (not just talking about Leach press conferences here) is to ask thinly veiled or sarcastic questions intended to incite some kind of elevated response. When asking questions, they have the benefit of 20:20 hindsight, and seem to get a pass at asking any question (relevant, irrelevant, obvious, or "idiotic") they want of a coach that hasn't come down yet off an emotional roller coaster. Leach's answer doesn't bother me a bit. (I much prefer it to the typical PC, evasive "coachspeak" you get from a lot of coaches.)
Thompson whiffed on his block when the kid jumped the play, that's why the INT looked so bad. You can blame Falk for not waiting an extra moment before releasing and pulling back if you like, but some of that blame goes to Thompson for not being ready to make a block right on the snap. He let the defender get past him. Some that also is just a great defensive play. On offense you have to be still at the snap. On defense you don't. That was a factor here.
The biggest issue I have with the QB thing is that it's a consistent problem. We simply don't account for the QB, and they beat us. QBs are averaging 55 yards per game against us - and we've let 3 QBs run for over 100 yards. Oddly enough, that's the same number of RBs that have run for 100 against us. Portland State's QB just missed, at 92 yards. This is a continuous issue, especially in the second half, and needs to be addressed if we want to really be a quality team.
This is pretty bad.
And if you read what I said, you'll see that I think it's OK to get burned once or twice, but you're right - we're getting burned, 3, 4, 5 times a game on the same thing. Not acceptable.
That was my issue with it as well. When they can go back to that well over and over, and it still works, that's really irritating.
Come on....Stanford made a great observation to have Hogan keep the ball on some options, but apart from that, the coaching advantage went to us in that game.
As far as the O, I think we made some adjustments at halftime, they just didn't pan out as much as we hoped. Hence we finally got a TD when we couldn't do so through the first half. So I think your assessment, if pointed towards the O, is completely baseless.
As far as D, are you suggesting that we should have made adjustments when our D was playing STELLAR and holding a TOP 10 in the nation team to just 3 points? THAT kind of performance requires adjustments?
Yes. If you'd told any Coug before the season that you'd overtake Oregon OR Stanford in the standings by beating them when they were both on track for bowls, that would demonstrate significant progress. And now that that's happened, it does.
A lot of folks thought wed beat Oregon without their QB. We played well AND we got lucky with that.
We lost to Stanford. We did not beat Stanford. Stanford won. I'll try to find you a link.
We lost to Stanford. We did not beat Stanford. Stanford won. I'll try to find you a link.
Here's the difference in your post: You say we got lucky with Oregon. How is it that Stanford WASN'T lucky?
Just a little glimpse into why so many think you of the Troll genus.
Using excuses to deny clear progress by the program. You know, like any authentic fan!
Every team who's beaten us this year got pretty lucky, too.
I'm not so upset with Luke for the INT.... if John Thompson would have done his job on that one play and blocked that DB, the INT would not have happened. But, he whiffed on the block and you know the results. There's blame plenty around, even on that one play.... Leach preaches that those who don't block as a WR at WSU won't play.... maybe Thompson shouldn't have been in that play. He makes the block he's supposed to and none of that happens. That was his ONLY job on that play. Get it done next time.
There has been a ton of progress since we lost to PSU. Our qb has shown a resilience way beyond his years. No question in my mind if he didn't get dinged up against PSU we win that game in the last minute.
I do get what Chinook is saying. Or at least what Leach tries to convey is that he gets zero satisfaction of playing a close game only to lose. He (coaches) put the players in a position to win. That is good coaching. He demands consistent execution. Am I pissed they lost. Heck yeah. Do I know why they lost? Yep. Do I get slogans and how it pumps us and the team up? Yep. But "Buy in or leave" is only a cute saying if they had another losing season. They can't continue to let games like this slip away. This game, the Cal game.
While no question we have improved, to be a winner on a Saturday you have to make plays. While they look small, they are game winning plays. Could be a key block. A key catch. To be a consistent winner you have to make those plays consistently.
Stanford did to us what BYU and others have done to us, but with different alignments. They make us go 80 yards and shorten the field from the 20 on in. If they make us kick a field it is a victory.
It is now two straight years where the senior explosive Wr gets the drops. Unfortunately, they are coming at the wrong time, a huge momentum shift. Mayle specifically on a key third down in the Apple Cup, and Dom Williams the pass right before the pick.
And while the defense gave up 27 points in the second half, the game really should have been over and Hogan probably would have had to throw much more in the second half, and they could have played the QB sweep differently if we scored 20 to 24 instead of 12 in the first half.
Are we too young? Maybe. Maybe it all crystalizes next year and we don't have players dropping key passes. Getting in the right gap on every play, and not missing assignment several times as Hogan the least likely player to go untouched for several scores. Bowl game this year, north champs next year.
While it is said we are young, it has been the older guys, the Williams, the Mayles who didn't have perfect execution. But with that said it sure is encouraging that we lose Destiny and Paulo and have the depth where we bring in Hercules and Barber is getting better and better. Joe S may be the most underpaid coach in the league, and he has to be thankful he didn't leave Pullman for the USC job.
Still all in all a great weekend.
I'm going to point out the obvious- when you play close games, especially against Power 5 opponents, you're going to lose some. Somehow the Rutgers, Oregon and Arizona games didn't get away from us.
That is the obvious. PSU Stanford and Cal are on the other side of the ledger. All within making a play of winning, and as Leach accurately points out should have won.
And finally, this year, there are marks in the "comfortable win" ledger without any in the "wipeout loss" column. Going from sub-mediocrity to contender as your recruits mature is just fine.
Yep...unless you are the coach who help sets the expectation level. Going to a bowl game this year is great.
Not at all.
Not sure there were ever Iron laws. Figment of your imagination.
Last edited:
Came over here to congratulate you guys on a great season to this point and for one of the best games from a pure viewing perspective this past Saturday.
Bonus is to also read some nonsense like this post. I guess if everyone thought the Cougars were a lock to beat Oregon, that news did not make to Vegas. Cashed one of my easiest bets this year that day with the Cougars getting 16. That sure is a lot of points to be giving a team that was a lock to win anyway.
