Most of the fan base sold itself on the magic eye for talent nonsense because we were looking for hope. We knew weren't going to land a bunch of 4 and 5 star guys so we had to convince ourselves we had an edge of some sort. Clinging to these myths 20 years later is silly.
How will recruiting go?
- Thread starter chugspig
- Start date
Most of the fan base sold itself on the magic eye for talent nonsense because we were looking for hope. We knew weren't going to land a bunch of 4 and 5 star guys so we had to convince ourselves we had an edge of some sort. Clinging to these myths 20 years later is silly.
Two things...I said I was a victim or portrayed it? I would just think a superior mind such as yourself would have better things to do. But if you disagree with my thoughts, feel free to respond.
McWashington was a walkon ? Not sure that is the case. I could be a dick like others and say "the internet is your friend", but I won't. Shawn McWashington was not a walk-on. Shawn Tims however was.
Hmmm....regarding Long- UW with Lambright did not go after him, then Rick came in and neither did he. So you are correct, if the recruiting period started for Long December of 1998. But why wasn't he offered by UW in May, June, July, August, September, October, November of 1998?
Price didn't want blue chippers? Ummm, I said or even implied that? No, he had to get talent in other ways, including an eye for talent and moving them into spots where they would be successful.
Look at Matt Storm out of Edmonds Wa way back in the day. He was a 6'5" white chip according to the Seattle Times. No one recruited the kid. Blue, red, White. Thought at best he was a PLU type kid. Turned out the kid didn't have the grades and went to Walla Walla Cc and became a JC all American and went to Georgia. And it wasn't his grades that put off colleges...they just didn't see what Price and staff did.
Yeah kids like Malcolm Stewart back in the day from Yakima , their film jumps out at you the minute you turn on the projector or these days the computer. They are easy to spot. Ron Childs, Pat Bennett, Derting, Gary Holmes, Torey Hunter, takes a little more imagination.
But if your argument is anyone can find these players with that type of upside I would have to disagree with you. Price in 13 years at the hardest school in the country, or one of them to recruit to won two conference titles, and Leach at Tech and in Pullman one zero, I think by the evidence Price was able to get players with higher upside and maybe a higher downside. And one other thing that helped Leach be more consistent. Lack of season ending injuries along the oline year after year served him well. For the most part he didn't have to shuffle lineups. (same can be said in Price's two 10 win seasons.)
Ed, you're considered one of the most erudite and logical posters on CougZone.
But it seems like you go out of your way at times to smudge Coach Mike Leach's track record of success at WSU.
A top 10 finish. Three straight Apple Cups with a chance to go to the Pac-12 championship.
IMHO, for a program with so-called limited resources, that's an accomplishment that should be appreciated by all in Cougar Nation.
Your victimhood abounds. You post nonsense on a message board, get called out for it, then rinse and repeat for years. Poor you. You can always choose not to post nonsense. Remember that you posted this:
"I know it is quarantine time, and I get you seem to be bored, but you sure spend a lot of time even though you seem to have a lot of it worrying about my mindless and stale discussions. Look at Mik, he rants on, do I really care what he has to say other than his kid was sick? Nope. do I care he goes on and on? Not at all."
Explain why Price posted three 3 win seasons and two 4 win seasons with the magic eye for talent? The magic eye for talent must have let him down half the time.
Your pea brain does not comprehend that Long and Trufant were waiting to get an offer from uw until they were told it wasn't going to happen. They didn't jump on Price's offer early.
It is appreciated. funny you read it that way. do you have that same eye when people say Price had the advantage of only 8 conference games, he had prop 48, he took academic risks, USC was down, UW wasn't the same UW etc etc?
Just out of curiosity, how did I smudge his record? By saying he didn't apparently get the same elite level talent as Price, as Price won two conference championships and Leach hasn't ever won one?
Let me put into perspective for you... Take 18, 17 and 16 teams and rank them with 2002, 97, and 2001. Based on talent alone how would you rank them?
Just at a first glance, I would probably go 97, 2002, 18, 16, 01, 17. Do I get much of a disagreement from you.
Now, if 97 played 18 3 times during the season, I think Mike Leach would win two with lesser talent. if 2002 played either 16 or 18 three times in a season I think despite being more gifted Leach would win two out of three times. I think there are times when Leach is a top 8 coach in the country, I think Price was in terms of strategy game day coaching was maybe top 30.
If I was going to misspell "derided," I don't think "erudite" would be the result, but I know these are unusual times.
Are you suggesting the 6'2", 300 lb HS senior wi
Who do you think would win in a fight: Batman or Spiderman?
Digibbobs on the message boards...all day-every day.
Oh, burn.
Is that young Samuel L. Jackson in the turbin?
I simply wondered why someone who is so much smarter would waste their time reading my posts. It is not a victim response, rather than a curious response. I am sure you understand the difference between the two. Maybe you are just the defender of what you see is the truth---in this Corona environment does your mask match your cape?
I am not bothered by you posting what you do, it is simply a curiosity why what you perceive as nonsense bothers you so much. That is a simple query in my head, nothing more or less. But what I will say I will continue to write down my thoughts and opinions on this board.
Which gets me back to your Trufant and Long comment. You just made my point. You have the tenth pick in the draft and the Outland trophy winner in the Dawgs back yard and they couldn't figure out they were special players at different positions most people projected them to be. Sorry you don't get the value or specialty in that. It is no different with Leach and his receivers. His slow slot guys he finds someone like Bret Bartilone and offers a scholie when no one else did.
If I may quote a dickish comment...By the lack of comment on Shawn McWashington you must have concluded you were incorrect about him not being offered a scholie...oh the internet is your friend.
Very easy to explain why Price had down years. One was schedule. Easier to string back to back bowl games when you go 3-5 in conference but play cupcakes versus going to Tennessee, Michigan, Colorado etc. That is one.
Two, Price was from Weber State, not a lot of street cred there. So he was forced to look for diamonds in the rough. Both causes hits and misses. He didn't have near the resources as we developed over the last ten years. Hell the guy had to pay out of his own pocket for the wives and families to go to the Sun Bowl in 2001. What school does that?
Three, his offense was qb centric. He lost two QB's a year early. In doing so it meant the QB room was shy of talent and experience. You are a big time QB talent in the class of 91. WSU is recruiting you hard. So is USC or even UCLA. (or you name the school). The kid looks at the roster and sees a freshman started six games and was very successful with a cannon for an arm. NFL quality. What is the top flight qb thinking? Yeah I want to go to Pullman for three years and sit on the bench behind Bledsoe, or would I rather sit on the bench at UCLA? In 92 WSU had their star qb locked up, a QB from Boise Idaho. He made a last minute trip to ASU and the rest was history.
If you are a qb in 95, 96 and even 97 with Leaf around, you going to choose and sit behind a freshman who had his starting debut in Husky stadium and Don James said that was the best freshman performance from a QB in Husky stadium?
So look at what the transition was very close to looking like? Brad Otten for 95 and 96 season. Jake Plummer had verbaled to Price, so he would have been there from 93 to 96. Do you think our offense would have looked as anemic? Akili Smith in 98.
That was one issue, another was injuries. Mike Pattison in 93 was devastating. Being thin on the oline also led to the ups and downs.
I answered your question, now my turn, why is it do you think Leach has never won a conference title, and didn't have that swing up?
Ed, I think in looking at actual game day coaching you could flip a coin between Leach and Price. Depended upon what was required in that game. Initial game strategy; I think both were about equal. 2nd quarter adjustments, prior to having the half to meet & discuss, I'd give to Leach. Half adjustments maybe narrowly to Leach, but halftime motivational speech goes to Price hands down. Clock management isn't even close...Price was not perfect, but it is one of Leach's weakest points. Both paid most of their attention to O and less to D, but Price seemed more alert with regard to special teams and always seemed more in tune with his FG kicker. Finally, Price was one of the best I've seen at capitalizing on momentum shift plays. A big play had Price injecting adrenaline all along the sideline. His kids could be exhausted, and he would get 3 or 4 plays out of them after a momentum shift where they looked fresh.
CML did one thing better than any coach I've seen. His workouts for the players...Leach Beach, etc....seemed to give him the fewest injuries that I've seen. That is a big deal when there is a noticeable drop off between your 1's and your 2's, and that was often the case for both coaches. Give conditioning results to Leach, and it's not even close.
CML did one thing better than any coach I've seen. His workouts for the players...Leach Beach, etc....seemed to give him the fewest injuries that I've seen. That is a big deal when there is a noticeable drop off between your 1's and your 2's, and that was often the case for both coaches. Give conditioning results to Leach, and it's not even close.
Ed, I think most have the view like me, that I, others, we would happily take LEACH's CONSISTENCY, over Price's INCONSISTENCY, 1 BOWL EVERY 3.5 YEARS, EVERY NON BOWL, A 2,3,4,5 WIN SEASON, And 2 Rosebowls.
Also your going by TECHNICALITIES in regards to Leach.
Yes Leach TECHNICALLY didnt goto a Rosebowl, Conference Championship.
But the 2018 year gets the MOTHER OF ALL POSITIVE ASTERIX next to the season.
You know how some teams, seasons, games, etc, get a negative asterix?
Well 2018 gets a positive Asterix
Asterix for 2018 season.
1. WORST PAC 12 OFFICIALS EVER NOT CALLING: A. ROUGHING THE PASSER. B. TARGETING, that if they would have called it like THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE, PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN A WSU WIN OVER USC.
THATS 12 WINS INSTEAD OF 11.
2. And 1,2,3 feet of snow, in the apple cup. Without that BLIZZARD, there is no doubt that MINSHEW, WSU, probably would have beaten UW, in the Apple cup.
That is 13 wins, unbeaten season.
BUT AT THE MINIMUM, IF NOT FOR THAT BS, WSU, LEACH WOULD HAVE, SHOULD HAVE WON AT LEAST ONE MORE WIN.
So 2018 was the asterix, technical equivalent to a 12 win season.
With 12 wins, WSU, Leach would have either been the Pac 12 Champ, Rosebowl, or a NY6 bowl, like the Fiesta, Cotton, Peach bowl, instead of the Alamo bowl that they got with 10 wins, winning the Alamo bowl as win number 11.
Next Ed, Prices Rosebowls, were 10, TEN, win teams, 1 win short of Leach's 2018 team.
Next Ed, Leach's 2018 team had a UP UW, and a semi UP, upper 1/3 of the Pac 12, while a more down Pac 12 in relation to the rest of the country.
What that means Ed, is that if the Pac 12 had been higher rated in relation to the rest of the country, WSU probably would have been in the Fiesta Bowl, etc.
And since WSU should have won, been credited with 1 more win at 11-1, there would have been a good chance that 2018 would have gone to the playoffs, if the Pac 12 had a better reputation, and if not for either the Blizzard, or Pac 12 officials.
Next Ed, If were to have taken that 2018 team, put them in a time machine, back to when USC, UCLA, UW, etc, was down under Price, 2018 would have been a either a Pac 12 champ, Rosebowl, National Champion.
2018 is the equivalent of Price's Pac 12 championship, Rosebowls
So Leach does, should get ASTERIX credit for having won a pac 12 championship, gone to a Rosebowl, Fiesta, NY6 bowl with, in the 2018 season.
Its not Leach's fault that the BS PAC 12 REFS BS REFS TOOK AWAY A CHANCE AT A WIN.
ITS NOT LEACH'S FAULT THAT A BLIZZARD(THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO A AIR RAID OFFENSE AND DEFENSE)HIT THE APPLE CUP.
If that kind of BS had prevented Mike Prices Rosebowls, etc, you would be defending Mike Price on, about that.
So Leach's high was comparable to Prices high's.
The difference between Leach and Price is that with Leach you didnt have to have 2,3, 3,4 win losing seasons, just to get the rosebowl equivalent year, like you did with Price.
Because of that, Leach had way the better record, was a better coach.
Yes I know Leach, Price's records werent that far apart, were closer then people think, but that is only because of his 1,2 3-9 years out of 8,9 seasons, and because of his 6-7 year.
If Leach had stayed at WSU for 13 years instead of 8,9, and had stayed for 13 years like Price did, Leach's record, would have probably been a HELL lot better then Price's.
Leach did better then Price, and Leach was a better coach then Price.
So stop trying to make Price out to be a better coach then Leach.
Also before Leach, Price was a great coach.
But as great as Price was, he is nowhere near as good as Leach.
Also your going by TECHNICALITIES in regards to Leach.
Yes Leach TECHNICALLY didnt goto a Rosebowl, Conference Championship.
But the 2018 year gets the MOTHER OF ALL POSITIVE ASTERIX next to the season.
You know how some teams, seasons, games, etc, get a negative asterix?
Well 2018 gets a positive Asterix
Asterix for 2018 season.
1. WORST PAC 12 OFFICIALS EVER NOT CALLING: A. ROUGHING THE PASSER. B. TARGETING, that if they would have called it like THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE, PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN A WSU WIN OVER USC.
THATS 12 WINS INSTEAD OF 11.
2. And 1,2,3 feet of snow, in the apple cup. Without that BLIZZARD, there is no doubt that MINSHEW, WSU, probably would have beaten UW, in the Apple cup.
That is 13 wins, unbeaten season.
BUT AT THE MINIMUM, IF NOT FOR THAT BS, WSU, LEACH WOULD HAVE, SHOULD HAVE WON AT LEAST ONE MORE WIN.
So 2018 was the asterix, technical equivalent to a 12 win season.
With 12 wins, WSU, Leach would have either been the Pac 12 Champ, Rosebowl, or a NY6 bowl, like the Fiesta, Cotton, Peach bowl, instead of the Alamo bowl that they got with 10 wins, winning the Alamo bowl as win number 11.
Next Ed, Prices Rosebowls, were 10, TEN, win teams, 1 win short of Leach's 2018 team.
Next Ed, Leach's 2018 team had a UP UW, and a semi UP, upper 1/3 of the Pac 12, while a more down Pac 12 in relation to the rest of the country.
What that means Ed, is that if the Pac 12 had been higher rated in relation to the rest of the country, WSU probably would have been in the Fiesta Bowl, etc.
And since WSU should have won, been credited with 1 more win at 11-1, there would have been a good chance that 2018 would have gone to the playoffs, if the Pac 12 had a better reputation, and if not for either the Blizzard, or Pac 12 officials.
Next Ed, If were to have taken that 2018 team, put them in a time machine, back to when USC, UCLA, UW, etc, was down under Price, 2018 would have been a either a Pac 12 champ, Rosebowl, National Champion.
2018 is the equivalent of Price's Pac 12 championship, Rosebowls
So Leach does, should get ASTERIX credit for having won a pac 12 championship, gone to a Rosebowl, Fiesta, NY6 bowl with, in the 2018 season.
Its not Leach's fault that the BS PAC 12 REFS BS REFS TOOK AWAY A CHANCE AT A WIN.
ITS NOT LEACH'S FAULT THAT A BLIZZARD(THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO A AIR RAID OFFENSE AND DEFENSE)HIT THE APPLE CUP.
If that kind of BS had prevented Mike Prices Rosebowls, etc, you would be defending Mike Price on, about that.
So Leach's high was comparable to Prices high's.
The difference between Leach and Price is that with Leach you didnt have to have 2,3, 3,4 win losing seasons, just to get the rosebowl equivalent year, like you did with Price.
Because of that, Leach had way the better record, was a better coach.
Yes I know Leach, Price's records werent that far apart, were closer then people think, but that is only because of his 1,2 3-9 years out of 8,9 seasons, and because of his 6-7 year.
If Leach had stayed at WSU for 13 years instead of 8,9, and had stayed for 13 years like Price did, Leach's record, would have probably been a HELL lot better then Price's.
Leach did better then Price, and Leach was a better coach then Price.
So stop trying to make Price out to be a better coach then Leach.
Also before Leach, Price was a great coach.
But as great as Price was, he is nowhere near as good as Leach.
What the hell is an "asterix"?
You argument is based on a lot of what ifs.
The same can be said for the 97 Rosebowl...of what Leach never reached.
What if MIchael Black didn't get hurt. What if Leaf's pass to McWashington in the endzone before the Woodson pick was a foot lower. If either one of those things happen, we beat the #1 team in the country and win the Rose Bowl.
What if Pattison didn't get hurt? What if they had more bowl games in 1989? We were 6-5 that year. That qualifies for a bowl as we have seen two 6-6 Leach teams go that btw became 6-7 both times.
Price was a nobody when he came to WSU...and didn't have the anywhere near the facilities, money, nor the name recognition that Leach had...and for him to have reached higher highs than Leach ever did is impressive.
Further, I don't think anyone would argue that any of Leach's teams could hold a candle to the 97 team. If they did, they are smoking rocks.
Heck, I don't think many would argue Leach's teams could beat the 2002 team.
Last edited:
I actually agree with you about the 2002 team being the best in school history. The team was both talented and experienced, a powerful combo. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if Price had stuck around for another 5-10 years to see if he could have maintained a consistent level of success. I know Price maintains he left the program in good shape (I agree) but our margin for error has always been small.
I actually don't think the 2002 team is the best in history. I think the 97 team is better but thinner.
The 2002 team had more depth...but the 97 team had too many weapons including a 1,000 yd back.
2002 beats 1997 head to head.
Leaf is the most talented player in the game but Gesser had a will to win unmatched by anyone other than Minshew. Michael Black was great, but the trio of Green, Tippins, and Smith was an underrated attack.
Receiver
Darling > Jackson
Bush > McKenzie
Riley > Taylor
McWashington > Henderson
Timms > Lunde/Moore
I'd give the edge to Bienemann (FR) over Love Jefferson too.
Plus you know Collin Henderson is good for a TD pass in the game.
I think the lines are a push.
But the 2002 defense was much better than the 1997 group. Long, Williams, Tupai, DD Acholonu, Ike Brown, Fred Shavies would have caused lots of trouble on the LOS. That pass rush was special. Trufant, Coleman, David, a very underrated Virgil Williams with Karl Paymah available in nickle packages would force turnovers. They had an answer for everything the 1997 team brought on offense. The 1997 team was too prone to the explosive play for me to pick them. 2002 wins 30 to 27 in OT.
Leaf is the most talented player in the game but Gesser had a will to win unmatched by anyone other than Minshew. Michael Black was great, but the trio of Green, Tippins, and Smith was an underrated attack.
Receiver
Darling > Jackson
Bush > McKenzie
Riley > Taylor
McWashington > Henderson
Timms > Lunde/Moore
I'd give the edge to Bienemann (FR) over Love Jefferson too.
Plus you know Collin Henderson is good for a TD pass in the game.
I think the lines are a push.
But the 2002 defense was much better than the 1997 group. Long, Williams, Tupai, DD Acholonu, Ike Brown, Fred Shavies would have caused lots of trouble on the LOS. That pass rush was special. Trufant, Coleman, David, a very underrated Virgil Williams with Karl Paymah available in nickle packages would force turnovers. They had an answer for everything the 1997 team brought on offense. The 1997 team was too prone to the explosive play for me to pick them. 2002 wins 30 to 27 in OT.
The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
With your analysis, the 2002 D is better than the 2003 D...and you would think so with losing Trufant and Long but the 2003 D was better.
Regarding Gesser and his will to win...he crapped the bed in Apple Cups.
He played horrible in the 02 Apple Cup before getting hurt.
Heck, that's another reason why the 97 team is better. Not only did they win the Apple Cup against a better UW team, they won it to go to the Rose Bowl!
I invite you to go back and watch both of those Apple Cups again and tell me who had the will to win. Leaf put his team on his back in the biggest game in our history at the time to go to the Rosebowl.
Further, the 97 team averaged 40.25 ppg which was 2nd in the country.
The 2002 team averaged 33.2
Interestingly enough, the Defense gave up exactly the same points in both yrs: 296
And finally, the eyeball test. The 97 team wins this one, too.
If you switch Leaf and Gesser, I would take the 2002. Leaf was the X factor.
You’ve never understood that different coaches can build a program in different ways. Leach pulled a two time All-American out of Wenatchee that no one else wanted. Leach pulled an OL out of Woodinville that no one else wanted that developed into a first round pick. How about a QB transfer that got benched at ECU. But in this very thread you’re saying that Leach doesn’t know how to get more out of guys that other coaches think are too small, too slow or whatever. Even though Leach’s career is built on doing more with less.
Where is your string of guys Leach almost got that would have saved the day?
You still don’t know how to spell Bartolone.
Why did Marino, Barry Sanders and Randy Moss never win a Super Bowl? Sometimes you get a snow storm during a key game and your QB can’t hang onto the ball. Price never won a conference title while James was at uw. Leach got to clean up the steaming pile Wulff left while Sarkisian was boozing his way around Lake Washington. The competition for Leach became much more difficult from 2016 on.
I don’t care that Leach hasn’t won a conference title. The reason is he focused on what he was best at- Xs and Os and running the offense and needed guys like Simmons, Manning, Salavea and Wilson to recruit. Leach won here. Consistently, which has never happened before.
Last edited:
I think it would be a hell of a game, but my gut is that 2002 would win 7 out of 10.
I think 2002’s defensive speed - especially on the DL - would be hard for the Fat Five to handle. The 2002 secondary was as good as any Leaf saw until the Rose Bowl, and the pressure he’d get would force mistakes.
I think the ‘97 DL would also create some problems for the ‘02 offense, but Gesser’s mobility would blunt that a bit, and there were more playmakers in the skill positions, along with their greater depth.
I think both defenses (‘97 and ‘02) would struggle with Minshew and the 2018 offense. But both offenses would be able to move against the ‘18 defense.
I never said that 2018, was better, would beat 97, 2002.
I dont think 2018 is even better then the 10-1, 2001 team.
But I did say, and I not only said so, but 2018 is COMPARABLE LIKE , a HIGH, LIKE UNTO, as HIGH as Price's High's.
And I dont think, and am not sure if 2018, would have done as good in 97, 2001, 2002, if went back in time to those specific years.
But I do think if 2018 went back in time to those years were Price won either 3,4,5,6 games, etc, that during at least one of those years that 2018 with Leach as coach, would have probably won a Pac 12 championship, gone to the Rosebowl, or Fiesta Bowl or maybe even played in, lost the BCS National Championship game.
And I agree with what Gibbons said to Ed in his most recent post to Ed, Sponge, about Leach and the 2018 team.
And 95coug is right that the 2018 team, tho it wasnt better, and probably would lose to the 97, 2002, 2001 teams, that 2018 would give those teams a run for their money, because Minshew, and tbe Air Raid offense of 2018 would have been more then 97, 2001, 2002, could handle.
Leach deserves technical credit for a Price like high, because of how either BAD, OR CORRUPT PAC 12 REFFS, and a Blizzard Snowstorm JOBBED, HOSED Leach out of a Rosebowl, NY6, National Title, beating USC, UW.
So Leach had A Price like high without having to have 2,3 bad years before it, without the losing seasons, inconsistentency.
Leach was a CONSISTENT WINNER, that DID have a Price Like high in 2018, without the Price Like inconsistency, and without the Price Like LOWS.
because of that most WSU fans would take Leach over Price.
And Leach is better then Price.
I dont think 2018 is even better then the 10-1, 2001 team.
But I did say, and I not only said so, but 2018 is COMPARABLE LIKE , a HIGH, LIKE UNTO, as HIGH as Price's High's.
And I dont think, and am not sure if 2018, would have done as good in 97, 2001, 2002, if went back in time to those specific years.
But I do think if 2018 went back in time to those years were Price won either 3,4,5,6 games, etc, that during at least one of those years that 2018 with Leach as coach, would have probably won a Pac 12 championship, gone to the Rosebowl, or Fiesta Bowl or maybe even played in, lost the BCS National Championship game.
And I agree with what Gibbons said to Ed in his most recent post to Ed, Sponge, about Leach and the 2018 team.
And 95coug is right that the 2018 team, tho it wasnt better, and probably would lose to the 97, 2002, 2001 teams, that 2018 would give those teams a run for their money, because Minshew, and tbe Air Raid offense of 2018 would have been more then 97, 2001, 2002, could handle.
Leach deserves technical credit for a Price like high, because of how either BAD, OR CORRUPT PAC 12 REFFS, and a Blizzard Snowstorm JOBBED, HOSED Leach out of a Rosebowl, NY6, National Title, beating USC, UW.
So Leach had A Price like high without having to have 2,3 bad years before it, without the losing seasons, inconsistentency.
Leach was a CONSISTENT WINNER, that DID have a Price Like high in 2018, without the Price Like inconsistency, and without the Price Like LOWS.
because of that most WSU fans would take Leach over Price.
And Leach is better then Price.
Last edited:
You do realize the Cougs played 13 games in 2002 compared to 12 in 1997, right? Pretty dishonest to cite ppg for the offense and switch to total points for defense. Nice try to sneak that one in.
If you want to talk about talent and 2002, go back and watch the USC game.
One of the reasons the 2002 team isn't held in the same esteem as 1997 fans was expectations. Leafs squad came out of nowhere. It's easy to overrate a team that surprises you like that. The 2002 squad returned plenty of talent from a 10 win team, was picked to win the PAC, and met those expectations. They didn't exceed them though. But they were headed for a hard fought Apple Cup win when Gesser broke his leg. Then silliness occured to get the game to OT (won't even get into the refs decision to end the game). Then Price mailed it in at the Rose Bowl because Bama played Oklahoma the next year and he didn't want to tip his playbook so he ran HB dive, bubble screen, draw, punt most of the game. It all felt unsatisfying.
2002 v. 1997. Both teams healthy and both coaching staffs focused? 2002 all day.
If you want to talk about talent and 2002, go back and watch the USC game.
One of the reasons the 2002 team isn't held in the same esteem as 1997 fans was expectations. Leafs squad came out of nowhere. It's easy to overrate a team that surprises you like that. The 2002 squad returned plenty of talent from a 10 win team, was picked to win the PAC, and met those expectations. They didn't exceed them though. But they were headed for a hard fought Apple Cup win when Gesser broke his leg. Then silliness occured to get the game to OT (won't even get into the refs decision to end the game). Then Price mailed it in at the Rose Bowl because Bama played Oklahoma the next year and he didn't want to tip his playbook so he ran HB dive, bubble screen, draw, punt most of the game. It all felt unsatisfying.
2002 v. 1997. Both teams healthy and both coaching staffs focused? 2002 all day.
The Air Raid was built to shred 4-3 man defenses like we ran under Price so it's not really fair to compare the two. Even with as good as our back 7 were, there is no way the could cover the space necessary to slow down the AR.
Umm..I didn't try sneaking anything in there.
I didn't look how many total games they played...just the points given up which were the same and I mentioned it because I found it interesting.
Doesn't detract from my point.
I was at all 3 games you mentioned above and watched pretty much every game for both teams.
I have to ask...did you watch the 97 season?
Gesser didn’t break his leg. He had a high ankle sprain that he was already playing on and got it aggravated on a rollout and awkward (maybe horse collar) tackle. I think he also had torn cartilage in his ribs, but that might have been another year. The broken leg was his sophomore year against Oregon, I think.
I mix up Gessers endless list of injuries. Poor guy played with no regard for his safety.
I never once argued coaches don't build it in different ways. Actually quite the contrary. I have said Price had a keen eye for talent, moved players into positions other coaches couldn't see. I said he was very good at it. He made Shawn McWashington, scholie player, (I am surprised you didn't know that...if I may quote you again) a WR, Nian Taylor a RB moved to WR. Other coaches weren't recruiting them for that position. I think other schools were recruiting Long to play TE, Trufant to play RB. That is how Price built it.
I never once said Leach doesn't know how to take a two star player and fit in his offensive system. Not once.
You are correct, Price didn't win a title when James was at UW, probably in part because James left early into Price's tenure. Price did something no one since 1931 until 1997, and no one has done since 2002, including Leach.
Just an aside, not sure what the big continent did to be an all american his junior year when his own conference didn't have him in the top 10 lineman in the conference, it always seemed to be an odd pick to me.
And of course I would expect Leach to do more than Price, simply because he had 10 years of D1 football under his belt in a major conference. Price came from Weber State. That alone should have given Leach more cred in the homes of recruits.
It is funny you mention the reason (and I will say that word again---reason) Leach had bad luck in the snow, and I am not sure I disagree with you. Some , probably Leach included if that was someone else would say that is an excuse. Others would say he should have adapted slightly to accommodate the winds and potential snow on the Palouse.
So I can make this very clear to you....I think Price was very good at getting talent others did not want or could not see, moving them on both sides of the ball. Leach in some cases didn't need to do that because offensively he had a plug and play system. Did he move players off their "recruited position", yes. He just didn't do it with the near the amount of time Price did. It would be akin to me saying Leach doesn't run trick plays, and then someone could say not true he ran a double pass in 2005.
Also, Leach did win more consistently than Price. But he had losing seasons in 12, 13, 14. Won in 15, 16, 17 and 18, and in my book took a huge step back in 19.
I very much appreciate what Leach did at WSU and there is a very personal reason I am sad that he is gone. Am I glad he left professionally? I wish he took the Tennessee job for numerous reasons. One, clearly a huge step up, not a side step to MSU. (plus Tenn doesn't have that stupid cow bell) I think he would have enjoyed way more success at Tenn than he will at MSU.
I also think he would have left a better program for the next coach to come in if he left for Tennessee. And he would have left on a real high vs some of the wearing things that happened in 2019. I disagree with Biggs when he says he lost his fire. I am not sure coaches lose it. But I think the job was for whatever reason wearing on him in 2019.
I think Sponge was referring to conference championships..unfortunately in a beer driven post he was correct.
All of which you say is true. Why was it the 97 team could go into Husky stadium and drop 41 to get to the Rose Bowl against a better husky team than the one that played in Pullman in 02, and the 02 needed three OT's to get to 26. One reason. Ryan Leaf...and there is the difference.
U
Its not just the Snow, altho that BLIZZARD was bad enough.
BAD, CORRUP PAC 12 REFS JOBBED, HOSED LEACH OUT OF BEATING USC.
Now you can say all you want that Leach, WSU could have made the game not close, so that the officiating wouldnt have made a difference.
BUT:
This was USC, not some measly Ore St, or PSU. That game was a TOUGH GAME, MATCH UP, CLOSE game, NOT because WSU didnt play well enough, but because despite WSU playing good enough to deserve to win, USC was USC tough.
It would be different if it was PSU/Ore St, and the BAD, Corrupt Pac 12 Refs, were to JOB, HOSE WSU/Leach out of beating PSU/Ore St. If that were to happen, I think most would blame Leach/WSU, not the Pac 12 Refs.
But it wasnt PSU/Ore St, it was USC, in a TOUGH, CLOSE game.
It would be like if that had happened in the National Championship game between Clemson, and Alabama, and the game werecto be close, EVERYBODY would RIGHTFULLY BLAME THE REFS.
Its like what happened to the SEAHAWKS. the Seahawks had to beat the JETS to get into the playoffs. Vinny Testaverde did about a 6 yard TD, with seconds left in the game, that would have won the game for the SEAHAWKS. But the Refs called Vinny 1.5 yards short of the End Zone line.
BUT Instant replay ABSOLUTELY Clearly showed Vinny EASILY getting into the Endzone.
The REFS, NFL BLEW that game. And became a laughing stock over it.
Seahawks WON that game. That game, season gets a ASTERIX.
Well similarly to that Minshewed was marching to a TD, and was about close to being in the Red Zone. And Minshew was clearly Roughed, Targeted. And it wasnt ticky tacky. IT WAS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS. And even after the game ESPN, FOX, and the rest of the Football Sports nation, highlighted it, for days, weeks. The Pac 12 officiating, was the LAUGHING STOCK of the whole country over it.
The BAD CORRUPT(i say corrupt, because of the corruption scandal over the game), PAC 12 REFS, OFFICIATING JOBBED, HOSED WSU/Leach, out of probably beating USC.
If they would have called roughing the passer, targeting like they SHOULD HAVE DONE, Minshew/WSU/Leach, would have found a way to win that game, as the Penalty would have put WSU either 1st and 10 or 1st and goal, close, closer to the end zone, with about 20 to 40 to 60 seconds left, with MOMENTUM, with the USC defense TIRED.
Call that making excuses all you want. But it is a LEGIT excuse. BAD CORRUPT OFFICIATING JOBBED, HOSED WSU/Leach,/Minshew out of beating USC, the same way the Seahawks were by bad officiating.
That's 1 more win, A 12, Twelve win season, if win the bowl. If dont win the bowl, it would have been a 11 win season, and it would have been a Rosebowl, or Fiesta Bowl, or NY6, and maybe even a play off season, all RUINED BECAUSE OF LAME ASS BAD CORRUPT PAC 12 REFS.
WSU/LEACH gets ASTERIX, TECHNICAL CREDIT FOR that kind of season and for being A COMPARABLE HIGH to Price's 97, 2001,2002 years.
Its not just the Snow, altho that BLIZZARD was bad enough.
BAD, CORRUP PAC 12 REFS JOBBED, HOSED LEACH OUT OF BEATING USC.
Now you can say all you want that Leach, WSU could have made the game not close, so that the officiating wouldnt have made a difference.
BUT:
This was USC, not some measly Ore St, or PSU. That game was a TOUGH GAME, MATCH UP, CLOSE game, NOT because WSU didnt play well enough, but because despite WSU playing good enough to deserve to win, USC was USC tough.
It would be different if it was PSU/Ore St, and the BAD, Corrupt Pac 12 Refs, were to JOB, HOSE WSU/Leach out of beating PSU/Ore St. If that were to happen, I think most would blame Leach/WSU, not the Pac 12 Refs.
But it wasnt PSU/Ore St, it was USC, in a TOUGH, CLOSE game.
It would be like if that had happened in the National Championship game between Clemson, and Alabama, and the game werecto be close, EVERYBODY would RIGHTFULLY BLAME THE REFS.
Its like what happened to the SEAHAWKS. the Seahawks had to beat the JETS to get into the playoffs. Vinny Testaverde did about a 6 yard TD, with seconds left in the game, that would have won the game for the SEAHAWKS. But the Refs called Vinny 1.5 yards short of the End Zone line.
BUT Instant replay ABSOLUTELY Clearly showed Vinny EASILY getting into the Endzone.
The REFS, NFL BLEW that game. And became a laughing stock over it.
Seahawks WON that game. That game, season gets a ASTERIX.
Well similarly to that Minshewed was marching to a TD, and was about close to being in the Red Zone. And Minshew was clearly Roughed, Targeted. And it wasnt ticky tacky. IT WAS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS. And even after the game ESPN, FOX, and the rest of the Football Sports nation, highlighted it, for days, weeks. The Pac 12 officiating, was the LAUGHING STOCK of the whole country over it.
The BAD CORRUPT(i say corrupt, because of the corruption scandal over the game), PAC 12 REFS, OFFICIATING JOBBED, HOSED WSU/Leach, out of probably beating USC.
If they would have called roughing the passer, targeting like they SHOULD HAVE DONE, Minshew/WSU/Leach, would have found a way to win that game, as the Penalty would have put WSU either 1st and 10 or 1st and goal, close, closer to the end zone, with about 20 to 40 to 60 seconds left, with MOMENTUM, with the USC defense TIRED.
Call that making excuses all you want. But it is a LEGIT excuse. BAD CORRUPT OFFICIATING JOBBED, HOSED WSU/Leach,/Minshew out of beating USC, the same way the Seahawks were by bad officiating.
That's 1 more win, A 12, Twelve win season, if win the bowl. If dont win the bowl, it would have been a 11 win season, and it would have been a Rosebowl, or Fiesta Bowl, or NY6, and maybe even a play off season, all RUINED BECAUSE OF LAME ASS BAD CORRUPT PAC 12 REFS.
WSU/LEACH gets ASTERIX, TECHNICAL CREDIT FOR that kind of season and for being A COMPARABLE HIGH to Price's 97, 2001,2002 years.
It's not about arguing Ed. You don't think coaches can build programs in different ways. That's why you constantly regurgitate the same tired crap. Constant historical analogies that don't make any sense. Constant misinformation and outright lies.
Here's the bottom line on McWashington- 66 career catches. One year as starter or key contributor. That's one of your poster children for magic eye for talent.
Cr8zy...you are spot on. Even more than being a brilliant play-caller, Leach developed the beach. A woman's AAU team I am familiar with had 3 ACL tears to three kids that if you lined up 500 kids you would say they are 499 and 500 least likely to tear their ACL's. Two of the tears came in no contact on the soccer field. Woman (I think) the stat is 7 times more likely to tear an ACL than men.
Through guidance of someone who administered the beach an AAU board member was starting to implement the program in the woman's program. That was until Covid...but a little shot of Jack and a Lysol chaser for lunch and maybe corona goes away so they can see if the sand helps with ACL tears. And of course it won't be known for years how effective the beach will be, but the rationale sure makes sense. No idea why more college teams don't use it.
Historian Ed forgets his history again. Green was injured in the first half, Gesser in the second. Hunt blew the snap count at the goal line. And don't forget that Price puckered up.
How many picks did Huard contribute in 1997? Six?
Last edited:
What part of the history did I forget? When Gesser went out late in the third quarter we had only scored 17 points. Not saying that wasn't a factor, but having Gesser healthy for the rest of the game they don't score more than 28 at best, and I am being kind. Leaf nailed 41 on the dawgs in Montlake.
Last edited:
Well...don't disagree they refs clearly missed a targeting. And I bet USC fans could look at things with that same lens and say Helton got screwed. USC was 4-5. We aren't talking about Washington in 18.
