If Mason clocked a 4.4 today during pro-day

[Fab5Coug]

Re: I would "expect" them to take a step back

Originally posted by CougEd:
whether it is Falk or Bender. They may get the same crazy yards, but I expect "real Scoring", not numbers inflated by a Cal game for example, but looking at game by game scoring and seeing if it really matches up with 500 yards of offense.

I expect more turnovers next year. I am expecting a very up and down year from our young QB's. I would expect we score fewer points against USC (if we play them), Utah, Arizona, ASU, Stanford and Cal than we scored in 2014. I think we will score more than 13 points against UW this year, and I would suspect we will beat them this year.

I think when you talk about average scoring, and say we are 7th in conference and we score 59 in one game it skews the numbers.

How effective was our offense. We moved the ball a lot. But moving the ball a lot means zip. Scoring points on offense is what you should look at , and you look at it not cumulative, but game by game. UW for example gave up 27 to Arizona, 44 to UCLA, 23 to CU, 24 to ASU, 45 to Oregon, 20 to Stanford, 59 to Eastern and 19 to Illinois. I would expect we score 24 points with the number 5 offense in the country.

I put my neck out all the time.

I have said many times I except four maybe five wins at the top in 2015. I think the 2016 is the season we get back to a bowl game.

Well, of course scoring 59 in one game skews the numbers. But, look at everyone's schedule...

UW hung 59 on Eastern.
Oregon scored 62 on South Dakota.
Cal scored 60 on us.
USC hung 56 on Colorado.
UCLA put up 62 on ASU.
Arizona hung 58 on UNLV.
ASU scored 58 against New Mexico.
Utah put up 56 against Idaho St.
Colorado scored 56 against Cal.

You act like WSU is the only school in the conference to have a big blowout game to pump their numbers up a bit.

Heck, at least ours was against a conference opponent this year, and not Portland St or New Mexico.

 

[dgibbons]

IRON LAWS!!!!!

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Apples to oranges. The conference and the game is completely different now.

Conference scoring is up...and we run more plays than we did back then.

For someone who likes to call other people stupid, you should probably look in the mirror.

What????? You mean those analogies to the 70s and 80s that your brother loves are meaningless?

I'm not sure that anyone who looks solely at conference scoring offense rankings should be calling anyone anything.

 

[dgibbons]

Re: Patrol...WSU has always been the toughest gig in colelge football

Originally posted by CougEd:
and actually with Utah and CU it might have gotten slightly easier. Not significantly, but easier.

Do I get wrapped up in scoring offense. Yes, when that is supposedly your strength and the defense is so gawd awful. But I said the same about Walden, and the same about a Brink led offense. The numbers lie. Great offenses between the 20's, but like the old saying in gold, drive for show, putt for dough.

I will say leach does make it tougher on himself in recruiting than say Price. Price wanted TE bodies. If he missed out on them he would move to OT, or DE. It gave him flexibility. If Leach misses on an olineman, say Denzell Dotson or Villarubia, they have no where else to go. They can't play TE, they can't play DE.

We will see in the next two years how good of evaluator in the Pac 12 he is. He will have his kids in the program. He won't have to fight kids to see his vision. He can get them in the weight room and film room, and they better have the same work ethic.

And actually, outside of USC, UCLA and maybe Stanford, who really is looking for the pro TE and the pro rb, or even the pro qb? If Marriota isn't hugely successful, teams will start recruiting against Oregon (and they may not even need that type of QB), and say the spread option does not get a kid ready to play at the next level,. Nor does it at RB. The recruiting pitch may be...go to Oregon if you like the uniform change, but if you want a pro career at WR, RB, TE, or QB, come to "my' school.

Price didn't take only TE/DE bodies. Plenty of guys Price recruited on the OL didn't pan out, as you love to point out about when defending Wulff. And the existence of guys like Cole Madison and Nick Begg indicates that Leach does the same thing Price did in recruiting guys with the frame to grow into OL types.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Re: Patrol...but what the numbers point to is we don't score

Originally posted by CougEd:

enough game to game to match the yards put forth. You can talk about Leach in 2000, and again in 2005, but this is ten years later. New job, new conference. All one has to look at the won/loss record and realize Leach is in unchartered territory. He has won every where he has gone, expect her. Point to me in another place where he was sub .500

If pointing out the number of points scored against our opponents and the 6 times we scored under 31, or the 4 times under 20, and stating that doesn't square with 500 yards a game is adjusting numbers to serve an argument, guilty as charged I guess. Cause I don't think our scoring out put matches our yardage output.

Combine that with a relatively inexperienced QB, and tons of questions of defense, we are still a year away.

This I would agree with. 7th in YPG, vs 48th in PPG is quite a difference. I think this has to do with a few factors. Some of which I think (and hope) will change. Some won't.

First, the lack of running game limits scoring. When we get close to the goal line, space becomes limited, and we just do not have the ability to pound the ball into the endzone. I would like to think that as our personal becomes better (RB & OL), we see more of a focus running the football.

Wildly inconsistent kicking game. 1 more FG per game would have moved us from 48th to 28th in PPG last year. We hit 11 FGs last year, good for 95th in the country. I can only hope we improve here, as it would be difficult to get much worse.

No TE, I think limits red zone options. Nice to have a big, sure handed target you can get the ball to in the RZ. That, obviously, is not going to change.

 

[spongebob11]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Yards, total offense might work well on your fantasy team dgibbons, but in the real world, its scoring...you know, the thing that determines who wins and loses the game

 

[dgibbons]

Re: Patrol...but what the numbers point to is we don't score

Originally posted by Fab5Coug:

Originally posted by CougEd:

enough game to game to match the yards put forth. You can talk about Leach in 2000, and again in 2005, but this is ten years later. New job, new conference. All one has to look at the won/loss record and realize Leach is in unchartered territory. He has won every where he has gone, expect her. Point to me in another place where he was sub .500

If pointing out the number of points scored against our opponents and the 6 times we scored under 31, or the 4 times under 20, and stating that doesn't square with 500 yards a game is adjusting numbers to serve an argument, guilty as charged I guess. Cause I don't think our scoring out put matches our yardage output.

Combine that with a relatively inexperienced QB, and tons of questions of defense, we are still a year away.

This I would agree with. 7th in YPG, vs 48th in PPG is quite a difference. I think this has to do with a few factors. Some of which I think (and hope) will change. Some won't.

First, the lack of running game limits scoring. When we get close to the goal line, space becomes limited, and we just do not have the ability to pound the ball into the endzone. I would like to think that as our personal becomes better (RB & OL), we see more of a focus running the football.

Wildly inconsistent kicking game. 1 more FG per game would have moved us from 48th to 28th in PPG last year. We hit 11 FGs last year, good for 95th in the country. I can only hope we improve here, as it would be difficult to get much worse.

No TE, I think limits red zone options. Nice to have a big, sure handed target you can get the ball to in the RZ. That, obviously, is not going to change.

One thing that can change. Someone needs to be willing to lead block in the two back set. Morrow barely even tried. Wicks is a decent power runner.

 

[dgibbons]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Yards, total offense might work well on your fantasy team dgibbons, but in the real world, its scoring...you know, the thing that determines who wins and loses the game

But what about the fact that WSU averaged 33 a game with one of the best teams in school history????

There is more to evaluating an offensive system than looking at scoring offense rankings for the conference. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. You just won't admit it.

 

[Cougsocal]

Re: Well if that is the case I want to change the opinion in which

Originally posted by Coug95man2:
He says the rebuild is going to take longer than anyone expects… He isn't so naive as to give out numbers for next year, he's just saying it will take several more years to get WSU out of this hole (I want to say 2017 or 2018 is when he says we'll be out but I'm not sure… he needs to clarify to be sure). I tend to agree but I'm certain the ride from here to there will be fun to watch.

Considering that Leach came in and fell flat on the recruiting front, we are still years off on the turnaround calendar. We won't win in 2015, but I hope we show signs of life, signs that we have returned to the Pac-12 recruiting wars. I want to see young players making dumb mistakes, then make an occassional great play, in 2015. Another year of too slow, too weak, too unathletic, 4 years in, means his Highness Mike Leach is probably not going to get it done.

Super Santa in the sky, please give me "the young and the restless" II, and some hope.

You don't become good until you put quality kids on the field.

 

[CougPatrol]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Yards, total offense might work well on your fantasy team dgibbons, but in the real world, its scoring...you know, the thing that determines who wins and loses the game

There seem to be a lot of debates about this matter, but let me ask you guys this....

Do we pull the plug on Leach and move in a different direction if we don't hit .500?

 

[dgibbons]

Re: Well if that is the case I want to change the opinion in which

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by Coug95man2:
He says the rebuild is going to take longer than anyone expects… He isn't so naive as to give out numbers for next year, he's just saying it will take several more years to get WSU out of this hole (I want to say 2017 or 2018 is when he says we'll be out but I'm not sure… he needs to clarify to be sure). I tend to agree but I'm certain the ride from here to there will be fun to watch.

Considering that Leach came in and fell flat on the recruiting front, we are still years off on the turnaround calendar. We won't win in 2015, but I hope we show signs of life, signs that we have returned to the Pac-12 recruiting wars. I want to see young players making dumb mistakes, then make an occassional great play, in 2015. Another year of too slow, too weak, too unathletic, 4 years in, means his Highness Mike Leach is probably not going to get it done.

Super Santa in the sky, please give me "the young and the restless" II, and some hope.

You don't become good until you put quality kids on the field.

Well, the OL is deeper than we've had since probably 2002. The damage inflicted by the previous regime at that position is now fading. The secondary is at least shows some sings of life with White and Pippins. Cooper will leave a hole, but the DL is finally starting to round into shape.

It's almost like you think WSU didn't make it to a bowl game for the first time in a decade in 2013....

 

[spongebob11]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Again, apples to oranges.

If anyone thinks this offense is anywhere close to the 97 offense, they are smoking rocks.

We avg more plays per game now than those teams...and our 97 offense was at the tops of our league in scoring...again, against our peers.

 

[spongebob11]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

I think it depends on how well the team plays.

If it looks like we are still watching middle school football, then probably need to cut bait.

If we are playing some competitive football and no more blow out losses, than stay the course.

I am still flabergasted as to how bad the special teams were and the defense.

Yes, Leach made changes but I agree with you. At the end of the day, he is the one who hired these guys.

I am really concerned about the D with a d coordinator with no exp taking over a gawd awful unit who loses Cooper early.

For a more concrete answer, if next season is a repeat of last season, cut bait.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Again, apples to oranges.

If anyone thinks this offense is anywhere close to the 97 offense, they are smoking rocks.

We avg more plays per game now than those teams...and our 97 offense was at the tops of our league in scoring...again, against our peers.

Pretty sure he was comparing it to the '02 offense, not '97.

 

[Coug95man2]

Re: Well if that is the case I want to change the opinion in which

Two things:
1. I'm OK with CML taking a little more time. I like what I'm seeing so I'm OK with this timeline. To be clear, NOT what I'd want but it is, what it is. I have no control over it.
2. I kinda disagree that CML fell flat on his face in recruiting. Was/Is he recruiting like a top 25? He wasn't when he was at TT. But I see glimmers of hope every year and it's certainly better than we've had in quite a while. Is the overall national ranking important? A bit because it's a gauge of the class and we're doing OK in that column, but I also look at the average star rating. Something that, if you are a star gazer, is more indicative of the rating/ranking of the individuals/classes. IMHO, we are getting players like we haven't had in a decade and a half. This, in and of itself, is good news and reason for optimism, IMHO.

Recruiting per year:
2002: 29th (mostly due to us taking 29, averaging 2.66, the worst average in the Top 36 in the nation) TT at #48 NOTE: WSU out recruited TT this year.
2003: 96th (mostly due to us taking 16 players. averaging 2.56) TT at #44
2004: 35th (again numbers. We took 27 players. averaging 2.63) TT at #40 NOTE: WSU out recruited TT this year.
2005: 52nd (taking 20 players, averaging 2.5) TT at #37
2006: 45th (taking 24 players, averaging 2.58) TT at #25
2007: 62nd (taking 27 players, averaging 2.44) TT at #52
2008: 82nd (taking 27 players, averaging 2.15) TT at #45
2009: 93rd (taking 22 players, averaging 2.55) TT at #33.
2010: 91st (taking 26 players, averaging 2.46)
2011: 73rd (taking 26 players, averaging 2.52)
2012: 56th (taking 27 players, averaging 2.7)
2013: 53rd (taking 22 players, averaging 2.82)
2014: 70th, (taking 19 players, averaging 2.74)
2015: 55th, (taking 22 players, averaging 2.77)

To me, this shows that CML can thrive with classes between the 25 and 55 national ranking classes. He's getting it together. I believed when he was hired, I believe now, this isn't about the players, per se, as much as it's about whats between the ears… the culture, if you will. I think CML and Moos know that the culture needed to be changed but I don't know that anyone realized how much that horrible, horrible terrible phrase has become engrained into WSU culture. Some fool said it and we've fallen for it. That's the thing CML is still battling, IMHO. Culture. Attitude. We gotta change the meaning that "Cougin' it" now means we just thrashed 'em.

EDIT: The above numbers do not indicate recruits taken after a certain point (haven't a clue when that is… Britt?). Example LaRue didn't affect these numbers. Nor does this include the recent commit Rickey Preston, et al. This is also true of years previous although I don't recall taking this many, of this star ranking, in the past either. CML and staff don't quit after LOI and that is clear.
This post was edited on 3/16 1:55 PM by Coug95man2

 

[spongebob11]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

OK...well same thing holds.

The other fact is that those teams were far more efficient.

Our disparity between yds gained and points scored proves my point even more.

This post was edited on 3/16 2:05 PM by spongebob11

 

[CougEd]

CP...there is a difference in talking about leading the nation in yards,

scoring points and firing the coach. He needs to get five years in. Say he is 4-8, what good does it do to fire him? We fired Doba a year to early. He should have received his 5th year in 2008. And we could have watched the miracles he could perform with that squad.

While they are not in power positions to affect change, I probably have heard more people tell me that it is a failed experiment than seeing success at the end of the rainbow. Some of these people are Coug fans, some used to be in the profession, some are just random fans.

If I were to gauge the level of confidence among random coug fans that I know and have talked to. I probably would put it between 3 and 4.

I agree with Socal...play young kids now. Why Taylor T is starting at safety is beyond me. Yes, he needs to move up a level ever to see the field again at WSU.

Why Pole for example was getting more than 10% of the reps when they lost their 7th game is beyond me. Same for any other senior on defense.

 

[dgibbons]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Originally posted by spongebob11:
OK...well same thing holds.

The other fact is that those teams were far more efficient.

Our disparity between yds gained and points scored proves my point even more.

This post was edited on 3/16 2:05 PM by spongebob11

Not really. At least assuming that your point is the offense is "avg to below avg."

 

[dgibbons]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Originally posted by spongebob11:
I think it depends on how well the team plays.

If it looks like we are still watching middle school football, then probably need to cut bait.

If we are playing some competitive football and no more blow out losses, than stay the course.

I am still flabergasted as to how bad the special teams were and the defense.

Yes, Leach made changes but I agree with you. At the end of the day, he is the one who hired these guys.

I am really concerned about the D with a d coordinator with no exp taking over a gawd awful unit who loses Cooper early.

For a more concrete answer, if next season is a repeat of last season, cut bait.

The Consistency Crusaders may take issue with this stance.

 

[CougEd]

Fab...being number 1 or two in yards per game in the conference

and then using the number thrown out here as 7th in the conference is a big discrepancy. No, I don't act like we are the only one blowing out PSU.

That is exactly why I listed all the games. Scoring 13 against Reno, 17 against Stanford, 13 against Washington, 17 against USC, 28 against Utah. Four time we scored below 20, 7 times below 32. How many did we have in garbage time against Arizona?

We could have had a mediocre defense and we lose against UW, USC, reno, ASU, Arizona, Stanford, and Oregon.

It is hard to argue that we are not yet an efficient team in the red zone. Take a game by game look instead of saying we average 32 a game.

 

[spongebob11]

Re: IRON LAWS!!!!!

Dude, are you from Mars?

Wtf is a consistency crusader?

This post was edited on 3/16 3:07 PM by spongebob11

 

[dgibbons]

Re: Fab...being number 1 or two in yards per game in the conference

Originally posted by CougEd:
and then using the number thrown out here as 7th in the conference is a big discrepancy. No, I don't act like we are the only one blowing out PSU.

That is exactly why I listed all the games. Scoring 13 against Reno, 17 against Stanford, 13 against Washington, 17 against USC, 28 against Utah. Four time we scored below 20, 7 times below 32. How many did we have in garbage time against Arizona?

We could have had a mediocre defense and we lose against UW, USC, reno, ASU, Arizona, Stanford, and Oregon.

It is hard to argue that we are not yet an efficient team in the red zone. Take a game by game look instead of saying we average 32 a game.

Unless you do the same thing for the other 11 teams, it's meaningless. Or you can just look at the averages knowing that all teams had outcomes that could be considered to skew the stats. Like USC giving up only 17 points when a starting QB got knocked out of the game, for instance.

Before you whine about consistency, during the prior regime, schools like Hawaii were ahead 35-0 with 10 minutes to go in the second quarter.

 

[YakiCoug]

Re: Right...

Originally posted by dgibbons:
Cause 7th in the nation in total offense doesn't count. Even when the starting QB misses three games.

Spongie's forty times are clocking between 10.5 and 12 now. That BYU-game booze has a residual drag.

 

[spongebob11]

Fantasy football players unite!

We all know that yds between the 20's are more important than actual points scored!

 

[Fab5Coug]

Re: Fab...being number 1 or two in yards per game in the conference

Originally posted by CougEd:
and then using the number thrown out here as 7th in the conference is a big discrepancy. No, I don't act like we are the only one blowing out PSU.

That is exactly why I listed all the games. Scoring 13 against Reno, 17 against Stanford, 13 against Washington, 17 against USC, 28 against Utah. Four time we scored below 20, 7 times below 32. How many did we have in garbage time against Arizona?

We could have had a mediocre defense and we lose against UW, USC, reno, ASU, Arizona, Stanford, and Oregon.

It is hard to argue that we are not yet an efficient team in the red zone. Take a game by game look instead of saying we average 32 a game.

Stanford, UW & Utah all had pretty good defenses. They held a lot of teams under 30.

So, I guess the point you're making is we didn't score a lot against good Ds, and scored a lot against bad Ds?

Well.....yea.

 

[YakiCoug]

Another factor: WSU forced only 8 turnovers...

Originally posted by CougPatrol:

Originally posted by YakiCoug:

Scoring nearly 32 points a game (7th) wasn't the problem. Giving up nearly 39 ppg, with special teams consistently breaking down, escapes you. Are you predicting the offense will get worse this coming season and beyond?

Leach has frustrated me with some of his game management decision, and yes, I do point the finger at him regarding our horrific special teams play last year. He's the head coach. That level of special teams ineptitude cannot escape my finger pointing.

With that said, I also think that Leach has proven himself to be an elite offensive coach. As Yaki pointed out, we averaged 32/33 ppg without any semblance of a kicking game. With even just an adequate placekicker and special teams coverage units last season, we would have averaged closer to 38 ppg. That's not a Kool-Aid laced "woulda', coulda', shoulda' hypothesis, it's legitimate.

When we hired Leach, I thought he was the perfect coach for our program, and I still feel that way. As his tenure plateau's, I think we'll have a program that consistently scored 35 ppg. We'll have the occasional year where we field a good defense and challenge for a top-tier spot in the league, we'll have the occasional year where things don't come together (like 2014) and we stumble to 3-4 wins, and our average years will be 6-7 wins with an upset over a top team in our conference.

As a WSU lifer, that's the ceiling for our program as I see it. Leach's offense maximizes our potential. We can't recruit with the power schools for linemen and a stable of 4-5 star athletes, but we can recruit good QB's, good WR's, and have a pesky program that drives people crazy. We might be gimmicky, but if you're Oregon, Arizona, UCLA, USC, etc. and you have to travel to Pullman to face us, you better not lay an egg offensively because we'll be able to score points. We got Oregon at a bad time for them last year, and we almost ruined their season. Same with Utah.

What cannot happen anymore, and it's apparent that Leach got the memo, is that we have abysmal special teams play. A great kicker and coverage teams, coupled with Leach's ability to move the ball on anyone, will be a deadly weapon and a great equalizer for us.

and, thus, ranked last in the conference in turnover margin. Comparatively, Oregon forced 34 turnovers, UW 29, ASU 26, Arizona 26, and USC 23. All but one of those schools averaged more points per game than we did. The basic point that a defense that allowed significant yardage/points and forced very few turnovers, combined with pecial teams breakdowns, was to blame for 3-9.
On the bright side, had WSU defeated Oregon, Cal, UNLV, and Rutgers - and not allowed ASU to run wild in the second half - the boo birds would be pouting in a corner looking for their innocence.

 

[CougEd]

Fab..not sure what we really disagree on...

The offense moving the ball would be consider above average. Being number two in total yards points to that. Being number 7 in scoring points to exactly what you said, and even Sponge has said, they have a problem in the red zone. You don't think teams play us this way? Bend but don't break? Let the Cougs move up and down the field burning three minutes off the clock, and either one of two things will happen. They will make a mistake or turn the ball over on downs. They were 7th for a reason in scoring, and that is a huge drop off from the yardage out put.

Will it change...count me in the wait and see mode. I have an open mind it will happen, but after 2003 and the optimism of a strong team after winter weightlifting, and the articles every year saying we worked harder than before, and that the team is close etc, I will believe offensive production, meaning scoring, when i see it.

 

[YakiCoug]

We scored 80 percent of the time in the red zone

"Being number 7 in scoring points to exactly what you said, and even Sponge has said, they have a problem in the red zone." - CougEd

Oregon, which won the Pac-12 and played for the national championship, scored 86 percent of the time. If 80 percent looks bad, it's only because two Pac-12 teams scored 90 and 94 percent of the time in the redzone, but this hardly equates to "a problem," as suggested by the WW freeboard Frick and Frack. Again, for the few here lacking opposable mental thumbs: poor special teams play, a poor defense that forced only eight turnovers (three picks/five fumbles), and a lousy FG kicker cost WSU at least three games. It really isn't that hard to grasp.

Now, if the aforementioned lousy defense/ST play continues, even I will provide the box for Ed and his little minions to hop upon and screech in ways they never did during 6 and 40.




This post was edited on 3/16 9:03 PM by YakiCoug

 

[YakiCoug]

Originally posted by earldacoug:
Coaches script practice so their favorite players can shine ? ridiculous. ivory was a hell of a talent. Too bad he was so often injured. no comparison between Ivory and Masons talents.

More than a few Wulffians are hoping Mason will become Leach's Chris Ivory.

 

[dgibbons]

Interesting that Stanford was last in conference

and the reason looks like their kicker stunk too.

 

[Cougsocal]

Re: Well if that is the case I want to change the opinion in which

Originally posted by dgibbons:

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by Coug95man2:
He says the rebuild is going to take longer than anyone expects… He isn't so naive as to give out numbers for next year, he's just saying it will take several more years to get WSU out of this hole (I want to say 2017 or 2018 is when he says we'll be out but I'm not sure… he needs to clarify to be sure). I tend to agree but I'm certain the ride from here to there will be fun to watch.

Considering that Leach came in and fell flat on the recruiting front, we are still years off on the turnaround calendar. We won't win in 2015, but I hope we show signs of life, signs that we have returned to the Pac-12 recruiting wars. I want to see young players making dumb mistakes, then make an occassional great play, in 2015. Another year of too slow, too weak, too unathletic, 4 years in, means his Highness Mike Leach is probably not going to get it done.

Super Santa in the sky, please give me "the young and the restless" II, and some hope.

You don't become good until you put quality kids on the field.

Well, the OL is deeper than we've had since probably 2002. The damage inflicted by the previous regime at that position is now fading. The secondary is at least shows some sings of life with White and Pippins. Cooper will leave a hole, but the DL is finally starting to round into shape.

It's almost like you think WSU didn't make it to a bowl game for the first time in a decade in 2013....

The OL has more numbers than I can remember. But until we sign kids with Armstrong/Lightbody like talent, we will continue to struggle. We still don't have 5 guys that can hold a block long enough to run a decent draw play. Were they really better pass blocking last year, or was it Halliday's quick reads and release? We don't know.

Vaeao and Pole combined had 2 sacks, 5 TFL, an 28 tackles all season (and I bet 75% of those very weak numbers came in the 1st quarter). Until we we sign Coopers to replace our Pole's Vaeao's we will struggle. As for rounding into shape, our DL was pretty good in the 1st quarter last year, after that they disappeared.

White and Pippen were part of a secondary that gave up nearly 3600 yards and had only 1 Int on 429 pass attempts. Our defense gave up 42 pts per game in Pac-12 play. Our LBs had twice as many Ints as our secondary, and our LBs weren't good. Is that a sign of life, or evidence of the very bad secondary? One thing is certain Trufant/David II, they are not.

2013 convinced me that Leach is a hell of an X and O coach. How he could get a team dominated with Wulff recruits to 6 wins is a friggin miracle. The problem is his first three recruiting classes have been underwhelming. How do I know that? If he had recruited well, we would not have sucked in 2014 and we would be talking about 2015 as a major break out year.

 

[Cougatron]

I swear there are some people that are just clueless.

Okay let's take a look at what happened to us offensively.

We'll start in 2006 before Wulff got in here a hosed us.

Offensive line is the star of the offense, and sacks tell you the kind of protection that is given.

2006 - 86
2007 - 46
Enter the Wulff -
2008 - #116
2009 - #119
2010 - #119
2011 - #116

Enter Leach
2012 - #120
2013- #95
2014 - #105

Now think about how long it takes to develop an offensive line. Ours was essentially burned to the ground and yet Leach is making the improvements. Now it still has a long way to go, but when the line isn't good... You get a lot of QB injuries. Tuel, Halliday etc. etc. So when that starts stabilizing higher and higher in ranking the better our offense is. In 2013 it was the highest it has been since 2007 and magically we are in a bowl game, the better that is the stronger our offense is. It's that simple.

More time to throw = better decisions and better decisions = better offensive production.

Despite the still poor offensive line we are making strides on offense. With a somewhat mistake prone QB (Halliday) who did improve and get better as he matured, but still there were lapses.

If you want a race car you can build the exterior aerodynamic and put in superior tires, but if the engine isn't working properly then forget it, and the offensive line is the engine that makes offenses go.

Every year he is bringing in 5 guys and our young line is getting more experience with more and upgrading talent as we go.

This is a slow process. It takes time and Leach has show he can make progress. Wulff had 4 years and it was clear all he did was gut and burn the heart of the offense, and all it cost was Tuel his kneecaps and Halliday a liver and a leg. We still are about 2 years out from having a line that won't get a QB hurt bad but the breakdowns are less and less.

The young guys are bigger and they are getting the experience they need.

Now as to RB.... Wicks and Morrow are upgrades in the backfield. More playing time for them means a better future. That's why they played and not the others as much. It's about who is the best, and who has the most upside.

As to scoring more points. The better the line the easier it is to score. That's how it is on the goal line. That's how it is on the 20, or the 50. We had Lufasa in 2013 to be a big back threat and punch it in with a better performing line, but his fumblitis proved costly and so was Caldwell's...thus they are replaced by others.

There is no magic cure or magic bullet to get us out of the hole we put ourselves in with Wulff. Leach isn't a miracle worker. He has to upgrade talent and get experience. That's not easy. So what do you do? Replace the people you can when you can and use some for experience when you can until there is a better option. .It's not easy to bring in 4-5 stars every year to Pullman. So he takes 3 star / 4star guys hungry to prove something and lets them compete. It's smart. It's what you have to do to attract people.

A 3 star kid with an offer to Nebraska can be told well you won't be the starter, probably RS and then we'll see if you get the top spot. That same kid at WSU is told. Hey if you are the best. You start. on day 1. That's enticing to a kid that wants to see the field, but is hard because someone that inexperienced can and will make mistakes. (Which we've seen)

Falk looks promising, Bender has more of a headstart then Halliday ever did, and the Hilinski kid looks the part, but it starts with the o-line. It's getting better, but it's a slow process.

The receivers and RBs are the flare. We have seen people like Marks, Calvin Green, Mayle, Bartalone, Cracraft emerge with little experience.. More will be coming in.

Wicks and Morrow are good, and the opportunity for more will be there too.

And if you think the offensive scheme is the problem...our o-line will be improving. Think how much production is out there now..rank 95 got us to a bowl game.... Rank 75-50? ... big big strides... So many games were close... so much so that special teams was a deciding factor in more than 1. We need a decent defense, and good special teams and our offense to continue to improve and upgrade. It's a process. Like most things that isn't instant. 2 years we were in a bowl for the first time in a decade. We'll get there.

 

[CougPatrol]

Originally posted by Cougatron:
I swear there are some people that are just clueless.

Okay let's take a look at what happened to us offensively.

We'll start in 2006 before Wulff got in here and hosed us.

Agree with the content of your post, but let's share the blame a bit. Doba's & staff hosed us too. Had they been able to continue the momentum from what was the best run in WSU football history, Paul Wulff would have never been hired.

I like Bill Doba as much or more than any other coach in WSU history, but his tenure was, for me, far more disappointing than Paul Wulff's.

Yes, Doba had better teams, but the beginning of the end was caused by Doba's staff.

 

[Coug95man2]

Agreed. And while the reasons for Doba's distraction from the football program are pretty legitimate, it doesn't take away the fact that this time period is where we started to fall.

And we can go round and round on the Doba years but personally, I also place a bit of blame on Sterk for this period of time. Regardless of anything else he did or didn't do, why in the world didn't he step in when Doba was having the issues he was, when it was obvious it was taking time away from his job (for good reason) and it was a distraction from the program and becoming detrimental to the program in a big way. I just don't get that part, either. He just needed to step in, get the "troops" in line, make changes if need be (they were needed) and then let them have the "ownership". Many times he seemed very "hands off", fine but this was blowing the program to the wind and sand.

I don't even want to touch the position coaches and what they were/weren't doing during that time. Well documented here.

 

[dgibbons]

Re: Well if that is the case I want to change the opinion in which

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by dgibbons:

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by Coug95man2:
He says the rebuild is going to take longer than anyone expects… He isn't so naive as to give out numbers for next year, he's just saying it will take several more years to get WSU out of this hole (I want to say 2017 or 2018 is when he says we'll be out but I'm not sure… he needs to clarify to be sure). I tend to agree but I'm certain the ride from here to there will be fun to watch.

Considering that Leach came in and fell flat on the recruiting front, we are still years off on the turnaround calendar. We won't win in 2015, but I hope we show signs of life, signs that we have returned to the Pac-12 recruiting wars. I want to see young players making dumb mistakes, then make an occassional great play, in 2015. Another year of too slow, too weak, too unathletic, 4 years in, means his Highness Mike Leach is probably not going to get it done.

Super Santa in the sky, please give me "the young and the restless" II, and some hope.

You don't become good until you put quality kids on the field.

Well, the OL is deeper than we've had since probably 2002. The damage inflicted by the previous regime at that position is now fading. The secondary is at least shows some sings of life with White and Pippins. Cooper will leave a hole, but the DL is finally starting to round into shape.

It's almost like you think WSU didn't make it to a bowl game for the first time in a decade in 2013....

The OL has more numbers than I can remember. But until we sign kids with Armstrong/Lightbody like talent, we will continue to struggle. We still don't have 5 guys that can hold a block long enough to run a decent draw play. Were they really better pass blocking last year, or was it Halliday's quick reads and release? We don't know.

Vaeao and Pole combined had 2 sacks, 5 TFL, an 28 tackles all season (and I bet 75% of those very weak numbers came in the 1st quarter). Until we we sign Coopers to replace our Pole's Vaeao's we will struggle. As for rounding into shape, our DL was pretty good in the 1st quarter last year, after that they disappeared.

White and Pippen were part of a secondary that gave up nearly 3600 yards and had only 1 Int on 429 pass attempts. Our defense gave up 42 pts per game in Pac-12 play. Our LBs had twice as many Ints as our secondary, and our LBs weren't good. Is that a sign of life, or evidence of the very bad secondary? One thing is certain Trufant/David II, they are not.

2013 convinced me that Leach is a hell of an X and O coach. How he could get a team dominated with Wulff recruits to 6 wins is a friggin miracle. The problem is his first three recruiting classes have been underwhelming. How do I know that? If he had recruited well, we would not have sucked in 2014 and we would be talking about 2015 as a major break out year.

You are correct that the team that went 3-9 last season, and the players that played on that team, do not resemble the some of the best players in school history. You have completely and totally killed that straw man!

 

[spongebob11]

Yes Yaki, I would love for a 22 yr old kid to have success on the football and off regardless of who coached or recruited him.

Only you could post something so ridiculous.

Go route for the Huskies or something.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by Coug95man2:
Agreed. And while the reasons for Doba's distraction from the football program are pretty legitimate, it doesn't take away the fact that this time period is where we started to fall.

And we can go round and round on the Doba years but personally, I also place a bit of blame on Sterk for this period of time. Regardless of anything else he did or didn't do, why in the world didn't he step in when Doba was having the issues he was, when it was obvious it was taking time away from his job (for good reason) and it was a distraction from the program and becoming detrimental to the program in a big way. I just don't get that part, either. He just needed to step in, get the "troops" in line, make changes if need be (they were needed) and then let them have the "ownership". Many times he seemed very "hands off", fine but this was blowing the program to the wind and sand.

I don't even want to touch the position coaches and what they were/weren't doing during that time. Well documented here.

The failure to capitalize on the best run in school history was an epic and systemic $hitting of the bed. V. Lane Rawlins liked to golf, so WSU built a golf course. How 'bout the return of investment on that. Pure genius move. Meanwhile Jimbo Sterk was able to get the students to approve a bond for new crappers and concessions at Martin....

 

[Fab5Coug]

Re: Fab..not sure what we really disagree on...

Originally posted by CougEd:
The offense moving the ball would be consider above average. Being number two in total yards points to that. Being number 7 in scoring points to exactly what you said, and even Sponge has said, they have a problem in the red zone. You don't think teams play us this way? Bend but don't break? Let the Cougs move up and down the field burning three minutes off the clock, and either one of two things will happen. They will make a mistake or turn the ball over on downs. They were 7th for a reason in scoring, and that is a huge drop off from the yardage out put.

Will it change...count me in the wait and see mode. I have an open mind it will happen, but after 2003 and the optimism of a strong team after winter weightlifting, and the articles every year saying we worked harder than before, and that the team is close etc, I will believe offensive production, meaning scoring, when i see it.

I agree. 48th in PPG, when you were 7th (or whatever they were) in YPG is an issue.

But, 32 PPG is 32 PPG. I don't believe in trying to lessen that number by saying, "but they scored 59 in one game", or "they scored this many in garbage time". Every team has an outlier game or two and every team scores garbage time points. It adds nothing to the discussion trying to lessen the number only for WSU.




This post was edited on 3/17 10:50 AM by Fab5Coug

 

[Fab5Coug]

Wulff's inability, or maybe just outright refusal to adequately recruit the offensive line is still baffling to me.

He recruited Fullington, and got Ecklund to campus, so he knew what a lineman was supposed to look like. He just didn't get anywhere near enough of them.

2008: Hogdon (Doba holdover), Spitz (Doba holdover), Reitnour
2009: Buckley, Prescott, Valenzuela
2010: Fullington, Rodgers
2011: Alex Mitchell, Christ, Taise

Those are the high school OL Wulff recruited. How on earth does a college football coach think he's going to succeed taking 2.75 OL recruits per class? Buckley, Mitchell & Taise never even qualified. So, Wulff actually ENROLLED 2 high school OL per year. Two.

Did he think he could just get away with having 8-10 bodies on the roster at all times? Did he think he was going to bat a thousand on the guys he landed?

Just confusing.

 

[CougEd]

95...when you use recruiting rankings after the kids have been in the


program for a year or two, and that is a basis of a discussion, I think those numbers tend to lie at this point. for discussion sake lets say the 2012 class was the number 28 class in the country. I will say that is a fair number considering the athletes we attracted.

Now we have had a chance to see them play. Here are some startling numbers. Apodoca, Caldwell, Davey, Dotson, Villarubia, Ewing, Jackson, Mitchell, Pettaway and dockery are no longer with the team. Out of that class, it took Allison 2.25 years to find a spot and we now have him for just one more year. Who are the contributors from that class? Allison and BArber has played limited minutes.

From 2014 Brown, Bruggman, Meyer, Sterling, Lepua, Failou are gone. In that class, Brown is the only one on that list that saw playing time.

Attrition is still taking place, so it is hard to argue with what Socal is saying, despite what we think the rankings are.

When you say we are getting players we haven't had in 10 years, it depends what is your criteria. Wulff for example will have more recruits on an NFL squad in his four years than Doba every recruited. Wulff had the first -first round draft pick since Trufant. Long, Wilson, Tuel and Fullington all got paid in the NFL. Cooper is the next kid to get drafted, and people are talking Jake Rodgers may go in the 6th round.

It can be easily argued too many holes, which I am willing to accept. But the look of the first two classes in Leach's tenure some of those holes will continue to be a problem with the attrition we have seen. And I like Socal hope these players turn the corner and fill the holes that keep us from having a winning season. But where I once believed it was certainty Leach would have the most successful run in WSU history, I now hope that is the case.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by Fab5Coug:
Wulff's inability, or maybe just outright refusal to adequately recruit the offensive line is still baffling to me.

He recruited Fullington, and got Ecklund to campus, so he knew what a lineman was supposed to look like. He just didn't get anywhere near enough of them.

2008: Hogdon (Doba holdover), Spitz (Doba holdover), Reitnour
2009: Buckley, Prescott, Valenzuela
2010: Fullington, Rodgers
2011: Alex Mitchell, Christ, Taise

Those are the high school OL Wulff recruited. How on earth does a college football coach think he's going to succeed taking 2.75 OL recruits per class? Buckley, Mitchell & Taise never even qualified. So, Wulff actually ENROLLED 2 high school OL per year. Two.

Did he think he could just get away with having 8-10 bodies on the roster at all times? Did he think he was going to bat a thousand on the guys he landed?

Just confusing.

Buckley was headed for DT. No one from the 2009 class played a meaningful down of football at WSU. Hodgdon ended up suing WSU and Wulff alleging head injuries from helmetless practices. Fullington was the only guy to complete his eligibility at WSU.