Jim Walden - Mike Leach as WSU coach?

[chinookpirate]

when comparing their first three seasons? it's always fun to revisit history.

Jim Walden took over a program in 1978 as it's 4th head coach in 4 seasons. He was 13-19-1 after 3 seasons. He had never been a head coach before. Home games were played in Spokane.

The following season, year 4, Jim Walden had the WSU Cougars playing in the Apple Cup where a win would secure the first Rose Bowl game for WSU since 1931... for that matter, it was the first bowl game anywhere since 1931.

Mike Leach is 12-25 in 3 seasons at WSU. I hope WSU is playing in the Apple Cup in Seattle next year with a trip to the Rose Bowl on the line. That would be cool.



This post was edited on 12/1 7:27 PM by chinookpirate

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Troublemaker.

 

[405 Coug]

Difficult to compare different times, Walden accomplished a lot in 4 years, the 4th year being the height of his time at WSU, the big difference between then and now is coaching in the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has never had this many good to great coaches at one time, there are no easy wins in conference. In Walden's day Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, and Oregon (and WSU) were all below average teams, win 3 or 4 and pull an upset somewhere and you had 4 or 5 conference wins, during this past year 9 of 12 pac 12 teams were ranked in the top 25 at one time or another during the year, that has never happened before if I am recalling correctly. Top to bottom I believe the Pac 12 is the toughest conference in the nation right now, and will be for a while.

 

[chinookpirate]

Yeah, I know. Walden's zero experience as a head coach, a 50year dearth of bowl games, locker rooms shared with the general public, students and PE classes and my favorite... 4 coaches in 4 years... was a REAL BIG advantage Walden enjoyed vs. our current situation.

almost forgot... 1978 was the first year scholarships were reduced from 105 to 95. I don't believe WSU ever got to 95... Didn't have the budget I was told.
This post was edited on 12/2 7:51 AM by chinookpirate

 

[jarvis1981]

Good post 405.
Stanford always had a decent offense but they couldn't defend anyone. They didn't make it to a bowl game with Elway at the helm if I recall correctly. Stanford and Oregon are the two most improved teams in the pac since that time and the two Arizona schools are now a force. Where are the easy wins? OSU has done well under Coach Reilly and so WSU is the school playing catch up. They started with the facilities and a coach, they got an offense and now need to get the other two areas to at least AVERAGE next year. That will get them to a bowl.

No surprise to the firings. You score 59 points and lose!!!! Time for a new defensive co-ordinator.
Leach is not on the hot seat but he's on the simmer seat. He needs to get to a bowl game next year, even with a 6-6 record and I think they get it done.

 

[BiggsCoug]

405, here comes the SEC fan boy to shout you down and call you names .....

 

[chinookpirate]

By definition, half the teams are always "below average". Hth.

 

[PINGDUDE4]

This is entertaining .

The name Jim Walden,have not heard that name in awhile since his days in old Big 8.

Does anyone realize Waldne has the 15th worst win % of all college football coaches that coached over 100 games in the history of the game. That is 15th worst of all time going back to leather helmets.

Great quote when Switzer took the Dallas Cowboy job about what he will most miss about coaching in the pros as opposed to college > His response > "Playing Iowa State". I guess you know who was at the helm of Iowa State during Switzer's at OU.

I am assuming from this board he must still have some media access up there, if he has a call in show someone should ask him about his place in the record books or Switzer's quote.

 

[Coug1990]

Originally posted by PINGDUDE4:
This is entertaining .

The name Jim Walden,have not heard that name in awhile since his days in old Big 8.

Does anyone realize Waldne has the 15th worst win % of all college football coaches that coached over 100 games in the history of the game. That is 15th worst of all time going back to leather helmets.

Great quote when Switzer took the Dallas Cowboy job about what he will most miss about coaching in the pros as opposed to college > His response > "Playing Iowa State". I guess you know who was at the helm of Iowa State during Switzer's at OU.

I am assuming from this board he must still have some media access up there, if he has a call in show someone should ask him about his place in the record books or Switzer's quote.

Walden is beloved by many Cougar fans. I am not one of them. I highly respect some of the things he did while he was coach of the Cougars. He stopped a revolving door of coaches. There was a period where WSU had four coaches in four years. He was instrumental in getting home games played on campus instead of Spokane. As a coach, he got WSU to a bowl for the first time in 50 years (not many bowls back then).

But, his record at WSU was mediocre and his last two years were two of his worst. He was the long time radio analyst and he is good in front of boosters with his anecdotes. But, he has become a bitter old man that trashes Leach any chance he gets because he thinks the previous coach was unfairly fired. Go look up Paul Wulff and and his record. You will know why he was fired.

 

[Glad Cougar]

Not relevant to his career coaching record, but Jim Walden was accessible and friendly to a young reporter like me back in the day. I had the opportunity to sit down with him for what I thought would be a 5 minute interview and it ended up being a half hour. He was forthright and respectful of me and everyone he was talking about. Of course, that was before the "bitter old man" phase. Love him or hate him, I always believed he cares a great deal for WSU. If I get criticized for believing that, so be it.

Glad Cougar

 

[chinookpirate]

Not the point... at all... But, thanks for playing.

Originally posted by PINGDUDE4:
This is entertaining .

The name Jim Walden,have not heard that name in awhile since his days in old Big 8.

Does anyone realize Waldne has the 15th worst win % of all college football coaches that coached over 100 games in the history of the game. That is 15th worst of all time going back to leather helmets.

Great quote when Switzer took the Dallas Cowboy job about what he will most miss about coaching in the pros as opposed to college > His response > "Playing Iowa State". I guess you know who was at the helm of Iowa State during Switzer's at OU.

I am assuming from this board he must still have some media access up there, if he has a call in show someone should ask him about his place in the record books or Switzer's quote.

 

[SCglory]

Walden and Leach coached/coach in vastly different times. College football itself in 1978 was still far more sport than business, even in the south; scholarship limits--although started in 73, were imposed again in 78 and 92 to make the current numbers; TV was mainly 3 stations, cable was nothing, there was no satellite stations; and there were few bowls.

Why do all those matter, you ask?

Well, back in the day, the great teams could totally dominate the players and TV times, so the tendencies were to STRONGLY separate the "have's from the have nots" and that is what happened. WSU simply lost to ucla and sc regularly but those programs were so stocked with great players that other, now "mid-tier" conf programs were doormats or much worse than they are now (UO, OSU, WSU, Arizona schools). So there were a few teams that WSU was just going to lose to, year after year, but many others who were in the same mix as they were. Until very recently, WSU and UO were tied in their h2h football series....since Nike U has emerged....not so much.

So Walden coached in an era of what might be called "limited parity" in which a whole bunch of schools were peers and capable of winning on every Saturday.

Recently, with the TV monies exploding, the HUGE revenue growth has served to increase overall parity in some cases but create new cliques in others. Now, it's purely a business, and money draws coaches and builds great facilities, so a hack university can become a great football program because an innovative ex-mountain troop soldier did things with a waffle iron on rubber and one of his track athletes was good at grasping marketing.

Walden was the right guy for that era and his 86 win against the Trojans was the perfect case of the right offense and the right QB at the right time against a weak SC coach. In many ways, Leach is similar to Walden: he is folksy (if he is approached right), informal, a rebel, and an innovator....but he understands that football NOW is light years away from the sport Walden presided over. In the late 70s and early 80s, if the cougs beat their peers (which they OFTEN did) all they needed was a few breaks and they might score an upset or 2 and their season would be great. I am thinking of Powers beating his old Nebraska team, Sweeney beating Stanford, Walden over SC, and whoever against the huskies. That was the formula then....but it would NOT work now.

Besides Colorado, who can we really point to now and say "Whew, there is an easy win!"? Ask SC about utah.....or BC

 

[PINGDUDE4]

Originally posted by Coug1990:

Originally posted by PINGDUDE4:
This is entertaining .

The name Jim Walden,have not heard that name in awhile since his days in old Big 8.

Does anyone realize Waldne has the 15th worst win % of all college football coaches that coached over 100 games in the history of the game. That is 15th worst of all time going back to leather helmets.

Great quote when Switzer took the Dallas Cowboy job about what he will most miss about coaching in the pros as opposed to college > His response > "Playing Iowa State". I guess you know who was at the helm of Iowa State during Switzer's at OU.

I am assuming from this board he must still have some media access up there, if he has a call in show someone should ask him about his place in the record books or Switzer's quote.

Walden is beloved by many Cougar fans. I am not one of them. I highly respect some of the things he did while he was coach of the Cougars. He stopped a revolving door of coaches. There was a period where WSU had four coaches in four years. He was instrumental in getting home games played on campus instead of Spokane. As a coach, he got WSU to a bowl for the first time in 50 years (not many bowls back then).

But, his record at WSU was mediocre and his last two years were two of his worst. He was the long time radio analyst and he is good in front of boosters with his anecdotes. But, he has become a bitter old man that trashes Leach any chance he gets because he thinks the previous coach was unfairly fired. Go look up Paul Wulff and and his record. You will know why he was fired.

Interesting that he trashes Leach.

Leach became pretty big buddies with Switzer during his time at OU.

Probably not, but it makes you wonder if Walden has somehow connected the dots back to his old nemesis who obviously made fun of him. Bitter old men sometimes get their revenge in strange ways. Probably nothing to it and has more to do with the previous coach and knowing Leach he probably did not properly kiss up to Walden, at least to his liking.

Like I said never heard of the guy other than his Big 8 days and granted Iowa State is a difficult place to win, but this guy took them to new lows. At least he made the record books.

It really is comical that a guy with his coaching record has any ground to express any opinion on current coaches. That is like a old heart surgeon who had to get out of the business because of too many bothched surgeries being put as head of quality control at a hospital.

Anyway, good luck with your next Defensive Coach, hope that you guys get a good one, your fan base deserves it.

This post was edited on 12/2 10:28 AM by PINGDUDE4

 

[wulffui]

So, what you're telling me is that Walden's PX in which he achieved modest success is much more like the perception of Leach's Big 12 than the actual Big 12 in which Leach was well established?

 

[chinookpirate]

I am referencing only two men who coached football at WSU in the modern era, who in their first three years shared eerily similar records and circumstances at WSU... and we know Walden got us to the top of the mountain in year 4... and we know that he is eternally greatful for the young boys who ALL had options to play at other Pac schools... yet took a big personal risk to follow him to Pullman... and build something special... something nobody had done in 50 years. Jim Walden sold Pullman when there was little "there" there, and they followed him... and they won. They made it to the top of the Mountain. IN Pullman... not in Spokane.

That eternal gratitude to those young men and Dr. Terrell and Sam Jankovich he cherishes to this day and will never extinguish his love for WSU and desire for us to find success.

It's water over the bridge today and I understand why some will always view him as 'crazy grandpa' but, I really wish more Cougars could have gotten to know THAT Jim Walden. Coach Jim Walden and felt his infectious energy of the day. The kind of infectious energy he had when he got those guys in that first class(listen to him tell it in the 1090fan interview) to follow him to Pullman.

Leach 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 are out. They are done. Recruiting to plans, hard hats and dust in the middle of a wheat field yielded one bowl game in three seasons. Not bad all in all.

Leach 2.0 is under way. The class is being assembled. The foundation is now set. Time to look ahead. We have our QB, OL, DL with plenty of game reps at other positions...to build on. The next 1-3 years is where Leach will and should be judged at WSU.

I believe Leach 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 we will once again enjoy a progressive march to the top of the Mountain.

 

[CougEd]

People can say what they would like about Walden, but he saved

Cougar football. He made them relevant. He presided over a very dark time. Each era has their own set of circumstances, but the reality is when Walden took over, UW was becoming a power broker in this conference.

What UW wanted it happened. It was no longer just USC and UCLA. UW had the largest radio contract in the country at the time. Their recruiting budget was at least ten fold of WSU's. WSU and Oregon State could have easily been banished to the WAC. But because Walden made them relevant and then Sam Smith became NCAA President which at the time secured their position in the Pac 10.

Think of the odds... Playing the first third of the season without your students. Playing all meaningful games 90 minutes away. Playing USC in Seattle. UCLA, USC and UW not traveling to Pullman 30 some years. A remodel was going to Rima Paint and Hardware and having the coaches paint their own offices. Having a giant program on the west side of the state.

If there was no Walden, there is no Price and Rose Bowls...and that is one thing I am sure of. With the 2 LA schools, the two bay schools, the two Arizona schools plus Washington, they had the votes to boot the two weakest teams in the conference.

 

[Coug1990]

Originally posted by PINGDUDE4:

Originally posted by Coug1990:

Originally posted by PINGDUDE4:
This is entertaining .

The name Jim Walden,have not heard that name in awhile since his days in old Big 8.

Does anyone realize Waldne has the 15th worst win % of all college football coaches that coached over 100 games in the history of the game. That is 15th worst of all time going back to leather helmets.

Great quote when Switzer took the Dallas Cowboy job about what he will most miss about coaching in the pros as opposed to college > His response > "Playing Iowa State". I guess you know who was at the helm of Iowa State during Switzer's at OU.

I am assuming from this board he must still have some media access up there, if he has a call in show someone should ask him about his place in the record books or Switzer's quote.

Walden is beloved by many Cougar fans. I am not one of them. I highly respect some of the things he did while he was coach of the Cougars. He stopped a revolving door of coaches. There was a period where WSU had four coaches in four years. He was instrumental in getting home games played on campus instead of Spokane. As a coach, he got WSU to a bowl for the first time in 50 years (not many bowls back then).

But, his record at WSU was mediocre and his last two years were two of his worst. He was the long time radio analyst and he is good in front of boosters with his anecdotes. But, he has become a bitter old man that trashes Leach any chance he gets because he thinks the previous coach was unfairly fired. Go look up Paul Wulff and and his record. You will know why he was fired.

Interesting that he trashes Leach.

Leach became pretty big buddies with Switzer during his time at OU.

Probably not, but it makes you wonder if Walden has somehow connected the dots back to his old nemesis who obviously made fun of him. Bitter old men sometimes get their revenge in strange ways. Probably nothing to it and has more to do with the previous coach and knowing Leach he probably did not properly kiss up to Walden, at least to his liking.

Like I said never heard of the guy other than his Big 8 days and granted Iowa State is a difficult place to win, but this guy took them to new lows. At least he made the record books.

It really is comical that a guy with his coaching record has any ground to express any opinion on current coaches. That is like a old heart surgeon who had to get out of the business because of too many bothched surgeries being put as head of quality control at a hospital.

Anyway, good luck with your next Defensive Coach, hope that you guys get a good one, your fan base deserves it.

This post was edited on 12/2 10:28 AM by PINGDUDE4

Thanks. I did not realize that Switzer made fun of Walden. I am sure that doesn't help and is something like the straw that broke the camels back. The previous coach, Paul Wulff, was recruited to WSU by Jim Walden. They are very very close. So, when WSU fired Wulff, Walden went scorched earth regarding anything WSU. He was pissed at the President of the school and the AD. So, when Leach was announced as the new coach, it makes some sense that he didn't like Leach from the start.

Heck, just last week Walden was on the radio saying that WSU only beat Oregon State because they didn't show up to play. He gave no credit to the players, nor Leach.

This post was edited on 12/2 12:51 PM by Coug1990

 

[Coug1990]

Originally posted by Glad Cougar:
Not relevant to his career coaching record, but Jim Walden was accessible and friendly to a young reporter like me back in the day. I had the opportunity to sit down with him for what I thought would be a 5 minute interview and it ended up being a half hour. He was forthright and respectful of me and everyone he was talking about. Of course, that was before the "bitter old man" phase. Love him or hate him, I always believed he cares a great deal for WSU. If I get criticized for believing that, so be it.

Glad Cougar

It is nice that he took the time for you. No criticizing from me. He has changed over the years, but that does not change the good times that you had previously.

 

[Cougsocal]

Originally posted by 405 Coug:
Difficult to compare different times, Walden accomplished a lot in 4 years, the 4th year being the height of his time at WSU, the big difference between then and now is coaching in the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has never had this many good to great coaches at one time, there are no easy wins in conference. In Walden's day Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, and Oregon (and WSU) were all below average teams, win 3 or 4 and pull an upset somewhere and you had 4 or 5 conference wins, during this past year 9 of 12 pac 12 teams were ranked in the top 25 at one time or another during the year, that has never happened before if I am recalling correctly. Top to bottom I believe the Pac 12 is the toughest conference in the nation right now, and will be for a while.

If you judge wins as evidence of good coaching, the Pac-10 has been better in the past. In 2002 for instance, we had 8 of 10 teams bowl eligible, despite FCS limitations with 2 BCS bowl teams. The Pac-12 has added patsy Colorado to join now traditional patsy WSU, which replace OSU as the conference doormat, and OSU may have returned to doormat status and who knows about Utah, is this year the exception? This year was good for the Pac-12, but WSU, Cal, OSU and Colorado are not bowl eligible, despite the ridiculously low standard of 5 wins over FBS teams, 1 win against a FCS team, requirement and let's not forget we lost to 7-5 Nevada by double digits.

You are wrong about the 9 teams ranked. Sport-reference.com says only 8 teams have been ranked, the same as in 2002, when there were only 10 teams. WSU played 9 teams that were in the rankings in 2002, include National Champ Ohio State, #4 USC and #8 Oklahoma.

Also it wasn't that long ago that the Pac-10 has the most players in the pros, by a wide margin, we are now third. In Walden's day Pac-10 was the conference of the future pros. In 1981 do you really think the conference was full of patsys? Stanford was 4-7 despite having junior John Elway was their QB.

Isn't the "Pac-12 is tougher than it has ever been," call in recent years a fiction created to excuse Leach's inability to take the conference by storm, though didn't CougEd make the same claim when Wulff was here? The reality is WSU won the Pac-10 in 2002, when USC, Ucla, Cal, OSU, Oregon, UW and ASU fielded teams with 7 wins or more, and we would have gone 8-0, but for Gesser's Apple Cup injury.

 

[Coug1990]

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by 405 Coug:
Difficult to compare different times, Walden accomplished a lot in 4 years, the 4th year being the height of his time at WSU, the big difference between then and now is coaching in the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has never had this many good to great coaches at one time, there are no easy wins in conference. In Walden's day Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, and Oregon (and WSU) were all below average teams, win 3 or 4 and pull an upset somewhere and you had 4 or 5 conference wins, during this past year 9 of 12 pac 12 teams were ranked in the top 25 at one time or another during the year, that has never happened before if I am recalling correctly. Top to bottom I believe the Pac 12 is the toughest conference in the nation right now, and will be for a while.

If you judge wins as evidence of good coaching, the Pac-10 has been better in the past. In 2002 for instance, we had 8 of 10 teams bowl eligible, despite FCS limitations with 2 BCS bowl teams. The Pac-12 has added patsy Colorado to join now traditional patsy WSU, which replace OSU as the conference doormat, and OSU may have returned to doormat status and who knows about Utah, is this year the exception? This year was good for the Pac-12, but WSU, Cal, OSU and Colorado are not bowl eligible, despite the ridiculously low standard of 5 wins over FBS teams, 1 win against a FCS team, requirement and let's not forget we lost to 7-5 Nevada by double digits.

I like how someone makes a reference to Walden era and you cherry pick 2002. If you didn't know, Mike Price was the coach of the Cougars then. In fact, there was a coach in between Walden and Price named Dennis Erickson.

OSU was in a bowl game last season and they have a down season and you already have them as dormant status? Really? Come on man!

Oklahoma was also in the bowl game.

You are wrong about the 9 teams ranked. Sport-reference.com says only 8 teams have been ranked, the same as in 2002, when there were only 10 teams. WSU played 9 teams that were in the rankings in 2002, include National Champ Ohio State, #4 USC and #8 Oklahoma.

Also it wasn't that long ago that the Pac-10 has the most players in the pros, by a wide margin, we are now third. In Walden's day Pac-10 was the conference of the future pros. In 1981 do you really think the conference was full of patsys? Stanford was 4-7 despite having junior John Elway was their QB.

What difference does it make if the QB is great, but the rest of the team stinks?

Isn't the "Pac-12 is tougher than it has ever been," call in recent years a fiction created to excuse Leach's inability to take the conference by storm, though didn't CougEd make the same claim when Wulff was here?

No, the coaches in the conference are at or close to their high point. It has nothing to do with Leach. This is a good conference and will continue to get better.

Brand Y wrote a very nice article regarding teams and rebuilding. They are things I have written in the past, but the writer does a much better job than I ever could.

The reality is WSU won the Pac-10 in 2002, when USC, Ucla, Cal, OSU, Oregon, UW and ASU fielded teams with 7 wins or more, and we would have gone 8-0, but for Gesser's Apple Cup injury.

This post was edited on 12/2 3:42 PM by Coug1990

 

[Cougsocal]

Originally posted by Coug1990:

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by 405 Coug:
Difficult to compare different times, Walden accomplished a lot in 4 years, the 4th year being the height of his time at WSU, the big difference between then and now is coaching in the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has never had this many good to great coaches at one time, there are no easy wins in conference. In Walden's day Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, and Oregon (and WSU) were all below average teams, win 3 or 4 and pull an upset somewhere and you had 4 or 5 conference wins, during this past year 9 of 12 pac 12 teams were ranked in the top 25 at one time or another during the year, that has never happened before if I am recalling correctly. Top to bottom I believe the Pac 12 is the toughest conference in the nation right now, and will be for a while.

If you judge wins as evidence of good coaching, the Pac-10 has been better in the past. In 2002 for instance, we had 8 of 10 teams bowl eligible, despite FCS limitations with 2 BCS bowl teams. The Pac-12 has added patsy Colorado to join now traditional patsy WSU, which replace OSU as the conference doormat, and OSU may have returned to doormat status and who knows about Utah, is this year the exception? This year was good for the Pac-12, but WSU, Cal, OSU and Colorado are not bowl eligible, despite the ridiculously low standard of 5 wins over FBS teams, 1 win against a FCS team, requirement and let's not forget we lost to 7-5 Nevada by double digits.

I like how someone makes a reference to Walden era and you cherry pick 2002. If you didn't know, Mike Price was the coach of the Cougars then. In fact, there was a coach in between Walden and Price named Dennis Erickson.

OSU was in a bowl game last season and they have a down season and you already have them as dormant status? Really? Come on man!

Oklahoma was also in the bowl game.

You are wrong about the 9 teams ranked. Sport-reference.com says only 8 teams have been ranked, the same as in 2002, when there were only 10 teams. WSU played 9 teams that were in the rankings in 2002, include National Champ Ohio State, #4 USC and #8 Oklahoma.

Also it wasn't that long ago that the Pac-10 has the most players in the pros, by a wide margin, we are now third. In Walden's day Pac-10 was the conference of the future pros. In 1981 do you really think the conference was full of patsys? Stanford was 4-7 despite having junior John Elway was their QB.

What difference does it make if the QB is great, but the rest of the team stinks?

Isn't the "Pac-12 is tougher than it has ever been," call in recent years a fiction created to excuse Leach's inability to take the conference by storm, though didn't CougEd make the same claim when Wulff was here?

No, the coaches in the conference are at or close to their high point. It has nothing to do with Leach. This is a good conference and will continue to get better.

Brand Y wrote a very nice article regarding teams and rebuilding. They are things I have written in the past, but the writer does a much better job than I ever could.

The reality is WSU won the Pac-10 in 2002, when USC, Ucla, Cal, OSU, Oregon, UW and ASU fielded teams with 7 wins or more, and we would have gone 8-0, but for Gesser's Apple Cup injury.

This post was edited on 12/2 3:42 PM by Coug1990

Coug1990,

I got to Walden eventually. But the premise of 405 post is the Pac-12 has never been better --- really. I remember 2002 because I used it in the past, to counter the assertion we can't expect Leach to compete for championships in the upgraded Pac-12. If, as you say, the conference is only going to get better, and you may be right, we are in trouble, because we need some stagnation at a minimum to get ahead and stay there. As for OSU -- we were in a bowl game last year, and look at us now. The thing about OSU is they were senior dominated (9 on defense plus Mannion). When you are senior dominated and 2-7, there is no where but down are our recruiting levels. This was supposed to be a big year for them. Riley is getting long in the tooth, is he up for another rebuild? I doubt it. Do you really expect Oregon State to be any good next year? They have doormat written all over them, specially starting a brand new QB, with crap receivers our DBs were able to shut down.

Halliday got us to 6-6 with a team that stunk around him, did he not? While Halliday is good, Elway may have been the most talented QB to have ever played the game. His problem was Paul "Chief" Wiggins. He took over a Bill Walsh (chopper liver) built team and had them at 1-10 in 4 seasons. He actual may be in the running for the worst conference coach ever along with Wulff.

 

[Coug1990]

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by Coug1990:

Originally posted by Cougsocal:

Originally posted by 405 Coug:
Difficult to compare different times, Walden accomplished a lot in 4 years, the 4th year being the height of his time at WSU, the big difference between then and now is coaching in the Pac 12. The Pac 12 has never had this many good to great coaches at one time, there are no easy wins in conference. In Walden's day Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, and Oregon (and WSU) were all below average teams, win 3 or 4 and pull an upset somewhere and you had 4 or 5 conference wins, during this past year 9 of 12 pac 12 teams were ranked in the top 25 at one time or another during the year, that has never happened before if I am recalling correctly. Top to bottom I believe the Pac 12 is the toughest conference in the nation right now, and will be for a while.

If you judge wins as evidence of good coaching, the Pac-10 has been better in the past. In 2002 for instance, we had 8 of 10 teams bowl eligible, despite FCS limitations with 2 BCS bowl teams. The Pac-12 has added patsy Colorado to join now traditional patsy WSU, which replace OSU as the conference doormat, and OSU may have returned to doormat status and who knows about Utah, is this year the exception? This year was good for the Pac-12, but WSU, Cal, OSU and Colorado are not bowl eligible, despite the ridiculously low standard of 5 wins over FBS teams, 1 win against a FCS team, requirement and let's not forget we lost to 7-5 Nevada by double digits.

I like how someone makes a reference to Walden era and you cherry pick 2002. If you didn't know, Mike Price was the coach of the Cougars then. In fact, there was a coach in between Walden and Price named Dennis Erickson.

OSU was in a bowl game last season and they have a down season and you already have them as dormant status? Really? Come on man!

Oklahoma was also in the bowl game.

You are wrong about the 9 teams ranked. Sport-reference.com says only 8 teams have been ranked, the same as in 2002, when there were only 10 teams. WSU played 9 teams that were in the rankings in 2002, include National Champ Ohio State, #4 USC and #8 Oklahoma.

Also it wasn't that long ago that the Pac-10 has the most players in the pros, by a wide margin, we are now third. In Walden's day Pac-10 was the conference of the future pros. In 1981 do you really think the conference was full of patsys? Stanford was 4-7 despite having junior John Elway was their QB.

What difference does it make if the QB is great, but the rest of the team stinks?

Isn't the "Pac-12 is tougher than it has ever been," call in recent years a fiction created to excuse Leach's inability to take the conference by storm, though didn't CougEd make the same claim when Wulff was here?

No, the coaches in the conference are at or close to their high point. It has nothing to do with Leach. This is a good conference and will continue to get better.

Brand Y wrote a very nice article regarding teams and rebuilding. They are things I have written in the past, but the writer does a much better job than I ever could.

The reality is WSU won the Pac-10 in 2002, when USC, Ucla, Cal, OSU, Oregon, UW and ASU fielded teams with 7 wins or more, and we would have gone 8-0, but for Gesser's Apple Cup injury.

This post was edited on 12/2 3:42 PM by Coug1990

Coug1990,

I got to Walden eventually. But the premise of 405 post is the Pac-12 has never been better --- really. I remember 2002 because I used it in the past, to counter the assertion we can't expect Leach to compete for championships in the upgraded Pac-12. If, as you say, the conference is only going to get better, and you may be right, we are in trouble, because we need some stagnation at a minimum to get ahead and stay there. As for OSU -- we were in a bowl game last year, and look at us now. The thing about OSU is they were senior dominated (9 on defense plus Mannion). When you are senior dominated and 2-7, there is no where but down are our recruiting levels. This was supposed to be a big year for them. Riley is getting long in the tooth, is he up for another rebuild? I doubt it. Do you really expect Oregon State to be any good next year? They have doormat written all over them, specially starting a brand new QB, with crap receivers our DBs were able to shut down.

Halliday got us to 6-6 with a team that stunk around him, did he not? While Halliday is good, Elway may have been the most talented QB to have ever played the game. His problem was Paul "Chief" Wiggins. He took over a Bill Walsh (chopper liver) built team and had them at 1-10 in 4 seasons. He actual may be in the running for the worst conference coach ever along with Wulff.

The conference is loaded this season. You may be right, the conference may have been better back in 2002 or not. The conference may be better this season. This is up for debate. His main point was that the conference back in Walden's day is not close to what it is now. Comparing the 2002 season and the 2014 season is a different argument and has nothing to do with what he was saying.

How do you know what Riley is thinking? Seriously? Maybe you have talked to him? He had down seasons four years ago and built the team back to making back to back bowls. 61 is not old.

Ok, I will go with what you say and Elway's problem was Paul Wiggins. The team was bad. What is the difference?

 

[SCglory]

different "mountains." And Walden never did make it to the "top," only Mike Price did.

 

[SCglory]

Re: People can say what they would like about Walden, but he saved

Ed, you're overselling here. I watched PLENTY of games in Pullman that were very "meaningful" in 74, 75, and 76. If you're referring to the larger market teams (SC) I remember watching that in the kingdome (which is more analogous to the Seattle game now) and the huskies in Albi. So you have legit points. But, as far as result, every conf game is equally "meaningful" and I watched a ton of those games in the pre-Walden era.

each coach worked in a separate and unique era, and Walden did what he did, and did a decent job of it during his time there. But even he saw WSU as a transient job then so his "cougar all the way" act now is a schtick combined with his revisionist history and memory.

Walden NOW is a non-entity and has erased a lot of the positive memories fans have/had of him. He was horrible in the booth, and he lacks nearly all the skills necessary to make macro-critiques

 

[CougEd]

Had nothing to do with "meaningful" games...it had to do with

WSU and OSU not having the market really to stand on their own two feet, a burden on the conference if you will. From 75 to 78 four different head coaches- why? Sweeney left, Sherrill and Powers left for more pay, much better gigs.

OSU was the worst team in the country. WSU didn't have the resources. And while you saw meaningful games in those years, how many winning seasons did you see in that time frame you mentioned.

The program lacked stability, it lacked funding, and probably as important the new Pac 10 power was in the same state five hours away.

 

[SCglory]

Re: Had nothing to do with "meaningful" games...it had to do with

"Think of the odds... Playing the first third of the season without your students. Playing all meaningful games 90 minutes away"

Your quote, Ed. My point is that not all meaningful games WERE in Albi. I was replying to your quote.

A lot of colleges and universities go through periods of coaching merry-go-rounds. Hell, look even at the venerable Alabama. Bear retires in 82. Since 1983, starting with Perkins, they have had NINE head coaches!!! That's 9 coaches in a little over 30 years....barely more than 3 years per coach! "Stability?"

You need to ask any head coach just how "stable" their job is. Ask Pelini at NE--he averaged 9 wins...and he's unemployed.

Look, Ed, you are grossly over-selling Walden by trying to make WSU WORSE than it was in the 70s. Yes, it lacked funding, so did about 85% of college programs, its problem was and is that it has no local market to speak of. Walden did OK overall there. He had only 3 (out of 9) winning seasons, and he did some good things. All granted. But he was no "great" coach...






This post was edited on 12/3 11:40 AM by SCglory

 

[chipdouglas]

Originally posted by BiggsCoug:
405, here comes the SEC fan boy to shout you down and call you names .....

You're so self-conscious!

 

[BiggsCoug]

Just giving a heads up to get another poster that doesn't agree with you that you'll be here soon enough to spout off about the SEC.... Which had 4 ACC losses last weekend....

 

[CougEd]

Not overselling anything...

I firmly believe if Walden did not stabilize the program, continued to be the doormat (with OSU) , continued to be a financial burden on the rest of the conference, that the powers that be, UW, UCLA, and USC would see no reason to keep them in the conference and would have sent them packing to the WAC.

 

[SCglory]

Re: Not overselling anything...

If that myth helps you sleep at night, then it's a piece of harmless fluff I guess. Not sure why you feel the need to elevate Walden's role and stature beyond reality. Most conferences have doormats. And many of those doormats are that way for a reason (whether higher academics means they get fewer quality athletes, like Vandy) or because of other reasons, college football has been played for so long that geography has been allowed to have a role on which schools thrive and which don't. Of course there are exceptions--Kansas State comes to mind--but whether those exceptions become a new "normal" is usually problematic. Remember what happened to KSU when Snyder left?

Keeping the ball rolling is hard.

If you look at the history of the P12/10/8.....you see that WSU joined the Big 5 within many of our lifetimes...so it's not like they have always been a member of the "Pac 8" or whatever.....it shifted around from the 20s onward.

If you look at the total coaching record at WSU historically, it's pretty clear that once you figure out how to measure success (and I would say long-term winning), then Hollingbery stands alone, but Mike Price is second, because of Rose Bowls, not because of long-term and sustained success. Erickson was an itinerant who could coach, Walden was a guy who really fit the culture but a mediocre coach. Walden's real success is that he--as you said--stabilized the program, helped manufacture a "brand" for cougar football, and had some successful games and seasons. But nobody in their right mind would ever see Walden as a great football coach or mind.

In the era when Walden coached it was not that easy to "remove" conference members for no real cause save athletic revenues!! Would SC and ucla liked to have seen the poorer brethren go?? Certainly. But wishes aren't reality. Walden helped the program with stability but he did not "save" the program from extinction. He was a step on the ladder up, but that's all. The cougars are still waiting for their guy, and it's now become legit to wonder about Mike Leach...or at least Mike Leach and how he's working out HERE. Maybe he needs more funds for the dept, to hire better assistants or whatever; but what's happening now is not great, and he can no longer be considered "the savior" of the program without results.

 

[chinookpirate]

Re: Not overselling anything...


statisticians love you, Glory... it's almost as if the actual history never really existed.

 

[SCglory]

Re: Not overselling anything...

Elaborate. What do you disagree with? I'd be fine discussing it. I think Ed is making Walden into something greater than he was. If you disagree, cool, just say more