Leach's deal at MSU
- Thread starter ScottHood
- Start date
staff money and staff poaching #1 factor for Leach taking MSU job imo
I also think the challenge of proving that his system will work in the SEC, despite some top notch defenses he'll have to face, was attractive to Leach.
Glad Cougar
Glad Cougar
There's a certain level of cognitive dissonance going on there with Leach.
He claims that he doesn't need top tier talent to make his system work, but whines and cries about UW's players being better than his. AND THEN goes on to state that MSU has better talent and recruiting pool, so it'll make a difference, yet he's already face top notch defenses (yet not even SEC level it could be argued) in UW and Kal.
I guess he thinks he'll have 5 Dillards on the OL next year?
Just pointing out there is nothing here about media compensation. That could potentially be huge, like $1 million plus per year huge. Leach was getting around $1.3 million in media compensation while at WSU.
Leach's biggest mistake with those comments was that they would get twisted by folks who get emotional and don't hear what he's saying. If the press/pundits wants to say we don't have the talent to compete all year long, why do they act surprised when the Cougs lose to teams lose to those with talent they say is superior?
I thought that too, but when you throw in that he mentioned recruits after the 2018 loss, then again after being hired at MSU, it would appear that it's recruiting and not the press that has his undies in a was
I get it.
Next Tuesday it will be 18 degrees for a high and 10 for a low with snow in Pullman.
Not directing this at anyone in particular, but I have a tough time understanding why people fail to realize the context in which these or other quotes / statements are given.
He was asked why he is making the move. What exactly would he say that would make people happy?
- "I wanted more money." Yeah, sure. Exactly nobody has ever said that, even if it's always a factor.
- "I wanted the challenge of the SEC." "Oh no, he's dissing the Pac-12, even though everyone does that every day and it's valid!"
- "I was sick of the damned cold and wanted to be closer to Florida." "He's mailing it in and this is just to be in a quasi-retirement! He hates the Northwest and isn't one of us!"
- "Mississippi State has great [tradition, history, resources, recruiting territory, etc.]." "Hey, by implication he's saying WSU doesn't have [whatever it is]! Screw that guy!"
- "The leadership here is giving me great support (i.e., a higher assistant coaching pool)." "So does he mean WSU wasn't doing that? Is he blaming that for a lack of success at WSU?"
I mean ... what's he supposed to say that would make everyone happy and not possibly offend anyone or be read to hint at any kind of shortcoming at WSU vis-a-vis his new spot or the conference it's in?
Last edited:
I don't need a Leach quite to "make me happy."
Most of what he said checks all of the"of course" boxes:
More money - of course
More resources - of course
Sec better - of course
But this is the guy who, when asked about it every year, repeatedly claimed that he puts no weight on stars or recruiting rankings. Yet a better recruiting pool was an impetus to leaving. I suppose I'm reading into that somewhat, but it would be safer to assume that the implication is that the talent is better down south - but isn't that "talent" evaluation subjective? You know, the system that holds no value to him?
THAT'S what I'm talking about
Last edited:
Yeah, I hear you. Bear in mind the distinction between (i) not giving a damn about "stars" or "rankings," though, with the point being that he relies on his own evaluations despite what the media says about which coaches are recruiting well, and (ii) being frustrated by an inability to get those players he identifies as good talents due to all kinds of challenges like fewer resources, no real natural recruiting territory, and, most significantly (IMO), his assistants constantly being poached.
There's only one answer that does that:
"I wanted to be closer to my kids/grandkids."
I'd have been fine with "They made me an offer I couldn't refuse. Big pay bump."
It's the truth.
In all honesty, some people know when to move on, when they are becoming stale. I like most thought because of his age and a job that is not pressure packed, has some nice perks he would stay around. But I am sure he saw that window for a challenge closing. Personally I wish Currie at Tenn wasn't fired, and Leach got that job.
Biggs railed on about how Leach wasn't plugged in this year. Not sure I agree with him, but for everything that went right in 18, the opposite happened in 19, and I think everything that happened, including recruiting wore on him.
I think the conversations with Chris Peterson, and how his flame went out made Leach think he did need to recharge the batteries. He needed a new challenge.
From the perspective of my WSU fan ego, I'd have preferred that he went to Tennessee for $7m a year or whatever it was. Easier to explain, and there was a lot happening in terms of assistant departures at the time. Grinch could have been promoted and not paid a ton. More moving parts and questions there for sure, but preferable in some ways.
Here's the thing, though -- Minshew, 11-2, and the Alamo Bowl win and top-10 ranking probably don't happen in that scenario. I'm OK with the trade, given some reasonable assumptions.
He was checked out. The thing with Clayes doesn’t happen with a HC that’s fully engaged. Hell he couldn’t wait to get down to the Keys. Yeah the conversation with CP probably nails it...do you really want a coach who’s asking other coaches “hey, how long you gonna keep doing this”. I think MSU is getting a coach who’s thinking about the golden years.
