I’m not going to argue with your position. You very well might be right. Personally, I don’t think your timeline lines up with what you said with staff turnover and that it seemed you were implying that we didn’t get many productive players after the 13 class.
New WR coach hired
- Thread starter Glad Cougar
- Start date
I’m not going to argue with your position. You very well might be right. Personally, I don’t think your timeline lines up with what you said with staff turnover and that it seemed you were implying that we didn’t get many productive players after the 13 class.
Acknowledging Leach recruited at a fairly solid level would undermine his narratives.
I'm saying two things: (1) You can't properly operate the posting function on this website; and (2) your statement "Leach started out well in 12/13, and then struggled." is total BS.
If you want to argue his best years recruiting the DL were in 12-13, we can agree. But at every other position, the team got better recruits later.
Gardner and Gordon were more productive than Falk.
James Williams and Max Borghi have been more productive than Morrow.
Marks and Cracraft were some of the most productive wideouts in school history. Maybe was great his senior year. But Easop and Arcanado were almost as productive this year. Patmon and Tay are crazy good as well.
Madison, Dahl, Sorensen, and the Continent were good, but Dillard, Ryan, Mauigoa, Watson, and Lucas was the best line of the Leach era.
Palacio, Allison, and Pelluer played early due to a lack of depth. Luvu, Woods and Taylor might be better when all is said and done.
In the secondary? Luani, Jalen Thompson, Darrien Molton, and Marcus Strong all were better talents than earlier recruits like Taylor Taliulu, Marcellus Pippins, and Isaac Dotson.
Not at all. I said they were rated worse (in the 60s) than any other year, representing the dropoff you were looking for. Try to keep up.
I was never talking about ratings . I was talking about production . Try to keep up part II
