Now that most are feeling very negative

[How_did_this_happen?]

...about last night's game, let me be the first to state that we will lose to Montana State next season. You all realize that, right? There is no doubt in my mind.

Just think about the headline..."Former WSU QB leads Bobcats to upset of Cougars".

And most fans here will be shocked again.

Just preparing you emotionally...




Yea..I'm feeling negative.

 

[ElComanche]

If Big Joe decides to leave, will begin to believe you.

 

[wulffbone]

If Big Joe is still talking to Whoregon he's already gone.

If the Cougar "heads" are where they were in the Holliday Bowl, they will lose the opener for sure. That includes the coaching staff top to bottom.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

If Big Joe decides to leave, will begin to believe you.

I thought he had already said he wasn't going anywhere ?

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

If Big Joe is still talking to Whoregon he's already gone.

If the Cougar "heads" are where they were in the Holliday Bowl, they will lose the opener for sure. That includes the coaching staff top to bottom.

Oh...they will be. I've got history to draw from.

 

[dgibbons]

...about last night's game, let me be the first to state that we will lose to Montana State next season. You all realize that, right? There is no doubt in my mind.

Just think about the headline..."Former WSU QB leads Bobcats to upset of Cougars".

And most fans here will be shocked again.

Just preparing you emotionally...




Yea..I'm feeling negative.

And if we win, we're headed for a three win season!

 

[WASH ST A&M FAN]

...Just think about the headline..."Former WSU QB leads Bobcats to upset of Cougars".

Bruggman lost his starting job the final Month of season to a frosh who won 2-straight to close out the 'Cats season.

He won't see the field.

 

[kougkurt]

I thought he had already said he wasn't going anywhere ?

He is still talking to them. Contract extension has not yet been signed. He is gone.

 

[CougPatrol]

Bruggman lost the job to an athletic, dual threat, good runner, freshman. Won the game at Montana and was the best player on the field.

Trust me, we'll have our hands full with him next season.

 

[WASH ST A&M FAN]

I'm confused.

Why did you just rewrite what I said?

 

[CougPatrol]

I'm confused.

Why did you just rewrite what I said?

I watched the MSU vs. Montana game. Kept thinking, uh oh regarding our opener.

 

[fingerdisco]

Bruggman lost the job to an athletic, dual threat, good runner, freshman. Won the game at Montana and was the best player on the field.

Trust me, we'll have our hands full with him next season.

So, a backup QB can come in and replace a starter, and succeed?

 

[CougPatrol]

Falk hasn't just been "a starter," he's been our franchise QB for the past 2 seasons. He's won a lot of games and led a lot of comebacks. Benching him in a bowl game because he's played poorly against the P12S champ, the P12 champs and #4 team, and a good Minnesota team.

It wasn't going to happen. No coach makes that move.

 

[fingerdisco]

Falk hasn't just been "a starter," he's been our franchise QB for the past 2 seasons. He's won a lot of games and led a lot of comebacks. Benching him in a bowl game because he's played poorly against the P12S champ, the P12 champs and #4 team, and a good Minnesota team.

It wasn't going to happen. No coach makes that move.

Flat out wrong--lots of starters, or franchise players, if you will--have been benched for poor play, both in the NFL and college. So yes, coaches do make that move.

 

[SCglory]

...about last night's game, let me be the first to state that we will lose to Montana State next season. You all realize that, right? There is no doubt in my mind.

Just think about the headline..."Former WSU QB leads Bobcats to upset of Cougars".

And most fans here will be shocked again.

Just preparing you emotionally...




Yea..I'm feeling negative.

In our "feelings-happy" society, I suppose you had to start out with that. But it's not about "feelings," it's about reality. The woeful team performance was merely the latest in a downward trend. Simply a fact. What I "feel" or what you or others "feel" is not important, in the scheme of things (which includes how to get better), but what IS important is this: what was seen in this game that provides a solid foundation for building for the future? And the answer is: not much. There were no units that looked even decent, and some of them looked like this was their first attempt at organized sports. The offensive line was just that. Falk looked drugged. And the utter lack of coaching responses to the UM's coach's obvious moves was stultifying. He simply let 3 of his guys take on our 5 AND our running back....so basically his 3 guys were better than our SIX. And one of those six was supposedly an "all-american" (that was proven to be a joke). This loss was not a regular loss, nor was there anything to hang one's hat on--this was a program-questioning loss. If THIS was the best that Leach & Co. can get these guys to play; and these efforts were the BEST that these guys can offer....than this is a bad team with bad coaching. Sure, in bowl games, "motivation" plays a big role, but obviously Leach showed himself incapable of providing any motivation and the players likewise responded by not being motivated. They both stunk up the place. I'm not sure that most cougar fans realize just how bad a loss this was. One fan's head was stuck so deep in the sand that he warbled "We will be just fine." Not sure what game that poor kid was watching, but the team that sleep-walked through the last three games was a team that showed just how easy it really is to stop this "vaunted" offense. What good team did the cougs beat this year? Leach needs to show he can beat good teams with consistency, and he can outcoach the other guy when his team is flat. I have seen nothing to show me he can do either of those things.

 

[Coug95man2]

In our "feelings-happy" society, I suppose you had to start out with that. But it's not about "feelings," it's about reality. The woeful team performance was merely the latest in a downward trend. Simply a fact. What I "feel" or what you or others "feel" is not important, in the scheme of things (which includes how to get better), but what IS important is this: what was seen in this game that provides a solid foundation for building for the future? And the answer is: not much. There were no units that looked even decent, and some of them looked like this was their first attempt at organized sports. The offensive line was just that. Falk looked drugged. And the utter lack of coaching responses to the UM's coach's obvious moves was stultifying. He simply let 3 of his guys take on our 5 AND our running back....so basically his 3 guys were better than our SIX. And one of those six was supposedly an "all-american" (that was proven to be a joke). This loss was not a regular loss, nor was there anything to hang one's hat on--this was a program-questioning loss. If THIS was the best that Leach & Co. can get these guys to play; and these efforts were the BEST that these guys can offer....than this is a bad team with bad coaching. Sure, in bowl games, "motivation" plays a big role, but obviously Leach showed himself incapable of providing any motivation and the players likewise responded by not being motivated. They both stunk up the place. I'm not sure that most cougar fans realize just how bad a loss this was. One fan's head was stuck so deep in the sand that he warbled "We will be just fine." Not sure what game that poor kid was watching, but the team that sleep-walked through the last three games was a team that showed just how easy it really is to stop this "vaunted" offense. What good team did the cougs beat this year? Leach needs to show he can beat good teams with consistency, and he can outcoach the other guy when his team is flat. I have seen nothing to show me he can do either of those things.

SC, I gotta say, your attitude is what is the problem with USC fans.

If we would have played better against UW, against CO, against MN... we would have won! Yes, we looked badly because we were being beat. Falk looked like he was completely stumped out there. The MN D had him covered. There were times Falk had 5-8 seconds to throw! Holy crap how much can we expect from our Oline!? He didn't know what to do! But isn't that a sign of a good opponent? How can anyone claim otherwise?!

Why is it so hard to conceive that WSU is not a TOP 5 Team in the nation right now? I just don't get this attitude. I'm not making excuses for the bad plays out there but when you are being "bested", that is what happens. Rarely... I mean rarely does a team that is trying to break into the TOP 25, lose and look good doing it. Now if Alabama loses, yes... they can look pretty darn good doing that. But for the vast majority of the programs out there... when you are getting beat, you look like crap doing it. Just a fact. We aren't Auburn, Alabama, Okie, Ohio State... Those guys... they can look good when they lose.

But we are growing guys. Holy crap, do we have a bunch of Chicken Littles running around here. And no offense, SC. You and I have a lot in common, I believe. But your football attitude in this situation is waaaaay off. Don't bring that Southern Cal, instant gratification attitude around here, where if CML doesn't bring us into the National Championship next year we should fire him, kinda thing. We are building. We aren't a perennial powerhouse like USC. Don't taint the attitude you have with what reality is. USC fans are known for some of the highest expectations (realistically or not rarely matters) and when they aren't meet, heads should roll. I can honestly say, as much as I believe FBS is a business, this extreme attitude from boosters/fans is also a contributing factor in what's ruining FBS.

There is a point where I believe we should have higher standards. And I believe those standards have been raised quite a bit from 4 or 5 years ago. But think about it, guys. Other than our Non-Con (Don't ask me what the hell was going on there but that isn't what is being discussed here, either), our losses are to extremely good teams.

We have NOTHING to be ashamed of and I see a lot of bright lights in front of us.

 

[CougPatrol]

Not sure why some people are mentioning the game at Colorado as a flop. That was a highly charged road game against a top-10 opponent and eventual P12 South champion. We played a highly competitive, hard fought game, but our defense couldn't get off the field. I thought we were the better team against the Buffs, especially early, and we should have been up 27-7.

UW is a superior team. The Minnesota game was a stinker. The Colorado game was a hard fought, very entertaining game against a good opponent. That one wasn't on Leach. The plays on offense were there to be made.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Not sure why some people are mentioning the game at Colorado as a flop. That was a highly charged road game against a top-10 opponent and eventual P12 South champion. We played a highly competitive, hard fought game, but our defense couldn't get off the field. I thought we were the better team against the Buffs, especially early, and we should have been up 27-7.

UW is a superior team. The Minnesota game was a stinker. The Colorado game was a hard fought, very entertaining game against a good opponent. That one wasn't on Leach. The plays on offense were there to be made.

Move that CU loss up in the schedule somewhere and people probably aren't losing their minds because "we lost 3 straight". Just happens, the 3 toughest opponents we faced all year were the last 3. It sucks, and it feels crappy, but that's how it goes sometimes.

I look at those 3 losses and come to the conclusion that the Cougs were a pretty good team. Not great, not even "real good", just pretty good. I don't know that we need to go much deeper on it than that.

 

[CougPatrol]

I had fun watching the Colorado game even though we lost. It was a tough, exciting game. The same cannot be said about the Apple Cup or the Holiday Bowl.

I agree with you. We lost our last 3 games. 2 of them were competitive, and one of them was against a superior opponent. That's the way it goes.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Not sure why some people are mentioning the game at Colorado as a flop. That was a highly charged road game against a top-10 opponent and eventual P12 South champion. We played a highly competitive, hard fought game, but our defense couldn't get off the field. I thought we were the better team against the Buffs, especially early, and we should have been up 27-7.

UW is a superior team. The Minnesota game was a stinker. The Colorado game was a hard fought, very entertaining game against a good opponent. That one wasn't on Leach. The plays on offense were there to be made.

Exactly.

"The plays were there to be made."

Boise is on Grinch and the D, but EWU, CU, UW and UM all have that same mantra - "The plays were there to be made." When you have a team that shows you that it CAN make those plays it is endlessly frustrating to watch them not - especially when it is due to no special effort of the opponent.

Yes, CU, UW and UM did take a lot away and influenced the outcome - that is not what I'm saying. I'm reiterating what you said - "the plays were there to be made" and yet they weren't. From a team that passes at an 80% completion rate, they suddenly drop to 60% - missed passes, lack of effort to fight and hold on to the ball, etc.

Maybe we are missing Yost more that we realize - there is a toughness that is no longer present in the receiving corp. The blocking sucks too. I don't know, just spitballing. What I do know is that these losses were not an x and o or a jimmie and joe thing - it was an effort and leadership thing, and that is unacceptable. The reason that people are getting after Leach is that he is responsible to see this kind of stuff and fix it - the fish rots from the head. Its on him to make sure the toughness and leadership is there - these are kids, they aren't going to figure it out for themselves.

 

[Coug95man2]

Maybe we are missing Yost more that we realize - there is a toughness that is no longer present in the receiving corp. The blocking sucks too. I don't know, just spitballing. What I do know is that these losses were not an x and o or a jimmie and joe thing - it was an effort and leadership thing, and that is unacceptable. The reason that people are getting after Leach is that he is responsible to see this kind of stuff and fix it - the fish rots from the head. Its on him to make sure the toughness and leadership is there - these are kids, they aren't going to figure it out for themselves.

While I agree with much of what you are saying, I would put it out there, that if the kids aren't going to figure it out for themselves, we'll never be a TOP 10 program. I think this is what CML is doing. He's kind of like a parent. He's allowing his kids to figure out life on their own. They are big boys, now. He's giving them the plays, he's giving them the tools to win... now it's up to them. Now, of course you can only take that so far. I'd put the "rallies" CML did during the MN game as evidence. He's not leaving them out in the cold to shiver but just like the QB relationship. He gives them the overall scheme but it's up to the QB to make the REAL call. So it is with the rest of the team.

Yes, this team needs a sparky leader. But CML isn't going to be the substitute until someone steps up either! Nor should he!

I've stated this from day 1 of CML's tenure. It's all between the ears. That is the problem with this program right now. We've made HUGE strides and I love Marks attitude. He is spot on. But I also see where we were last year. We've made progress. Next year, I expect more.

 

[CougPatrol]

Well, I didn't see many plays against UW and Minnesota that were there to be made. Of course we had some chances, but UW mugged us in the 1st quarter and completely took us out of the game.

The only way we could have hung in there vs. UW was if we matched them score for score early, and that just wasn't happening. I didn't see many opportunities against Minnesota either. Everything was a discombobulated grind. Frankly, Minnesota missed far more opportunities than we did by overthrowing some open vertical routes.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

While I agree with much of what you are saying, I would put it out there, that if the kids aren't going to figure it out for themselves, we'll never be a TOP 10 program. I think this is what CML is doing. He's kind of like a parent. He's allowing his kids to figure out life on their own. They are big boys, now. He's giving them the plays, he's giving them the tools to win... now it's up to them. Now, of course you can only take that so far. I'd put the "rallies" CML did during the MN game as evidence. He's not leaving them out in the cold to shiver but just like the QB relationship. He gives them the overall scheme but it's up to the QB to make the REAL call. So it is with the rest of the team.

Yes, this team needs a sparky leader. But CML isn't going to be the substitute until someone steps up either! Nor should he!

I've stated this from day 1 of CML's tenure. It's all between the ears. That is the problem with this program right now. We've made HUGE strides and I love Marks attitude. He is spot on. But I also see where we were last year. We've made progress. Next year, I expect more.

It is possible that CML is too big of a personality for a leader to grow and flourish under his tenure? Kind of "the locker room is only big enough for one ego" type of thing?

Again, just spitballing.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

Well, I didn't see many plays against UW and Minnesota that were there to be made. Of course we had some chances, but UW mugged us in the 1st quarter and completely took us out of the game.

The only way we could have hung in there vs. UW was if we matched them score for score early, and that just wasn't happening. I didn't see many opportunities against Minnesota either. Everything was a discombobulated grind. Frankly, Minnesota missed far more opportunities than we did by overthrowing some open vertical routes.

Um, ok. I was quoting you directly, but I guess not...

 

[Fab5Coug]

Exactly.

"The plays were there to be made."

Boise is on Grinch and the D, but EWU, CU, UW and UM all have that same mantra - "The plays were there to be made." When you have a team that shows you that it CAN make those plays it is endlessly frustrating to watch them not - especially when it is due to no special effort of the opponent.

Yes, CU, UW and UM did take a lot away and influenced the outcome - that is not what I'm saying. I'm reiterating what you said - "the plays were there to be made" and yet they weren't. From a team that passes at an 80% completion rate, they suddenly drop to 60% - missed passes, lack of effort to fight and hold on to the ball, etc.

Maybe we are missing Yost more that we realize - there is a toughness that is no longer present in the receiving corp. The blocking sucks too. I don't know, just spitballing. What I do know is that these losses were not an x and o or a jimmie and joe thing - it was an effort and leadership thing, and that is unacceptable. The reason that people are getting after Leach is that he is responsible to see this kind of stuff and fix it - the fish rots from the head. Its on him to make sure the toughness and leadership is there - these are kids, they aren't going to figure it out for themselves.

We have a team that is competitive in most games, not good enough to blow teams out often. The last 2 seasons, we've had 14 games that have ended within a single score. That is an amazing number of close games. We are 8-6 in those games. That seems about right for a a good, not great team.

So, it's easy to point to a Boise or Minnesota loss and question why we "can't make the plays that are there to be had", but we're ignoring the plays that were made against ASU, UCLA, Miami or Oregon.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

We have a team that is competitive in most games, not good enough to blow teams out often. The last 2 seasons, we've had 14 games that have ended within a single score. That is an amazing number of close games. We are 8-6 in those games. That seems about right for a a good, not great team.

So, it's easy to point to a Boise or Minnesota loss and question why we "can't make the plays that are there to be had", but we're ignoring the plays that were made against ASU, UCLA, Miami or Oregon.

I disagree. I think this is a really good bordering on great team that horribly underachieves when the pressure is on. We could argue until we're blue in the face exactly why that is, but good-not-great teams don't drop 3 50 pts games and 1 60 (almost 70) point game on opponents.

They played inspired football sometimes - other times they didn't.