Twist: Ed and Fab are the same poster and he enjoys the witty give and take with himself.
Our 600 pound Gorilla
- Thread starter Cougsocal
- Start date
Twist: Ed and Fab are the same poster and he enjoys the witty give and take with himself.
Hmmm...tell me what adjective you would prefer. Top flight? All conference? Right now the sum of the parts are greater than any one individual. May and I would probably be inclined to agree
Then if we are talking simple production I am 100% agreement with you. Leach will never have a bad QB. Never. If that is the definition of "non spotty" recruiting I agree with you.
So I am clear my expectation whether he holds an open tryout, gives the job to a walk on, recruits a one star kid from Colton High School,. or gets a 4 star kid from Cali, I expect Mike Leach will get outstanding production from the position.
Now simply in terms of rankings...no more or no less the fact Falk is successful does nothing for the ranking system, which was the topic of discussion.
And one last thing about "spotty" in which people are having a difficult time with, he doesn't have to hit on every kid. He needs to hit on one every two to three years.
So I don't have an "expectation" that he needs to hit on more than 50%. What I am surprised about that two things- 1) kids aren't begging him to recruit them. Begging. Yes, I agree the system is looked down upon by the NFL, but holy cow he has coached three kids at WSU, and two sit on top of the Pac 12 record books.
What does surprise me (not expectation) is that Bruggman was such a miss that he couldn't really land anywhere where he could play and Bender flamed out as fast as he did. Please don't read as a knock on Leach. But his work is of such high quality it is simply surprising to me, especially about Bruggman.
His QB recruiting hasn't been "spotty" from a rankings standpoint either. Bruggman was a 4 star, Hilinksi was a 4 star, Cooper is a 4 star, Neville was a 3 star (4 star on BX) & Bender was a 3 star. I don't know, how much more consistent do you want?
And WR recruiting has been very good. "Functional" to me, means "adequate". I think they've been far better than that.
I will choose my words more carefully as functional to me means productive. Not necessarily the best athlete Bartilone/Cracraft but get the job done. Doba seem to always have productive/functional linebackers. He would plug and play. Same with Leach. Maybe because he has the Wes Welker types that are vital to his offense, maybe that is why I use the term functional. Plug and play.
I think as a unit they are very good, but individually how many people do you believ are banging down the door to get cracraft or many of the other receivers he got production out of? He got production out of Dom Williams and Ricky Galvin. So functional to me means something else, but they have been very productive. And if they quit fumbling and dropping the ball in the Apple Cup I will change it to highly productive....: )
Got several questions for you.
1) is there a reason why you feel it is important to use my name? (by the way my middle initial is C since you care so much). Would you put my name out there if I knew your name?
2) Is "tossing dirt" by saying he is a top 10 coach? Or fully supporting him when he gets beat by Eastern and PSU? When have I tossed dirt on him when Falk struggles, or we give up 55 plus points against Arizona? I don't.
3) Someone is lying. It is either you or Moos. BTW moos denies ever saying that to anyone at the Tri City Event. And BTW, are you saying Moos told you I actually attend those events, or did he tell you I don't attend those events but give money?
And to be honest, if CougEd's "antics" as you call them are remotely on their radar screen from a message board Moos and the Athletic Department are in big trouble.
So f'ing what--Max Browne was a 5-star kid who did the same thing. I guess 'SC can't recruit.
Ed, maybe this escapes you--you incessantly bring up the fact that Leach somehow totally misjudged 4-star recruit Bruggman, but can't get it through your thick skull that it happens everywhere.
While my skull is thick I do get it . I brought it up once ever on this board. Ever. It was in this thread . So I have a little give and take with fab . What part of my posts ... or do you just go to the bruggman line of a post and read that as I have said maybe 6 times in this thread that hitting on 50% of your recruits overall is a good track record .
“ED hates Winning Cougar Football Under Mike Leach”
Can We Just Start The Thread With That Topic and Lock It?
That way it’s at the top for all to see each day & ED doesn’t need to post again.
Can We Just Start The Thread With That Topic and Lock It?
That way it’s at the top for all to see each day & ED doesn’t need to post again.
Yea, he gets a few lightly recruited guys like Cracraft & Welker, but he also lands pretty heavily recruited guys like Marks, Mayle, Calvin, Johnson Mack & Drue Jackson.
Last edited:
8 or 9 win seasons as the norm? I will take that in a minute. We will always - ALWAYS - be the underdog. As much $ as we've poured into facilities the others have done the same. We're just barely keeping up. 8 or 9 win seasons with an occasional 10-win? SIGN ME UP! It's a hard pill to swallow (took me decades) but we will always, ALWAYS be second fiddle in this state. If our peers can be Oky State, Michigan State, VaTech and K-State, Etc. - GREAT!
Just look across the field this past weekend at Stanford, which has AWFUL QB play despite having the ability to pull in some four- (and even five-) star QBs. Costello isn't any good and Chryst was much worse. Costello chose Stanford over USC and Michigan and was a 4-star on here. Chryst was the overall no. 2 pro-style QB on Rivals and had offers from Alabama, USC, and who knows how many others. Most people would say those players are flat-out awful.
You see this at all schools if you look. Look at all the 4-star recruits at Alabama (e.g., Cornwell), USC (remember Max Browne, the 5-star, and many others over the years), UW (too many to name) ... basically every school in the country. QB recruiting leads to a lot of "busts" since only one guy can play and most Power 5 teams are able to get pretty solid recruits every year. Some of those kids just can't make the jump, like it seems we're seeing with these Stanford kids, and some others have the poor fortune to get stuck in a playing time crunch even if they're pretty decent.
Getting back to Leach, he identified a walk-on who has become the most prolific QB in Pac-12 history by the numbers, and who was (and still may be) a legitimate pro prospect. Hilinski looks like he's probably better once the turnovers are coached out. Leach was one of only a couple schools to offer Baker Mayfield out of high school. Criticizing Leach's QB recruiting is pretty silly.
Jones Stadium is where the Wildcats just beat Texas Tech 42 to 35
Why do I care about that?
