Pac-12 achiever article

[Loyal Coug]

From the main Rivals site. 10 year study, WSU ranks #3. Recent success outweighs prior dismal results. Draft stats are terrible, but improving.

https://n.rivals.com/news/overachiever-or-underachiever-ranking-all-the-pac-12-teams

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Interesting reading. Thanks for the link, Loyal!

 

[425cougfan]

From the main Rivals site. 10 year study, WSU ranks #3. Recent success outweighs prior dismal results. Draft stats are terrible, but improving.

https://n.rivals.com/news/overachiever-or-underachiever-ranking-all-the-pac-12-teams

This speaks to the job done by the coaches, given the challenges of recruiting to Pullman, but ranking highly on a list like this is a mixed blessing, to say the least.

 

[Cougsocal]

Proves the point that Mike Leach is a hell of a coach, can evaluate 2 and 3 star talent better than his brother P-12 coaches, but.... top talent seems to avoid the man like the plague. As for recruiting to Pullman "problem," it didn't stop Mike Price signing 14 guys that would drafted in the first 3 rounds of the draft, including the #1 overall. It didn't stop Walden from signing the #1 QB recruit in the country, signing 3 future first round draft picks and 8 in the first three rounds. And let's not forget they didn't have a fiscally naive AD to throw a $100,000,000 at the perceived cause of the "problem," the facilities gap. It is tough to recruit to Pullman, don't get me wrong, but not as tough Leach is making it.

 

[Loyal Coug]

Proves the point that Mike Leach is a hell of a coach, can evaluate 2 and 3 star talent better than his brother P-12 coaches, but.... top talent seems to avoid the man like the plague. As for recruiting to Pullman "problem," it didn't stop Mike Price signing 14 guys that would drafted in the first 3 rounds of the draft, including the #1 overall. It didn't stop Walden from signing the #1 QB recruit in the country, signing 3 future first round draft picks and 8 in the first three rounds. And let's not forget they didn't have a fiscally naive AD to throw a $100,000,000 at the perceived cause of the "problem," the facilities gap. It is tough to recruit to Pullman, don't get me wrong, but not as tough (as?) Leach is making it.

Had to go back and read your last comment again. Did you leave out the "as"? If so, I don't follow you at all. Leach is making recruiting to Pullman tough?

You know this survey is a 10 year thing - on-field results include 6 years of CML and the previous 4 years. Same with drafted players. So the drafted player part includes recruits from 2 former coaches, and what - 2 CML classes?

I think what you meant to say is this: "It is tough to recruit to Pullman, don't get me wrong, but not as tough now that Leach is making it work." Or something like that?

CML came into Pullman with a whole different attitude. Remember the "anthill of students" quip? He spun the positive aspects of college town WSU from the get-go. And recruited good citizens and has improved academic success every year. And our results show it. Including recruiting rankings. Draftees will follow.

 

[Cougsocal]

Had to go back and read your last comment again. Did you leave out the "as"? If so, I don't follow you at all. Leach is making recruiting to Pullman tough?

You know this survey is a 10 year thing - on-field results include 6 years of CML and the previous 4 years. Same with drafted players. So the drafted player part includes recruits from 2 former coaches, and what - 2 CML classes?

I think what you meant to say is this: "It is tough to recruit to Pullman, don't get me wrong, but not as tough now that Leach is making it work." Or something like that?

CML came into Pullman with a whole different attitude. Remember the "anthill of students" quip? He spun the positive aspects of college town WSU from the get-go. And recruited good citizens and has improved academic success every year. And our results show it. Including recruiting rankings. Draftees will follow.

Sorry about the "as." Exactly the opposite. According to the Rivals, Leach's first five recruiting classes were worse than any other P-12 school, when averaged. How he get's 8-9 win with the conference rejects, effectively, amazes me. Its great coaching and talent evaluation, I believe. With what he has in terms of recruits, he is the overachievers' overachiever

That said, with $100,000,000 in upgrades, three straight bowls, even his most recent class, #46 nationally, is disappointing. Price was able to recruit top #25 classes, with none of the advantages Leach has/had i.e. Crazy Moos' credit card. Of course, Price wasn't the coach Leach is, so he needed significantly more talent to win. Nevertheless, I'd like to see Leach match Price is terms of recruiting, with talent equivalent to what Price had in Pullman in 2001/2002. With that talent level, Leach could get us to the playoffs, IMO. Now even you must admit that we don't have the talent in Pullman now, that Price had in 2000-2002 or even 1992-1994 (16 players on the all Pac-10 team (five 1st team) vs, 8 last year (2 first team) )

 

[longtimecoug]

Sorry about the "as." Exactly the opposite. According to the Rivals, Leach's first five recruiting classes were worse than any other P-12 school, when averaged. How he get's 8-9 win with the conference rejects, effectively, amazes me. Its great coaching and talent evaluation, I believe. With what he has in terms of recruits, he is the overachievers' overachiever

That said, with $100,000,000 in upgrades, three straight bowls, even his most recent class, #46 nationally, is disappointing. Price was able to recruit top #25 classes, with none of the advantages Leach has/had i.e. Crazy Moos' credit card. Of course, Price wasn't the coach Leach is, so he needed significantly more talent to win. Nevertheless, I'd like to see Leach match Price is terms of recruiting, with talent equivalent to what Price had in Pullman in 2001/2002. With that talent level, Leach could get us to the playoffs, IMO. Now even you must admit that we don't have the talent in Pullman now, that Price had in 2000-2002 or even 1992-1994 (16 players on the all Pac-10 team (five 1st team) vs, 8 last year (2 first team) )

Price was enamored with taking high risk kids, many of which never made it to campus but inflated his recruiting rankings, his recruiting for the most part was awful

 

[Cougsocal]

Price was enamored with taking high risk kids, many of which never made it to campus but inflated his recruiting rankings, his recruiting for the most part was awful

Two questions: How does a guy who gets the Cougs to two Rose Bowls, 3 X10 and 16 kids on the all Pac-10 team recruit" for the most part" awfully? Don't you think you might be "Troning" this a little, i.e. letting feelings for a person cloud your view of reality?

The claim that Price unduly recruited high risk kids that never made it to campus is just a is just your own fiction. Some evidence please. The facts are that Price, at his recruiting worst, was equivalent to Leach's first five years of recruiting. Last is last, unless you are Paul Wulff, who took last place recruiting to a new level, i.e. top #100 vs. #60. The difference is Leach's superior coaching. He can win with kids that most other P-12 schools passed on. Hell, he got 6 wins, including a USC win, out of kids that most MWC teams passed on (Wulff's kids). Price was doomed to 3-8 seasons with those kids. Price needed a couple quality recruiting classes strung together to win, which he didn't always get, admittedly. Hence the cycle of boom and bust.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

What I'd say about Price is that QB depth was horrible during his time at WSU. He could land big-time QBs, but after the No. 1 guy, the drop off was scary bad (with an exception or two).

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Three coaches. Three different people. My take:

Price and Doba were both player's coaches. Price was also a recruiter.
Leach is neither a player's coach nor a recruiter.

Price was a decent O coordinator who occasionally reached higher and delegated the D to a great extent.
Doba was a better than decent D coordinator who delegated the offense, but not to the extent that Price delegated the defense.
Doba managed the clock well. Price and Leach both understood clock management but were capable of being distracted from it.
Leach is one of the most brilliant offensive minds in the last 30 years of college football. He delegates the D to a great extent.

All three of these guys could game plan well, though from an overall game plan standpoint they each had pro's and con's. I'm sure I'll get static for this, but I think Doba might have been the best of the three from an overall game planning standpoint.

Price was a motivator. Doba was your favorite uncle. Leach expects you to execute or you don't play.

Leach is a superb organizer who monitors his subordinates. Price was a pretty good organizer who did a credible job of monitoring subordinates. Doba was an average organizer who did not monitor his subordinates.

Leach takes an extremely active role in monitoring the recruiting process and both monitoring and participating in the evaluation process, though he is not personally a born recruiter. Leach is not interested in borderline academic kids...presumably he has been burned before. Doba delegated much of the recruiting process, from soup to nuts, including making decisions on borderline academic kids. Price loved recruiting and did a much better than average job of projecting how well a "project" would physically develop. Unfortunately, he often convinced himself that a borderline academic prospect might make it when the evidence strongly suggested otherwise. That paid off a few times, and sometimes in a big way; Mark Fields comes immediately to mind; but usually it didn't. My anecdotal guess is that his academic risks failed at least 2/3 of the time. If you told me 3/4 of the time I might believe you.

We all do the best we can with the skill set with which we were born and/or developed. These guys did that, too. Each one a good coach in his own way. I give Leach the nod over Price, but that takes nothing away from St. Mike. Both of them were more suited to being a HC than Bill Doba, God bless him.

 

[earldacoug]

Price could get Prop 48 players on campus. Also Price recruited speed, track and field athletes, hoop tourney guys, he really scavenged before the Internet days. He turned over rocks and found guys no one knew of, but now because of internet those recruits are exposed. Price also had a new wide open offense to recruit too. All the advantages Price had are gone now imo. It would be much tougher for Him to succeed in 2017-18. I think Leach has done greatt in the last 6 years, better than Price could have done imo.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Price could get Prop 48 players on campus. Also Price recruited speed, track and field athletes, hoop tourney guys, he really scavenged before the Internet days. He turned over rocks and found guys no one knew of, but now because of internet those recruits are exposed. Price also had a new wide open offense to recruit too. All the advantages Price had are gone now imo. It would be much tougher for Him to succeed in 2017-18. I think Leach has done greatt in the last 6 years, better than Price could have done imo.

Valid points, Earl, and I agree.

 

[earldacoug]

One more thing on Price and staff, they partied it up too much imo, way too much. There are very few secrets anymore because of cell phones, video, pictures, the internet. This would negatively affect Price today. Leach isn’t a party guy so we don’t have that to worry about, thankfully

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Price could get Prop 48 players on campus. Also Price recruited speed, track and field athletes, hoop tourney guys, he really scavenged before the Internet days. He turned over rocks and found guys no one knew of, but now because of internet those recruits are exposed. Price also had a new wide open offense to recruit too. All the advantages Price had are gone now imo. It would be much tougher for Him to succeed in 2017-18. I think Leach has done greatt in the last 6 years, better than Price could have done imo.

There's a reason why Price was not successful at UTEP the way he was at WSU or Weber State. Before UTEP, he could scavange for those guys that were going to develop over a couple years. It's harder for the diamonds in the rough to get overlooked these days. His habit (need?) of recruiting those players is a reason why his success was so cyclical at both WSU's. He had to spend time building players up before they were ready to compete against the big boys.

 

[Cougsocal]

There's a reason why Price was not successful at UTEP the way he was at WSU or Weber State. Before UTEP, he could scavange for those guys that were going to develop over a couple years. It's harder for the diamonds in the rough to get overlooked these days. His habit (need?) of recruiting those players is a reason why his success was so cyclical at both WSU's. He had to spend time building players up before they were ready to compete against the big boys.

Success is relative. Look at UTEP before and after Price. UTEP may be the most difficult program to win at in all D1. That is why, I believe, Price was the most successful coach at UTEP in 50-60 years (that isn't saying much).

Sure Price had his project "athlete" recruits, but let's not forget he also signed kids that were highly sought after too, i.e. Bledsoe, Butch Williams, Jeremy Williams, Sparks, Sanders, Darling, Ford, Green, Josh Shavies, Paymah, Kevin Brown. Then there is that next level group that included Kegel, Leaf, Trufant, Austin, Moronkola, Coleman, Moore, Mobley, Hunter, Rushing, yada yada yada. So let's nor pretend that Price teams were loaded with project hidden gems that aren't available now. He was signing kids, we aren't now. Nor did he win with a team full of prop 48 types like Fields, Eaton, Wilson or Bender. They were the rare exception, not the rule.

Leach IS struggling on the recruiting front, despite the stupid $100,000,000 facilities outlay. Add 4 bowls in 5 years, 3 straight... and the best he can do is a #46 recruiting class! It is his achilles heel.

If we want to get back to actually beating the Huskies, being able to compete for, and win, championships, or the ulimate goal, to do so consistently, something above what Price accomplished, top 50 and top 60 recruiting classes won't cut it, even if you believe they are underrated. As great a coach as Leach is (genius, in fact), it can't be done with concensus bottom division talent. If I were Leach I'd start by being more circumspect. It is so easy to offend, so easy to come across as your grouchy granddad. For example, he shouldn't tell reporters that he isn't interested in developing kids for the NFL. Like it or not the NFL is most P-12 calibre recruits dream. To say you aren't going to do anything to help them to accomplish that dream, isn't a recruiting positive.

 

[Loyal Coug]

Success is relative. Look at UTEP before and after Price. UTEP may be the most difficult program to win at in all D1. That is why, I believe, Price was the most successful coach at UTEP in 50-60 years (that isn't saying much).

Sure Price had his project "athlete" recruits, but let's not forget he also signed kids that were highly sought after too, i.e. Bledsoe, Butch Williams, Jeremy Williams, Sparks, Sanders, Darling, Ford, Green, Josh Shavies, Paymah, Kevin Brown. Then there is that next level group that included Kegel, Leaf, Trufant, Austin, Moronkola, Coleman, Moore, Mobley, Hunter, Rushing, yada yada yada. So let's nor pretend that Price teams were loaded with project hidden gems that aren't available now. He was signing kids, we aren't now. Nor did he win with a team full of prop 48 types like Fields, Eaton, Wilson or Bender. They were the rare exception, not the rule.

Leach IS struggling on the recruiting front, despite the stupid $100,000,000 facilities outlay. Add 4 bowls in 5 years, 3 straight... and the best he can do is a #46 recruiting class! It is his achilles heel.

If we want to get back to actually beating the Huskies, being able to compete for, and win, championships, or the ulimate goal, to do so consistently, something above what Price accomplished, top 50 and top 60 recruiting classes won't cut it, even if you believe they are underrated. As great a coach as Leach is (genius, in fact), it can't be done with concensus bottom division talent. If I were Leach I'd start by being more circumspect. It is so easy to offend, so easy to come across as your grouchy granddad. For example, he shouldn't tell reporters that he isn't interested in developing kids for the NFL. Like it or not the NFL is most P-12 calibre recruits dream. To say you aren't going to do anything to help them to accomplish that dream, isn't a recruiting positive.

Pretty spot on here. I actually Wiki'd El Paso before I replied - have never been there. This blurb surprised me:

In 2010, El Paso received an All-America City Award. As of January 2014, El Paso has been ranked the safest large city in the U.S. for four consecutive years[13] and has ranked in the top three since 1997

That aside, yeah they are way the heck in the middle of desert nothing. Makes Lubbock look like the center of the state. And Pullman look like a cute little oasis.

I agree on the foolishness of CML's NFL comments. Coach, just sometimes shut up, OK? Although I don't really disagree with his opinion. But then we all have some opinions that we don't state publicly.

On the recruiting rankings, I dunno. Yes I would love to see a couple of of 5 stars, and a nice handful of 4 stars every year. But I am happy with seeing almost all 3 stars up and down the list. And from what little I have learned about rankings, they seem to be kind of skewed. One non-ranked guy will make your ranking plummet. Falk probably deep-sixed our rating for his year. A couple of 4/5 stars will make it jump. So give me a bunch of 3's, and a 4 at QB, and I'm happy.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Success is relative. Look at UTEP before and after Price. UTEP may be the most difficult program to win at in all D1. That is why, I believe, Price was the most successful coach at UTEP in 50-60 years (that isn't saying much).

Sure Price had his project "athlete" recruits, but let's not forget he also signed kids that were highly sought after too, i.e. Bledsoe, Butch Williams, Jeremy Williams, Sparks, Sanders, Darling, Ford, Green, Josh Shavies, Paymah, Kevin Brown. Then there is that next level group that included Kegel, Leaf, Trufant, Austin, Moronkola, Coleman, Moore, Mobley, Hunter, Rushing, yada yada yada. So let's nor pretend that Price teams were loaded with project hidden gems that aren't available now. He was signing kids, we aren't now. Nor did he win with a team full of prop 48 types like Fields, Eaton, Wilson or Bender. They were the rare exception, not the rule.

Leach IS struggling on the recruiting front, despite the stupid $100,000,000 facilities outlay. Add 4 bowls in 5 years, 3 straight... and the best he can do is a #46 recruiting class! It is his achilles heel.

If we want to get back to actually beating the Huskies, being able to compete for, and win, championships, or the ulimate goal, to do so consistently, something above what Price accomplished, top 50 and top 60 recruiting classes won't cut it, even if you believe they are underrated. As great a coach as Leach is (genius, in fact), it can't be done with concensus bottom division talent. If I were Leach I'd start by being more circumspect. It is so easy to offend, so easy to come across as your grouchy granddad. For example, he shouldn't tell reporters that he isn't interested in developing kids for the NFL. Like it or not the NFL is most P-12 calibre recruits dream. To say you aren't going to do anything to help them to accomplish that dream, isn't a recruiting positive.

Bledsoe, Butch Williams, and Jeremy Williams were legacy players. Green was a juco guy, Darling had a family history of heart problems. While others were looking at them, they were either destined for WSU or reasons for others to skip them. Price did a better job of recruiting with what he had than Leach has so far, but I still remember us getting a lot of guys that weren't top shelf players their first couple years more than I remember us getting guys that could come in as freshmen and dominate.

I agree with your comments that Leach can be his own worst enemy at times. His name has national cachet but it's also got some baggage associated with it. I think the results on the field suggests that his recruiting isn't terrible and he's actually done a good job of getting a couple diamonds in the rough.

As far as UTEP success goes, Price did well in his first two seasons with his predecessor's players. His best finish after that was 6-7. His other years at UTEP were generally miserable.

 

[Observer11]

Bledose's dad went to the UW.

 

[425cougfan]

Success is relative. Look at UTEP before and after Price. UTEP may be the most difficult program to win at in all D1. That is why, I believe, Price was the most successful coach at UTEP in 50-60 years (that isn't saying much).

Sure Price had his project "athlete" recruits, but let's not forget he also signed kids that were highly sought after too, i.e. Bledsoe, Butch Williams, Jeremy Williams, Sparks, Sanders, Darling, Ford, Green, Josh Shavies, Paymah, Kevin Brown. Then there is that next level group that included Kegel, Leaf, Trufant, Austin, Moronkola, Coleman, Moore, Mobley, Hunter, Rushing, yada yada yada. So let's nor pretend that Price teams were loaded with project hidden gems that aren't available now. He was signing kids, we aren't now. Nor did he win with a team full of prop 48 types like Fields, Eaton, Wilson or Bender. They were the rare exception, not the rule.

Leach IS struggling on the recruiting front, despite the stupid $100,000,000 facilities outlay. Add 4 bowls in 5 years, 3 straight... and the best he can do is a #46 recruiting class! It is his achilles heel.

If we want to get back to actually beating the Huskies, being able to compete for, and win, championships, or the ulimate goal, to do so consistently, something above what Price accomplished, top 50 and top 60 recruiting classes won't cut it, even if you believe they are underrated. As great a coach as Leach is (genius, in fact), it can't be done with concensus bottom division talent. If I were Leach I'd start by being more circumspect. It is so easy to offend, so easy to come across as your grouchy granddad. For example, he shouldn't tell reporters that he isn't interested in developing kids for the NFL. Like it or not the NFL is most P-12 calibre recruits dream. To say you aren't going to do anything to help them to accomplish that dream, isn't a recruiting positive.

Some great discussion in this thread overall, and I agree with your overall sentiment, SoCal. I just want to point out that Leach's recruiting has been *excellent* in terms of getting a solid base of legitimate Pac-12 players. A lot of the 3-star kids he is recruiting aren't that impressive from a rankings standpoint but have a good amount of other Pac-12 offers. Contrast this with certain other recent WSU coaches who would bring in "3-star" players who often would only have Mountain West offers, leaving aside the 2-star types who only had Big Sky offers. Yes, they're both 3-star players, but to me, they present a very different picture.

My numbers here aren't reliable since this is by memory, but I recall comparing the other D-1 offers that Leach's classes had compared to those of his predecessor and the difference was astounding ... it was something like Leach's players in his first cobbled-together 2012 class had more Pac-12 and solid MWC (e.g., Boise State) offers than his predecessor did in his entire tenure, or something along those lines.

Stated alternatively, even when Leach's classes have ranked poorly in the Pac-12, they're at least Pac-12-quality overall, even if at or near the bottom of the Pac-12. This is consistent with, and doesn't dispose of, your point about the recruiting not being very good overall and insufficient to get enough quality players to beat UW or beat other top programs consistently. It's amazing he's been able to beat programs like USC, Oregon, and Stanford with the consistency he has.

 

[etowncoug]

Interesting thread. Several thoughts to add to the mix.

1) Leach has done a fine job recruiting top tier talent. Gabe Marks, Tyler Bruggeman, Chandler Leniu, Thomas Toki, Shalom Luani, Kameron Powell, Jamire Calvin, Connor Neville, Robert Valencia, Dontae Powell, Cammon Cooper, Max Borghi, Rodrick Fisher, Drue Jackson, RJ Stone and Kassidy Woods were all 4 star recruits (by at least 1 service). That's a nice chunk. It also doesn't include transfers Kyrin Priester and Sebastian Lerue who were also 4 star recruits.

Lots of these recruits haven't panned out. But I suspect this will improve as the program has gotten stronger. Hopefully the days of a 4 star expecting to play just because they are talented are behind us. Jamire Calvin, for example, seems determined to work his butt off to see the field.

2) Leach values intelligence and discipline more than athleticism. Price valued emotion and athleticism more than intelligence. Brett Bartolone, River Cracraft, John Thompson, and Kyle Sweet are just a few of the players who were successful under Leach who wouldn't have done much under Price. On the flip side, what could MP have done with Marquess Wilson?

3) Leach has done a much better job building depth. This is a function of good recruiting. Depth was always a challenge for Price.

4) I'm 100% in agreement Price's biggest advantages wouldn't be there today. But if he was given great facilities, a recruiting budget allowing him to recruit Nationwide, and a competitive salary pool for assistants I think he could recruit at the level of Leach.

5) There are a lot more power schools now than there was during the Price era. Schools like Utah and TCU were nobody's in the 90's. Oregon wasn't Oregon. Boise St wasnt beating P5 schools for recruits. UW was facing sanctions. I'm sure we could build quite the list of programs who leapfrogged us in prestige in our decade in the wilderness.

6) Leach recruits tons of OL, a position which historically gets underrated by services. I suspect our classes would be higher ranked if instead he brought in 8 or so TE/DE types a year and bulked them up. I think the team would be less consistent under this plan, but ranked higher by services. Go figure.

 

[YakiCoug]

Erickson signed Butch Williams. Nice try. Kevin Brown? lasted one season, and did nothing to stop the "first to worst" slide.
And your "(Price) was signing kids, we aren't now" is just sh!t talking. You sound like spongesh!t for brains with a new handle. And there's no way you can downplay the fact that academically challenged guys like Field, Eaton, Moore, and Bender weren't a difference. Their contributions to WSU's success is precisely why USC, Stanford, and the UW worked to get rid of Prop 48. Wake up, dumb arse.

Success is relative. Look at UTEP before and after Price. UTEP may be the most difficult program to win at in all D1. That is why, I believe, Price was the most successful coach at UTEP in 50-60 years (that isn't saying much).

Sure Price had his project "athlete" recruits, but let's not forget he also signed kids that were highly sought after too, i.e. Bledsoe, Butch Williams, Jeremy Williams, Sparks, Sanders, Darling, Ford, Green, Josh Shavies, Paymah, Kevin Brown. Then there is that next level group that included Kegel, Leaf, Trufant, Austin, Moronkola, Coleman, Moore, Mobley, Hunter, Rushing, yada yada yada. So let's nor pretend that Price teams were loaded with project hidden gems that aren't available now. He was signing kids, we aren't now. Nor did he win with a team full of prop 48 types like Fields, Eaton, Wilson or Bender. They were the rare exception, not the rule.

Leach IS struggling on the recruiting front, despite the stupid $100,000,000 facilities outlay. Add 4 bowls in 5 years, 3 straight... and the best he can do is a #46 recruiting class! It is his achilles heel.

If we want to get back to actually beating the Huskies, being able to compete for, and win, championships, or the ulimate goal, to do so consistently, something above what Price accomplished, top 50 and top 60 recruiting classes won't cut it, even if you believe they are underrated. As great a coach as Leach is (genius, in fact), it can't be done with concensus bottom division talent. If I were Leach I'd start by being more circumspect. It is so easy to offend, so easy to come across as your grouchy granddad. For example, he shouldn't tell reporters that he isn't interested in developing kids for the NFL. Like it or not the NFL is most P-12 calibre recruits dream. To say you aren't going to do anything to help them to accomplish that dream, isn't a recruiting positive.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

You guys are covering the Coug side of the discussion pretty well, so I'll leave it alone. But a word about UTEP, and Price at UTEP, seems in order.

Many of you have probably driven across Texas east/west, and most of you probably recognize that the bulk of the population is in the east. But did you realize that the road distance from Houston to El Paso is 3 (yes, three) times what it is from Seattle to Pullman? I'm not sure if El Paso is a New Mexico suburb, or if New Mexico is an El Paso suburb, but El Paso is a Texas city in only the strictest sense. No Texan would deny El Paso, because it is officially Texas. But most Texans have never been to El Paso and have no plans to go. A kid growing up in the Metroplex or Houston barely recognizes El Paso as being an in-state school. His parents could drive 2 states in another direction and still attend his games more easily than going to El Paso (even given the relatively low cost SW Air fares).

Price recruited the El Paso and west Texas area respectably well. His capture rate of kids who were a step below B12 and within those areas was actually pretty good. But the population in that area would at best support 1/5 of a football team...El Paso metro population area is less than 1 million, and west Texas as a whole has a lot of empty miles. Price had to recruit Dallas, Houston, et al, in the same way that Leach has to recruit California, and with more handicaps. Lower level conference, a metro area continually dissed by the large population center media, a distance so great that few within the large population areas had ever been there, limited TV exposure in his primary recruiting areas...if UTEP had been a B12 school with the money and media exposure that brings, he would have been at less of a disadvantage. I think he did as well there as any coach could. St. Mike was a flawed individual, but he had many talents. He went to UTEP when they were below pitiful. I think he did what any objective observer would have to conclude was a pretty good job.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

You guys are covering the Coug side of the discussion pretty well, so I'll leave it alone. But a word about UTEP, and Price at UTEP, seems in order.

Many of you have probably driven across Texas east/west, and most of you probably recognize that the bulk of the population is in the east. But did you realize that the road distance from Houston to El Paso is 3 (yes, three) times what it is from Seattle to Pullman? I'm not sure if El Paso is a New Mexico suburb, or if New Mexico is an El Paso suburb, but El Paso is a Texas city in only the strictest sense. No Texan would deny El Paso, because it is officially Texas. But most Texans have never been to El Paso and have no plans to go. A kid growing up in the Metroplex or Houston barely recognizes El Paso as being an in-state school. His parents could drive 2 states in another direction and still attend his games more easily than going to El Paso (even given the relatively low cost SW Air fares).

Price recruited the El Paso and west Texas area respectably well. His capture rate of kids who were a step below B12 and within those areas was actually pretty good. But the population in that area would at best support 1/5 of a football team...El Paso metro population area is less than 1 million, and west Texas as a whole has a lot of empty miles. Price had to recruit Dallas, Houston, et al, in the same way that Leach has to recruit California, and with more handicaps. Lower level conference, a metro area continually dissed by the large population center media, a distance so great that few within the large population areas had ever been there, limited TV exposure in his primary recruiting areas...if UTEP had been a B12 school with the money and media exposure that brings, he would have been at less of a disadvantage. I think he did as well there as any coach could. St. Mike was a flawed individual, but he had many talents. He went to UTEP when they were below pitiful. I think he did what any objective observer would have to conclude was a pretty good job.

Even ignoring the first couple years, Mike Price did a better than average job at UTEP. He's #3 out of 14 UTEP coaches in the past 60 years in terms of winning percentage and his three bowl appearances are tied for first in school history. He couldn't mimic the magic he had in Pullman but he clearly did a good job given the situation. It's just such a bad situation there that it's going to take the right coach with a little luck to overcome the disadvantages that UTEP faces. BTW, El Paso would suck as the place that you have to go to college. Pullman is secluded, small and boring, but it's a far better place to go to college on several different levels. I've been to El Paso twice and it's the armpit of Texas.

 

[Cougsocal]

Some great discussion in this thread overall, and I agree with your overall sentiment, SoCal. I just want to point out that Leach's recruiting has been *excellent* in terms of getting a solid base of legitimate Pac-12 players. A lot of the 3-star kids he is recruiting aren't that impressive from a rankings standpoint but have a good amount of other Pac-12 offers. Contrast this with certain other recent WSU coaches who would bring in "3-star" players who often would only have Mountain West offers, leaving aside the 2-star types who only had Big Sky offers. Yes, they're both 3-star players, but to me, they present a very different picture.

My numbers here aren't reliable since this is by memory, but I recall comparing the other D-1 offers that Leach's classes had compared to those of his predecessor and the difference was astounding ... it was something like Leach's players in his first cobbled-together 2012 class had more Pac-12 and solid MWC (e.g., Boise State) offers than his predecessor did in his entire tenure, or something along those lines.

Stated alternatively, even when Leach's classes have ranked poorly in the Pac-12, they're at least Pac-12-quality overall, even if at or near the bottom of the Pac-12. This is consistent with, and doesn't dispose of, your point about the recruiting not being very good overall and insufficient to get enough quality players to beat UW or beat other top programs consistently. It's amazing he's been able to beat programs like USC, Oregon, and Stanford with the consistency he has.

I agree, Leach and Co. have done well evaluating talent. There are a large number of quality 2-3 star kids out there, and Leach has a great job sifting the wheat from the chaff. Hell, we've gone on the 2nd most successful run in school history with those kids. But the FOB wasn't built to evaluate talent, it was built to win recruiting battles. I just hope Leach is looking in the mirror, assessing his strengths and weaknesses, and thinking "what can I do to improve recruiting." The fact is that there is more wheat and less chaff among the 4-5 star kids, than between 2-3 star kids.

I just want Leach to break through his glass sealing. At TT, he may never have been in a position to recruit well enough to take the next step, the structure and dynamics of that conference is so different. But in the Pac-12, even the small fish can recruit the talent needed to win championships. Let's not forget that in 2002, in the post prop 48 era, we were the favorite to win the conference, going in, not because Mike Price was a coaching genius, but because he had recruited the deepest, most talented team in the conference, using Bolher as our FOB. So it can and has been done, in Pullman, no less.

As for the argument that "it can't be done today," the same was being said in prior to 1997, during the 68 year drought. I grew up in the going back to Rose Bowl can't be done era. Then right after, it was said that it couldn't be done again.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

"As for the argument that "it can't be done today," the same was being said in prior to 1997, during the 68 year drought. I grew up in the going back to Rose Bowl can't be done era. Then right after, it was said that it couldn't be done again."

Amen to that, brother.

 

[CougEd]

What I'd say about Price is that QB depth was horrible during his time at WSU. He could land big-time QBs, but after the No. 1 guy, the drop off was scary bad (with an exception or two).

There was a reason behind that . When Bledsoe starts his freshman year and had success (clear he was good) what qb wants to travel to WSU to sit on the bench for three years? Same with Leaf. His qbs were nfl quality. They all knew it. Bill Dietrich said at a coug gathering after his Drew’s freshman year why would we redshirt him for the nfl. He is gone in two years and he was spot on .

The fact there was a tailing off had to do with the talent that would be starting for potentially three more years .

 

[cr8zyncalif]

I remember reading in the LA Times once during the '90's when a local high school WR (with elite speed; was either first or second in the state SoCal big school 100 meter dash) who chose ASU over WSU was quoted as saying that he picked ASU because at WSU the receivers were expected to block on any play in which they were not going out for a pass, and if the pass did not go to them they were expected to block downfield. Cracked me up. I cut it out of the paper and sent it to my brother (also a Coug). That one memory also suggests a reason why Price did not always get the top kids...he & the staff were honest with them up front. The trade off was that he seldom had kids get mad and leave. They might leave over grades or playing time issues, but they seldom felt that they were lied to.

 

[CougEd]

One more thing on Price and staff, they partied it up too much imo, way too much. There are very few secrets anymore because of cell phones, video, pictures, the internet. This would negatively affect Price today. Leach isn’t a party guy so we don’t have that to worry about, thankfully

Outside of Clambake mary's place, did Price really cut loose in Pullman? Leach---he is too smart if he were to party we wouldn't know about it.

 

[Coug95man2]

Outside of Clambake mary's place, did Price really cut loose in Pullman? Leach---he is too smart if he were to party we wouldn't know about it.

LOL. I can only imagine what a party with Leach would be like. He'd hide in a corner and only talk to those that aren't going to talk about football. If he can spark up a conversation that is interesting to him, he'll stand there the whole time, maybe with one drink. But damn... "what a great party".

 

[CougEd]

LOL. I can only imagine what a party with Leach would be like. He'd hide in a corner and only talk to those that aren't going to talk about football. If he can spark up a conversation that is interesting to him, he'll stand there the whole time, maybe with one drink. But damn... "what a great party".

First, this isn't high school where everyone is standing. At 57 I bet if Mike were to have a cocktail he would be sitting down. Not like Price had a lampshade over his head. I go to parties and it isn't like I don't know the company.

 

[Coug95man2]

First, this isn't high school where everyone is standing. At 57 I bet if Mike were to have a cocktail he would be sitting down. Not like Price had a lampshade over his head. I go to parties and it isn't like I don't know the company.

Who said anything about a high school party? What the... ?