That's stupid as hell. How do you know what I predicted in 2012?
The answer is, you don't. So don't behave like you do.
Pac-12 QB rankings post spring
- Thread starter chinookpirate
- Start date
The answer is, you don't. So don't behave like you do.
Well I don't Wulffui. So what did you predict? Is it safe to say most people thought the offense was really going to turn up a notch, and most people thought like Leach the offense was going to be really exciting and that a bowl game was in the plans?
So after 1989...The 6 win season for Mike Price...after those players from the 9-3 team left there was a drop off yes? Wow low and behold there was.
He had gutted the team before that because he had too many guys that were there for themselves and not for WSU
Maybe Leach should have done something similar...oh wait...he did.
You basically proved my point. Price wasn't magic. Price won 6 games being handed a 9-3 team. Remade the roster, and didn't start winning until he had his QB and his type of players in and were developed.
Leach coming in from a much much worse starting point did pretty much the same thing.
Year before price. 9 wins. Price 6 wins -3 dropff
Year before Leach 4 wins Leach 3 wins -1 dropff
Year 2 Leach actually got us 6
While Price got 3
and year 3 Price got 4
while Leach got 3
Price was VERY cyclical. typically it took him 3 years in between winning seasons
After Price went 9-3 he went 5-6 then 8-4, 3-8, 5-6, then 10-2, then 3-8, 3-9, 4- 7.
4 times Price won just 3 games
2 times Price won just 4 games
2 times Price won just 5 games
8 out of 14...more than half the time it was a losing season and people forget that.
Leach is laying a foundation for the same kind of success at WSU, and it's obvious from a historical and statistical perspective when you look at everything.
And finally...If you don't think the circumstances were very different for Leach and Price coming in..
The guy before Price was asked to Head Coach a team that won a national title...
The guy before Leach was asked to leave and beg to serve coffee.
If that's not polar opposite situations I'm not sure what is.
Tron, since we have broken down the QB situation, let's look at the oline. John Husby split time with Ken Kuiper in 1988, and Paul Wulff started. So coming into 1989 we had two returning lineman, other three had no starting or playing experience. There is not one player from 1989 that got into an NFL camp. In 2012 WSU had Matt Goetz, a player that Leach recruited at Tech, Rodgers, who was just drafted, Fullington, who was in camp this past year, Forbes, great athlete, didn't seem to click, Spitz, a starter who went down with an illness, Ecklund, Boesch and Dahl who was a surprise addition that was on campus in the spring of 2012. In addition, they had four freshman coming in the fall. I am not sure there is great deal of difference. Do you believe there is?
Well, are you saying from a talent and experience perspective he is coming in a much worse situation? Clearly not at QB or Oline.
But per your progression, should we venture to think this is a 8-4 club in 2015?
He wasn't handed a 9-3 team!! As I and others have pointed out, most of that team graduated.
Why you fail to grasp this is beyond me.
And further, he certainly wasn't left with a defense. That '88 defense sucked. We simply had the best line we've ever had here...but they key pieces left.
Quit number crunching for a minute and look at the situation. Price was not left with a winning program. The team didn't have a winning season before '88 except for '81.
All you are saying is Don't look at these facts! It tells the truth and not the narrative I want to believe!
Answer these simple questions.
How many games did Price win his first year? How many games were won the year prior?
How many games did Leach win his first year? How many games were won the year prior?
How many games did Price win year 2? How many games did Leach win year 2?
How many games did Price win year 3? How many games did Leach win year 3?
Very easy questions to answer I already did answer them for you. But since you like to refer to Leach as 3-9 Leach Price will now be referred to as 3 win Price as he had more 3 win seasons than any other.
Again, just because the 88 team won 9 teams has nothing to do with 1989.
We won 10 games in 97...then in 98 won 4 I believe it was.
You act like the 88 team was a trend. It was not. And for the nth time, most of that team was gone.
I'll ask you a question. How many games will we win in year 4?
If Leach wins 8 or 9 games, I'll subscribe to your narrative.
I think there is a better chance of me climbing aboard a flying saucer, however.
2000 Pac-10 4 7 0 .364 1.93 6.66 Mike Price (4-7)
1999 Pac-10 3 9 0 .250 -4.93 1.15 Mike Price (3-9)
1998 Pac-10 3 8 0 .273 -5.75 3.71 Mike Price (3-8)
1997 Pac-10 10 2 0 .833 14.21 4.71 8 9 Mike Price (10-2) Rose Bowl-L
1996 Pac-10 5 6 0 .455 1.41 2.32 Mike Price (5-6)
1995 Pac-10 3 8 0 .273 -2.01 2.27 Mike Price (3-8)
Like many things you believe you are wrong.
How many games will we win? I don't know I'd have to see where the defense really is and special teams to make an assessment.
If it's good we could win 8-9
If it's okay we could win 6-7
If it's bad we could win 4-5
Oh sorry...I was off by 1 game...which is why I qualified the statement as it was off the top of my head.
When one nitpicks at minutiae(like dgibbons always does) as opposed to the main point of the argument, you are just telling the world you lose the argument.
So if we win 4 games, will you stop with this Leach is better than Price nonsense?
If Leach wants to be mentioned in the same breath as Mike Price when the topic of Legendary Cougar Coaches comes up 25 Years from now... he'll make the most of this "Copper Bowl" run.
I never said Leach was better I just wanted to show you that they are similar in their restructuring, and how hypocritical it is to bag on Leach for putting up 3-9 records while rebuilding which is EXACTLY what Price did.
You are leaving out his 5 bowl games, 3 10 win seasons while leaving Doba a 4th.
Price had 2 winning seasons in his first 4 yrs. When Leach starts getting 8 and 9 win seasons, then we can compare him to Price...and honestly I wouldn't be having this discussion if I thought we were an 8 win team next yr. But I don't see that defense being anywhere close to being the 92 defense.
But, everybody knows how Price did it.
The thing that sets Price apart from every coach before and since is that he did indeed do it.
The thing that sets Price apart from every coach before and since is that he did indeed do it.
3- 10 win seasons... 1st 10 win - year 9. 3 times the time Leach has had
5 Bowl games. Year 4, Year 6, Year 9, Year 13, Year 14. / Leach Year 2
Leaving Doba a 4th. So Price's teams carry over to next year but not Ericson's? You really need to work on that hypocrisy.
You are comparing apples to oranges. What he did at Tech doesn't help him in Pullman.
Yes, Price's teams carry over to the next yr when Price leaves the whole team sans a starting Qb.
That is not what Erickson left Price, however.
Two different scenarios that your serial number crunching doesn't account for.
Tron...I guess here is my problem with your numbers. If you were to make the sole argument that 1989 was a result of players knowing how to win as a result of 1988, that is an easier argument to make. To make the argument about talent, we have started off with two positions and it could be easily argued Mike Price was shorted at QB and Oline compared to what Leach inherited.
Also, where it seems a bit misguided, is that WSU had a top two QB in the conference coming back. Our main QB from 2013 has graduated. In 1991 all four DB's play together and they had experience coming into 1992. I haven't see a Torey Hunter out there. Maybe someone will step up their game. Do I see Mobley or Rushing? I haven't as of yet.
Along the d line the three interior guys, Forde and Hall had gained some experience, and Eaton became a pro player. So if you are to say...I think based on their success, limited as it may be I hope they have the talent to go 7-5 or better, it is easier for me to swallow. I just think it is problematic when you lose your two DT's, the guys behind them didn't get a ton of reps. Who knows, they may be better than Cooper and Pole.
While Price's rebuid was flimsy, IE, very little depth I would agree. But the starting 22 had enough talent to go 8-3 in the regular season, and that was accomplished from very little help from the Dennis Erickson class.
BUT COUGAR TEAMS NEVER WIN WITH NEW QB's! Guys on here who think they're smart ABSOLUTELY SWEAR it.
Except this one time, right?
Well who said it hasn't been done. Just certainly not close to being the norm. It is an anomaly
Well, if you don't like being called out, then you probably shouldn't criticize people for thinking we were going to win 6 games in 2012 unless you can prove that you predicted otherwise.
Well, I would hardly call Kegel a New Qb. He was a 5th yr senior and Price gave him many a series at the start of the 2nd quarter of games. In general, though you are correct. We typically don't do well with new QB's.
What I thought doesn't have even a scintilla of effect on how bad a prediction it was. It stands on its own.
so did Price get the starting QB Tim Rosenbach from the 88 team?
did Doba get the starting QB Jason Gesser?
The answer to both is no. There is carry over and Price benefited from it in 88 to 89 just like Doba did in 2003-2003. And Leach "benefited" with what Wulff gave him.
Price was given a team that was decent, Doba given a team that was great, and Leach a team that was not good.
Now as to the reconstruction efforts Price typically would win 3-4 games before spiking up. Leach hasn't spiked yet, but the pattern is very similar, and given his starting point he's very similar to the Mike Price rebuild pattern.
In 1990 Bledsoe won the starting job as a true freshman and the team finished 3-8
In 1991 Bledsoe as a soph led the team to a 4-7 record
and in his 3rd year 9-3 was achieved.
Leach given Tuel and Halliday both were in need of development, but terrible O-line depth and size and recruiting caused both to be injured. Leach brought in a QB in his 2nd class Bruggman who would leave when Falk the walk-on looked to be supplanting him.
Since Halliday was young and had more experience he was given the go. Apodaca left because he was getting passed up, and we rode Halliday until this Leach's 4th year for a Leach QB to come in and start.
Price used his QB his 2nd year. Leach will be using his in the 4th. He could have got rid of Halliday but I would assume waited to let the young guys rep as much as possible before sending them out into the fire.
Price didn't and even with someone as talented as Bledsoe 3-9, 4-7 was what happened.
Neither Price nor Leach's method are better than the other. It's the same goal, just different ways to do it.
How would the story of Bledsoe be written if a swiss cheese O-line let someone lacerate his spleen, or sprain a knee? Probably not the same.
There are two areas that we need real improvement in. Special teams, and defense.
That's the corner stone now for the program to take a big jump. Leach has opted for replacing coaches to make that happen. Exactly what someone should do if they feel like those areas are under performing.
As much as you complain if you look at what is happening it's clear to me at least that the program is in the process of rebuilding with the offense being just about ready, and the defense and special teams being the area that we need to focus on.
The staff has been upgraded (maybe special teams..I don't know enough about Mele) but I like Roy Manning and Grinch. I like Wilson and Coach Joe. So I see a young hungry group that can recruit and that is very encouraging.
Well, I complain because we are going into year 4, and I don't see much improvement happening. It doesn't take 4 yrs to build a secondary that can be in the tv screen on plays.
I do agree that it takes a few yrs to develop on the o-line...but we have a d-coordinator who has never coached the position before going against Pac 12 offenses with not a whole lot of talent(that has stood out to me)
So I don't share your optimism here. I'll become optimistic when I start seeing speed on defense like Price used to have...and when we start running the ball more.
You're qb is going to make mistakes when he chucks the ball as much as Leach throws it..especially a RS soph.
Thirty minutes into the BYU game in 2012, you screeched that Leach wasn't going to get it done. Then you dismissed a bowl game that would have inundated your panties had it happened in 2011. And now you're just b!tching, pissing, and moaning yet again, even though WSU has yet to lose a game in 2015. Yes, everyone gets that you miss Mike Price and those priceless seasons in '90, '91, '93, '95, '96, '98, '99, and 2000 - and the three Apple Cup wins in 14 seasons. And, of course, your and your big sis's love for 6 and 40 is well documented. But, by all means, continue the whine fest.
There's been some talk in this thread about experience and Luke Falk's lack thereof. When you look at how Leach's offense works, I'd argue that he is more experienced than some give him credit for. He threw 243 pass attempts last year. When you look at most of the other QB's in the league, it means that he threw as many balls in four games as many of them threw in 6-8 games. He has a lot of film to study in the offseason with Leach to see where he made good decisions (and bad ones). A lot of how he plays this year depends on how much time it puts into that. He took too many sacks as time went on because he started to hold onto the ball. He's got to learn when to throw it away, went to tuck and run and when to take the sack. He's already got pretty good instincts overall in my opinion.
When comparing him to Bledsoe, I think you have to consider that Bledsoe was a better version of Connor Halliday. Not particularly mobile, a bit of a gunslinger and prone to turnovers. The game has changed in the past 20+ years since Drew played but he threw 15 picks and only 20 touchdowns as a junior in 1992. The advantage that Bledsoe had in 1992 over our recent QB's is a balanced offense. Shaumbe rushed for over 1300 yards in 1992. We'll be lucky to get 1000 yards as a team in 2015.
Because of the pass heavy nature of our offense, I believe that it will allow our QB's to mature faster as passers but it also puts significantly more pressure on them. We have a huge OL this year with guys that have all been in the system for a while even though a few of them don't have a lot of starts. More than any year since 2005, this is a season where our offense has an opportunity to be very dynamic because of that. Falk has the potential to shatter every passing record in the conference this year if his play in the spring is any indication of the fall. He obviously won't put up the ridiculous stats that he had in the spring game but if he can complete 70% of his passes with a 3:1 TD to INT ratio, he (and WSU) is going to have a great year. At some point, we are going to have an OL that will be capable of allowing this offense to run like it should. When that happens, you'll see our rushing offense double as teams lose their ability to just tee off on every down.
When comparing him to Bledsoe, I think you have to consider that Bledsoe was a better version of Connor Halliday. Not particularly mobile, a bit of a gunslinger and prone to turnovers. The game has changed in the past 20+ years since Drew played but he threw 15 picks and only 20 touchdowns as a junior in 1992. The advantage that Bledsoe had in 1992 over our recent QB's is a balanced offense. Shaumbe rushed for over 1300 yards in 1992. We'll be lucky to get 1000 yards as a team in 2015.
Because of the pass heavy nature of our offense, I believe that it will allow our QB's to mature faster as passers but it also puts significantly more pressure on them. We have a huge OL this year with guys that have all been in the system for a while even though a few of them don't have a lot of starts. More than any year since 2005, this is a season where our offense has an opportunity to be very dynamic because of that. Falk has the potential to shatter every passing record in the conference this year if his play in the spring is any indication of the fall. He obviously won't put up the ridiculous stats that he had in the spring game but if he can complete 70% of his passes with a 3:1 TD to INT ratio, he (and WSU) is going to have a great year. At some point, we are going to have an OL that will be capable of allowing this offense to run like it should. When that happens, you'll see our rushing offense double as teams lose their ability to just tee off on every down.
Interesting in that i "hate Halliday on a very personal Level" Interesting in that i do not even know the kid. Perhaps he does stand for all the spoiled kids who pout and gets their way.He showed his true colors and maybe it is because i"hate him". Anyway Falk will be a huge improvement at the OB position. People maybe be saying in amazement."where has Leach's offense been all this time". The recruiting will continue to improve as the on the field success happens. Yes ,i do expect a bowl game this year.
If it were up to me, and it is not. Everytime you made a reference to Halliday, I would just delete your comment.
None of us think that Halliday is the greatest QB to play at WSU. The QB's from here on out will all put up video game numbers. The QB's will go to more bowl games. The QB's will have more wins.
The QB's going forward will also have a more complete team around them. The QB's will have learned nothing but the Air Raid once they step foot in Pullman. Every single one will have advantages that Halliday never had. So yes, we all expect them to do better than Halliday did in their careers. However, Halliday was an important stone in building a program. Your hatred of him (yes, hatred) blinds you to this fact.
Spongie isn't exactly laughing all the way to the bank with his award-winning internet marketing videos on YouTube. I do find his efforts to learn my occupation a bit humorous if not far off base. And, of course, it's stalking in the classic sense. hahahah
I'm looking in reverse order.
OSU looks in worst shape at QB, followed by UCLA. I'd put UW next. CO might be next after that, but their line was so bad last year, it is hard to evaluate the QB. He might be better than we realize. The same is true in reverse for Hogan...in that O and behind that line, a QB could be pretty bad and we wouldn't know. Falk showed some good things but was greener than grass...there is a QB there, but that jewel still needs polishing. I'd put USC and ASU next (flip a coin; Kessler is good, but not great). UA next; this will be a good season in Tucson. And Goff is both a good QB and also comfortable in his system. Bottom line: the QB position will hurt OSU, UCLA and UW. It will help Cal, UA, USC and ASU. I see the rest as having a suitable QB that will fit, but won't be overwhelmingly QB dependent one way or the other.
OSU looks in worst shape at QB, followed by UCLA. I'd put UW next. CO might be next after that, but their line was so bad last year, it is hard to evaluate the QB. He might be better than we realize. The same is true in reverse for Hogan...in that O and behind that line, a QB could be pretty bad and we wouldn't know. Falk showed some good things but was greener than grass...there is a QB there, but that jewel still needs polishing. I'd put USC and ASU next (flip a coin; Kessler is good, but not great). UA next; this will be a good season in Tucson. And Goff is both a good QB and also comfortable in his system. Bottom line: the QB position will hurt OSU, UCLA and UW. It will help Cal, UA, USC and ASU. I see the rest as having a suitable QB that will fit, but won't be overwhelmingly QB dependent one way or the other.
Oops...just realized I forgot Oregon. I think Adams would be probably 4th or 5th in the league, so if somebody beats him out, the guy would have to be pretty good. Adams is the right style of QB for UO. If he can stay healthy for a season (and there is good reason to doubt that), QB would be an asset for the ducks. But if he goes down, I expect a big drop off.
I dub thee Nanook.
The fact you took time to Google my name and spend time searching to figure out what I do is the definition if stalking.
Its funny, you claim to know how much money Ed and I make...if that's not stalking with some crazy to go along I don't know what is.
And I've never attempted to learn your profession(could care less). I have just said that you collect crazy pay from the state because well...your f'ing nuts.
Last edited:
Too late. Your original "crazy pay" stabs in the dark included a profession. Perhaps you got your 3x5 stupid cards mixed up? Your script is beyond worn out in sooooo many ways. In the meantime, allow your brother to medicate you until the season begins. He's already told everyone you need to calm down.
If the voices in your head have convinced you that I care about your profession or have tried to guess it, then I am not going to argue with them.
What were Liufau's and Bercovici's stats in 2014? As for Bercovici, one Hail Mary for a TD hardly equals 1,883 yards, a 64 percent passing completion, and 13 TDs, most of which was in four games. Speaking of which, Falk is in an offense that far outranked Colorado's in '14 and likely will do so again. In his four games, Falk averaged 12 yards per completion; Liufau just 9.8. And Falk actually won a game. It's not a stretch to say he could actually improve upon performances that closed a 24-0 USC lead to 24-14, and had WSU leading ASU well into the third quarter.
Last edited:
So, your count is now up to eight? Does this include those who've been banned (Steptoe, HWGC)? Are you acknowledging the fact that those you oppose have significantly more "likes" than you and the other Whining Wulffians (little bro still stands at zero)? And there are more subscribers now than before.
Similar threads
