ADVERTISEMENT

Well, ol' timey Coug football is back!!!

and not in a good way.

Guess those who pine for the 'loveable loser" days get half their wish, 'cause there is nothing lovable about Rolo on or off the field.
Those oldsters on the south side will love it. Easier to get in and out. More RV parking available. Can let Rolo go in a couple years and bring in a "real northwest guy" like Beau Baldwin so WSU can go 4-8, give UW "all it can handle" in the Apple Cup with trick plays and other BS, and allow a lot of time for drinking since you don't really have to watch the game.
 
Feels worse than the early years with Price. No understanding or feel for how you need to play in a conference like the Pac 12. Strange decisions that turn into disasters.

With de Laura we are in position to be up 3 scores go to a qb quick kick to end the half? Did de Laura end up hurting his knee on that play or on the way to the locker room? Doesn't start the second half but comes back?

Down to QB3 and play a walk-on over a scholarship player that came into camp in the QB competition.

S*** show stuff.
 
If we are being honest, Rolo can't coach and he can't recruit. The question is do we drag it out for 4 or 5 years, like we did with Wulff, hoping and praying for a miracle. Their is no sign that Rolo has the capacity to right the sinking ship ... none. Miracles only happen in the Bible, not on the gridiron over a season.

Price and Leach also had rocky starts too, you say. That is true. But Leach got us to a bowl game with the least talented Cougar team since WWII. Price signed Drew Bledsoe in his first recruiting class. That provided realistic hope!

Chun, don't compound your initial mistake by waiting too long to acknowledge it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sea-Coug
Those oldsters on the south side will love it. Easier to get in and out. More RV parking available. Can let Rolo go in a couple years and bring in a "real northwest guy" like Beau Baldwin so WSU can go 4-8, give UW "all it can handle" in the Apple Cup with trick plays and other BS, and allow a lot of time for drinking since you don't really have to watch the game.
No, oldsters have been to the promised land, the Rose Bowl, twice. When you have done that, while beat the Dawgs in Montlake, a 2/3 empty "Holiday" Bowl after getting blown out by the Dawgs feels like getting sh*t in your Christmas stocking. I would trade the NM, Cheez it and Holiday bowl appearances for one meaningful win over the Dawgs and another Pac-12 championship any day. Here is an analogy that might help explain it to you fans that haven't had the good fortune of witnessing the Cougs win the Pac-12 . Winning a gold medal in the Olympic just once, in a career otherwise fraught with failure, is far better than making the Olympic finals 4 times, but failing medal.

Pretty clear now, Rolo won't even get us to the finals, let alone a medal. He needs to be the second Pac-12 coach canned this season.
 
No, oldsters have been to the promised land, the Rose Bowl, twice. When you have done that, while beat the Dawgs in Montlake, a 2/3 empty "Holiday" Bowl after getting blown out by the Dawgs feels like getting sh*t in your Christmas stocking. I would trade the NM, Cheez it and Holiday bowl appearances for one meaningful win over the Dawgs and another Pac-12 championship any day. Here is an analogy that might help explain it to you fans that haven't had the good fortune of witnessing the Cougs win the Pac-12 . Winning a gold medal in the Olympic just once, in a career otherwise fraught with failure, is far better than making the Olympic finals 4 times, but failing medal.

Pretty clear now, Rolo won't even get us to the finals, let alone a medal. He needs to be the second Pac-12 coach canned this season.
"Oldsters" was a bit of a loaded term. Not all fans over a certain age are big fans of lovable losers and don't really know what's going on. Just a lot, based on my time in the stands there.

More generally, and with us having had various threads over the years re the trade-off between a Leach / Price performance arc, I'd take Price, too. I think there's a great deal of value in consistent bowl appearances and general success, but not if the price for that is getting clowned by UW every year and looking bad most of the time against decent teams in bowl games. I get it.

We're on the same page re Rolo and the almost certain lack of upside.

Longer story but I think just about anyone we realistically can hire would have a very hard time approaching double digit wins, especially with the continued changes that make it even tougher. We at least need competence, though. Days like today make me more amenable to just hiring a damn good football coach, even if he doesn't have a unique approach or anything else that might help recruit in Pullman. We're pretty much going to get the players we're going to get anyway.
 
Guys, Rolo is gone. It’s not even worth speculating if he’s going to be let go, but rather when.

Looking at the staff, there’s nobody who I feel comfortable with in an interim role, so I’m not sure how we’ll handle his removal. Then there’s the issue of player morale and the transfer portal. I really don’t want to lose JDL. I’m still high on him.
 
Guys, Rolo is gone. It’s not even worth speculating if he’s going to be let go, but rather when.

Looking at the staff, there’s nobody who I feel comfortable with in an interim role, so I’m not sure how we’ll handle his removal. Then there’s the issue of player morale and the transfer portal. I really don’t want to lose JDL. I’m still high on him.
Maybe Banker, but none of these coaches would have their heart and soul into taking over. It would be a continued disaster anyway you cut it.
 
If we are being honest, Rolo can't coach and he can't recruit. The question is do we drag it out for 4 or 5 years, like we did with Wulff, hoping and praying for a miracle. Their is no sign that Rolo has the capacity to right the sinking ship ... none. Miracles only happen in the Bible, not on the gridiron over a season.

Price and Leach also had rocky starts too, you say. That is true. But Leach got us to a bowl game with the least talented Cougar team since WWII. Price signed Drew Bledsoe in his first recruiting class. That provided realistic hope!

Chun, don't compound your initial mistake by waiting too long to acknowledge it.
No. It does no good to have a lame duck coach. Cut bait and move on. He’s clearly not up to the task…and from my point of view he doesn’t seem to give a shit. You may keep him around the rest of the season, but the search starts now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BiggsCoug
Guys, Rolo is gone. It’s not even worth speculating if he’s going to be let go, but rather when.

Looking at the staff, there’s nobody who I feel comfortable with in an interim role, so I’m not sure how we’ll handle his removal. Then there’s the issue of player morale and the transfer portal. I really don’t want to lose JDL. I’m still high
Fixed it for you.

JDL is a project player, not a phenom. He’s one you keep on the roster to see if you can reach him touch, improve his accuracy, and teach him to understand what the D is doing. Maybe with a couple years of coaching, he’s serviceable. You don’t give him the keys.

Additional problem is that I don’t see even a hint of leadership quality in him. Without that, he’s never truly going to be The Guy.
 
Fixed it for you.

JDL is a project player, not a phenom. He’s one you keep on the roster to see if you can reach him touch, improve his accuracy, and teach him to understand what the D is doing. Maybe with a couple years of coaching, he’s serviceable. You don’t give him the keys.

Additional problem is that I don’t see even a hint of leadership quality in him. Without that, he’s never truly going to be The Guy.
I disagree with you completely. When he’s in the game, the entire offense picks up. When he’s not, we look like slugs.

I’ve watched most P12 teams this season, and only a few have better QBs than JDL.
 
Fixed it for you.

JDL is a project player, not a phenom. He’s one you keep on the roster to see if you can reach him touch, improve his accuracy, and teach him to understand what the D is doing. Maybe with a couple years of coaching, he’s serviceable. You don’t give him the keys.

Additional problem is that I don’t see even a hint of leadership quality in him. Without that, he’s never truly going to be The Guy.
Damn. I respectfully disagree with everything here. Were you at the game? He was throwing rockets on the money. On time and accurate on the toughest of routes - long out routes. There was one ball in the first half that he missed on badly. Total command of the offense. Absolutely the leader of the offense which showed when he went down. He had no business limping back in the game when it was not going to be salvageable at that point. Another stupid decision by Rolo. Had the ball been caught in the EZ, USC may have mailed it in…probably 21/28-0 at half.
 
I disagree with you completely. When he’s in the game, the entire offense picks up. When he’s not, we look like slugs.

I’ve watched most P12 teams this season, and only a few have better QBs than JDL.
That’s not a high bar.

I grant you that we might not have a better QB on the roster. But I think that says more about the talent of the roster than it does about the talent of JDL.

He’s only played what, 7 games? So maybe there still something there to salvage. But it’s not going to happen unless he gets better coaching, and I think he needs to be #2 for a season. Right now, he’s still a high school QB.
 
Damn. I respectfully disagree with everything here. Were you at the game? He was throwing rockets on the money. On time and accurate on the toughest of routes - long out routes. There was one ball in the first half that he missed on badly. Total command of the offense. Absolutely the leader of the offense which showed when he went down. He had no business limping back in the game when it was not going to be salvageable at that point. Another stupid decision by Rolo. Had the ball been caught in the EZ, USC may have mailed it in…probably 21/28-0 at half.
Yes, I was there. Two drives ended in the end zone. One of those was a 6 minute drive that looked pretty good for the most part. But there was still a lack of consistency and a degree of panic from him. Plus he was getting some yards from the run game. After that, we started ignoring the run, and the wheels came off.
 
Yes, I was there. Two drives ended in the end zone. One of those was a 6 minute drive that looked pretty good for the most part. But there was still a lack of consistency and a degree of panic from him. Plus he was getting some yards from the run game. After that, we started ignoring the run, and the wheels came off.
Yeah, but a third should have if his receiver catches a ball that hits him in the hands. There’s going to be some rough patches and on the field learning he’s basically a RS Freshman. I see a pretty consistent improvement from game 1 to 3. He shouldn’t have been out there in the 2nd half. I’m not saying you name him the starter for the next 3 years but I like what I’ve got if he gets any decent coaching. That I’m not confident in.
 
"Oldsters" was a bit of a loaded term. Not all fans over a certain age are big fans of lovable losers and don't really know what's going on. Just a lot, based on my time in the stands there.

More generally, and with us having had various threads over the years re the trade-off between a Leach / Price performance arc, I'd take Price, too. I think there's a great deal of value in consistent bowl appearances and general success, but not if the price for that is getting clowned by UW every year and looking bad most of the time against decent teams in bowl games. I get it.

We're on the same page re Rolo and the almost certain lack of upside.

Longer story but I think just about anyone we realistically can hire would have a very hard time approaching double digit wins, especially with the continued changes that make it even tougher. We at least need competence, though. Days like today make me more amenable to just hiring a damn good football coach, even if he doesn't have a unique approach or anything else that might help recruit in Pullman. We're pretty much going to get the players we're going to get anyway.

Here is some prospective you might be interested in about how difficult it is, and was, to win in Pullman.

When I went to WSU, we hadn't been to the Rose Bowl, or any bowl, in 50 years. As a freshman, the Apple Cup was for all the marbles, and we went Holiday Bowl. That was the direct result of the 95 scholarship limit, imposed in 1978, before that it had been 105, and before 1973 there was no limit. USC brought 50 kids in a class. If you wanted to transfer, you lost a year of eligibility and the school you tranferred to lost a scholarship for that year. Also the Pac-8/10 was the dominant conference, elite talent was everywhere. Try winning under those circumstances.

The scholarship limit was reduced to 85 in 1992, and Price had us in the Rose Bowl within five years, twice in 10, during an era when the conference still played elite level football. In 2002. 8 of 10 Pac-10 schools had 7 wins or more. We played Ohio State, the national champion, on the friggen road and 4 other nationally ranked teams, beating USC, who finished 3rd.

Right now the conference has never had less talent. It has never been easier to win a conference game. The UW just got throttled by Montana at home. We just got beat by a previously depleted and floundering USU team that needed to be revamped during the off season though transfer portal (hint hint). They just beat MWC power Air Force on the road. Did I mention the small fortune we spent on the FOB to be able to recruit better.

Frankly, I see more opportunity to win football games in Pullman than ever before, with the right coach.
 
"Oldsters" was a bit of a loaded term. Not all fans over a certain age are big fans of lovable losers and don't really know what's going on. Just a lot, based on my time in the stands there.

More generally, and with us having had various threads over the years re the trade-off between a Leach / Price performance arc, I'd take Price, too. I think there's a great deal of value in consistent bowl appearances and general success, but not if the price for that is getting clowned by UW every year and looking bad most of the time against decent teams in bowl games. I get it.

We're on the same page re Rolo and the almost certain lack of upside.

Longer story but I think just about anyone we realistically can hire would have a very hard time approaching double digit wins, especially with the continued changes that make it even tougher. We at least need competence, though. Days like today make me more amenable to just hiring a damn good football coach, even if he doesn't have a unique approach or anything else that might help recruit in Pullman. We're pretty much going to get the players we're going to get anyway.
What is the real value we are seeing in going to a bowl game every year. Part of what we are seeing today is because Leach left a ton of holes because of his recruiting. When you stack up his third recruiting class for example with a guy who had no success here and the guy with no success had a much better recruiting class says a lot.

There are spots where leach did well, but where is here, destiny , barber eukale? Where is Dahl Middleton , Sorensen . Yes we have Lucas, Ryan is way out of position . Who are the juniors and seniors that will help next year right the ship ?
 
Damn. I respectfully disagree with everything here. Were you at the game? He was throwing rockets on the money. On time and accurate on the toughest of routes - long out routes. There was one ball in the first half that he missed on badly. Total command of the offense. Absolutely the leader of the offense which showed when he went down. He had no business limping back in the game when it was not going to be salvageable at that point. Another stupid decision by Rolo. Had the ball been caught in the EZ, USC may have mailed it in…probably 21/28-0 at half.

JDL played a pretty decent game but he was not nearly as "on time" and "accurate" as he needed to be. There were multiple passes where he missed the receivers badly and they had to dive or fall down to catch the pass. Those count as completions, but we missed out on dozens of yards after the catch because he missed badly.

Still, he did have a decent game overall and he's clearly our best option. Personally, I feel like Cooper needs more snaps if JDL isn't available. The freshman showed me absolutely nothing and putting him in the game is Rolovich acknowledging that he's not even trying to win football games. The kid has no business being out there right now.
 
What is the real value we are seeing in going to a bowl game every year. Part of what we are seeing today is because Leach left a ton of holes because of his recruiting. When you stack up his third recruiting class for example with a guy who had no success here and the guy with no success had a much better recruiting class says a lot.

There are spots where leach did well, but where is here, destiny , barber eukale? Where is Dahl Middleton , Sorensen . Yes we have Lucas, Ryan is way out of position . Who are the juniors and seniors that will help next year right the ship ?
In brief, I think going to a bowl every year has its virtues because it is one of the few ways WSU's image will change in the longer run. Even then, it wouldn't necessarily work. As we have seen, even a top-10 finish at WSU and going 11-2 doesn't really matter in terms of changing the narrative around the program. Winning the conference is another matter, but I feel like in today's world, if WSU was 6-7, 8-5, won the Pac-12 but lost the Rose Bowl, then was 7-6, the conference championship year would just be thrown out as a fluke.

That's in addition to the extra practices, having the bowl appearance pending each early signing day, etc.

As for Leach's recruiting, owing to his fault and some other factors that weren't completely in his control, like his best assistants getting poached, it was OK but not consistently great.

Longer story but I think a major reason he left, and was looking to leave as early as that offseason before the 2018 year, was that he saw that no matter how good of a job he did in Pullman, it could all be undone by Oregon or someone else showing up and poaching his assistants. There's just about no way for any coach to succeed at WSU if your rivals can just take your best assistants with more money than WSU can afford, thereby screwing up your recruiting, not to mention the impacts on the program more generally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fab5Coug
Here is some prospective you might be interested in about how difficult it is, and was, to win in Pullman.

When I went to WSU, we hadn't been to the Rose Bowl, or any bowl, in 50 years. As a freshman, the Apple Cup was for all the marbles, and we went Holiday Bowl. That was the direct result of the 95 scholarship limit, imposed in 1978, before that it had been 105, and before 1973 there was no limit. USC brought 50 kids in a class. If you wanted to transfer, you lost a year of eligibility and the school you tranferred to lost a scholarship for that year. Also the Pac-8/10 was the dominant conference, elite talent was everywhere. Try winning under those circumstances.

The scholarship limit was reduced to 85 in 1992, and Price had us in the Rose Bowl within five years, twice in 10, during an era when the conference still played elite level football. In 2002. 8 of 10 Pac-10 schools had 7 wins or more. We played Ohio State, the national champion, on the friggen road and 4 other nationally ranked teams, beating USC, who finished 3rd.

Right now the conference has never had less talent. It has never been easier to win a conference game. The UW just got throttled by Montana at home. We just got beat by a previously depleted and floundering USU team that needed to be revamped during the off season though transfer portal (hint hint). They just beat MWC power Air Force on the road. Did I mention the small fortune we spent on the FOB to be able to recruit better.

Frankly, I see more opportunity to win football games in Pullman than ever before, with the right coach.

This is a great rundown and some good points. I'm aware of the history, likely more than most. I think the picture is much more complex, though, when it comes to cross-era comparisons and WSU's ability to win in the current environment.

No disagreement on the conference right now in terms of talent and ease of winning. I think right now, as in today, the Pac-12 clearly is there to be had. UW has a weak coach, USC has (had) a weak coach, Oregon is good but still can be beaten, and the rest of the conference simply is weak. Even UCLA, which might be the best team in the conference (and if not better than Oregon, seems like the best in the south), just lost at home to Fresno State and a 3-star QB who couldn't get on the field at UW. Arizona State and Utah, two of the better programs in the south, can't beat BYU, which was supposed to be retrenching a bit this year and isn't all that talented. I get it. In the next few years, though, I expect the conference to improve as a whole as Kelly continues to build UCLA and USC finally makes a decent hire. UW probably will let Lake blame the current mess on a coordinator and give him at least this year and the next, but it may move on, too, and it probably will get a decent coach. Point is that it almost surely will get harder to win in coming years even if it never has been as easy to win the conference as it is today.

More generally, I appreciate the history and significance of what Price did. Today, though, you have a ton of factors cutting against WSU's ability to recruit and retain talent and otherwise win (e.g., scouting services, social media, NIL, unfettered transfers, increased attention by recruits on things like the extent of "networks" and academics, huge money at other programs leading to all kinds of personnel who help with recruiting, scouting, and scheming, all of which they can afford to a much greater extent than WSU ever could). The FOB is great but it's not like it allows WSU to beat other P5 programs out. Even MWC programs have decent FOBs now. It was just necessary to keep WSU in the mix. I think you may be a lawyer ... it's like saying our law firm should be able to outrecruit peer firms because it has nice offices. Well, everyone has those. They're necessary to stay in the game but don't change our position vis-a-vis our competition.

All of this, especially social media, cuts against WSU recruiting substantially. Not to say earlier coaches' jobs were easy--far from it, especially going back to the times when WSU wasn't even playing in Pullman and there weren't scholie limits like today--or that they didn't face other challenges, but each of these is meaningful, and when combining them, they are tremendously impactful. I grant that the portal creates some opportunities, too, but like all this stuff, even if WSU found a way to do very well with the portal, we would just see 60 or 70 better-positioned teams do whatever WSU did, but better, and use their greater resources to hire away whatever coaches or other staff WSU has who are getting it done.

I don't want to make this too long, so hopefully the brief allusions suffice.
 
Last edited:


Meanwhile former Coug assistant scores a big win

Ball burned some bridges when Price left for Bama but came back (a couple times?)
 
Here is some prospective you might be interested in about how difficult it is, and was, to win in Pullman.

When I went to WSU, we hadn't been to the Rose Bowl, or any bowl, in 50 years. As a freshman, the Apple Cup was for all the marbles, and we went Holiday Bowl. That was the direct result of the 95 scholarship limit, imposed in 1978, before that it had been 105, and before 1973 there was no limit. USC brought 50 kids in a class. If you wanted to transfer, you lost a year of eligibility and the school you tranferred to lost a scholarship for that year. Also the Pac-8/10 was the dominant conference, elite talent was everywhere. Try winning under those circumstances.

The scholarship limit was reduced to 85 in 1992, and Price had us in the Rose Bowl within five years, twice in 10, during an era when the conference still played elite level football. In 2002. 8 of 10 Pac-10 schools had 7 wins or more. We played Ohio State, the national champion, on the friggen road and 4 other nationally ranked teams, beating USC, who finished 3rd.

Right now the conference has never had less talent. It has never been easier to win a conference game. The UW just got throttled by Montana at home. We just got beat by a previously depleted and floundering USU team that needed to be revamped during the off season though transfer portal (hint hint). They just beat MWC power Air Force on the road. Did I mention the small fortune we spent on the FOB to be able to recruit better.

Frankly, I see more opportunity to win football games in Pullman than ever before, with the right coach.
Fantastic post and points. Also, I think there an easier path to the “under radar kids”. Every play of every high school game is online now, you just gotta do the work. This “culture” bullshit is such a cop out for a lazy POS that doesn’t want to do his job and never did. There was and is plenty of talent here. There’s plenty of opportunity to bring in talent with the improvements to the stadium, FOB, and past 6-7 years of relative success. The right group of 3 stars will compete just fine against a collection of premadona 4 and 5 stars that are poorly coached. Happens every Saturday in CFB.
 
Even UCLA, which might be the best team in the conference (and if not better than Oregon, seems like the best in the south), just lost at home to Fresno State and a 3-star QB who couldn't get on the field at UW.
Did you see that 3-star QB play last night? There’s no justice if he’s not a player of the week. He willed his team to a win, and then carried them to it.
 
Did you see that 3-star QB play last night? There’s no justice if he’s not a player of the week. He willed his team to a win, and then carried them to it.

Yeah. He can play and has a coach who is getting a lot out of him.
 
What is the real value we are seeing in going to a bowl game every year. Part of what we are seeing today is because Leach left a ton of holes because of his recruiting. When you stack up his third recruiting class for example with a guy who had no success here and the guy with no success had a much better recruiting class says a lot.

There are spots where leach did well, but where is here, destiny , barber eukale? Where is Dahl Middleton , Sorensen . Yes we have Lucas, Ryan is way out of position . Who are the juniors and seniors that will help next year right the ship ?
In the end, it falls on the HC, but Leach also had all of his top assistants and best recruiters poached. Mastro, Big Joe, Wilson, McGuire, Mele, Simmons, Manning, Grinch all poached within a few years. That’s just off the top of my head. I know there were a few more

At some point, a guy has kind of tapped out his resources for hiring new guys.

Frustrating because Oregon got tired of losing to him and set out to dismantle the staff and they did just that.

In the end, I still think that’s one of the main reasons he left. He got tired of hiring and training new staff every year.
 
What is the real value we are seeing in going to a bowl game every year. Part of what we are seeing today is because Leach left a ton of holes because of his recruiting. When you stack up his third recruiting class for example with a guy who had no success here and the guy with no success had a much better recruiting class says a lot.

There are spots where leach did well, but where is here, destiny , barber eukale? Where is Dahl Middleton , Sorensen . Yes we have Lucas, Ryan is way out of position . Who are the juniors and seniors that will help next year right the ship ?

And I think it’s hilarious you keep bringing up that 14 class and comparing it to the ONE passably Pac12 class Wulff had.

Yes, Wulff’s best class by a country mile was slightly better than Leachs worst. That Leach class had 3 NFLers in it, by the way. And that Wulff class was largely successful because they got to be coached by Leachs staff. And that Leach class directly preceded one of the most productive classes we’ve had in decades.
 
This is a great rundown and some good points. I'm aware of the history, likely more than most. I think the picture is much more complex, though, when it comes to cross-era comparisons and WSU's ability to win in the current environment.

No disagreement on the conference right now in terms of talent and ease of winning. I think right now, as in today, the Pac-12 clearly is there to be had. UW has a weak coach, USC has (had) a weak coach, Oregon is good but still can be beaten, and the rest of the conference simply is weak. Even UCLA, which might be the best team in the conference (and if not better than Oregon, seems like the best in the south), just lost at home to Fresno State and a 3-star QB who couldn't get on the field at UW. Arizona State and Utah, two of the better programs in the south, can't beat BYU, which was supposed to be retrenching a bit this year and isn't all that talented. I get it. In the next few years, though, I expect the conference to improve as a whole as Kelly continues to build UCLA and USC finally makes a decent hire. UW probably will let Lake blame the current mess on a coordinator and give him at least this year and the next, but it may move on, too, and it probably will get a decent coach. Point is that it almost surely will get harder to win in coming years even if it never has been as easy to win the conference as it is today.

More generally, I appreciate the history and significance of what Price did. Today, though, you have a ton of factors cutting against WSU's ability to recruit and retain talent and otherwise win (e.g., scouting services, social media, NIL, unfettered transfers, increased attention by recruits on things like the extent of "networks" and academics, huge money at other programs leading to all kinds of personnel who help with recruiting, scouting, and scheming, all of which they can afford to a much greater extent than WSU ever could). The FOB is great but it's not like it allows WSU to beat other P5 programs out. Even MWC programs have decent FOBs now. It was just necessary to keep WSU in the mix. I think you may be a lawyer ... it's like saying our law firm should be able to outrecruit peer firms because it has nice offices. Well, everyone has those. They're necessary to stay in the game but don't change our position vis-a-vis our competition.

All of this, especially social media, cuts against WSU recruiting substantially. Not to say earlier coaches' jobs were easy--far from it, especially going back to the times when WSU wasn't even playing in Pullman and there weren't scholie limits like today--or that they didn't face other challenges, but each of these is meaningful, and when combining them, they are tremendously impactful. I grant that the portal creates some opportunities, too, but like all this stuff, even if WSU found a way to do very well with the portal, we would just see 60 or 70 better-positioned teams do whatever WSU did, but better, and use their greater resources to hire away whatever coaches or other staff WSU has who are getting it done.

I don't want to make this too long, so hopefully the brief allusions suffice.
That 3* QB is better than QB UW has on their roster right now
 
In the end, it falls on the HC, but Leach also had all of his top assistants and best recruiters poached. Mastro, Big Joe, Wilson, McGuire, Mele, Simmons, Manning, Grinch all poached within a few years. That’s just off the top of my head. I know there were a few more

At some point, a guy has kind of tapped out his resources for hiring new guys.

Frustrating because Oregon got tired of losing to him and set out to dismantle the staff and they did just that.

In the end, I still think that’s one of the main reasons he left. He got tired of hiring and training new staff every year.
a classic corporate business move, no doubt instigated by Phil Knight, poach competitors talent to weaken them and it worked. we aren't far from the Wulff era right now
 
In the end, it falls on the HC, but Leach also had all of his top assistants and best recruiters poached. Mastro, Big Joe, Wilson, McGuire, Mele, Simmons, Manning, Grinch all poached within a few years. That’s just off the top of my head. I know there were a few more

At some point, a guy has kind of tapped out his resources for hiring new guys.

Frustrating because Oregon got tired of losing to him and set out to dismantle the staff and they did just that.

In the end, I still think that’s one of the main reasons he left. He got tired of hiring and training new staff every year.
All of the recruiters were there I believe in 14 and that was the start of decline in recruiting .
 
This is a great rundown and some good points. I'm aware of the history, likely more than most. I think the picture is much more complex, though, when it comes to cross-era comparisons and WSU's ability to win in the current environment.

No disagreement on the conference right now in terms of talent and ease of winning. I think right now, as in today, the Pac-12 clearly is there to be had. UW has a weak coach, USC has (had) a weak coach, Oregon is good but still can be beaten, and the rest of the conference simply is weak. Even UCLA, which might be the best team in the conference (and if not better than Oregon, seems like the best in the south), just lost at home to Fresno State and a 3-star QB who couldn't get on the field at UW. Arizona State and Utah, two of the better programs in the south, can't beat BYU, which was supposed to be retrenching a bit this year and isn't all that talented. I get it. In the next few years, though, I expect the conference to improve as a whole as Kelly continues to build UCLA and USC finally makes a decent hire. UW probably will let Lake blame the current mess on a coordinator and give him at least this year and the next, but it may move on, too, and it probably will get a decent coach. Point is that it almost surely will get harder to win in coming years even if it never has been as easy to win the conference as it is today.

More generally, I appreciate the history and significance of what Price did. Today, though, you have a ton of factors cutting against WSU's ability to recruit and retain talent and otherwise win (e.g., scouting services, social media, NIL, unfettered transfers, increased attention by recruits on things like the extent of "networks" and academics, huge money at other programs leading to all kinds of personnel who help with recruiting, scouting, and scheming, all of which they can afford to a much greater extent than WSU ever could). The FOB is great but it's not like it allows WSU to beat other P5 programs out. Even MWC programs have decent FOBs now. It was just necessary to keep WSU in the mix. I think you may be a lawyer ... it's like saying our law firm should be able to outrecruit peer firms because it has nice offices. Well, everyone has those. They're necessary to stay in the game but don't change our position vis-a-vis our competition.

All of this, especially social media, cuts against WSU recruiting substantially. Not to say earlier coaches' jobs were easy--far from it, especially going back to the times when WSU wasn't even playing in Pullman and there weren't scholie limits like today--or that they didn't face other challenges, but each of these is meaningful, and when combining them, they are tremendously impactful. I grant that the portal creates some opportunities, too, but like all this stuff, even if WSU found a way to do very well with the portal, we would just see 60 or 70 better-positioned teams do whatever WSU did, but better, and use their greater resources to hire away whatever coaches or other staff WSU has who are getting it done.

I don't want to make this too long, so hopefully the brief allusions suffice.
There is a two word response to the, "how can WSU recruit in the modern world with all the disadvantages stacked against it?," wailing and gnashing of teeth. Those two words are "Kyle Smith." We have more talent, top to bottom, now on the basketball team than at any time since Raveling, 40 years ago. Whether he can coach these kids to success is yet to be seen, but the man has blown up the you can't recruit to Pullman narrative.

Don't get me wrong, recruiting to Pullman is tough, but if you are willing to work at it and leave no stone unturned, it can be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_1nb5kgc7kwlls
All of the recruiters were there I believe in 14 and that was the start of decline in recruiting .
So Leach had 1.5 classes in your mind, and then the decline began?

And no, not "all of the recruiters" were there in 2014.
 
Last edited:
Fantastic post and points. Also, I think there an easier path to the “under radar kids”. Every play of every high school game is online now, you just gotta do the work. This “culture” bullshit is such a cop out for a lazy POS that doesn’t want to do his job and never did. There was and is plenty of talent here. There’s plenty of opportunity to bring in talent with the improvements to the stadium, FOB, and past 6-7 years of relative success. The right group of 3 stars will compete just fine against a collection of premadona 4 and 5 stars that are poorly coached. Happens every Saturday in CFB.
It is getting the right mix. Price didn't sign only 4-5 star kids. It was some 4-5 star kids (Bledsoe), it was some talented, but troubled kids (Leaf), some under the radar kids (Derting and Darling), as well as the overachievers (Gleason) and generally quality above the radar kids (Gesser). Throw in a heap of luck and bam your considered the top dog, AKA 2002.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M-I-Coug
So Leach had 1.5 classes in your mind, and then the decline began?

And no, not "all of the recruiters" were there in 2014.
I stand corrected, Volero and Breske were fired. Simmons was around, Wilson, Mastro, Joe S....the 13 class was the foundation of the program.

Just start off with the Dline and we can work are way around if you would like to discuss...and yes, I think recruiting slipped after 13.

In 14 they had one DT- Herc, and he was a DE coming in, but he was special at DT. 15 they took one, Toki and no way he was going to get eligible. 16 no DT's were taken. 17 two were taken, Hobbs and Rodgers. You believe they are Destiny, Barber, Herc, and Eukale quality? 2 in 18, Syr Riley and Crowder. Same question about comparison to the 13 class.

We can go to oline next and compare all the resources poured into that position and all of the misses of players who never played a down. Compare that to Cole Madison etc.

Not sure we can talk about his high school qb's. But I would say getting Falk to play at his level and Tyler was going to be a star needs to be mentioned to offset the misses in Bruggman, Neville, Bender, Cruz, Cam etc.
 
I stand corrected, Volero and Breske were fired. Simmons was around, Wilson, Mastro, Joe S....the 13 class was the foundation of the program.

Just start off with the Dline and we can work are way around if you would like to discuss...and yes, I think recruiting slipped after 13.

In 14 they had one DT- Herc, and he was a DE coming in, but he was special at DT. 15 they took one, Toki and no way he was going to get eligible. 16 no DT's were taken. 17 two were taken, Hobbs and Rodgers. You believe they are Destiny, Barber, Herc, and Eukale quality? 2 in 18, Syr Riley and Crowder. Same question about comparison to the 13 class.

We can go to oline next and compare all the resources poured into that position and all of the misses of players who never played a down. Compare that to Cole Madison etc.

Not sure we can talk about his high school qb's. But I would say getting Falk to play at his level and Tyler was going to be a star needs to be mentioned to offset the misses in Bruggman, Neville, Bender, Cruz, Cam etc.

Leach is the first WSU coach to invest in the OL. You will not have sustained success at WSU if you do not consistently bring in 5 OL per class. Only reason not to is if you have a certain number you want on the roster and guys are sticking. It is a high turnover position. Kids will get hurt, not pan out, drop out for whatever reason or just leave. You have to start with numbers to end with numbers. No OL? Offense goes to crap fast.

You can bitch all you want about Leach missing on OL, it isnt about the misses. Its about the hits. You do what you have to do to make it work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coug90 and Fab5Coug
All of the recruiters were there I believe in 14 and that was the start of decline in recruiting .
Oh, I forgot about Graham Harrell as well.

And, yea, I guess the recruiting fell off from the '13 class, but again, that was probably one of the best classes we've ever had.

The '15 class had Luani, Tavares Martin, Dale, Hillinski, Molton, James Williams, Broughton, Sweet, Parker, Tago, Nnamdi Oguayo and Sean Harper Jr. That's a pretty good class for WSU.

The '16 class had Mauigoa, Renard Bell, Jalen Thompson, Dez Patmon, Josh Watson, Jahad, Justus Rogers, Skyler Thomas, Marcus Strong, Robert Taylor, Liam Ryan, McBroom & Anthony Gordon. Derek Moore was also good before getting injured. Again, that's a pretty good class.
 
I stand corrected, Volero and Breske were fired. Simmons was around, Wilson, Mastro, Joe S....the 13 class was the foundation of the program.

Just start off with the Dline and we can work are way around if you would like to discuss...and yes, I think recruiting slipped after 13.

In 14 they had one DT- Herc, and he was a DE coming in, but he was special at DT. 15 they took one, Toki and no way he was going to get eligible. 16 no DT's were taken. 17 two were taken, Hobbs and Rodgers. You believe they are Destiny, Barber, Herc, and Eukale quality? 2 in 18, Syr Riley and Crowder. Same question about comparison to the 13 class.

We can go to oline next and compare all the resources poured into that position and all of the misses of players who never played a down. Compare that to Cole Madison etc.

Not sure we can talk about his high school qb's. But I would say getting Falk to play at his level and Tyler was going to be a star needs to be mentioned to offset the misses in Bruggman, Neville, Bender, Cruz, Cam etc.
That was the strategy on the OL. Wulff tried to recruit 2-3 a year. 2 or 3 x 5 classes on campus at once = 10-12 good OL every season, right? No way. Leach realized he had to throw 5 schollies a year at it. Just by the numbers, that means some guys aren't going to play. But, the guys that DID make it? I'd say Leach probably recruited the OL better than any coach we've had in recent memory. Dahl was in the league, Dillard was a 1st rounder, Abe is going to the league, Madison had a cup of coffee, O'Connell was an All American, then you've got just solid guys like Ryan, Sorenson, Watson, Mauigoa.

And criticizing DL recruiting? That's the hardest position to recruit. I'd bet there's not a program in the conference that recruits that position very well. In '15, they also took Fehoko, Mattox & Mitchell. In '16, they took Bartley, Bender & McBroom. In '18, they took Brennan Jackson, Lolohea, Aliolupotea-Pei, in addition to Crowder and Riley. So, you want to criticize them, criticize them for missing on a bunch of dudes. Don't criticize them for not trying.

And they definitely took an odd route to get productive QB play. Falk was a walk on, Minshew was a transfer, Gordon was a JC guy. But, who cares? One thing you never had to worry about with Leach was sub par QB play. Harping on Bruggman, Neville & Bender is just looking for things to complain about.

You seem to just REALLY want to nitpick on the misses. That's how recruiting works. Out of 25 guys, probably half of them are not ever going to do anything for you. You get 2-3 star players and maybe a half dozen other solid starters in each class and you're going bowling every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BiggsCoug
That was the strategy on the OL. Wulff tried to recruit 2-3 a year. 2 or 3 x 5 classes on campus at once = 10-12 good OL every season, right? No way. Leach realized he had to throw 5 schollies a year at it. Just by the numbers, that means some guys aren't going to play. But, the guys that DID make it? I'd say Leach probably recruited the OL better than any coach we've had in recent memory. Dahl was in the league, Dillard was a 1st rounder, Abe is going to the league, Madison had a cup of coffee, O'Connell was an All American, then you've got just solid guys like Ryan, Sorenson, Watson, Mauigoa.

And criticizing DL recruiting? That's the hardest position to recruit. I'd bet there's not a program in the conference that recruits that position very well. In '15, they also took Fehoko, Mattox & Mitchell. In '16, they took Bartley, Bender & McBroom. In '18, they took Brennan Jackson, Lolohea, Aliolupotea-Pei, in addition to Crowder and Riley. So, you want to criticize them, criticize them for missing on a bunch of dudes. Don't criticize them for not trying.

And they definitely took an odd route to get productive QB play. Falk was a walk on, Minshew was a transfer, Gordon was a JC guy. But, who cares? One thing you never had to worry about with Leach was sub par QB play. Harping on Bruggman, Neville & Bender is just looking for things to complain about.

You seem to just REALLY want to nitpick on the misses. That's how recruiting works. Out of 25 guys, probably half of them are not ever going to do anything for you. You get 2-3 star players and maybe a half dozen other solid starters in each class and you're going bowling every year.
I never said Leach's Oline strategy was bad, or incorrect, I said he invested a lot in that position that never played.

Second, the discussion is about his recruiting and how it declined. I don't think that is incorrect, or at least you didn't give me information to make me reassess my position. Do you believe any subsequence class was as close to what Leach recruited his second class?

Third, you gave me names of DE's. I was specifically talking about DT's, big body types. Again, The first two years he had Guata, Barber, DEstiny and Eukale. That is coming off losing seasons. Why did he not bring that success forward.

Could Leach get away with sub par recruiting classes and get above 7-5? Yep. But the rails came off in 19. The misses started to mount. The shortage at DL, especially the big bodies was being felt and continues to be felt. I would have hoped that recruiting would have got stringer with more bowl games and the winning records, it did not. The question is why?

And I am not sure I criticized them for not trying. Not sure I have done that ever, I do know some people felt Doba's assistants let him down in this area. But not sure I would ever say they didn't give an effort, they just had poor results.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT