ADVERTISEMENT

While Rolo struggles, Smith is killing it ...

Cougsocal

Hall Of Fame
Sep 5, 2010
2,959
1,150
113
on the recruiting front with the best class in school history, despite having Raveling era facilities.

This is an object lesson on where an AD's priorities should lie. And it isn't creating a legacy through facility building. It is fund retention and liquidity to hire and retain top coaches. Moos got it partly right. He used the Pac 12 Network contract to hire Mike Leach, when every other conference AD thought exclusively about facility upgrades, and went coaching cheap, at least in football. The result has been the utter demise of Pac-12 football.

Where Moos got it wrong was also "double downing" on facilities. He took advantage of the one major advantage WSU has in this conference, Spokane's ridiculously low wage scale, to build facilities second only to Oregon, at a truly bargain price. The down side was the financial hole it left when the Pac-12 network fizzled.

This isn't about whether to upgrade. You need to upgrade. The question is whether you take advantage of the "Spokane bonus" to keep up with the Jones's, for far less, or try to put them to shame. Bill went with the "put them to shame" approach. The result was, while we could keep Leach, we couldn't pay to keep or upgrade his assistants. And when Leach bolted for perceived greener pastures (how much of that had to do his struggles retaining his coaches), we were once again left trying to find and hire a great coach from the bargain basement. Rolo may be fantastic, just like Smith, but there is inherently far greater risk trying to find an undervalued coaching gem, than paying a proven coach what he demands. Paul " the program destroyer" Wulff is an extreme example.
 
Moos gave zero F's about anything but football. He lazy buddy hired Ernie and is still likely receiving his kickback royalties from Ernie's severance package.

Ernie could have pulled talent - he chose not to and hired more of his lazy buddies. I pointed out a rising 9th grader several years ago to him - never even lifted a finger or made a phone call.

Same kid - a year ago, sent Smith's recruiting coordinator a quick heads up - and within minutes, got a reply a text and a phone call asking for more info.

The kid just signed with Boise State out of JC but at least the Cougs made the effort.


So, yes, coaching hires matter.
 
Last edited:
Moos gave zero F's about anything but football. He lazy buddy hired Ernie and is still likely receiving his kickback royalties from Ernie's severance package.

Ernie could have pulled talent - he chose not to and hired more of his lazy buddies. I pointed out a rising 9th grader several years ago to him - never even made a lifted a finger or made a phone call.

The kid just signed with Boise State out of JC.

So, yes, coaching hires matter.

Football is also the only sport that will provide any significant return on investment. Dumping a bunch of money into anything else would not have elevated the Athletic Department as a whole.
 
Football is also the only sport that will provide any significant return on investment. Dumping a bunch of money into anything else would not have elevated the Athletic Department as a whole.

By 'dumping a bunch of money into anything else" - are you exempting the lazy Ernie Kent buddy hire or the massive severance dollars dumped down that rat hole?
 
By 'dumping a bunch of money into anything else" - are you exempting the lazy Ernie Kent buddy hire or the massive severance dollars dumped down that rat hole?

You've made clear you didn't like the Kent hire. I'm not sure there is anyone who did. Kent was going to be a caretaker until the financial situation improved to invest some money into basketball.
 
You've made clear you didn't like the Kent hire. I'm not sure there is anyone who did. Kent was going to be a caretaker until the financial situation improved to invest some money into basketball.

Market rate on caretakers is a lot less than $1.4 Million per year with a 5 year rollover.

So you're position is that Moos was fiscally responsible and utilized his resources with good stewardship as he poured money into football. Got it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doggiedoo
Market rate on caretakers is a lot less than $1.4 Million per year with a 5 year rollover.

So you're position is that Moos was fiscally responsible and utilized his resources with good stewardship as he poured money into football. Got it.

Actually my “position” is that the basketball program was going to have to tread water for awhile and that was the correct decision. Football is the only program that would have produced a return. Feel free to make shit up though.
 
We could've retained Ken Bone at 60% of EK's salary, and avoid the expensive buyout, and still would have treaded water. The basketball program actually got worse under Kent....as a lot of us predicted. I was in favor of replacing Bone but even without the benefit of hindsight, many of us felt a younger, hungrier coach would at least give WSU more effort and energy. Moos made a lazy hire of a buddy who nobody else wanted to hire. If he wasn't doing a favor for his friend, why did he allow the automatic rollover after EK's year 2 record of 1-17 in conference play?

It doesn't matter now. It appears we might have struck gold in Kyle Smith...even without the facility & infrastructure upgrades that some people used as an excuse for WSU not being able to hire a good basketball coach.

Glad Cougar
 
Actually my “position” is that the basketball program was going to have to tread water for awhile and that was the correct decision. Football is the only program that would have produced a return. Feel free to make shit up though.

What is not factual about the amount Ernie Kent was paid by Bill Moos?

You seem to be the only one still holding onto the bone that Kent was a homerun hire by Moos and a great use of financial resources during a time when "basketball was going to have to tread water" (your words, not mine).

How is that 'making shit up'?

Making shit up would be 'dgibbons spent the Ernie Kent years wiping Moos' semen off his chin". I cannot validate that claim. So I didn't post it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spongeworthy12
It doesn't matter now. It appears we might have struck gold in Kyle Smith...even without the facility & infrastructure upgrades that some people used as an excuse for WSU not being able to hire a good basketball coach.

Glad Cougar

I really hope that even with COVID, financials, etc. the AD can find a way to make sure the cameras CKS asked for are installed. He and the staff are doing work on the recruiting trail and they deserve to have the finished. The AD would be very ignorant if they try to push that out another year.
 
What is not factual about the amount Ernie Kent was paid by Bill Moos?

You seem to be the only one still holding onto the bone that Kent was a homerun hire by Moos and a great use of financial resources during a time when "basketball was going to have to tread water" (your words, not mine).

How is that 'making shit up'?

Making shit up would be 'dgibbons spent the Ernie Kent years wiping Moos' semen off his chin". I cannot validate that claim. So I didn't post it.

The above is an example of making shit up. Carry on.
 
We could've retained Ken Bone at 60% of EK's salary, and avoid the expensive buyout, and still would have treaded water. The basketball program actually got worse under Kent....as a lot of us predicted. I was in favor of replacing Bone but even without the benefit of hindsight, many of us felt a younger, hungrier coach would at least give WSU more effort and energy. Moos made a lazy hire of a buddy who nobody else wanted to hire. If he wasn't doing a favor for his friend, why did he allow the automatic rollover after EK's year 2 record of 1-17 in conference play?

It doesn't matter now. It appears we might have struck gold in Kyle Smith...even without the facility & infrastructure upgrades that some people used as an excuse for WSU not being able to hire a good basketball coach.

Glad Cougar

The program was broken at the end of Bone's tenure. Just like it was broken at the end of Kent's. Recruiting was dead. Interest was dead. The current players were not invested. A change had to be made. MLB teams will change managers all of the time to try to show the masses they care, without making any significant improvement in the team, not spending more on payroll, etc. I used to call it the KC Royals effect, before they had their run in 2014-2015. Should probably call it the Mariners effect now.

I never said I was in favor of the rollover. In past discussions I have said it was a bad decision.
 
The above is an example of making shit up. Carry on.

Feel free to expand on your position then to set the record straight.

If there another logical conclusion to reconcile the '"basketball was going to have to tread water" (your words, not mine) with the
$1.4 Million salary plus 5 year rollover contract (factual), you have the floor.
 
Moos gave zero F's about anything but football. He lazy buddy hired Ernie and is still likely receiving his kickback royalties from Ernie's severance package.

Ernie could have pulled talent - he chose not to and hired more of his lazy buddies. I pointed out a rising 9th grader several years ago to him - never even lifted a finger or made a phone call.

Same kid - a year ago, sent Smith's recruiting coordinator a quick heads up - and within minutes, got a reply a text and a phone call asking for more info.

The kid just signed with Boise State out of JC but at least the Cougs made the effort.


So, yes, coaching hires matter.
you may be right, but it's hard to compare a coaching staff's interest in a 9th grader vs. a JC sophomore.
 
Feel free to expand on your position then to set the record straight.

If there another logical conclusion to reconcile the '"basketball was going to have to tread water" (your words, not mine) with the
$1.4 Million salary plus 5 year rollover contract (factual), you have the floor.

Would you like me to repeat my posts? Then you can repeat a lie such as "You seem to be the only one still holding onto the bone that Kent was a homerun hire by Moos and a great use of financial resources during a time when "basketball was going to have to tread water" (your words, not mine)." Or have a toddler tantrum or whatever you're doing. Then we can do it again.

Or you can act like an adult and not make shit up and put words in others' mouths. Ball is in your court.
 
Would you like me to repeat my posts? Then you can repeat a lie such as "You seem to be the only one still holding onto the bone that Kent was a homerun hire by Moos and a great use of financial resources during a time when "basketball was going to have to tread water" (your words, not mine)." Or have a toddler tantrum or whatever you're doing. Then we can do it again.

Or you can act like an adult and not make shit up and put words in others' mouths. Ball is in your court.

I would like you to repeat your posts about as much as I would like a root canal.

I suggest you take your often given advice and go back and re-read your own posts.
 
I would like you to repeat your posts about as much as I would like a root canal.

I suggest you take your often given advice and go back and re-read your own posts.

I don't need to re-read my posts. I know what they say and if I forget I just have to scroll up. Not hard. But some people are still working on that skill.
 
I hate to get back onto the original topic, but hey....let's start with the title of this string.

I don't think that Rolo is struggling, but I agree that Smith is killing it. I actually think that Rolo is doing pretty well under the circumstances. Smith had the opportunity to do most of his immediate prior class's recruiting prior to Covid. Rolo did not get the same personal contact window for his 2021 class, and unless the Covid situation changes, Smith will also not have a lot of personal visit time for his 2021 class. The good news for Smith is that, with this huge class, he won't need the same numbers in the next class. Rolo probably will never see a year where he doesn't need at least close to 25 kids. And Rolo has not yet finished his class...but he is on track or ahead compared to prior years. At this point I am happy with Rolo and agree that Smith has put together a pretty spectacular-looking class.

As for the rest of it...I think at least most of us would agree that Ernie was a poor hire, at a price that did not reflect any kind of value to WSU. We can probably also agree that, by the time Ken Bone was replaced, it needed to happen (though I grew to respect Bone; good guy who gave full effort; just the wrong guy for that job). The WSU job will never be a job for a HC (in any sport) looking to glide into retirement. It requires energy and effort. Both Rolo and Smith are demonstrating both energy and effort.

As for the money...whether it is facilities, HC salary, staff salary or which ever line item that is in the athletic department budget...it is undeniable that football is the only sport that could be a big revenue producer, though during the times when we packed Friel for the big games, hoops was a net contributor to the budget. Maybe not a huge contributor, but it was in the black. Haven't seen that since the Bennett years, but if Smith's recruiting class pans out, we may be able to turn the ship sooner than I had expected.

If there is no high school football this year, or if the season is significantly truncated, there will be more hidden gems out there than we've seen since the start of the internet era. There will also be more risky scholarship offers across the board, since a kid's HS performance will be less well defined. I think Rolo's approach: offer early and often, start conversations, see what sort of relationship can be started, be perceived by the kid as interested early...is the right approach, especially this year. I think recruiting is going reasonably well so far in football, and the hoops class was amazing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M-I-Coug
The funny, and sad, thing is what the OP espoused is what Moos thought he was doing with basketball. He thought he was getting a "top" coach among the group of coaches who was realistic to land with WSU's situation with facilities and otherwise, with "top" defined in terms of name recognition, some measure of past achievement, and an ostensibly exciting brand of basketball. That kind of coach--in theory, not in fact--merited something in the range of the salary Moos laid out in the initial deal. It was too high but not ridiculous (much like, I'd argue, Rolovich's salary being too high but, one can argue, not absurdly so).

Of course, the hire was lazy and reflected a gravely poor assessment by Moos of Kent's ability, especially in a truly disadvantaged recruiting situation, not just a limited one like the pre-Matt Knight Arena era in Eugene. The rollovers were nothing less than criminal. That said, despite appearances--especially after the fact--I don't buy that Moos was just helping out an old friend. He thought he was doing something fairly close to the Leach hire in football, adjusted for the hoops situation being worse than that for football. It just was executed very poorly, especially with those godforsaken rollovers, and reflected Moos not knowing what he was doing on basketball and then being some combination of lazy, uninformed, out the door, and/or constrained by his own bad decisions with the rollovers to rectify that mistake.

As much as Kent sucked, I'm glad Moos didn't try to rectify that mistake. He would have blown it. At least he got out of the way and let Chun make a good hire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cr8zyncalif
The funny, and sad, thing is what the OP espoused is what Moos thought he was doing with basketball. He thought he was getting a "top" coach among the group of coaches who was realistic to land with WSU's situation with facilities and otherwise, with "top" defined in terms of name recognition, some measure of past achievement, and an ostensibly exciting brand of basketball. That kind of coach--in theory, not in fact--merited something in the range of the salary Moos laid out in the initial deal. It was too high but not ridiculous (much like, I'd argue, Rolovich's salary being too high but, one can argue, not absurdly so).

Of course, the hire was lazy and reflected a gravely poor assessment by Moos of Kent's ability, especially in a truly disadvantaged recruiting situation, not just a limited one like the pre-Matt Knight Arena era in Eugene. The rollovers were nothing less than criminal. That said, despite appearances--especially after the fact--I don't buy that Moos was just helping out an old friend. He thought he was doing something fairly close to the Leach hire in football, adjusted for the hoops situation being worse than that for football. It just was executed very poorly, especially with those godforsaken rollovers, and reflected Moos not knowing what he was doing on basketball and then being some combination of lazy, uninformed, out the door, and/or constrained by his own bad decisions with the rollovers to rectify that mistake.

As much as Kent sucked, I'm glad Moos didn't try to rectify that mistake. He would have blown it. At least he got out of the way and let Chun make a good hire.
Good assessment. I would only add that Kent had been out of coaching for 5 years for a reason. He tried hard to land another HC position but nobody hired him. Combined with the last couple of years at UO, and it was a long time since Ernie had demonstrated success. Some people like to say "...he didn't just forget how to coach" in a situation like that, but sometimes the game just passes you by. I don't know what happened to Kent....and he's not a bad guy....but there was nothing about him in 2014 that suggested he should warrant $1.4 million. So I still think Moos' primary objective was to help out an old friend.....but one that he was confident could at least be a caretaker so Moos wouldn't have to deal with basketball for awhile.

Glad Cougar
 
....but there was nothing about him in 2014 that suggested he should warrant $1.4 million.
Glad Cougar

I agree - and I believe Moos wanted to show that WSU wasn't as "notoriously cheap" as in the past. But $1.4MM for CEK wasn't a good move. But it felt like Moos was trying to set precedent - going cheap on an up-and-comer and it's "usual" WSU move. Wasn't a CEK fan at the hire time (uninspiring hire) but just hoped he could keep us competitive). Just want CKS and staff rewarded as they continue on their positive trajectory. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the AD better get those cameras BB wanted in, stat.

I appreciate the current AD willing to pay $3MM+ for a football coach, but I also felt that was an overpay. $3MM+ could end up being a bargain deal...I think I just felt $2.25MM-$2.5MM range with a coach like Rolo starting out was more in range. Kudos to the AD being willing to pay a handsome salary to show that WSU is serious about athletics. I was beating the drum to spend $3.5MM-$4MM+ on a lure away another P5 coach. I think Rolo will continue to win at WSU, but I see it being more of a Price tenure than a Leach tenure in terms of W/L: higher peaks, lower valleys. Rolo has really done an excellent job immersing himself into the WSU culture - he definitely fits there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cr8zyncalif
Good assessment. I would only add that Kent had been out of coaching for 5 years for a reason. He tried hard to land another HC position but nobody hired him. Combined with the last couple of years at UO, and it was a long time since Ernie had demonstrated success. Some people like to say "...he didn't just forget how to coach" in a situation like that, but sometimes the game just passes you by. I don't know what happened to Kent....and he's not a bad guy....but there was nothing about him in 2014 that suggested he should warrant $1.4 million. So I still think Moos' primary objective was to help out an old friend.....but one that he was confident could at least be a caretaker so Moos wouldn't have to deal with basketball for awhile.

Glad Cougar

Yeah, I get it. The last thing I'd want is this construed as my endorsement of paying Ernie Kent anything, let alone $1.4 million. That's almost like being on record endorsing the Wulff hire. I've probably written as many anti-Moos / Kent posts as anyone, especially about the stupid rollovers. I just meant that subjectively and in view of basketball not being in his wheelhouse, I believe Moos really thought that he was getting a "name brand" coach with those attributes I described who wouldn't have come to Pullman prior to the money from the TV deal allowing WSU to pay a decent wage for a coach, even though he had been out of coaching for a while and had a rough exit from Oregon.
 
Last edited:
Bill Moos didn't only seriously overpay Ernie, Leach utterly took him to the cleaners in contract negotiations. We paid 2 million or so, guaranteeing 7 years, for a guy who was being blackballed, he was literally CFB's Dalton Trumbo. We needed Leach, but Bill just opened the vault. History will not look kindly on Bill's second stay in Pullman. Bill was an "idea man," not a competent administrator.

https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/01/20/mike-leach
 
Bill Moos didn't only seriously overpay Ernie, Leach utterly took him to the cleaners in contract negotiations. We paid 2 million or so, guaranteeing 7 years, for a guy who was being blackballed, he was literally CFB's Dalton Trumbo. We needed Leach, but Bill just opened the vault. History will not look kindly on Bill's second stay in Pullman. Bill was an "idea man," not a competent administrator.

https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/01/20/mike-leach

Are you not contradicting yourself here? Your first post says paying top coaches should be the priority. Now you’re complaining about the coaches getting paid.
 
Bill Moos didn't only seriously overpay Ernie, Leach utterly took him to the cleaners in contract negotiations. We paid 2 million or so, guaranteeing 7 years, for a guy who was being blackballed, he was literally CFB's Dalton Trumbo. We needed Leach, but Bill just opened the vault. History will not look kindly on Bill's second stay in Pullman. Bill was an "idea man," not a competent administrator.

https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/01/20/mike-leach
I disagree. You pay the coach what you pay the coach. Did Chun overpay Rolo by more than tripling his salary? Or, should he have lowballed him and and set that precedent and continued the long held belief that WSU is cheap and doesn't pay their coaches?

Moos paid Leach, and it was still on the lower end of conference coaches when he was hired. Moos wanted to make a statement that WSU pays in line with other P5 conference schools. He has said as much in interviews. Also, you have no idea if Leach would have accepted if Moos lowballs him. We all know how stubborn Leach is. He is the type of personality that would not accept a job if he felt disrespected. Plus, if you want a long-term relationship, you don't start it out by disrespecting the other party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NMBRCRNCHR
I've heard comments locally that some of the HS coaches, with D1 caliber talent, they haven't heard a peep from Rolo or staff.

This was/is contradictory to the message that Rolo was going to recruit hard in this state. I think at a minimum the perception is/was this staff would be more active in establishing in-state relationships.

Perhaps COVID is the excuse. You still can pick up the phone, reach out via email, etc.

I'm just the messenger....
 
I've heard comments locally that some of the HS coaches, with D1 caliber talent, they haven't heard a peep from Rolo or staff.

This was/is contradictory to the message that Rolo was going to recruit hard in this state. I think at a minimum the perception is/was this staff would be more active in establishing in-state relationships.

Perhaps COVID is the excuse. You still can pick up the phone, reach out via email, etc.

I'm just the messenger....

Where is locally to you?
 
Tacoma area. Don't want to name specifically.

I'm sure someone could do a survey around "WSU coaches" engagement with HS coaches. From an N of one, he expressed some disappointment.

They may be just trying to hit targets they have in their previous pipeline.
 
I've heard comments locally that some of the HS coaches, with D1 caliber talent, they haven't heard a peep from Rolo or staff.

This was/is contradictory to the message that Rolo was going to recruit hard in this state. I think at a minimum the perception is/was this staff would be more active in establishing in-state relationships.

Perhaps COVID is the excuse. You still can pick up the phone, reach out via email, etc.

I'm just the messenger....

IMO, there are some HS coaches in the State of Washington that believe they have "D1 caliber talent" but in are in the distinct minority on that opinion. There seems to be a sense of entitlement that WSU needs to offer their guys. Or that somehow, some way WSU needs to invest a bunch of time and effort into recruiting guys that are never genuinely going to consider WSU. But for some reason it's important for them to get love and attention from WSU in order to say they're going elsewhere.
 
Bill Moos didn't only seriously overpay Ernie, Leach utterly took him to the cleaners in contract negotiations. We paid 2 million or so, guaranteeing 7 years, for a guy who was being blackballed, he was literally CFB's Dalton Trumbo. We needed Leach, but Bill just opened the vault. History will not look kindly on Bill's second stay in Pullman. Bill was an "idea man," not a competent administrator.

https://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/01/20/mike-leach

Leach took us to 6 bowl games in 7 years, 2 9 win seasons and a school record 11 win season, a top 10 finish in the polls, GameDay, fun wins over SC and Oregon, increased ticket sales and attendance. I’ll say WSU got their money’s worth with Leach.
 
IMO, there are some HS coaches in the State of Washington that believe they have "D1 caliber talent" but in are in the distinct minority on that opinion. There seems to be a sense of entitlement that WSU needs to offer their guys. Or that somehow, some way WSU needs to invest a bunch of time and effort into recruiting guys that are never genuinely going to consider WSU. But for some reason it's important for them to get love and attention from WSU in order to say they're going elsewhere.
Well, there's one way to validate ttowns message; wait to see how many kids out of Tacoma area get D1 offers.

And what you said is right: there is a HUGE ego game with these HS coaches for them to be able to say "I got this kid in college and this kid, AND the reason he's a D1 kids is AAAAAAALLLLLLL because of me". Any guy bitching about not getting his kids looked at has a huge conflict on interest. Its one thing to send out tape and maybe make a phone call for those couple of special kids that come through programs, but yeah.

One thing that you didn't mention is the belief that WSU should be calling on their kids because WSU can't do any better. "Well, UW didn't call so maybe Central will. Or Eastern. Or WSU. You know, a lower tier school."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cougzz
My point is I think WSU just needs to make inroads with all the local high schools, regardless of what kind of talent they have.

Petersen was apparently very respect in this regard. Any recruit that came on campus was treated the same. (so i am told).

We need to build bridges, and hopefully good things will come as a result.
 
IMO, there are some HS coaches in the State of Washington that believe they have "D1 caliber talent" but in are in the distinct minority on that opinion. There seems to be a sense of entitlement that WSU needs to offer their guys. Or that somehow, some way WSU needs to invest a bunch of time and effort into recruiting guys that are never genuinely going to consider WSU. But for some reason it's important for them to get love and attention from WSU in order to say they're going elsewhere.

That's recruiting. All coaches invest time into kids who may never step foot on campus. But you still need to play the game. The coach at Curtis, you have to make him feel like he has the line from the commissioners office to Bat cave. Yes, there is ego involved, they want to feel the love. If WSU doesn't offer their kid so be it, but play the game.
 
That's recruiting. All coaches invest time into kids who may never step foot on campus. But you still need to play the game. The coach at Curtis, you have to make him feel like he has the line from the commissioners office to Bat cave. Yes, there is ego involved, they want to feel the love. If WSU doesn't offer their kid so be it, but play the game.

No. WSU doesn't experience this in California, Hawaii, Texas or anywhere else.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT