Why Leach isn’t eligible for the College Football HOF...

[M-I-Coug]

Jon WilnerJune 11, 2024 at 11:38 am​

Nine coaches appear on the College Football Hall of Fame’s ballot for 2025, including two of the biggest names in the sport over the past quarter century: Urban Meyer and Nick Saban.

Tommy Tuberville, who gained fame at Auburn, also appears. So does Miami’s Larry Coker and Maryland’s Ralph Friedgen.

Not on the ballot, which was released last week: Mike Leach.

The late Mike Leach, who made Texas Tech relevant, did the same for Washington State and, along the way, changed the game like few coaches in the past 50 years.

Leach wasn’t on the 2025 ballot for a good reason: Coaches aren’t eligible until three years after retirement unless they are at least 70 years old.

Saban, 72, was eligible the moment he stepped down at Alabama earlier this year.

But Leach was only 61 when he died in December 2022, from complications related to a heart condition, following his third season at Mississippi State.

There is no process to fast-track coaches for posthumous induction, according to Steve Hatchell, president of the National Football Foundation, which runs the Hall of Fame

Which means the earliest Leach could appear on the ballot is the spring of 2026 — except for one teeny-tiny problem:

He doesn’t meet the selection criteria.

The Hall of Fame requires coaching nominees to “have been a head football coach for a minimum of 10 years and coached at least 100 games with a .600 winning percentage.”

Leach coached for 21 years and won 158 games.

But his career winning percentage is .596, and the Hall of Fame does not round up.

Leach is one win short.

The man whose Air Raid passing game has come to dominate high school and college football and is used throughout the NFL …

The man who posted 11-win seasons in Lubbock and Pullman …

Who mentored current head coaches Josh Heupel (Tennessee), Dave Aranda (Baylor), Sonny Dykes (TCU), Lincoln Riley (USC) and a slew of others …

Who had 16 winning seasons and just five losing seasons at three schools (Texas Tech, WSU and MSU) that will never, ever be mistaken for football blue-bloods …

That guy does not qualify for the Hall of Fame because his career record is 158-107 and not 159-106.

(At this point in the proceedings, Washington State fans are undoubtedly sifting through their mental Rolodex of games the Cougars lost because of egregious Pac-12 officiating.)

“If you don’t qualify under one of the criteria, it’s tough,” Hatchell said Monday.

“We’ve heard every reason why we should look beyond why someone is not in the Hall of Fame. But at some point, you have to say, ‘These are the rules.'”

The problem with that approach, of course, is that location impacts success.

It’s vastly more difficult to win 55% of your games a year at Texas Tech or Washington State than 65% of your games at Texas or Washington.

Yet because of the sheer number of potential inductees — more than 700 colleges and universities play football — the Hall of Fame needs a baseline for players and coaches.

That said, the Hall isn’t inherently anti-Leach. Quite the opposite, in fact.

“Mike was great to the National Football Foundation and the Hall of Fame,” said Hatchell, whose NFF office is located in Irving, Texas.

“If we needed counsel on something, I’d call him. We love Mike and what he did for the sport. What he did for Texas Tech and Washington State was nothing short of phenomenal.

Sponsored​

“But once you get wiggly on the criteria, what do you say doesn’t matter?”

There are coaches in the Hall of Fame with a winning percentage below .600 — Iowa legend Hayden Fry, for example — but the governing board changed the criteria after Hatchell took over in 2005.

“It was made clear to me that it’s a Hall of Fame,” he said, “not a Hall of Participation.”

So Leach cannot enter the Hall through the established route for coaches. But there are two other avenues:

— The timing of his death (as an active, not retired head coach) could lead to a carveout in the rules.

Because the Hall doesn’t round up with the winning percentage, Hatchell explained, Leach’s case “would be more like: Is it different that he passed away” while still coaching?

— Leach could be admitted in the outstanding contributors category.

“We recognize people that way,” Hatchell said, “but most coaches would rather go in as coaches than the outstanding contributor category.”

The first step is a nomination: Texas Tech, WSU or Mississippi State would have to offer Leach’s name for induction once he’s eligible in 2026. At that point, the Hall of Fame would have to consider established policy and potential precedent.

But there is only one right answer for a coach who’s one victory shy of meeting the selection standard for winning percentage.

Leach’s sustained success at two power conference outposts is unprecedented.

His Air Raid is everywhere.

His impact on the sport is incalculable.

Once eligible, he’s worthy of immediate induction.

Jon Wilner: jwilner@bayareanewsgroup.com

 

[COUGinNCW]

2018 screw job in LA rears its ugly head again.

 

[Suudy]

What's the voting rules for those who meet the .600 criteria? A simple majority?

Perhaps jack up the voting requirements for those under .600, perhaps with 2/3 vote? Or allow petitions from current voters?

 

[UberCougars]

Wilner, while on kjr-950 with Softy said there is a workaround being discussed around the fact Leach died mid-season.

Not his fault.

 

[ttowncoug]

I think WSU should add him to the WSU HOF this year. Doing at the Texas Tech game would be a great idea.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Probs at least a dozen games he could personally be blamed for that would have made the "one win short" moot.

Having said that, the .600 winning percentage criteria seems dumb and arbitrary.

I can think of no other HOF that has a specific statistical requirement to be inducted. It's either clear to a majority of voters or it isn't - based off abstract and intangible factors - like those Wilner listed. These would seem to make him CLEARLY a HOF college coach. That's all I have to say about that.

 

[79COUG]

He'll get in one way or another. I've seen this same story on a lot of other national news services recently.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

I think WSU should add him to the WSU HOF this year. Doing at the Texas Tech game would be a great idea.

Yes as well as designate that game as a WSU/TT Mike Leach tribute game. Get his wife and/or kids, former players to attend and raise both flags. Why WSU hasn't jumped on and publicized this is ridiculous. C'mon AD, get your shit together.

 

[wsudefense]

I would love to see a bronze statue of Mike on campus. That’s something I could easy donate. I was in Pullman last week and campus was deserted but I loved it.

 

[M-I-Coug]

I would love to see a bronze statue of Mike on campus. That’s something I could easy donate. I was in Pullman last week and campus was deserted but I loved it.

The Bob Robertson statue foundation

and the

Mike Leach statue foundation.

This has to happen in our lifetime.

 

[425cougfan]

To be fair regarding the 2018 Porter Gustin screw job, if WSU wins that game, WSU is very likely in a NY6 game, and maybe even the playoff if the freak ice slush storm doesn't happen and WSU beats UW in the AC. Either a first-round playoff matchup or a NY6 game would have been much more likely to result in a loss than the Alamo Bowl against a solid, but not great, Iowa State team that WSU didn't beat by much. That would net out the same for purposes of his winning percentage. In any case, you could look at all kinds of other close games and weird losses similarly. He had some close and otherwise improbable wins, too, even if it seemed like his teams usually got screwed over disproportionately since he always was at relative have-nots.

More generally, as Krusty wrote, that .600 winning percentage requirement seems arbitrary and not well-founded. If a coach is good or otherwise remarkable enough to gain traction and get elected, his record should be irrelevant.

Even if a lot of mediocre coaches were on the ballot but had no realistic chance of being elected, I don't see a lot of harm there compared to the clear harm of screwing over a very good coach and legitimate pioneer and innovator like Leach.

Leach only coached at relative have-nots. Yeah, that's on him, both absolutely (he chose where to coach) and otherwise (his quirks were largely responsible for him never getting a gig even at a school that typically was in the middle of the pack in its conference, let alone near the top), but you can't ignore that when looking at his W/L record. Even if he had coached at, say, Okie State, Arizona State, and Ole Miss, I would expect his record to be more like .650 at minimum. His teams would still blow games and come up short in title games, most likely, but he would have had tons more talent and resources to work with.

It always used to piss me off when people would criticize Leach's shortcomings, ignoring the challenges presented by where he coached, especially at WSU, and pretend that he was in an apples-to-apples situation compared to some shitty coach like, say, Todd Graham. Swap where those guys are at and watch what happens over the next 5 years.

 

[Cougsocal]

Leach should be in the hall of fame because he is one of, if not the most influential college football coach in the last 50 years. But his actual coaching was schizo, including three of the worst losses in school history, EWU, Montana State and UCLA, did I mention putting up a basketball score, and still losing against Cal. He needs to go in, but for reasons outside of Ws and Ls.

 

[Coug90]

Probs at least a dozen games he could personally be blamed for that would have made the "one win short" moot.

Having said that, the .600 winning percentage criteria seems dumb and arbitrary.

I can think of no other HOF that has a specific statistical requirement to be inducted. It's either clear to a majority of voters or it isn't - based off abstract and intangible factors - like those Wilner listed. These would seem to make him CLEARLY a HOF college coach. That's all I have to say about that.

Yeah it’s idiotic. That .600 doesnt take into account how he was changing the game at Kentucky and Oklahoma as an offensive coordinator. The NFL is different now because of Leach. His coaching tree is one of the most impressive in the game. There’s a simple question to decide if someone’s a HOFer. Can you tell the story of college football without Mike Leach? Easy answer.

 

[Observer11]

Yeah it’s idiotic. That .600 doesnt take into account how he was changing the game at Kentucky and Oklahoma as an offensive coordinator. The NFL is different now because of Leach. His coaching tree is one of the most impressive in the game. There’s a simple question to decide if someone’s a HOFer. Can you tell the story of college football without Mike Leach? Easy answer.

“Well, that’s a stupid question.”

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Yeah it’s idiotic. That .600 doesnt take into account how he was changing the game at Kentucky and Oklahoma as an offensive coordinator. The NFL is different now because of Leach. His coaching tree is one of the most impressive in the game. There’s a simple question to decide if someone’s a HOFer. Can you tell the story of college football without Mike Leach? Easy answer.

His induction will happen.