Mike Leach interviewing for Washington's head coaching job

#26
#26
Lexvol said:
If I remember correctly they were setting the standard for team speed back in the early 90's (with the possible exception of Miami of course).
Click to expand...
They shared a national title with the 'Canes in '91. They cost Oklahoma a shot at a national championship in the Orange Bowl after the 1984 season. They also were the only team to beat Miami in 2000.
 
#27
#27
hatvol96 said:
I love how people aren't able to realize the only time Washington has been bad in the last 35 years is when they hire terrible coaches. Don James won big. Rick Neuheisel won big. It's an infinitely better job than one at a nondescript outpost in a league where the only teams that matter are Oklahoma, Texas, and Nebraska(when they inevitably get back).
Click to expand...

I'd argue the landscape has changed. Oregon, Cal, and even Oregon State and Stanford are getting the recruits that would be locks for UW in the past. These 4 programs were completely in the toilet during the james era. Even slick rick had serious problems recuiting after his first two years. SC isn't mediocre like it was for much of the james era. UW's facilities stink. Their current talent stinks, Washington produces very few elite div 1a players, and their fanbase expects to be regurally winning pac-10 championships. The new coach just wont be able to attract the southern and northern california talent like they used to. Not with SC been dominant and 3 viable alternatives in northern california and oregon.
 
Last edited:
#29
#29
hatvol96 said:
They shared a national title with the 'Canes in '91. They cost Oklahoma a shot at a national championship in the Orange Bowl after the 1984 season. They also were the only team to beat Miami in 2000.
Click to expand...
and they had Emtman, who was the baddest looking DL ever to wear a college uni.
 
#31
#31
droski said:
I'd argue the landscape has changed. Oregon, Cal, and even Oregon State and Stanford are getting the recruits that would be locks for UW in the past.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that has a whole lot to do with the idiots who have been recruiting for Washington since Neuheisel's departure.
 
#32
#32
droski said:
I'd argue the landscape has changed. Oregon, Cal, and even Oregon State and Stanford are getting the recruits that would be locks for UW in the past. These 4 programs were completely in the toilet during the james era. Even slick rick had serious problems recuiting after his first two years. SC isn't mediocre like it was for much of the james era. UW's facilities stink. Their current talent stinks, Washington produces very few elite div 1a players, and their fanbase expects to be regurally winning pac-10 championships. The new coach just wont be able to attract the southern and northern california talent like they used to. Not with SC been dominant and 3 viable alternatives in northern california and oregon.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and Oklahoma was going to be held down forever by Texas, Colorado, and Nebraska after the Gibbs/Schnellenberger/Blake age of disaster.
 
#33
#33
hatvol96 said:
The only short term rewards he's going to reap are more 3rd place finishes in the Big 12 South and Holiday or Alamo Bowl trips.
Click to expand...

Losing Crabtree will hurt, but I cant say that they stables are bare for him where he's at. I think, provided they recruit well, maintain their O-line, and imrove on defense a bit more, they will be in the hunt for more than an Alamo bowl.

At Washington he'd have to start all over with a bunch of guys that have been beaten physically and mentally for a very long college football season.
 
#35
#35
TXVOL07 said:
Losing Crabtree will hurt, but I cant say that they stables are bare for him where he's at. I think, provided they recruit well, maintain their O-line, and imrove on defense a bit more, they will be in the hunt for more than an Alamo bowl.
Click to expand...
He's been there 9 years. Remind me how many of those were seasons where they were "in the hunt" for anything more than a Holiday/Alamo Bowl finish. 2008 Texas Tech Season=Pure Pyrite.
 
#36
#36
hatvol96 said:
Yeah, and Oklahoma was going to be held down forever by Texas, Colorado, and Nebraska after the Gibbs/Schnellenberger/Blake age of disaster.
Click to expand...

you do realize that oklahoma is 5th in all time winning % and washington isn't even in the top 25 right? Colorado would probably be a better comparison actually.
 
#37
#37
droski said:
you do realize that oklahoma is 5th in all time winning % and washington isn't even in the top 25 right? Colorado would probably be a better comparison actually.
Click to expand...
Where are Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, and the other teams that are going to "hold Washington down" on the all time winning & list?
 
#38
#38
I think the argument has strayed away from it's orginal topic. We were talking about Washington being a better/worse job than tech.

Overall winning records, and historical relevance are just that, historical. The "current" situation is far less than that of tech's in terms of public attention thus leading to better recruiting. The other point that has been made is that of the current rosters of which I would strongly argue that tech's is far superior.
 
#39
#39
Good move for Leach, if they take him. I read somewhere that he would had crawled to UCLA but they wanted no part of him.
 
#40
#40
hatvol96 said:
Where are Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, and the other teams that are going to "hold Washington down" on the all time winning & list?
Click to expand...

doesn't matter. my argument is that UW is not a traditional power like oklahoma. What advantages does UW have that Cal or UCLA does not? There are more div 1a players within 50 miles of Berkeley than in the entire state of washington.
 
#42
#42
hatvol96 said:
A fan base that actually cares.
Click to expand...

While you make a valid point on both counts:

2007 Attendance per game
UW 67,732
UCLA 76,379
CAL 63,136

And that's paid attendance. Husky stadium has been a ghost town the last couple of years.
 
#43
#43
droski said:
While you make a valid point on both counts:

2007 Attendance per game
UW 67,732
UCLA 76,379
CAL 63,136

And that's paid attendance. Husky stadium has been a ghost town the last couple of years.
Click to expand...
If UCLA or Cal were in the process of finishing an era of terrible coaching with an 0-12, they'd both be drawing in the 40s.
 
#44
#44
hatvol96 said:
If UCLA or Cal were in the process of finishing an era of terrible coaching with an 0-12, they'd both be drawing in the 40s.
Click to expand...

Well i'd argue UCLA wasn't far off last year (these stats are from 07. I imagine UW stats are lower this year). Cal would be closer to the low 30s (or was when they were in our own stretch in the 90s).
 
Last edited:
#45
#45
TXVOL07 said:
Your kidding right?

My guess is this is ploy to earn a big check from tceh.
Click to expand...

no, I'm not kidding. Washington is a good job. The only reason Texas Tech is even remotely good is because of Leach as of late. But Washington has a had a rich history of football and the resources there are better than in Lubbock.
 
#46
#46
Wow, unless he is going to be Oprah rich, he should never even consider this job >.>
 
#50
#50
leach IMO was lobbying for a pay increase from tech. Hill isn't a good coach. He can't even dominate his own conference with by far the best recruiting base.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top