Hey Turf, my bad. That post wasn't directed to you directly, but more to the general tone in the multiple threads discussing this very topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turfdawg67
Printable View
Hey Turf, my bad. That post wasn't directed to you directly, but more to the general tone in the multiple threads discussing this very topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turfdawg67
Post of the yearQuote:
Originally Posted by Turfdawg67
Yea my bad. I understand you tho.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardoMSU
It’s just crazy some people act like this dude was the best back ever here. Hell I would have and so have many others, said that Aries should have played over him. Further more, honestly last yr, I would have gave Nick G more of KH carries. Gibson was a bruiser. I loved his running style. It wasn’t no dodge, dive, duck, dip, and dodging... its was 17 you here I come...
really? Define successful .... any conference championships or appearances in a conf championship game? Any division titles? ...... if not then successful is being defined as an average 7 win seasonQuote:
Originally Posted by StoneDawg
Success is defined as the amount which you exceed the status quo or expectations. So yes, he's been successful to anyone with a brain.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
then that is left up to personal interpretation and doesn't have a damn thing to do with a brain and thus the reason for discussion on a sports message board .... I personally don't define success as a 7 win seasonQuote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
I will say he's been very successful at making the covid thread go away tho .... most of us that appear to be dissatisfied with ML aren't really dissatisfied with having him as our coach at all ... we are just having a hard time understanding why he won't make use of what he has now to win until he gets his "players"
Hey, go with it. I realize you don't like Leach and that's your right. Leach has won 11 games twice and 9 games 5 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
So I'm not sure where the 7 game thing comes from. Did you just make that up?
People that don't think Leach has been "successful" in his head coaching career are detached from reality and not worth engaging in discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
19 years = 140 wins = 7.36 wins per year .... and I do like and support Leach - just a little perturbed at his stubbornness is allQuote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
What about MSU people who are hanging their hats on his wins at different schools and even more different conferences?Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
Those 7.3 wins include 3 rebuilding projects and 2 of which aren't top 40 recruiters.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
As for the stubbornness, it's been 4 games. 4 freaking games.
What about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44
I think you are confusing changing an offense for a player vs calling plays and shifting philosophy within the playbook that fits his personnel better. Either for a season or for a game. Spurrier didn?t really change his offensive system. He called games differently because of personnel. HUGE difference. And as soon as he got the players to run what he wanted most of the time, he went right back. Now he did add and expand for and after the NFL. But that is what a coach should do but the basis of his offense was still within that So Car playbook his last year as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turfdawg67
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
They seem just as detached from reality wouldn't you think? Just re-living glory days that didn't occur at MSU.
Seems very grounded.***
At this point, with what we've seen this season, it's no different than people who still supported and gave Moorhead the benefit of the doubt early on, when plenty of others were saying he was a bust early on.
DISCLAIMER:
I'm not saying Leach is a bust. But saying our coach had success previously doesn't mean shit if we still suck it up and are as one dimensional as almost any team I've ever watched.
Insert whatever your excuse is here:
I was merely responding to a discussion where someone was arguing that Leach hasn't been "successful".Quote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44
As for your "what about" tangent, do you think a coach that has been successful at two different programs in two different conferences is more or less likely to be successful at a third program with similar disadvantages as the previous two? Obviously none of us know for sure whether it will work out long term, but between the two I think it is more likely, and value his body of work over a 3 game sample size in his first year, which also happens to be during a worldwide pandemic.
You are free to dismiss his coaching career entirely if you want to compare him to Moorhead because of 3 games. That just seems like a huge stretch.
Though probably needlessly premature, whether Leach will be successful at State or not is at least a worthwhile discussion, unlike whether Leach has been successful previously in his career which was the original point.
So you're saying the big -12 and pac-12 are good comps for playing in the SEC? Even Steven huh? Same talent all across the conferences right? Guess that's where we lose each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverCityDawg
I agree, the jobs he had in those conferences line up with where MSU might line up in the pecking order of the SEC. You are right about that. Put him in the ACC, do you think he would have more success so far than he has this year in the SEC? Hypothetical, I know. No more hypothetical that clutching onto his career record.
I'm not comparing him to Moorhead. He is a better head coach than Moorhead. Try not to get caught up on that. I'm comparing the fan's reactions to Moorhead and Leach so far and how so many fans "saw the writing on the wall" on Moorhead with a slightly smaller sample size so far from Leach. For God's sake 'Gun is being the voice of reason for a lot of people so far this season.
If Leach had won a Natty at the previous schools he coached does that mean we should hang our hat on that too? Previous wins don't carry over to the next year or division or conference ya know?
I'll admit I supported Moorhead until the Tennessee game. I'll do the same if not more for Leach. But we can't get through this year fast enough at this point.
Bottom line, his wins at TT & WSU do MSU absolutely no good.
Right or wrong this site has numerous posters that feel like they have to inject their opinion on every <17>ing thing discussed especially when they don't know jack shit about what they are talking about.
The dumbasd is strong up in herasQuote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44
Nice to see where you fall on the topic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckdog
This is not a true post. Texas Tech had not had a losing season in the last 7 years before Leach. They were 35-23 in the 5 years before Leach with a 24-15 conference record. They pushed Spike Dykes out because they wanted a coach to get them to the conference championship game. Leach didnt make it happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
So dan wasn't successful in his tenure here? Got it. Lord have mercy.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
how far into JoMo's season did it take you to realize he wasn't the guy ? Most of us saw it pretty quicklyQuote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Dan succeeded in bringing us out of the cellar and getting us to bowl games but he really blew it on real opportunities ... so yes he had limited success to a degree but he was also a 1st time head coach for us.... ML has been a HC for 18 years before coming here - expectations should be a little higher for him and I would bet that Dan will win at least a division title in his first 19 years ...... If you want to say ML elevated WSU to average 7 win seasons and bowl games and consider that as success then go ahead .... We just have different opinions of successQuote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Joe didn't have 20 years of track record and Joe was also following Mullen so it made the regression so much easier to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
At this point, I don't know what our offense players have been taught for 2 years.
As for the track record though, that's pretty elementary and obvious to understand
I guess that depends on what your definition of rebuilding is. The way I see it Tech all through the 90's aside from two losing seasons they rode the fence line barely finishing above .500 with several seasons at .500. If that's successful to you then I guess. It's clear that Leach took Tech to the next level which they had never been at before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
In Spike's 13 years there he went 82-67. A .550 win percentage. Outside of two anomaly years where he won 9 games he never won more than 7.
Leach at Tech during 9 years went 84-43 .661. Leach at Tech was the equivalent of Mullen at State. Tech and State had some success here and there usually far and few between but never consistent until those two arrived. As far as competing for the conference championship Tech arguably should've had a chance in '08 but was snubbed from being able to be included in the cointoss between OK and TX.
This was my main concern as well. Why go through all that for a coach whose track record is middling to modest success. Then when I read all the talk about CML doing more with less and the talent gaps he had to overcome, plus the quality D MSU has been able to churn out over the years, something CML teams haven't been known for in the past, I bought in and got really excited.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
Leach had never gone so long without an offensive touchdown, never not scored at least one touchdown per game, until this year. No matter how it's sliced, he's never struggled like this. Maybe Dan's JUCO heavy lackluster recruiting at the end (especially OL) plays a huge role in this. If so, does Moorhead get slack for his on the field performance and was his getting fired strictly about disciplinary issues?
I'm going to support the Bulldogs no matter what. Always have, always will. But dang I loathed the Croom years, when support barely rose above apathy.
The all conference schedule has a lot to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaChicagoDog
Mixing Alabama State into the middle of this would've been helpful for gaining confidence and rhythm. We're having to figure it out again top 25 defenses rather than the typical non-conference games.
"limited success to a degree" That's how you define dans tenure here?Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
Dan averaged 7.1-4.9 here over a decade. Bowl every year after year 1. The sec and the cfb world overwhelmingly label his time here a success. If our fans cant call that a success, we are the problem.
If leach stays here a decade and averages 7+ wins a year and never misses a bowl after year one, he will be labeled a success by the cfb world regardless if we ever win the west.
Totally different situation. What we saw immediately with Joe Mo was an extremely undisciplined team that was horribly out of shape. He turned them into a bunch of pus*^*# within months. Leach has a lot more work to do than moorehead did.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
The problem is that there is a faction of our fan base who thinks we're Alabama, UGA, LSU, etc. What Dan did is the blueprint for how to be successful at outlier SEC schools such as State, Ole Miss, Mizzou, USCe, UK, etc. You win between 6 to 8 for the first two years of a recruiting class and then you hope to catch some breaks in years 3 and 4 and put yourself in the playoff conversation. It's what he did in 14 and 15 and what he was set up to do in 18 because we had peaked a year before he thought we would in 17.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
We're a developmental program and always have been. You have to be able to bring kids in at all skills levels, whether 5 star or no star and max out their contributions at the end of 3 to 4 years. We can only have 2 to 3 misses a class. Dan was amazing at doing this. Look at guys like McKinney, Slay, Preston Smith, Cam Lawrence, Dillon Day, Ben Beckwith, JBanks, Fitz, and the list goes on and on. Then you look at higher rated guys like Simmons, Jones, Sweat, KJ Wright and it's the same thing. We were able to get everything out of each one of those guys because of CULTURE. It's what we lost under Joe
ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
#1 True. We still had a real shot at being in the playoffs in 2014 had we not lost to OM. We were #4 in the rankings at the time. Dan blew it when it really counted.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
#2 Absolutely. The difference being that Dan is at a blue blood now. Dan is a good coach and coaching at a blue blood raking in the star recruits will counteract some of his tendency to blow it in big games. He'll win the SEC East eventually mostly because Bama isn't in there with him. Now as long as Saban is coaching SEC title is another story.
#3 No question that Leach put WSU on the map. Outside of a few 10 win years in the early '00s WSU has perennially been a doormat since it's inception. Before '11 WSU all time record sat at 424-480 a consistent loser. They achieved their first ever 11 win season under Leach.
#4 Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
Funny because game 4 of Moorhead's career was that awful Kentucy loss in the pouring down rain.
I do feel like I remember people saying "square peg, round hole" etc. after that loss. Might not have been quite that soon though.
On the flip side you had people making excuse. The rain, lack of effort, coaching, etc.
No no no. I'm so glad we don't have a chance to embarrass ourselves against non P5 opponents. We are that bad offensively.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
You right about that part. We could not execute against any decently coached team right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowbell
Joe ruining our culture is the number one problem we have right now. And this from the President of the Dan Mullen recruiting sins fan club.Quote:
Originally Posted by StarkVegasSteve
I think Leach will fix both issues.
I'm still fine being on the record giving a coach a pass on one bad game. That's reasonable. Even with the benefit of hindsight. I can't think of one coach that hasn't had a bad game.Quote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44
No logic. Speculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Lane Kiffens offense has done just fine at OM. Under the Same circumstances.
I keep being so thankful for this thinking back over some of the embarrassment Arkansas took last year. We would certainly drop one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Rock
100000% correct. It's cynical for fans to ignore Leach in all of his tenure has never struggled to this degree on offense. Regardless of what the narrative of excuses are for him we have enough talent to score touchdowns. The irony of the situation is being he's coached so long he should have figured this out.Quote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44