Stoops has put us in a position to win every game but 3 with his non-game coaching. (ie; recruiting, practicing, intesity, defensive scheme, etc) The problem is the game day decisions. Coaching decisions lost the Vandy game, I would attest play calling and poor coaching decisions also cost us the Fla and Auburn games. Horrible game management has cost us 3 games. I will go a step further and say poor coaching decisions cost us any chance of being competitive in the 3 blow outs. He needs a new OC, Special teams coach and probably a Co-Head coach to manage the game. Only way he will be successfull as he has proven he can't make good, basic game decisions.
Mike Leach
- Thread starter Jon(-24)
- Start date
I like Mike Leach's personality but the clamor for him is the same line of thinking that the only way to win here is to be "different". The fans in Pullman were ready to run him out of town on a rail after the loss to Portland State. Good for him for recovering from that disaster in a weak, no defense conference. I wish we had that luxury.
I don't think Mike Leach would have done any better thus far here than Stoops has. Probably even worse. And I'm not a Stoops fan either.
You win in the SEC by stopping people and getting talent. You don't have to have the best talent but enough on both sides of the football to make a difference. And I'm talking about winning. Not hoping every few seasons for a "down" year in the conference and maybe winning 6 or 7 games while blowing out your patsies in between getting 50+ hung on you in the Swamp. I'm talking about a consistent, winning football program that doesn't own horrid streaks to opponents or clamor to pat itself on the back for moral victories.
Every program (maybe with the exception of Vandy who we just lost to and honestly has a better, more talented and well coached defense than we have) is better than Kentucky in regards to talent, facilities and recruiting in a conference where football is king and everyone wants the throne.
I don't think Mike Leach would have done any better thus far here than Stoops has. Probably even worse. And I'm not a Stoops fan either.
You win in the SEC by stopping people and getting talent. You don't have to have the best talent but enough on both sides of the football to make a difference. And I'm talking about winning. Not hoping every few seasons for a "down" year in the conference and maybe winning 6 or 7 games while blowing out your patsies in between getting 50+ hung on you in the Swamp. I'm talking about a consistent, winning football program that doesn't own horrid streaks to opponents or clamor to pat itself on the back for moral victories.
Every program (maybe with the exception of Vandy who we just lost to and honestly has a better, more talented and well coached defense than we have) is better than Kentucky in regards to talent, facilities and recruiting in a conference where football is king and everyone wants the throne.
Leach obviously can seriously coach. He stepped into an utter dumpster fire at WSU with EVERYTHING working against him---a program that was at the bottom and considered the toilet program of the PAC 12, in an isolated middle-of-nowhere small town where no recruits wanted to go, with the upperclassmen essentially having a mutiny against him his first year---and despite everything going wrong that possibly could at the beginning, he STILL has somehow turned that program around and has it on a winning track for the first time in quite a long time.
And it's worth noting he did same thing at Texas Tech with a similar isolated middle-of-nowhere program facing inherent disadvantages.
In retrospect, Leach probably would've been the perfect choice for UK since he seems to specialize in turning around programs that face inherent disadvantages compared to the rest of their conference, and that's exact;y what UK is in football. One wonders what Leach could do if he'd ever be given the keys to a power program that wasn't disadvantaged.
And it's worth noting he did same thing at Texas Tech with a similar isolated middle-of-nowhere program facing inherent disadvantages.
In retrospect, Leach probably would've been the perfect choice for UK since he seems to specialize in turning around programs that face inherent disadvantages compared to the rest of their conference, and that's exact;y what UK is in football. One wonders what Leach could do if he'd ever be given the keys to a power program that wasn't disadvantaged.
You commented earlier on how Leach could only beat unranked teams. We have only lost to two ranked teams this year. So there is the two loss logic. Not saying we would be 8-2 but its fact that our schedule has only included two currently ranked teams. What most don't realize that just beating who you are supposed to turns into annual bowl games in today's college football. Pull an upset or two and you are at eight or nine wins (James Franklin)
I can't believe we are debating whether or not Leach is a good coach on the site, but then again a lot of people here fought for BCG until the end. I hope Stoops makes it but it absurd not to think that Leach is one of the better ones at making middle of the pack teams competitive.
Not sure why beating up on bottom feeders relates to only losing to ranked teams? Also, and I hate saying this, but the SEC as we know it is way different "competitive" wise than the big 12 at any point so while you say we have only played 2 ranked teams I'd point out that at some point Mizzou, Tennesse, Auburn, UGA, UF and MSU were all ranked.
No, but I won't act like unranked SEC teams are a joke like big 12 teams either.
No one has compared apples to apples in begging for Mike Leach at all, and there isn't a shred of evidence that he would do any better than stoops. Add to it no one has recruited like Stoops and aid say Leach would be trying with even lessor talent and still playing Sophs and FR because Joker left nothing here!
I know we are a basketball school but for Christ sake if you choose to talk football act like you are fans of UK and not BAMA!
No one has compared apples to apples in begging for Mike Leach at all, and there isn't a shred of evidence that he would do any better than stoops. Add to it no one has recruited like Stoops and aid say Leach would be trying with even lessor talent and still playing Sophs and FR because Joker left nothing here!
I know we are a basketball school but for Christ sake if you choose to talk football act like you are fans of UK and not BAMA!
Mike Leach helped get us to a New Year's Day bowl game in year two here. The talent level was overall horrible. We just had a very good quarterback and a good wide receiver who I believe was a quarterback in the past. We had a terrible offensive line that was built to run block and he put up record numbers in both years he was here. He left here and spent I believe 1 year at Oklahoma and helped revive their program and then took Texas Tech to levels they had never seen before or since.
You can just look at how much we started to decline when he left here and Mumme took over as offensive coordinator. I believe Leach could have done very good here and he was my first choice to replace Joker. Unfortunately, we followed one unproven offensive coordinator to head coach with an unproven defensive coordinator to head coach. How many times will we keep making the same mistake before getting it right?
You can just look at how much we started to decline when he left here and Mumme took over as offensive coordinator. I believe Leach could have done very good here and he was my first choice to replace Joker. Unfortunately, we followed one unproven offensive coordinator to head coach with an unproven defensive coordinator to head coach. How many times will we keep making the same mistake before getting it right?