Leech can never be forced out. His contract rolls over every year at Moos' sign off. To not roll over means an admission by Moos that he hired the wrong guy. Moos' ego isn't capable of such self-examination.
I think a better question is who is forced out first... Mike Leach or Bill Moos?
If any person was as bad at their job at Moos is then they would have been fired after the first week let alone how long he has been there.
He hired Bone for bball after Bennett who sucked ass. He hired Leach who so far has sucked ass.... And Ernie Kent has the team possibly on the way this season to less wins than the football team!
Bone was hired by Jim Sterk. Which wasn't a terrible hire at the time but it was the 7 year itch contract that he gave him. If he had the standard 4 or even 5 year contract, Bone would have been fired after year 3 and things probably wouldn't be near as bad as they are now. Hiring Ernie Kent was a lazy hire on the surface. However those extra 2 years that Bone had to be kept around due to contract issues left WSU as probably a bottom 3 power 5 conference Bball program.
Just what up and coming coach is gonna gamble a career on the rise to take on that reclamation project? Moos hired Ernie Kent to at least get the program out of dumpster fire status and they actually won a couple basketball games this weekend. He's not a place holder but more of a Servicemaster type of coach. Get things cleaned up enough to where you can sell the job to a younger up and coming coach in the next 3 or 4 years.
After 4 wonderful years of Paul Wulff, the football program was left in the same state. Again, please tell me who else we would have got to come to Pullman with the program in that state?
I'm pretty sure we weren't gonna get anybody else better than a guy who had a 84-43 record from a power conference.
It hasn't worked out so far. But I don't blame Moos..... yet.
This is another reason why I think Petersen will exceed expectations at UW. He is clearly the best coach in the p12 north. Because of Chip's influence, Oregon will be strong for another 3-4 years but where else is the competition? Look at Shaw now that Harbaugh's effect and players are completely gone. Dykes has done a good job this year but that style isn't conducive to competing for championships regularly. And OSU and WSU are well…OSU and WSU. The pac-12 division setup is very favorable for UW and Oregon. Look at UW's best seasons and in pretty much every one they didn't play UCLA or USC. The South is going to be very tough as long as Rich Rod and Graham are at those schools.
I think Stanford had a down year. It's too early to tell if it was a sign of things to come. They lost some close games they probably should have won (USC, Notre Dame, Utah). Similar to UCLA, their preseason ranking was optimistic based on what they lost. They are still a formidable foe. 4 or 5 OL will be back, Wright at RB, and probably Hogan. I can't see him going pro. McCaffrey is going to be a real playmaker and a future All conference player. They do lose a lot from their defense though.
Avg star rankings for Stanford: 2011- 3.37, 2012- 3.59, 2013- 3.17 (12 commits), 2014- 3.50. They have recruited well under Shaw. He gets shit on this board, but he's a solid coach despite his play calling fuck ups.
This is another reason why I think Petersen will exceed expectations at UW. He is clearly the best coach in the p12 north. Because of Chip's influence, Oregon will be strong for another 3-4 years but where else is the competition? Look at Shaw now that Harbaugh's effect and players are completely gone. Dykes has done a good job this year but that style isn't conducive to competing for championships regularly. And OSU and WSU are well…OSU and WSU. The pac-12 division setup is very favorable for UW and Oregon. Look at UW's best seasons and in pretty much every one they didn't play UCLA or USC. The South is going to be very tough as long as Rich Rod and Graham are at those schools.
I think Stanford had a down year. It's too early to tell if it was a sign of things to come. They lost some close games they probably should have won (USC, Notre Dame, Utah). Similar to UCLA, their preseason ranking was optimistic based on what they lost. They are still a formidable foe. 4 or 5 OL will be back, Wright at RB, and probably Hogan. I can't see him going pro. McCaffrey is going to be a real playmaker and a future All conference player. They do lose a lot from their defense though.
Avg star rankings for Stanford: 2011- 3.37, 2012- 3.59, 2013- 3.17 (12 commits), 2014- 3.50. They have recruited well under Shaw. He gets shit on this board, but he's a solid coach despite his play calling fuck ups.
Losing the fiesta bowl lucks jr year was one of the worst coaching jobs I've seen. But yes sometimes he surprises me too (see the 2 Oregon wins and asu games last year).
I don't see any playmakers on their offense next year though. They lose Montgomery. I don't fear any of their tailbacks to be honest. I see a similar year. Oregon won't be as good,though so the north may be open competition. Or not. Should be interesting.
Comments
Avg star rankings for Stanford: 2011- 3.37, 2012- 3.59, 2013- 3.17 (12 commits), 2014- 3.50. They have recruited well under Shaw. He gets shit on this board, but he's a solid coach despite his play calling fuck ups.
I don't see any playmakers on their offense next year though. They lose Montgomery. I don't fear any of their tailbacks to be honest. I see a similar year. Oregon won't be as good,though so the north may be open competition. Or not. Should be interesting.