CougCenter: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Network Message: 50% Off: CBS/SB Nation Fantasy Baseball

Paul Wulff: The hero or the villain?

We won a game!

Well, mostly. Lost in the jubilation over the Cougars' 30-27 victory over SMU is the fact we were basically handed the game on four bad balls from Bo Levi Mitchell - two of which were returned for touchdowns. The Mustangs blew a 17-0 lead, and, despite racking up a 504 to 276 total yards advantage, gave the game away.

Or did they? Was it inspired play by the Cougar defense that ruined Mitchell's day and drove the Cougars to victory?

That's the thing with Wulff. All of a sudden, I can't get a read on whether I love him or I hate him. Whether he'll be the savior of the program or the catalyst to drag us down to depths we've never reached.

For three quarters Saturday, honestly, I wanted him fired. SMU, a program not much stronger than the weakened Hawaii program we had faced a week earlier, had jumped out to a 17-0 lead. Despite his decree to use Jeff Tuel and Marshall Lobbestael, Wulff stuck with Lobster despite two harmful interceptions and a completion percentage under fifty percent. I could see the program circling the drain - from three ten win seasons and the Rose Bowl, to the mediocrity of the Doba era, to 0-12 and the laughingstock of the conference. The moment I found out Steve Sarkisian's revitalized UW program had upset mighty USC, I started formulating my list of new head coaching candidates: Robb Akey, Nick Holt, Turner Gill. Heck, we probably don't even have a shot at a Kyle Whittingham or Chris Petersen, even though we would have seven years ago.

But then: the comeback. AH-E gets a pick six. Myron Beck and his flowing mane of hair does the same on an even bigger return. Then, Lobbestael, after a terrible attempt at a game tying drive his previous time out, guides the Cougars on an eighty yard march to the promised land. Silences his critics in the crowd. Gives the Cougars all the momentum in the world heading into OT.

The defensive backfield, our achilles' heel so far this year, was phenomenal. Brandon Jones makes a diving INT to keep SMU from going up ten in the fourth. Chima Nwachukwu picks off the first pass of overtime to give the Cougars an easy path to victory. And the special teams issues? Resolved. Nico Grasu comes back from a missed FG and muffed PAT attempt to hit the game winner. Grasu's kickoffs found the endzone and beyond, and his one squib kick was a beauty down the middle, deep into SMU territory. His game winner came on another clutch performance - shades of the Apple Cup winner last fall. Even through the same goalposts at the East end.

And the stadium was rocking. The best moment? The WSU student section shifting over into empty seats near the East end zone as the Cougars took the field defensively to start OT. Of course, before they could get settled in, Nwachukwu had caught the key INT to set up the Cougar win.

Still - we needed all that magic to beat SMU. A program that struggled two games earlier with Steven F. Austin. Death Penalty U; still far removed from its former glory. We were lucky in some ways: outgained, outplayed for the majority of this game - we either stole this game or it was given to us.

One can't help but question the coaching decisions that put us in a 17-0, and later a 24-7, hole. Again with the 3-3-5 defense after getting schooled by Hawaii? Only nine touches for the best offensive playmaker, James Montgomery? Pass play after pass play for the struggling Marshall Lobbestael? No Tuel or Lopina after previous promises to find the best guy and stick with him? Of course Wulff's gamble on Lobbestael paid off on this one, but it makes you wonder if we'll be so lucky the next time. It's hard to sugar coat the fact that Marshall struggled for much of the day.

Meanwhile, there were some inspired decisions by Wulff. Using his timeouts wisely near the end of the first half to set up the Cougar touchdown that would bring us within ten. Saving his timeouts in the second half - to allow the Cougars plenty of time and clock stoppages at their disposal for the game tying drive. Firing up the defense in the second half. Utilizing Johnny Forzani, Daniel Blackledge and Jared Karstetter in ways that made us forget we even had wide receiver depth problems in the first place. Making the right call to keep Lobbestael on the field, instead of the emotional one that might have pulled him off it. Having faith in Grasu after another early miss.

And remember all the penalties under Doba? Yet again, the Cougs played clean ball in Pullman. Four penalties for forty-five yards. One of the personal fouls was a mental lapse by Bernard Wolfgramm, the other undeserved on a terrible call. This was the kind of blemish-free play I'd been praying for years earlier. Not to mention the roster cleaning up its actions off the field. Players are now accountable. Commit a significant crime? Fail to make it academically? You're gone. Incoming players in particular under Wulff are facing less external discipline than they did under Doba.

Of course, the performance on the field has been inconsistent at best. Sometimes it's worth it to take a chance on a player with questionable character and make the most of the upside (see: every Dennis Erickson team ever). And the disparities in talent have been clear. Even mid-majors like SMU and Hawaii can claim an advantage in speed and size at certain positions. I cringe at how things might play out when we're up against top tier Pac-10 talent. Better than last year, certainly, but nothing to write home about.

Then, there's recruiting. It's looking good. The recruiting services have many of our players ranked nationally. We're locking down the hometown kids: from Spokane, the west side, and the necessary players from California. Excuse me though if I can't help but think our roster is starting to look a lot like Eastern Washington's. Almost exclusively kids from the Evergreen State and California. Our former pipeline to Texas has been cut off, even though you can see the benefit of it on the field in the form of players like Chima Nwachukwu.

At the end of the day I can't decide. I'm thrilled we avoided 0-12. I'm shocked we have to deal with the threat of that futility in the first place. I feel there are times Wulff is in over his head, and that gimmicky no-huddle offense should have been left back with the Eastern Eagles. I also feel there are times that Wulff is resurrecting a program from its lowest depths with exceptional recruiting and decent in-game coaching. He wins close games; something Doba rarely did. But he also gets blown out. A lot. We've had some brilliant moments, but we've also had quite a few embarrassments.

Wulff has only had a little over a year to coach at WSU. Hardly enough time to give a conclusive evaluation. And yet, the Cougs are getting killed out there. USC ran out the clock during the first half last year, in scoring position with a 41-0 lead, out of pity for the crimson and gray team they were slaughtering. If there was a mercy rule, it would've been enacted. And yet we beat a Washington team last year that had much of the talent that beat USC today. We look like a team that could get beat by a FCS team at any moment; yet we blew out the one FCS opponent we've faced under Wulff.

I'm at a loss to decide if Wulff is our savior or our program-killer.

So, now, I turn the question over to you.

Poll
Paul Wulff is WSU's...
Hero
311 votes
Villain
120 votes

431 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs  |  Comment 38 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I can't vote for either.

Wulff’s certainly no hero. Not yet, anyways. Will he be? Who knows…but if he is, I’d love for him to show me some signs. But I can’t call him a villain, either. Even if he torpedoes WSU’s program. I can’t believe that, as an alum, he doesn’t want to succeed even more than the average football head coach. On the other hand, it may be possible that he simply doesn’t have what it takes.

by jj_fekl on Sep 20, 2009 8:24 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

agree to support paul w

the question is why wsu let the football program get to this point ? paul w did not have anything to do w/ the fall – just asked to clean it up / bring it back .

by willarose on Sep 21, 2009 7:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I voted hero

only because to vote villain I’d have to support removing him immediately. I don’t.

by TiltingRight on Sep 20, 2009 8:33 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

...

This sticks out to me the most…

http://washingtonstate.scout.com/2/900039.html

#Heading into last season, WSU had only nine players on its entire roster who had received scholarship offers from other BCS schools.

  1. In a limited amount of time, Coach Wulff signed nine players with BCS offers in his debut recruiting class of 2008.
  1. Of the 38 inherited players on this year’s roster who were on the team when Wulff arrived, only five had been offered scholarships by other BCS schools.
  1. With only one full recruiting class under his belt – the class signed this past February — Wulff has already brought in 18 players with a combined 30 offers from other BCS schools.
  1. WSU’s longest-tenured and most successful coaches did not reach a bowl game immediately. Jim Walden was in year four, Mike Price in year four and legendary Babe Hollingbery in year five.

…We aren’t playing with bcs level athletes and it isn’t Wulff’s fault. Injuries have been piling up.
I know these two aren’t injuries, but I would think Jeshua Anderson was really our number 2 receiver and he left the program. Norrell is suspended for the season and he was our number 1. So we are really playing without our 1 and 2 WRs already.

We are missing a couple of starting o-linemen and a backup or two. We are without starting d-end (kooymen), and starting mlb (bland). Wasn’t one of our starting corner backs injured, and we moved nwuchkwu to corner and his backup broke his leg so we have a 3rd string safety playing. Not to mention since we don’t have any players with bcs offers, the guys backing them up are obviously worse.

The difference between UW and WSU is Sark inherited a program full of talent as each and every one of Willingham’s recruiting classes were excellent besides last year’s and they aren’t full of injuries like we are.

by Roy Weaver Stuckey on Sep 20, 2009 8:58 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I don't know if I'd say excellent...

in relation to Doba’s, maybe. They were mostly ranked in the 30’s (and around 4/6th in the conference) nationally, and 2008 was deep but had no standout players except our TE Middleton (who’s underachieved so far reletive to his recruiting scores).

Wulff seems to be doing okay recruiting to Pullman, not great, but adequate. I think the biggest thing that sets off red flags to me is the game planning. So far Sark has had three great gameplans in three tries. Wulff has had about 0.25 out of three, and frankly I’m not even sure that it wasn’t the players that made your 4th quarter on Saturday.

As an unbiased (at least as unbiased as a Husky can be) observer, it seems like he just doesn’t have the big stage experience yet. Sark and Holt came in at the 2nd in command at arguably the best program in the country. Wulff came in as the head man at arguably the 7th or 8th best program in the Northwest.

I’m not saying he can’t succeed, because he can, and I hope he does in every game except the Apple Cup. I just see a lot of paralells between him and Willingham. Noteably the ability to be stubborn to a fault with nothing to lose. WSU was staring 0-12 in the face this week, and he didn’t really go after it and go all out. He sat on his failing gameplan and waited for his team to come through (which thankfully they did).

In conclusion, I ramble about stuff I don’t really have a ton of insight to. I’m not trying troll, I would really like to engage this discussion with you guys on how you feel after an ugly win like this.

by B Money on Sep 20, 2009 11:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think that's fair

Wulff has a long way to go still, and if this is the finished product then I think he’ll be canned in a few years. However, people who attended the game did say he changed up the defense at halftime in response to the fact that SMU could hardly run the ball. IF that’s true, then I think that change is what unnerved SMU’s QB and let us back in the game. Otherwise I’d have to say that it’s the players that pulled it out.

It’s true that Wulff doesn’t have the big game experience or even necessarily the game planning ability of Coach Sark. The difference between our two “floundering” programs is pretty stark. We have neither the money nor the tradition to attract a coach & staff like that, not being bitter it’s just how it is. From an outside observer standpoint, it appears that the most obvious thing Sark has learned from Carroll is how to infuse enthusiasm and optimism into his players. Wulff still needs to learn a lot about that sort of thing as well.

But (I think) we knew he wasn’t a polished coach when we hired him. I think that so far in every respect other than W’s and L’s he has done what we wanted him to do. None of us imagined that our record would be so horrible but in theory we’re going through the hard times together and in the next few years we will reap the rewards. If that never happens, Wulff will be out the door soon enough.

by johnnycougar on Sep 21, 2009 7:04 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There were times against SMU

when they were playing Travis Long (true frosh) and Dan Spitz (redshirt frosh) at d-end and Anthony Laurenzi (redshirt frosh) at d-tackle. I don’t know how many snaps Lurenzi or Spitz had made this year but it wasn’t many.

Hoffman-Ellis and Bland came into the season with injuries as did Mattingly. Having stripling healthy has been pretty big.

They are still without Zack Williams and now lose BJ Guerra for 6-8 weeks. Roxas has been out all year and Tyson Pencer is just starting to play.

I’m not exactly crying about it but for the last 5 years or so we always seem to have a ton of injuries to deal with.

They are young and will take their lumps this year and next but if they can get them healthier things will start to turn.

by BornCoug on Sep 20, 2009 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't remember this being a problem for the last 5 years

I seem to remember a talented team underachieving 5 years ago.

by Jo-Jo on Sep 21, 2009 7:40 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not the hero we need, but the hero we deserve?

Did I quote that right?

Well, this is an interesting debate. I mostly agree with Roy over here. I also think that it’s possible another coach could have taken the leftover Doba recruits and made a little bit better time of it, but Wulff is approaching this thing from the ground up and I think that’ s ultimately the best way to go.

Obviously he still makes mistakes. He’s got a lot to learn about in-game coaching, as well as how to handle greater media attention (and not throwing kids under the bus). I think most of us agree that his no-huddle offense is at best a work-in-progress, and at worst just a poorly executed idea, but maybe he’ll scrap that eventually. Bottom line for me is that he’s working hard, building up talent, kicking bad people off the team, and showing signs of progress.

Remember the only reason we didn’t go 0-13 last year was that we played a Division II (or whatever) team and also had our rivals at home who had quit on their coach and had their best players injured. Even the Apple Cup was miraculous in that WSU barely deserved to win that game. At least this time around we played a semi-respectable team and played outstanding defense in the 2nd half to pull ourselves back in it. This wasn’t ineptitude vs. unmotivated like last year’s Apple Cup. We played solidly in the 2nd half, maybe didn’t “deserve” to win but we DID force the turnovers, it’s not like they kept fumbling snaps and stuff. This win means more to me for Wulff’s success than the Apple Cup, and I’m encouraged for the overall direction of the program.

by johnnycougar on Sep 20, 2009 11:06 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

More respectable than Portland State

I guess I meant “not the worst team in the FBS”

It’s not like we almost lost to Appalachian State!

by johnnycougar on Sep 21, 2009 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also SMU was favored

So we beat a team that was supposed to be more respectable than us.

by johnnycougar on Sep 21, 2009 8:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Squib Kicks...
Grasu’s kickoffs found the endzone and beyond, and his one squib kick was a beauty down the middle…

I’m pretty sure that Grasu’s last two kicks were squib kicks… or atleast the results were.

by cfred on Sep 20, 2009 11:48 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I was in the students section.

And it was the players who actually asked all of the students to move over towards the far endzone during the overtime.

by cfred on Sep 20, 2009 11:59 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I am really tired of this "ground up" quotation.

If in fact we were playing with non-DI talent in DOba’s last yr, then how in the heck did we finish 5-7?
As a coach you need to balance creating a sustainable program and a program that continues to compete. I don’t think we utilize what Dick did over at the basketball program. He inherited a team at rock bottom. I know bball ain’t football, but he had confidence in his system and implemented it even when it hurt (see Ok St.) to do so.
If someone asked me what PW is trying to do offensively or defensively, I would say I don’t know. Lou Holtz was talking about needing to define your football and concentrate on doing one thing right. I am still not sure what that is with Wazzu.
We consistently go away from the run although PW calls for balance. We continue to drop back into zone coverage while teams tear us apart underneath.
Tell me what PW is trying to do on the field. Ground up means he has a system for on the field play as well as recruiting. Remember DB concentrated on building with 4-yr players as well. We keep talking about recruiting, but it goes hand in hand with the system on the field, which there appears to be none from my perspective.

by ptowncoug3012 on Sep 21, 2009 8:27 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

We had Pac10 talent in our Sr class

Brink, Bumpus, Dillon, Collins, Byrd, Pitoitua and Johnson on the DLine and Abdullah were Seniors.

I think if there’s no coaching/system change, we would have done marginally better in 08 (scores, rather than wins/losses), but Doba would still run into the same lack of talent problem, as after the 3 and 4 year starters that played on the 08 team left, the cupboards are bare.

You mentioned Bball is not Football. One playmaker can change a basketball team to a large degree. That’s not the case in football, as you still need blocking, still need tackling, etc., and one player (or even 2 or 3) can’t do it all. Especially in one year.

I can’t disagree with you re: not knowing what that “one thing” is for us. I would have said the run game, pre-season, but if we’re constantly playing from behind, we have to throw the ball. Maybe the answer really IS to do a 2 minute drill all the time…. That leaves our struggling Defense out to dry, though. As for the zone coverages, that’s where the int’s came from. We’re already slow on D, zone gives us the chance to keep the ball in front of us, FWIW. I prefer attacking D’s that pressure the QB and disrupt the O at every opportunity. I just don’t know how we do that with a depleted and young D line, which means, like the end result or not, the coaches are adjusting for our talent.

Back at the end of last year, most folks were looking at 09 as being a year where we’d see gains, but it wouldn’t show up as Ws, necessarily. I’ve certainly seen improvement in all aspects of the game. It’s not everything I wanted to see… but my expectations creeped up as we got closer to the season with all the “strong and faster; bought in; practicing better; holding each other accountable” and so on that we got in fall camp. I’m thinking everyone else had the same thing happen.

Remember when last year Wulff talked about how shocked he was at our training regimen, how thin we were across the board? We didn’t listen. We drank the koolaid and figured we’d end up as a typical lower half PacTen team. The first game against OKST allowed us to keep our delusions. That quickly changed. I’m thinking (as depressing as it sounds), we need to understand that the team is young and will be struggle. Wulff is not playing 5 card stud while the rest of the Pac10 is playing 7 card draw. We just don’t have the options they do… yet.

From here out, we’re looking for incremental improvement. Better tackling, not playing out of position, better blocking, better decisions out of Marshall. Things that only time and coaching can improve. Next year, we can expect to see that show up in the win column, if only against the ones we should EXPECT to beat, with perhaps a surprise thrown in on someone overlooking us. If that’s not happening in 09, I think we can say Wulff is a villain. Until then, I just can’t go there.

by TiltingRight on Sep 21, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hero.....I think

I’m no coaching expert, played B-8 football, so I’m not going to say his gameplan was right. Heck, to me it seems like playing tight man to man would work better against the run and shoot. But, Wulff had a plan to play the zone against it and I think what we saw in the 2nd half was what he envisioned happening from the beginning. So, you can say the players saved the day but I believe Wulff put them in the position to save the day.

Also, it could have been a completely different story but, he looks like a genius for leaving Lobster in. Hopefully that boosted his confidence and we won’t have to see the deer in the headlights look from him again.

Last, I have to give Wulff a lot of credit for what he’s done on the recruiting trail. To get the kids he’s getting while the program is at it’s lowest is really encouraging. Let’s hope his game plans look better with the talent he’s bringing in.

by Wazzu Willy on Sep 21, 2009 9:15 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Tight man exposes you to crossing patterns

In general, it doesn’t matter what kind of coverage you play against a team that’s going to pass 80 percent of the time if you can’t get any pressure on the QB. The run-and-shoot is a read and react system; the only way to truly disrupt it is to not give them the time to read and/or react.

by Jeff Nusser on Sep 21, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Tight man only exposes you to crossing patterns when you jam a player inside

When you play tight man you jam a player towards your help, it depends on what coverage you’re running. Preferably you jam a guy forcing him to the outside so that if you do get beat it takes the ball longer to get there and hopefully gives you more time to recover.

by Jo-Jo on Sep 21, 2009 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The big point remains the same

Without pressure, it really doesn’t matter.

by Jeff Nusser on Sep 21, 2009 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yes.

Pressure is key. But with subpar DB’s, you can’t leave them in a one on one situation. A classic catch-22.

by Wazzu Willy on Sep 21, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I can understand why people don't want to villianize him (yet)

But I’ve yet to hear one argument that justifies calling him a hero. What is so great about Coach Paul Wulff? Why would you vote him as a hero? I think a hero save people and things, and I’m not seeing it (yet).

Someone, convince me, please, why anyone of you considers him a hero.

by Jo-Jo on Sep 21, 2009 9:54 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I can't vote on this poll

Because I’m not convinced of either one. I just think it’s too early to tell. We’ve made undeniable strides — in strength, in not giving up, in execution — but we’ve still got a long way to go. There are sound arguments to be made for both, so I’ll go ahead and sit this one out.

by Jeff Nusser on Sep 21, 2009 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

how you could call him either is laughable to me

it should be more like: is his approach working, or not working.

Formerly Peaty411s

by spencer peaty on Sep 21, 2009 11:10 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Fickle Coug Fans

Interesting looking at the results of the poll showing over 60% calling Wulff a hero when less then a week ago I would say well over 60% of fans wanted him fired.

I still do not think he is the hero, he is a villain whose team got lucky last week and I expect we will all be back on the villain side after a few weeks of blow outs coming up.

If Wulff does turn this thing around, I will be the first to admit I was wrong about him, but one game over SMU does not change my opinion about this guy or his staff.

by spokanecougar on Sep 21, 2009 11:14 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I think most folks who called for his head

last week probably realized they over-reacted after just one game (with 7 turnovers). Not to say they all think he’s the second coming of Sark now… just that given the two choices, they didn’t think he was a villain.

by TiltingRight on Sep 21, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hey now...

we all know that nobody is the second coming of Sark. That’s just ludicrous…

Note: Sarcasam Alert!

by B Money on Sep 21, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just one game?

This team has been getting it’s ass kicked since the day he showed up.

by Jo-Jo on Sep 21, 2009 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Was talking about this season

Three games in… Stanford left most people with “moral victories” warm fuzzies… or at least “progress made” observations. Hawaii people lost their minds (rightly or not). I think now the pattern of the team not giving up, and the fact that the team pulled out a win that looked like it was a loss gives a little bit of perspective.

Like I’ve said, I’m not necessarily saying he’s “absolutely the right guy,” I’m just saying it’s too early to burn his house down, flog his kids and chase him out of town with pitchforks. And if you force me to choose between “Hero” and “Villain,” I can’t choose villain.

by TiltingRight on Sep 21, 2009 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I like to stay away from results based analysis

If we would’ve lost, people would be calling for his head, still. By winning, there is a faction of fans that are back in love with Wulff.

For me, the jury is still out. What I saw in the game was a team that didn’t look great in the first half even though they played against nearly the same scheme last week. I saw us stick with a 3-3-5 that didn’t work last time. I saw blown assignments on defense. I also saw a quarterback situation that resembled last week. I saw Blackledge dropping pass after pass. Loebestaal was not making the right reads and wasn’t making throws he should. This week, I saw a staff that looks totally lost with what to do at quarterback and are severely risking screwing themselves, the team, and Jeff Tuel by mishandling his situation due to their inability to make a decision. To me, these things are signs of poor coaching.

On the positive end, I saw a team that was more disciplined. Special teams didn’t give up the homerun or even a triple. Stupid penalties were down(except for Wolfgrams error). The team never quit, where they may have rolled over last year. The defense finally woke up and made plays and the offense had two good drives to end each half.

For the life of me, I can’t figure out this team. They’re getting blown away in the first half and I want to blame it on poor game-week coaching. There is also the inexperience of the players themselves. Then, we come out in the second half of the games and look like a whole different team. Is Wulff a great adjuster? Is the team not awake in the first half? Or does he half an amazingly inspirational halftime speech? I think the second half of games shows flashes of promise from the staff and the players. Oh, and the man can actually recruit. If he could develop these players he’s recruiting, he has a chance to have a great program. Unfortunately I don’t know if he can right now.

by cougfan on Sep 21, 2009 4:04 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Wulff believes it's that they come out tight

For what it’s worth. And I feel much the same way you do.

by Jeff Nusser on Sep 21, 2009 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I heard him say that, but I still find it hard to believe

If they’re tight, it’s his job to get them loose. We’re 3 games in now and we shouldn’t be coming out so stiff we freeze up. The blown coverages in the first half seemed to be more than just being tight to me. The fact it took 3 quarters for our d to realize Hawaii was running dumps to the flat and 5 yard outs with 17 was frustrating as hell to watch. I watched them march the field in the second half throwing almost nothing but 5 yard outs to the wide side. That’s something the coaches should’ve prepared them for or at least adjusted for (we did, in the fourth).

I’m sold on his recruiting, I’m not sold on his game coaching and preparation.

by cougfan on Sep 21, 2009 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to CougCenter, a blog dedicated to Washington State University athletics.

Community Guidelines
Start posting about the Cougars »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Taylor Rochestie Interview from Goettingen, Germany
Small
For levity's sake
Summercamp4_small
Need a little help...
Small
Cougars on Lexy.com
Small
Gold medal game open thread
Small
Cougs sweep Friday's doubleheader
Small
Anyone Interested in a Little Viewing Party?
Small
The Air is a Crisp 45º Outside Beasley Coliseum
Arizona_small
Olympic Hockey Open Thread.
Small
Pac-10 games following suit

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Facebook

In addition to Twitter @CougCenter, find us on Facebook!

CougCenter.com on Facebook

Go Cougs


Official Partner of CBS Sports