Jump to content
Awful horrible bad shit is happening in the USA right now, if you are afraid of your fucking feelings getting hurt this isn't the website for you. ×
Parliament

No, Mike Leach, YOU'RE awesome!

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Bartles said:

Oh, and why does the video in the previous post contain an extended photo viewing of Nick Saban accepting the CFP trophy?

It's in his contract.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So hilarious to see the predictable outrage from the usual suspects and the media this time around. They are just proving his point for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, trza-hawk said:

So hilarious to see the predictable outrage from the usual suspects and the media this time around. They are just proving his point for them.

But, like, the point was that the video was fake. It's not even politics. There's plenty of things to mad at Obama about but Leach just played himself...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, texifornia said:

But, like, the point was that the video was fake. It's not even politics. There's plenty of things to mad at Obama about but Leach just played himself...

Yep, nothing cloak room about an idiot who treats a fake video as legitimately thought-provoking.  Except it's 2018 so I guess it is cloak room.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 8:06 PM, MaybeACoordinator said:

A few months back I had a dream about Mike Leach...

I was mowing the lawn at my grandparents' house when the Pirate rolled up in a pearl-colored vintage Cadillac, driven by friends, and announced that he was ready to be interviewed for a profile on him I had been assigned.

This was not the arranged time, so I told him I would have to run upstairs and change and get my notebook and tape recorder, etc., and by the time I got back down there, he'd switched cars, to something smaller, a convertible with the top down, one that was sparkly and gold-colored, and of a similar late '50s vintage to the Caddy, and also crammed with people.

All the men in the car were dressed like Elvis and the women looked like they were extras in Grease. I was assigned to be sort of a fly on the wall, so I was mostly listening to their banter as we rolled through heavy road construction in Houston's Museum District, which was strangely Victorian-looking, with gloomy old factories and witch's hat houses and crumbling churches lining the streets, en route to some shindig way up in north Houston.

Leach seemed to be in a bad mood, unlike his '50s-looking friends. 

"What are your hobbies?" dream-Leach asked me out of the blue, and I told him how as kid I collected stamps and coins. "No, what are your real hobbies?" he insisted. It was so important for him to know. I told him how I once wrote a book about dive bars, and everyone in the gold lamé convertible laughed, but Leach still looked grieved.

And then I woke up. 

 

I want to party with you, cowboy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

You have to Mike about your hobbies before we let you in to one of our jamz. 

What does this mean, though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SKJ said:

What does this mean, though?

Only the Pirate knows. I might have to write this on a scroll, in blood, for his Final Wisdom on the matter. I might even ride a donkey all the way to Pullman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LEEEEEAAAACCHHH.0.gif

Mike Leach could be a Longhorn fan, looking to infiltrate the Cougars out on the west coast in a reverse psychological strike against the old Red Raiders of Lubbock..?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kopp0e said:

LEEEEEAAAACCHHH.0.gif

Mike Leach could be a Longhorn fan, looking to infiltrate the Cougars out on the west coast in a reverse psychological strike against the old Red Raiders of Lubbock..?

 

I thought that was "chop block 25, both knees."

Edited by runthebone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2018 at 11:47 PM, MaybeACoordinator said:

I just sent the Dream to Leach's SID to see if he will comment on it. Worth a shot. His PR needs a little sprucing up. 

Why do you care?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2018 at 12:39 AM, MaybeACoordinator said:

Because the man is a national treasure, occasional forays into idiocy notwithstanding.

This is so, assuming you meant "insanity" rather than idiocy. No sane person would be able to encompass Mormonism, Lawyering, and Coaching Merkin Footy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On account of 2008 being brought up earlier today just thought it should be known Mike Leach isn’t awesome. Fuck Mike Leach and fuck Texas Tech. Neither one will ever win shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dropout said:

On account of 2008 being brought up earlier today just thought it should be known Mike Leach isn’t awesome. Fuck Mike Leach and fuck Texas Tech. Neither one will ever win shit.

keep on hatin...lolz.

Leach is arguably the most influential coach of the past 20 years and he's among the best interviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, slorch said:

keep on hatin...lolz.

Leach is arguably the most influential coach of the past 20 years and he's among the best interviews.

Yup, it should be said the playoff should be expanded to give more teams a solid chance at winning the title, when a team wins the national title, but loses it's division title..?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2018 at 1:50 AM, slorch said:

keep on hatin...lolz.

Leach is arguably the most influential coach of the past 20 years and he's among the best interviews.

Neither will ever win anything. It’s not hatin it’s the truth. Most influential coach on mediocre football. Keep arguing. Maybe one day he will figure out how to run the ball. He can have the championship of interviews congratulations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Neither will ever win anything. It’s not hatin it’s the truth. Most influential coach on mediocre football. Keep arguing. Maybe one day he will figure out how to run the ball. He can have the championship of interviews congratulations.

You couldn't be more wrong.  When you talk about running the ball and imply one has to be able to run the ball for the sake of balance Leach will tell you you are inaccurately defining balance.  He explains it here and it makes some sense. https://www.cougcenter.com/2013/6/3/4360000/using-data-to-assess-the-balance-of-mike-leachs-air-raid-at-wsu

Mediocre football, I'm not so sure.  He's been PAC 12 coach of the year, Big 12 coach of the year,  won the Woody Hayes and George Munger awards for national coach of the year and so on.  Leach has taken arguably the worst Power 5 program in the country to 9 win seasons 2 of the last 3 years.  He ended his tenure at Tech being nationally ranked five of his last 6 years there.  The one season he wasn't he won 8 games btw.

Tech had four seasons of nine wins or more while he was there, at one point being ranked as high as 2nd in the country 8 games into the season.  Mediocre?  Like I said, I'm not so sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leach doesn't dominate time of possession either...  wanna cherry pick any more stats?  His RBs are historically very productive.  When they aren't, his whole system sputters.

Then again, if you knew this, you wouldn't be saying what you're saying.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, pigmeat markham said:

You couldn't be more wrong.  When you talk about running the ball and imply one has to be able to run the ball for the sake of balance Leach will tell you you are inaccurately defining balance.  He explains it here and it makes some sense. https://www.cougcenter.com/2013/6/3/4360000/using-data-to-assess-the-balance-of-mike-leachs-air-raid-at-wsu

Mediocre football, I'm not so sure.  He's been PAC 12 coach of the year, Big 12 coach of the year,  won the Woody Hayes and George Munger awards for national coach of the year and so on.  Leach has taken arguably the worst Power 5 program in the country to 9 win seasons 2 of the last 3 years.  He ended his tenure at Tech being nationally ranked five of his last 6 years there.  The one season he wasn't he won 8 games btw.

Tech had four seasons of nine wins or more while he was there, at one point being ranked as high as 2nd in the country 8 games into the season.  Mediocre?  Like I said, I'm not so sure.

Ron Zook won Big Ten Coach of the Year at Illinois. He also won a conference championship. Leach's next conference championship will be his first.

Who's the better coach? Leach is Rich Rodriguez with a more surly demeanor. People remember his big upset wins but conveniently forget the annual losses he has no excuse for. Other than to blame his players in an entertaining press conference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, slorch said:

Leach doesn't dominate time of possession either...  wanna cherry pick any more stats?  His RBs are historically very productive.  When they aren't, his whole system sputters.

Then again, if you knew this, you wouldn't be saying what you're saying.

 

Why cherry pick stats when you’ll do it for me. Are you insinuating TOP isn’t important in football? Very productive RBs? Henderson and Batch were his best. Neither eclipsed 900 yards a season. His entire time at tech produced 0 1000 yard rushers. He lost 2 games once (should of been 3) and 3 another. The rest of his coaching career is a bunch of 4 and 5 loss seasons. Grand total 122-81 and 6-7 in bowl games. And as mentioned above 0 conference championships. I know tech has a different standard but that’s mediocre. Mike Leach is mediocre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Are you insinuating TOP isn’t important in football? 

I can't speak for slorch, but I'm telling you directly that it isn't. Look at the top 10 teams in TOP last season and understand those teams, combined, had a 59-48 regular season record in 2017. 3 of them had losing records, 1 had a .500 record, and another would have had Harvey not cancelled the UH vs. UTSA game (no fucking way UTSA wins that game). Either way, that's a winning percentage of 55%. That should tell you that there's a shitload of considerations when it comes to statistics, and TOP isn't the golden goose you imply that it is.

Or to put it another way, here's the final regular season poll and to the in parentheses is their TOP ranking (playoff teams highlighted).

1. Clemson (49th)
2. Auburn (31st)
3. Oklahoma (23rd)
4. Wisconsin (2nd)
5. Alabama (70th)
6. Georgia (19th)
7. Miami (123rd)
8. Ohio State (98th)
9. Penn State (58th)
10. USC (43rd)

Avg TOP rank: 52nd (it's 40th among the CFP teams)

It's not important, at least not as much as you make it out to be.

Edited by hpslugga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pigmeat markham said:

You couldn't be more wrong.  When you talk about running the ball and imply one has to be able to run the ball for the sake of balance Leach will tell you you are inaccurately defining balance.  He explains it here and it makes some sense. https://www.cougcenter.com/2013/6/3/4360000/using-data-to-assess-the-balance-of-mike-leachs-air-raid-at-wsu

Mediocre football, I'm not so sure.  He's been PAC 12 coach of the year, Big 12 coach of the year,  won the Woody Hayes and George Munger awards for national coach of the year and so on.  Leach has taken arguably the worst Power 5 program in the country to 9 win seasons 2 of the last 3 years.  He ended his tenure at Tech being nationally ranked five of his last 6 years there.  The one season he wasn't he won 8 games btw.

Tech had four seasons of nine wins or more while he was there, at one point being ranked as high as 2nd in the country 8 games into the season.  Mediocre?  Like I said, I'm not so sure.

I can only imagine where Tech would be if Leach had been allowed to stay as coach of the Red Raiders over the last few years... If both Baylor & TCU barely missed out on the CFP, then it's arguable that the Matadors could have made the CFP with Leach at the helm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pigmeat markham said:

You couldn't be more wrong.  When you talk about running the ball and imply one has to be able to run the ball for the sake of balance Leach will tell you you are inaccurately defining balance.  He explains it here and it makes some sense. https://www.cougcenter.com/2013/6/3/4360000/using-data-to-assess-the-balance-of-mike-leachs-air-raid-at-wsu

Mediocre football, I'm not so sure.  He's been PAC 12 coach of the year, Big 12 coach of the year,  won the Woody Hayes and George Munger awards for national coach of the year and so on.  Leach has taken arguably the worst Power 5 program in the country to 9 win seasons 2 of the last 3 years.  He ended his tenure at Tech being nationally ranked five of his last 6 years there.  The one season he wasn't he won 8 games btw.

Tech had four seasons of nine wins or more while he was there, at one point being ranked as high as 2nd in the country 8 games into the season.  Mediocre?  Like I said, I'm not so sure.

Im pretty sure dropout was talking about MNCs and conference championships.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

I can't speak for slorch, but I'm telling you directly that it isn't. Look at the top 10 teams in TOP last season and understand those teams, combined, had a 59-48 regular season record in 2017. 3 of them had losing records, 1 had a .500 record, and another would have had Harvey not cancelled the UH vs. UTSA game (no fucking way UTSA wins that game). Either way, that's a winning percentage of 55%. That should tell you that there's a shitload of considerations when it comes to statistics, and TOP isn't the golden goose you imply that it is.

Or to put it another way, here's the final regular season poll and to the in parentheses is their TOP ranking (playoff teams highlighted).

1. Clemson (49th)
2. Auburn (31st)
3. Oklahoma (23rd)
4. Wisconsin (2nd)
5. Alabama (70th)
6. Georgia (19th)
7. Miami (123rd)
8. Ohio State (98th)
9. Penn State (58th)
10. USC (43rd)

Avg TOP rank: 52nd (it's 40th among the CFP teams)

It's not important, at least not as much as you make it out to be.

https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/average-time-of-possession-net-of-ot?date=2017-01-10

Alot of the top ten throughout the years admittedly run gimmick offenses Army Navy Air Force etc. I’d still take my chances with the teams holding the ball more than 30 min than those who don’t. And I didn’t make TOP the golden goose or most important stat ever. I simply asked slorch if he was insinuating it’s not an important aspect of the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dropout said:

https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/average-time-of-possession-net-of-ot?date=2017-01-10

Alot of the top ten throughout the years admittedly run gimmick offenses Army Navy Air Force etc. I’d still take my chances with the teams holding the ball more than 30 min than those who don’t. And I didn’t make TOP the golden goose or most important stat ever. I simply asked slorch if he was insinuating it’s not an important aspect of the game. 

And I answered your question: it's not. Now, you might have your own personal preference, but that in no way proves that it's important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dropout said:

So if you were a betting man you’d take the bottom half of those lists over the top half?

I'm saying that I wouldn't base any hypothetical wagers I'd make on teams by TOP.

Your question-begging, strawman argument implies that I said there's an inverse correlation. I said no such thing. I said it's unimportant. Those are two different things.

Seriously, you're talking about a stat where the national champion ranked 70th. Any stat where the national leader has a 6-6 regular season and the national champion ranked 70th is by definition an unimportant statistic.

Edited by hpslugga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

I'm saying that I wouldn't base any hypothetical wagers I'd make on teams by TOP.

Seriously, you're talking about a stat where the national champion ranked 70th

Nor would I but I’d consider it. And you’re talking about one year. Not to mention every team in the CFP won TOP. And the list I’m looking at has last years champion at 59. Greater than 30 min winning TOP. And that’s a down year for the most dominant team the past decade or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dropout said:

And you’re talking about one year

You pick the beginning.

Clemson was somewhere in the 50's in 2016
Bama was 4th in 2015
Ohio State was 35th in 2014
Florida State was 55th in 2013
Bama was 15th in 2012 and 12th in 2011
Auburn was 64th in 2010 (and the team they beat in the MNC game was 104th)

See what I mean? It's all over the fucking place and there's no positive or negative correlation to it.

Quote

And the list I’m looking at has last years champion at 59.

They were 70th. https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/2018/team/705/p2

Either way, that's not a huge difference.

Edited by hpslugga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a pretty clear correlation. Good teams win TOP. Anything above 30 min or about 65th place is winning TOP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
42 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

And I answered your question: it's not. Now, you might have your own personal preference, but that in no way proves that it's important.

Not only did he answer your question, he did so directly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dropout said:

Why cherry pick stats when you’ll do it for me. Are you insinuating TOP isn’t important in football? Very productive RBs? Henderson and Batch were his best. Neither eclipsed 900 yards a season. His entire time at tech produced 0 1000 yard rushers. He lost 2 games once (should of been 3) and 3 another. The rest of his coaching career is a bunch of 4 and 5 loss seasons. Grand total 122-81 and 6-7 in bowl games. And as mentioned above 0 conference championships. I know tech has a different standard but that’s mediocre. Mike Leach is mediocre.

Taurean Henderson Lead the Big Xii in all purpose yards his Senior year, and for his career had 302 catches which is 1st  for any Tech player, regardless of position with a solid 18 years of prolific production in the program since the advent of the Air Raid. He scored 50 TDs in his career, second in Tech history behind James Gray.

 

Yeah... you smell of the GOB defender odor.  Your arguments are crazy. How’s that Tuberville mask feel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I just want to reiterate Leach is totally overrated, and Kent Hance was my former neighbor, and slorch eats dick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

I just want to reiterate Leach is totally overrated, and Kent Hance was my former neighbor, and slorch eats dick. 

1 out of 3 is pretty good if you’re playing baseball...and I’m taking your word that you and Hance were neighbors.

Edited by slorch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
38 minutes ago, slorch said:

1 out of 3 is pretty good if you’re playing baseball...and I’m taking your word that you and Hance were neighbors.

We were, you know you like dick as much as Stoops, and you know my batting average and slugging % is absurdly high. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, slorch said:

1 out of 3 is pretty good if you’re playing baseball...and I’m taking your word that you and Hance were neighbors.

Not quite - he said Hance was his former neighbor. Either Hance is defunct, or they're neighbors again - there may be other possibilities.

Moving on, Leach is a funny, funny guy and extremely entertaining. He's also a pretty good coach, and made both Tceh and Wazzu better football teams than most of their previous coaches.

The bottom line on Leach's awesomeness is whether you'd actually, intentionally, watch a presser or interview of him - as opposed to, say, Dabo Swinney or what's-his-name at Jawja - or Charlie Strong, for that matter. 

Leach is awesome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, slorch said:

Taurean Henderson Lead the Big Xii in all purpose yards his Senior year, and for his career had 302 catches which is 1st  for any Tech player, regardless of position with a solid 18 years of prolific production in the program since the advent of the Air Raid. He scored 50 TDs in his career, second in Tech history behind James Gray.

 

Yeah... you smell of the GOB defender odor.  Your arguments are crazy. How’s that Tuberville mask feel?

My main argument is Leach is a mediocre coach. 122-81 overall 6-7 in bowl games 0 conference championships. Obviously 0 ncs. But let’s skip over and not address those numbers. Too crazy of an argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dropout said:

My main argument is Leach is a mediocre coach. 122-81 overall 6-7 in bowl games 0 conference championships. Obviously 0 ncs. But let’s skip over and not address those numbers. Too crazy of an argument...

Naahh - you don't have a main argument... you aren't arguing at all: you're expressing an opinion that is unpopular, and it's unpopular because it's not shared by very many folks. It isn't shared by very many folks because it's ignorant. You aren't going to change the opinions of others because you are simply quoting information which is generally not disputed but is well known, and which does not address the reasons others consider Leach to be awesome. Repetition of your ignorant bullshit is tiresome and diminishes the likelihood that anyone will pay the slightest attention to anything you have to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Parliament said:

The only thing standing between Leach and P12 Championships is defense. He doesn't have one.

This is true. 

It has been claimed this is because of one or both of two major factors: (1) Recruiting is focused to a huge extent on offensive players, so defensive players are less talented; (2) practice emphasis is not only on offense, but the format leaves little for the defense to practice against. We saw complaints under Strong when Sterlin took over that Sterlin's practice methods were causing problems with the defense. 

It seems likely that both reasons are pertinent, and it may not be possible to remedy. I'd like to see someone try, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...