Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: More Televised Winter Baseball, Please

Great Article on Mike Leach

Bumped from the diaries. Quickhands flags a must read article for everyone interested in our coaching search, that gives us a lot to think about. GO BRUINS. -N

Apologies if this has been posted before. The NY Times Magazine from December 4, 2005 has a long profile of Mike Leach. It is written by Michael Lewis, author of "Moneyball" and "The Blind Side."

I know the pros and cons of Leach have been debated, probably endlessly. But reading this article, I became very interested in him. Maybe I'm a sucker...

I found this part particularly interesting:

"Leach made his way to the sideline and from his back pocket pulled a crumpled piece of paper with the notations for dozens of plays typed on it, along with a red pen. When a play doesn't work, he puts an X next to it. When a play works well, he draws a circle beside it - "to remind myself to run it again." But at the start of a game, he's unsure what's going to work. So one goal is to throw as many different things at a defense as he can, to see what it finds most disturbing. Another goal is to create as much confusion as possible for the defense while keeping things as simple as possible for the offense." Anyway, check it out for yourself. It's a long read, but well worth it. I'm especially interested to hear people's thoughts after reading it.

GO BRUINS!

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

Comment 57 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

A take from Red Raider
I read that article, too. Lewis is a great writer and his sports pieces are incredible-I think Moneyball may be the best baseball book ever written. In any event, when this piece came out I started following Leach, and not too long ago the Texas Tech fans were getting a little disgruntled with the Pirate King for many of the reasons BN posters have alluded to when discussing LEach as a Dorrell replacement. One of the main posters for the Texas Tech SBN blog wrote a pretty good defense of Leach this summer addressing many of the salient points, and I link it here for any who are interested: http://www.doubletnation.com/story/2007/7/10/23186/1953

I appreciate the fact that this poster looked at a lot of information to make his case. However, I don't think he addresses thoroughly the defensive issues glaringly apparent to even a casual observer of Texas Tech. He seems to lay most if not all of the problem on the lack of elite talent playing at Tech, especially when going up against OU and Texas. Considering that in the 7 years Leach has coached at Tech, two Big 12 teams have won the national title (OU 2000, Texas 2005) and Oklahoma and Nebraska have both played for titles in that time frame (Nebraska IIRC 2001, Oklahoma 2004?), there may be something to that. Getting top talent on either side of the ball to Lubbock has to be hard, especially competing against OU, Texas and A & M, not to mention Nebraska and the other heavyweights who scour Texas for talent. Still, the number of blowout losses against the top tier of teams as well as some puzzling losses against the second-tier teams like Oklahoma State make me question that thesis somewhat-surely the number of blowouts is a little too high to be explained solely by limited talent? Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

It is clear that Leach is not a defensive minded coach, which is fine with me-most coaches have a specialty area. However, it becomes critical if he is the hire to either get a top-flight D coordinator or keep Walker and hope that he can continue to improve, field better talent and find a way to defend the spread attacks he faces. On the plus side in that regard, Dixon and Brink graduate this year.  

by ucladj89 on Dec 3, 2007 6:54 PM PST reply actions  

In addition
Here's a link to a blog article questioning Leach and what he could/would do to get TT beyond its position as third banana in the Big 12 South. Good takes on Leach, pro and con-search through the responses for a pretty lively debate about Leach and what he brings to the table at the Tech HC. BTW, this blog post is what generated the SBN post I linked to in the above post.

http://www.fanblogs.com/texas_tech/007046.php

by ucladj89 on Dec 3, 2007 7:15 PM PST reply actions  

Good stuff guys
Thanks for flagging this. If you all are reading more Leach related notes, this would be a good thread to post the links.

by Nestor on Dec 3, 2007 7:28 PM PST reply actions  

This Article is a Must Read for BN'ers
Thanks, Quickhands for the post. And, thanks 89 for the follow up post.

Wow! I love Mike Leach. So many parts of that profile resonate with the things we've been saying.

First and foremost, he wants to win. In that sense, watching tape after a victory, not sleeping, planning -- he reminds me of Howland.

But, more importantly, I love the fact that his out-of-the-box thinking has helped revolutionize the sport.

Even more, I love that other football coaches don't like him, don't want to play against him, and won't say nice things about him. If we hire Leach, I promise you he won't get a wringing endorsement from Cheaty.

Although Leach sees "thinking mans football" as an oxymoron, the truth is that his intellectual approach to the game, his development and testing of hypotheses render somewhat moot his belief that football is nothing but a game of violence.

I now understand why the spread works. I now understand how he can create a scoring machine with marginally talented players. And, I now understand why TT seems to be stuck for three quarters and then explodes. Leach uses most of the game to study the D, then makes the adjustments necessary to wipe it out. And, he levels the playing field for his small O lines by running the other team's bigger D lineman all over the field for 30 minutes. When they can run no more, he unleashes the scoring machine.

Also, I can see why players love him, have confidence in him, and play beyond projected expectations in his system.

As a Texan (yuck, did I really say that?) As an exiled Californian living in Texas (that's better) I read about TT every day.

My concern has always been about TT's lack of D. However, I've got to believe that with a great DC we would play D under Leach. One "problem" he's had -- he's the antithesis of KD; he's loyal to his DC, who has stumbled, and will not throw him under the bus.

I'm glad I read the article. Had I not, I would have had concerns had Leach turned out to be our coach. Now, if we get him, I'll be the first in line to donate $$$ just to get a chance to have lunch with him. He's my kind of guy.

sjh

PS. As I've said in another post, I don't want DW retained, in any way. But, if DG and ML choose to keep him, I can think of no better way to school DW and our D in how to stop the spread than to have them practice against Leach and his O, every day.

READ THIS ARTICLE. If you care about who we hire, you owe it to yourself to learn about this most interesting coach. I doubt there is another in the nation like him. I think he is what we need. I hope you agree.

What a great time to be a Bruin!!! Great options. Great times ahead.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 3, 2007 7:32 PM PST reply actions  

Agree With Your Thoughts...
What I like most about Leach is that he would completely revamp the UCLA football program. We all know that through Donahue, Toledo and Dorrell, UCLA football has cultivated a culture of mediocrity. Look at Streeter's article...to paraphrase, "UCLA has never been good, so they shouldn't expect to be good."

Leach is so different that he would instantly change the culture and fabric of the program. This wouldn't be your grandfather's UCLA team, or whatever analogy you want to use. From the first day of a Mike Leach coaching tenure, all Bruin fans would know that a new era had begun and things were going to be different.

That is why I am so drawn to Leach. He's the antithesis of everything Bruin football has been for 30 years. And that's what we need right now. Something totally different.

That being said, if we end up with Mooch or Petersen, I'll be happpy. But Leach is the guy I really want. He can put his mark on UCLA football in a way we haven't seen before.

by Quickhands on Dec 3, 2007 7:43 PM PST up reply actions  

agreed but one thing
And, he levels the playing field for his small O lines by running the other team's bigger D lineman all over the field for 30 minutes.
Leach actually has the biggest offensive line in all of football. Don't believe me? Check out their roster.

Leach would be a great hire for UCLA. I live in Austin and follow Big 12 Football, so I've seen them and followed his program since he arrived in Lubbock.

I read that Lewis article awhile ago so I won't again, but does it mention that Leach was the architect behind Hal Mumme's ridiculous offenses at Kentucky when Tim Couch was there? What about his success as Bob Stoops offensive coordinator? The Sooners stunk before Leach got there, and were dynamnite when he was there before being lured away to Lubbock. This guy can flat out coach offense.

Yes, I do agree that his style and system is not conducive for defensive football - it's just too much to ask of your defense to constantly be putting them back out there, not to mention his propensity for gambling on 4th down no matter the distance or field position. But give him a few UCLA caliber athletes and they'll make enough plays to keep you in just about every football game. Plus, not like the Pac 10 is known for grind it out rugged football.

Did you know there's only one program in the history of the Big 12 without a losing season? Yup, it's Texas Tech. Mike Leach wins football games (good record in the bowls as well), his teams play hard, he's not an excuse maker like your former coach, and his players and his fans LOVE him.

Finally, you'd get a coach with balls, bravado, and a mighty fine sense of humor. Did you know he was in Donald Trump's Tower a few weeks ago, told one of his assistants that he wanted to talk to the Donald about his building, then proceeded to have an honest, man-to-man conversation with Trump about the design and layout of his building and what he could do to improve it? What do you think Trump's reaction was to this weird guy from West Texas? Well, he was damn impressed and the two are now friends. Trump introduced the starting lineups for Tech during the upset W over OU. Bottom line is this guy has an engaging, honest, forthright personality that would be very much appreciated by an intelligent UCLA commmunity.

Leach may not win multiple national championships, but I can assure you you'd win 8-10 games a year, have a great fucking time watching and supporting the program, and have a team that was legitimately competitive for Pac 10 championships on a yearly basis.

Plus, he makes a damn good weatherman.

by Blitzburgh @ Bruins Nation on Dec 3, 2007 8:32 PM PST up reply actions  

hi guys btw
Thought I'd say hey and mention I've been following the saga at UCLA for awhile now. I finished high school in Orange County and my parents teach at UCI, so I have a passive interest in your program.

I also write the Pittsburgh Steelers blog on SBN, so I've been aware of what Nestor and you guys have done as a community.

Seriously though, Leech may not be a slam-dunk sure bet like Urban Meyer to win national titles, but you would never, ever regret hiring him. You'd just be too engaged and supportive of the product being put out there each Saturday to complain about the occasional loss. Hired Mariuchi, and you'll get two-four years tops of so-so football before he jumps back to the NFL. Peterson would also be a solid hire, and I think you'd definitely win Pac 10 championships on an acceptably consistent basis (certainly as soon as Pom Pom left LA).

by Blitzburgh @ Bruins Nation on Dec 3, 2007 8:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Quick
Thank you for posting this again. I have read the article twice now. I am going to give it couple of more reads. You got me thinking.

by Nestor on Dec 3, 2007 7:43 PM PST reply actions  

One More Thing...
Building on what 66 had to say about other coaches not liking him...

From the first day that Mike Leach is the UCLA head coach, every single coach in the Pac 10 is worried. Even Peter Carroll.

I think Mooch and Petersen would each be good hires, maybe even great hires. But I don't know if they would strike fear in the conference's coaches. I feel certain that Mike Leach would.

GO BRUINS!

by Quickhands on Dec 3, 2007 7:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Cheaty's Endorsement
enraged us and made us laugh.

None of Leach's opponents will ever try to prop him up to make sure he will be around for the next season.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 3, 2007 7:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Mike Leach is the Don Nelson of college football.
I really love his offensive system. Mixing up 30 plays with different formations forces the opposing team to read two things at the same time.

by uclachem87 on Dec 3, 2007 7:57 PM PST reply actions  

Yet it follows the KISS protocol
Now that I understand it, I see that its brilliance is in its simplicity.

Easy for the O to run, impossible for the other team to D.

THERE IS NO PLAYBOOK. None. There aren't that many formations. People learn the system and carry it in their heads.

Unlike what we've just been through -- a coach telling us it will take years to learn our version of the WCO -- and then with the kids who had been in it the longest, it completely failed.

Star quarterbacks? Leach made them. They came without offers from other schools and they left owning national records.

How can you not be excited about a guy who has learned how to discipline his resources, make a move, and turn a corner -- all at once.

And, he's a pirate. You just have to love the thought of the Skull and Crossbones flying at the Rose Bowl.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 3, 2007 8:02 PM PST up reply actions  

WCO
Whatever his intentions, Dorrell's WCO resulted in it being incredibly complicated to run and incredibly easy to defend. Leach seems to think the opposite is the way to go. What a thought...

My other favorite quote from the article is this:
"The Texas Tech offense is not just an offense; it's a mood: optimism. It is designed to maximize the possibility of something good happening rather than to minimize the possibility of something bad happening." Again, anti-Dorrell.

Whoever the new coach is, what an exciting time it is to be a Bruin fan. A new coach is on the horizon.

by Quickhands on Dec 3, 2007 8:06 PM PST up reply actions  

Leach's offense
One of the comments that I found very interesting in the Lewis article was the mention that when Leach was the OC of Oklahoma Heupel, their QB, went from OK to All-star and Oklahoma won it all using his offense the year after he left for the Tech job. There has been a vein of criticism that Leach's offenses are too "gimmicky" or one-dimensional, and this presumably would render them unsuccessful. I took a look at the stats for Tech going back to 2000 against Texas and OU, as much of the criticism about the O is that it doesn't work against the best defenses. If we grant that Texas and Oklahoma have had the best defenses in the Big 12 since Leach arrived his teams have averaged by my admittedly limited math skills about 28 ppg when they play these guys. They have been held down many times, the lowest scoring game against either of these two was against Texas in 2001 when they scored only one TD, but this year they hung 43 on Texas at Texas and 34 against Oklahoma at home and in 2006 it was 31 and 24, respectively. In '05 they only scored 17 against UT and 23 in their win against OU, but that was Texas' national championship year.

Whatever the gimmick, the offense does what is most important: score points, even with sub-par talent against some outstanding defenses. This year, they have Michael Crabtree, who is a real talent, but they have nobody else I believe who is a 1st team all-conference pick.

This offense would almost certainly be successful in the Pac-10 as it has been in the Big 12. The question remains whether a defense can be found to keep the other guys from scoring at will. Hasn't happened at TT yet.  

by ucladj89 on Dec 3, 2007 8:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Olson
could you imagine what Leach would do to Olson?

by uclaov1 on Dec 3, 2007 8:36 PM PST reply actions  

I can imagine what he would
do with ALL of our QBs.  No more wasted talent.  Leach looks like a good choice to me now, along with Paul Johnson.  

by bruinhawk on Dec 4, 2007 8:23 AM PST up reply actions  

Great find with that article, Quick
I guess I'm easily swayed.  Two days ago, the savior of the program was Petersin (I can't remember if it's an "e" or an "o" so I compromised).  Yesterday, if we didn't get Mendenhall, I was sure the end of the world was at hand.  So today, I want Leach, if for no other reason than he is the anti-CTS.  

Is there a quarterback in any high school in the country who would not want to play for Leach at the Rose Bowl?

Plus, he is a really great weather man.

by Fox 71 on Dec 3, 2007 9:03 PM PST reply actions  

weatherman
Did u watch that link I included above? Pretty damn funny when you realize he's just messin around. This is a funny, funny, and might innovative football mind.

by Blitzburgh @ Bruins Nation on Dec 3, 2007 9:09 PM PST up reply actions  

hm
Very interesting article.  My opinion of Leach improved significantly after reading this.  Makes you wonder what he can do with the type of talent we can recruit at UCLA.  A requirement to hiring him would be to find a great defensive coordinator though.

by ranelar on Dec 3, 2007 9:36 PM PST reply actions  

Count
me among those who was highly skeptical of hiring Mike Leach as the head man at UCLA. After reading this article, however, my opinion of him has drastically changed.

I love that he has no playbook, that he analyzes the opponents defense and makes sound adjustments. I love his non-comformity, his willingness to stretch the boundaries of the passing game, and most of all, I love that he loves to win. I love that he feels failure when he doesn't score that last second touchdown, even if his team is absolutely bashing the opposing team.

I think Leach is a guy that Carrol himself would genuinely fear, someone who is unpredictable and who's offense puts the fear of God upon any opposing defense. I'm all for this guy as our next head coach.

Bring the Air Raid to Westwood DG.

by BruinFanatic1988 on Dec 3, 2007 10:36 PM PST reply actions  

Non-conformity? Creative offense?
It's showtime. Really, what could be better in L.A? Wow.

by Chandler on Dec 4, 2007 1:15 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe nitpicking but....
This quote kind of bothered me:

"If you are the captain of a pirate ship [referring to Mike Leach], you cannot complain too much about lawless behavior - and Texas Tech is one of the most heavily penalized teams in college football - but still it's painful to watch a crew member drop treasure overboard."

This link shows that Texas Tech is in the top 25 for penalties, even more than UCLA. Again, maybe I am just nitpicking, but something to keep an eye on.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/sortables?stat=teammisc&sort=penalties&group=80&year=2007

by HE HATE ME on Dec 3, 2007 10:37 PM PST reply actions  

don't over-think it man
A game involving Texas Tech is going to have far more plays per game than the average college football team. More plays = more opportunities for penalties. Pretty simple really. I suppose you could throw in a defense that probably takes a few more risks trying to force turnovers than some and there ya go. But really, it's just simple math. Not trying to be snide or anything, but really, it's nothing more than that.

by Blitzburgh @ Bruins Nation on Dec 3, 2007 11:07 PM PST reply actions  

Hypothetical Question
What would you guys say, if DeWayne Walker was Leach's defensive coordinator at UCLA.  It would be made clear that Walker has no potential to ever be the head coach, or have a 2-pronged system ... Leach is the one and only head coach.  Also, assume that Leach accepts the idea, and would like Walker to stay on as DC

Let me preface this by saying, Leach is not my first choice, nor am I a fan of Walker by any means ... I just want to get a sense of how Walker is perceived by BN.

Hypothetically, how would you react?

by Dante on Dec 3, 2007 11:53 PM PST reply actions  

My take on it is
whoever we hire should have full control of his staff. If who we hire wants DW, then I want DW. If he doesn't want DW, I don't. Pretty simple.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Dec 3, 2007 11:56 PM PST up reply actions  

I see him as a potential DC
He must not become our HC, but if the HC we get wants him, then go for it. Without pressure from our administration of course. Trying to push a DC, no matter how subtle, on our next coach isn't going to produce the kind of atmosphere we want around our FB program.

If the next guy happens to be Leach, he will want to seriously think long and hard about who he wants as a DC, because he and his choice will come under scrutiny given the obvious concern everyone has about his coaching style.

by Tydides on Dec 4, 2007 12:49 AM PST up reply actions  

not a fan of leach...
but i agree, he should be able to pick his own staff. i disagree with the poster above who noted no big difference between the current ucla and tech defenses.  our d is ranked better with a much harders strength of schedule... and we had an inept offense that put our D in horrible positions repeatedly.  again i'm not sold on leach and his gimmick offense. i'd much prefer a smart x's and o's guy (like kelly), but again, i agree... the new guy should have reign on who he wants his staff to be.

by bruinthug98 on Dec 4, 2007 1:04 AM PST up reply actions  

It is only a "gimmick"
in the eyes of people who think in traditional terms.

To others, it is a part of the future.

There are people, during the radio days, who said that TV was a gimmick.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 4, 2007 5:11 AM PST up reply actions  

That's true!
Spread offense is a passing fad, same with this 'personal computer' thing. It'll never catch on
Victory or until next year!

by ncrpz2 on Dec 4, 2007 11:46 AM PST up reply actions  

The positions were pretty much the same
Texas Tech had a few less turnovers than UCLA, but it also had a lower time of possession than UCLA.  The biggest difference was the strength of schedule.  I'm not saying it would be a bad idea for him to keep Walker if he is hired, but it would be stupid to choose Walker over him because of Texas Tech's defensive problems.

by SuperBruinMan on Dec 4, 2007 5:41 PM PST up reply actions  

depends on how influential he is...
in recruiting.

if leach can't recruit that well in LA (esp. in the beginning), and if walker is a crucial to recruiting and as well liked by players as i've heard, it might be worth keeping him even if he isn't the optimal DC. im not sure, i think it just depends on how good of a recruiter he is.

by radiorahim on Dec 4, 2007 1:46 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm not completely sold...
...on Leach. He is definiely the anti-Dorrell: A guy who comes off as slow but actually is a genius. However, his laid-back approach, creative offense, lack of a defense, etc. smells too much of Toledo. I think Leach would bring an exciting brand of football to Westwood and be successful here, but my gut feeling is that he will have the same issues that got Toledo fired.

The article was really interesting, and Leach sounds like a really interesting guy. I know that you can't give away too much of your secrets, but I wished the article gave a better example of the sorts of adjustments that Leach makes that allows him to be successful.

Another thing I noticed is that is seems his players that make it to the NFL don't have good track records. Could it be for the same reasons that spread offenses produce NFL busts (especially at the quarterback position)? If I were a stud athlete, I would choose a coach who has a track record of producing successful professional athletes (like Howland).

by solidgoldsound on Dec 4, 2007 1:04 AM PST reply actions  

There's Toledo potential in there
You're right about that, and the concerns about his ability to put a defense together are certainly legitimate. But the article does sort of shine a light on the NFL issue. The players he is able to recruit aren't on any NFL team's radar to begin with. They don't get offers from any of the big name schools. Howland has put Farmar and Afflalo in the NBA, but they were highly regarded out of HS.

I don't know if Leach is the guy. There are so many intangibles that come with trying to evaluate a coach. I'm just glad I don't have to be the one to do this search or make this decision.

by Tydides on Dec 4, 2007 1:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Leach's Players and the Pro's
Leach takes players that no one recruits, players who probably come to school never anticipating a pro career.

He has players without all of the natural attributes associated with pro ball -- and makes them look so good in college that the pro's at least give them a chance.

Do you think The Firm will go pro? Probably not. But Leach would give someone like him a chance to have a great college career.

Now, bring him the kind of kids we can recruit, kids who looked like pro's in junior high -- and watch what happens.

sjh

PS. For the last 5 years, we've had the opposite -- players not living to their true potential.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 4, 2007 5:14 AM PST up reply actions  

There's a reason...
he hasn't been snatched up yet.

This article might have changed your opinion of him, but for the first time in decades UCLA has the opportunity to lay the foundation for a perennially elite program. Leach is not the coach to fulfill that role.

I don't really want Mooch because he's a retread but I can at least see him as the first step into something greater. Leach just feels like a Toledo retread.

by Karakand on Dec 4, 2007 1:08 AM PST reply actions  

But...
To simply say there is a reason he hasn't been hired by a big name program and, therefore, should not be hired by UCLA is short sighted.

That's exactly the point. The more established programs don't like to think outside the box. They almost always look at coaching retreads. Taking a chance on Leach requires a leap of faith to some extent, but that also shows a determination to be on the cutting edge and ahead of the game.

My feeling is the reason he hasn't been snatched up is because people are afraid of doing something different. They would much rather get some washed up NFL DC or whatever, rather than take a chance on the brilliant coach sitting right in front of them.

I just don't think the fact that he hasn't been hired yet is reason not to hire him now. Let's be the first. Let's make a statement. Let's think outside the box.

GO BRUINS.

by Quickhands on Dec 4, 2007 9:21 AM PST up reply actions  

The author of the Leach article also wrote
"Moneyball."  (I thought "Moneyball" was a great book.  If you guys need hints to leave for Christmas presents, a "Moneyball" hint would not be regretted.)

Leach is the Billy Beane of college football.  He does have a "gimmick offense."  That "gimmick" is to run 30 more plays than the other side runs, and to score more points than the other side scores.  Just like Billy Beane's gimmick is to get guys with great om-base percentages and who will score more runs than the other team.

Prothro was an innovative coach.  Vermeil was an innovative coach.  But all those years of Donahue and CTS have dulled the senses of many.  We are used to stodgy, predictable offenses with occasional great plays by great players.  That's what CTS was talking about with his "Football 101" comment.  

Ask someone at a failing company why they continue to fix their 1962 Chevy panel truck to make deliveries or some similar question, and the answer often is "That's the way we've always done it."  That's the kind of thinking that makes companies fail and football programs fail.  Obviously Leach is an innovater and a creative guy.  

Whether it's Leach or someone else, I don't want a coach who is going to do the same old thing the way the old school football guys did it.  Remember when George Costanza did everything the opposite of what he thought he should do.  That's what I would like to see our coach try.  Maybe we can pass the ball and set up the run.

by Fox 71 on Dec 4, 2007 11:09 AM PST up reply actions  

Billy Beane
Billy Beane's "gimmick" is to go after whatever is under-valued in the market. At the time of Moneyball, OBP was clearly under-valued. As more of his disciples have gotten GM jobs and others have accepted its importance (sadly not my Cubs), he has had to shift to exploiting the market by finding something else that is under-valued.

One thing to point out is that it's not shocking Leach's defense struggles. If he's having such a hard time recruiting against the big dogs in Texas and Oklahoma on offense, he's got to have a harder time recruiting for defense. Other things cause problems for his defense too: unnecessary risks leading to poor field position as mentioned (going for it on 4th down on your side of the field) and his strategy likely will wear out his own defensive linemen - not just the opponents.

Clearly his offense still works though and isn't a flash in the pan. He beat Oklahoma earlier this season (Missouri's high-powered offense lost to the Sooners twice!). I do wonder about his recruiting since he seemingly still struggles for offensive guys. It might be easier at a big name school like UCLA, but he might still struggle.

He is by no means my leading candidate (for one, Michael Lewis is a great writer and you can't just base all your info on a coach based on Lewis)but if he's hired, a strong defensive coordinator will need to be hired too.

by Raisin on Dec 4, 2007 11:20 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't know whether DG wants or needs
any input from us.  I want him to find the absolute prettiest girl in the school and ask her to the prom.  Shoot high, DG!  Like Alabama did hiring Saban ... no, wait a minute.

by Fox 71 on Dec 4, 2007 1:02 PM PST up reply actions  

If You Liked "Moneyball"...
Do yourself a favor, Fox, and check out "The Blind Side." It was released in the last year or so, and basically goes through the evolution of football from run-dominated to pass-dominated, all the while chronicling the life and recruitment of Michael Oher, who went on to Ole Miss.

Lewis is a great writer, and "The Blind Side" is a great book. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

GO BRUINS!

by Quickhands on Dec 4, 2007 1:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Lewis
Good recommendation, good book.

by Raisin on Dec 4, 2007 1:24 PM PST up reply actions  

great book indeed
But I would further specify that it's about the tackle position in the NFL and how it became to be valued as the second most valuable commodity on a team: the first one being the QB, the 2nd one being the guy who protects the most valuable asset.

Like all of Lewis' work, it's approached from a distinctly economic angle. If you like Lewis, read Liars Poker, about his experience on Wall Street. It's an earlier work of his, but it's damn, damn funny. Moneyball and Blind Side are brilliant, but if you want to see Lewis' raw, witty intellect and humor in its purest form, check it out. Great stuff.

by Blitzburgh @ Bruins Nation on Dec 4, 2007 9:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Blitz
I've been rough on you (somewhat deservedly IMO!) but on this you get kudos and agreement from me. Not that you need it. But I've read all of Lewis's books, I am a big fan.

by tasser10 on Dec 5, 2007 6:27 AM PST up reply actions  

agreed
I think that we need to be careful about looking to deep at the anti-Dorrell - its nice to get away from Dorrell but not at the expense of going all the way to his antithesis and ending up with the same situation, different problem.

Leach might have offensive genius but the overall package might not be the best fit.

We really need a coach that brings the complete game - both great on and off the field, meaning good performance in game and in class. Johnson, Mendenhall, and Petersen are the best candidates still IMO but they seem to be long shots by far.

by blinkshot on Dec 4, 2007 2:36 AM PST reply actions  

Looking to the Future
I like Johnson, Petersen, and Mendenhall in that order.

But, I like Leach best.

We can make a choice to be the program of old thinking -- fit right in with all of the others or

We can make a choice to be the program that innovates and creates the new thinking.

Leach, with a solid D will give us a chance to change the paradigm, to set the path -- not just walk the old one.

Yes, there is some risk involved -- but none of the other choices are without risk. The downsides of all of the traditional coaches have been analyzed, at length, on this board.

The choice is whether we want to look around us at what is or in front of us at what can be.

I want to look forward.

sjh

PS. I'll be thrilled with any of these guys, just more thrilled with Leach.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 4, 2007 5:19 AM PST reply actions  

Great column
I love the creativity on offense.

If we had Leach, I wouldn't have to die every time we ran up the gut on first down a la Norvell (hey, it's good for 1-2 yards--without fail!).

by Barnes2JJ on Dec 4, 2007 6:53 AM PST reply actions  

Facts About Leach's Contract
The Houston Chronicle has an article in which it mentions that Leach is on the list of candidates for our HC position.

I found this interesting:

Salary:

2008 $1.75 million
2009 $1.85 million
2010 $2.15 million

$800,000 bonus for staying through 2009
$200,000 for staying through 2010

Interestingly, his buyout seems low at: $500,000.

IF THIS IS ABOUT MONEY -- WE WILL LOSE
but I do not think it is about money.

Leach is a west coast guy -- went to Pepperdine law school and loves it out here. If he wants to move away from Lubbock, we win.

If he wants a chance at recruiting on an even basis, something he does not have in the Big 12, we win.

If it is about money, we will lose.

When oil prices are high, Texans do well. And, they spend. Our arts are thriving. Charities doing well. If it comes down to money, no self-respecting Texan will lose the battle to a bunch of sprout eating Californians. Word.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Dec 4, 2007 6:53 AM PST reply actions  

This raised my interest from moderate to keen
Wow, what a terrific piece of writing. Impossible not to be a Mike Leach fan after reading this article. Thanks, QH.

For those who don't have the time to read the entire article just now, here are a few juicy excerpts.
He regards receivers as raffle tickets: the more of them you have, the more likely one will hit big. Some go wide, some go deep, some come across the middle. All are fast. (When Leach recruits high-school players, he is forced to compromise on most talents, but he insists on speed.) All have been conditioned to run much more than a football player normally does. A typical N.F.L. receiver in training might run 1,500 yards of sprints a day; Texas Tech receivers run 2,500 yards. To prepare his receivers' ankles and knees for the unusual punishment of his nonstop-running offense, Leach has installed a 40-yard-long sand pit on his practice field; slogging through the sand, he says, strengthens the receivers' joints. And when they finish sprinting, they move to Leach's tennis-ball bazookas. A year of catching tiny fuzzy balls fired at their chests at 60 m.p.h. has turned many young men who got to Texas Tech with hands of stone into glue-fingered receivers.
The Texas Tech offense is not just an offense; it's a mood: optimism. It is designed to maximize the possibility of something good happening rather than to minimize the possibility of something bad happening.
"Our notion of balance," Leach says, "is that the five guys who catch the ball all gain 1,000 yards in the season." (The Indianapolis Colts last season became only the fourth team in N.F.L. history to have three receivers gain more than 1,000 yards in a single season.) The trouble with running plays, as Leach sees it, is that they clump players together on the field - by putting two of them, during a handoff, in the same spot with the ball. "I've thought about going a whole season without calling a single running play," Leach says, only half-joking.
"The only information he ever asks for at halftime is the distribution," Hodges [Quarterback] says. "He doesn't even care about the score. If Y has caught five passes and Z hasn't caught any, he wants to figure out how to get the ball to Z." Leach says, "You try to get the ball in everyone's hands because then it makes the whole offense harder to keep track of." If they aren't spreading the ball around, they aren't forcing the defense to cover the entire field. They are leaving empty spaces unprobed.
"That's the risk of playing 330-pound guys," Leach said later. "You get good push, but if you got to run around a lot, you get tired." Before the game, Leach had said to Hodges: "Get those fat guys up front and make them run. They're already a little slow. By play 40, they'll be immobilized." That was one reason he kept sending so many receivers on deep routes: to force the defense to run with them.
"He makes them nervous," O'Hagan [Leach's agent] says. "They don't like coaching against him; they'd rather coach against another version of themselves. It's not that they don't like him. But privately they haven't accepted him. You know how you can tell? Because when you're talking to them Monday morning, and you say, Did you see the play Leach ran on third and 26, they dismiss it immediately. Dismissive is the word. They dismiss him out of hand. And you know why? Because he's not doing things because that's the way they've always been done. It's like he's been given this chessboard, and all the pieces but none of the rules, and he's trying to figure out where all the chess pieces should go. From scratch!"

by Bruinut on Dec 4, 2007 9:24 AM PST reply actions  

This is one crazy bastard
and for what it's worth, the article upped my interest in him considerably.

by Tydides on Dec 4, 2007 10:57 AM PST reply actions  

Wouldn't it be perfect
at UCLA? The quirky, crazy genius driving the rest of the conference mad? UCLA, at the forefront of innovation! I think it is kind of befitting of our image...

I wasn't so high on him before either, but if you think about it, he will at the very least make the games fun to watch again! Just think about how you feel when our offense used to take the field...any confidence? NONE whatsoever! Every completed pass was more a surprise and a relief than anything else. The risk is, of course, that we will badly need a very good defensive coordinator.

by tasser10 on Dec 4, 2007 3:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bruins Nation, an unofficial daily online scrap book covering the greatest collegiate athletic program in the nation. Established June 16, 2005. GO BRUINS.

Managers

Uclabear1_small Nestor

Arron_afflalo1_small Tydides

Brad_pitt_as_achilles_small Achilles

377011_2642084725867_1068030137_32302525_1166539782_n_small Ryan Rosenblatt

Telemachus_small Telemachus

Licenseplate_small gbruin

2761_small tasser10

Blue_bellerophon_small Bellerophon

Img_0052_2_small Patroclus

Small DCBruins

Of Counsels

094_small Ajax

Menelaus2_small Menelaus

Small Meriones

Small Odysseus

Associates

Eee_small freesia39

Uclabruins_small AHMB