A Perfect Marriage?-Mike Leach and Arkansas?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Mike Leach, the HC at Texas Tech, was brought up in another thread and I thought, whoaaa, now there is a name I have not heard mentioned on here in regard to who might be a great successor to HDN, when and IF, he goes anywhere. My first thoughts were, geez, wouldn't he and Reggie Herring make a great team? Mr. Wide Open Offense and Mr. I'll Kick Your Butt Defense teamed against the college football world? While Leach has a pretty dry personality and sense of humor, he is never, on the other hand, in the middle of any controversy. He recruits well in Texas but does not limit himself to Texas alone. He is not above going to California to get a great receiver if he feels he needs to. Granted, Texas Tech hasn't set the world on fire, but being placed in a better Head Coaching gig(Arkansas) and being teamed with our current DC, might just set the ball rolling towards us handing someone a knock out punch in the SEC Championship.

His numbers, averaged and compared to ours(offensively) from 2002 though 2006 are listed below.

                       Scoring Off    Pass Off      Total Off      Red Zone Off
Texas Tech          37.8            404.4          501.7             84.9%

Arkansas             28.8             165.5          384.2             78.3%

An average of 9 more points per game might have made a big difference in our record last year. Lost to LSU by 5, Florida by 10 and Wisconsin by 3? Might have been 12-2 or even 13-1 and with the twists and turns of a season, maybe even 14-0? And the fact that his offenses punch it in 6.6% more often that we have, just means more points. The one thing Leach has always needed and has never seemed to be able to have is a great RB. We have several. He knows how to develop QB's and WR's and with a strong minded DC like Herring to game plan against SEC offenses, it might just be a marriage made in heaven.

Your thoughts?

           

[PaleHorse]

Won't work in the SEC.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Won't work in the SEC.

Frank?

[Boner]

Won't work in the SEC.

Doesn't work in the Big 12.  If fans think last year was mediocre for Arkansas, I have no idea why they would want Leach.

He beats all the cupcakes, goes .500 against some decent teams, and gets blown out of the stadium by the good teams (i.e. teams with defensive speed and running games).

[demonHOG1013]

Reggie wouldnt like it for the same reason he didnt want Gus to run his offense.  Statistically that offense makes the defense look bad.  Its not that Texas Tech has a bad defense its just statistically bad because of the offense they run

[macman]

Is this the same Texas Tech team that had Texas beaten badly but couldn't win because they did not have a run game?

[AFWarrior83]

The Big XII does not have the teams that the SEC has. We just need balance.

[hog.goblin]

His numbers, averaged and compared to ours(offensively) from 2002 though 2006 are listed below.

During the same time, in the weak Big 12, Texas Tech is 42-22 overall, 24-16 in conference.  Thanks but no thanks.  Why replace Nutt with someone who, at best, would get us the same results, albeit with a different style?

[NWASooner]

Houston Nutt regularly wins 7-8 games with a running game and no passing game.  Leach would win 7-8 games with a passing game and no running game.  What's the difference other than entertainment value?  Although, he would bring some expertise in the passing area.  OU wouldn't have had this success we did over the past 6 years if not for the one year Leach spent in Norman.

FWIW, I love Mike Leach.  He's hilarious and actually very intelligent.  He has a law degree from Pepperdine, I believe.  He has the best line from a coach ever.  After breaking A&M's heart yet again, he said "Sometimes a pirate can beat a soldier."  (This was after spending game week making fun of the Aggie Corps.)

Back to the issue at hand, though.  Mike Leach's offense and Houston Nutt's offense are just opposite sides of the same coin.  Last year the pro-Nutt people kept defending their high school offense by thinking the pro-Gus people were wanting a Mike Leach style offense.

A passing game entertains but balance and defense wins titles.

[hogfan064]

Mike Leach, the HC at Texas Tech, was brought up in another thread and I thought, whoaaa, now there is a name I have not heard mentioned on here in regard to who might be a great successor to HDN, when and IF, he goes anywhere. My first thoughts were, geez, wouldn't he and Reggie Herring make a great team? Mr. Wide Open Offense and Mr. I'll Kick Your Butt Defense teamed against the college football world? While Leach has a pretty dry personality and sense of humor, he is never, on the other hand, in the middle of any controversy. He recruits well in Texas but does not limit himself to Texas alone. He is not above going to California to get a great receiver if he feels he needs to. Granted, Texas Tech hasn't set the world on fire, but being placed in a better Head Coaching gig(Arkansas) and being teamed with our current DC, might just set the ball rolling towards us handing someone a knock out punch in the SEC Championship.

His numbers, averaged and compared to ours(offensively) from 2002 though 2006 are listed below.

                       Scoring Off    Pass Off      Total Off      Red Zone Off
Texas Tech          37.8            404.4          501.7             84.9%

Arkansas             28.8             165.5          384.2             78.3%

An average of 9 more points per game might have made a big difference in our record last year. Lost to LSU by 5, Florida by 10 and Wisconsin by 3? Might have been 12-2 or even 13-1 and with the twists and turns of a season, maybe even 14-0? And the fact that his offenses punch it in 6.6% more often that we have, just means more points. The one thing Leach has always needed and has never seemed to be able to have is a great RB. We have several. He knows how to develop QB's and WR's and with a strong minded DC like Herring to game plan against SEC offenses, it might just be a marriage made in heaven.

Your thoughts?

          

Did you see how that Mike Leach offense did against Alabama in the Cotton Bowl 2 years ago.  They put up great numbers against bad teams.  Then when they play a good team they'll lose.  Remember how great those Hal Mummie offenses worked at UK?  6-6 and 7-5 seasons were the best Hal could do.  If I'm not mistaken Leach is from the Mummie school of offense.   If he were to come to Arkansas we'd win 7-8 games a year, but never win a championship.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Won't work in the SEC.

Doesn't work in the Big 12.  If fans think last year was mediocre for Arkansas, I have no idea why they would want Leach.

He beats all the cupcakes, goes .500 against some decent teams, and gets blown out of the stadium by the good teams (i.e. teams with defensive speed and running games).

I disagree. The reason they don't win more ball games is because traditionally, they don't play great defense. Put him with a great DC like Herring and things would change dramatically. And that offense, with the way they throw the ball around, just think about how many yards D-Mac and F-Jo could get with the defense backed off the line of scrimmage? The holes would be gigantic. No one wants to see D-Mac or F-Jo in the open field. As for the schedule he plays, well, he does play some cupcakes, no doubt.......but what do we call Missouri State? Utah State? Chattanooga for goodness sakes? All teams, for the most part, have their share of cupcakes. But Texas Tech has had their share of big wins as well with victories over Nebraska, Texas A&M and Oklahoma. They did lose to #8 Alabama by 3 in the Cotton Bowl one year and another year to #5 Texas by only 3. But they have aklso beaten #9 California by 14, #18 Ole Miss by 4 and #9 Texas by 4.

I think he would be a great fit and we can't really boast that we have been setting the world on fire with our play, with the exception of last year. I am thinking about the long term good of the program. Changing the way we do things and being more open to newer and more progressive offensive ideas, that's all.

[PAHog]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

[hogfan064]

Won't work in the SEC.

Doesn't work in the Big 12.  If fans think last year was mediocre for Arkansas, I have no idea why they would want Leach.

He beats all the cupcakes, goes .500 against some decent teams, and gets blown out of the stadium by the good teams (i.e. teams with defensive speed and running games).

I disagree. The reason they don't win more ball games is because traditionally, they don't play great defense. Put him with a great DC like Herring and things would change dramatically. And that offense, with the way they throw the ball around, just think about how many yards D-Mac and F-Jo could get with the defense backed off the line of scrimmage? The holes would be gigantic. No one wants to see D-Mac or F-Jo in the open field. As for the schedule he plays, well, he does play some cupcakes, no doubt.......but what do we call Missouri State? Utah State? Chattanooga for goodness sakes? All teams, for the most part, have their share of cupcakes. But Texas Tech has had their share of big wins as well with victories over Nebraska, Texas A&M and Oklahoma. They did lose to #8 Alabama by 3 in the Cotton Bowl one year and another year to #5 Texas by only 3. But they have aklso beaten #9 California by 14, #18 Ole Miss by 4 and #9 Texas by 4.

I think he would be a great fit and we can't really boast that we have been setting the world on fire with our play, with the exception of last year. I am thinking about the long term good of the program. Changing the way we do things and being more open to newer and more progressive offensive ideas, that's all.

Herring would leave if he was coach at Arkansas.  Herring wouldn't want to coach a defense that's in the game as much as TTU's is. 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Houston Nutt regularly wins 7-8 games with a running game and no passing game.  Leach would win 7-8 games with a passing game and no running game.  What's the difference other than entertainment value?  Although, he would bring some expertise in the passing area.  OU wouldn't have had this success we did over the past 6 years if not for the one year Leach spent in Norman.

FWIW, I love Mike Leach.  He's hilarious and actually very intelligent.  He has a law degree from Pepperdine, I believe.  He has the best line from a coach ever.  After breaking A&M's heart yet again, he said "Sometimes a pirate can beat a soldier."  (This was after spending game week making fun of the Aggie Corps.)

Back to the issue at hand, though.  Mike Leach's offense and Houston Nutt's offense are just opposite sides of the same coin.  Last year the pro-Nutt people kept defending their high school offense by thinking the pro-Gus people were wanting a Mike Leach style offense.

A passing game entertains but balance and defense wins titles.

Hey, I am with you, but we have great running backs here and I believe he would find a way to use them, to incorporate them into the offense. As you pointed out, he is intelligent. With this arsenal of weapons and an application of his spread offense, I think we would be seriously dangerous, more so than now. Like you, I am not for exchanging an ALL running game, for an ALL passing game. I just want to see us open it up a bit, have a viable game plan and passing attack that is more than, "geez, it is 3rd and 10, guess we better throw".

[Ouachihog]

I agree with most of the responses.  If people think HDN is "mediocre" then they definitely wouldn't be happy with Leach. 

Over the last 7 seasons, Tech is 2-12 against Texas and Oklahoma.  I don't see any improvement with Leach, in my opinion. 

However, if HDN leaves or gets fired, and Butch Davis turns us down, then we will be going after someone like this guy.  It could be much the same as the basketball coaching search turned out to be.  I like John Pelphrey, and he may set the world on fire at Ark, but he wasn't one of our top 3 or 4 candidates.  If the football coaching search turns out like that, who do we end up with??

[djgaffer]

Wow.  I think this would be a horrible marriage.  I would put the same test that most apply to Nutt.  Don't look at results from non-conference and weak conference opponent games.  Look at the offensive numbers versus Texas, OU, and see if you still think it is a great system. 

The 2005 Bama team held them to 10 points in the cotton bowl.  The touchdown was a 2 play, 38 yard drive.   

I think this is just a factor of the mindset that "anything different is better" and "passing is better than running".  Otherwise, there's not a lot of merit to the pass, pass, pass offenses.  The NFL had it's stint of run and shoot teams in the 90s.  Nobody won a championship that way.  The system puts points up but has too many flaws.  You put a lot of pressure on your defense by having them on the field more.  Your defense is more apt to be soft because you're spending most of your practice time in pass coverage, so you can be more susceptible to the run. 

It works in some colleges against lesser opponents.  You can put up gaudy numbers in those games.  But when the athletes get faster on defense (therefore the field gets smaller) these teams always struggle.  I think it would be ugly in the SEC.

I would like to pass the ball more effectively.  I do not want Mike Leach.

[hogfan064]

Hire Charlie Strong, Arkansas native, Spurrier assistant, Urban Myer assistant, Lou Holtz assistant, and he has a NC ring.  He knows how to recruit Florida, Georgia, and The Carolinas.  3 hotbed recruiting spots that the Hogs rarely ever get major talent from.

[tconey1]

Leech may be the best we can get. I dont think that there will be a trail of coaches begging to come to the hill. The days of getting a BIG name coach are over -  wait, when did we ever get a big name coach?

[NWASooner]

As for the Mike Leach folds against good teams theory, that may be true but Tech played Ole Miss a few years back and lit them up like a pinball machine.

[Landonhog]

We don't like our middle of the pack SEC coach so we go get a middle of the pack Little 12 coach    


Obviously I'll take a little more balance, but I certainly don't want to become a gimicky pass happy offense...  Go watch AFL if that's what your wanting to see...  I want my hogs to be a smash mouth running team, that passes to open up the run...  :razorback:

[Landonhog]

As for the Mike Leach folds against good teams theory, that may be true but Tech played Ole Miss a few years back and lit them up like a pinball machine.

Who didn't?

[hogfan064]

Leech may be the best we can get. I dont think that there will be a trail of coaches begging to come to the hill. The days of getting a BIG name coach are over -  wait, when did we ever get a big name coach?

Danny Ford was one of the winningest coaches in the 80s.  The youngest coach ever to win a NC.  He was a big name guy.  Lou Holtz was a NFL coach and was well thought of as a college coach when we hired him. 

[Ouachihog]

As for the Mike Leach folds against good teams theory, that may be true but Tech played Ole Miss a few years back and lit them up like a pinball machine.

We've outscored Ole Miss 101-23 over the last 3 years.  Beating Ole Miss isn't the problem. 

[DeltaBoy]

Mike Leach, the HC at Texas Tech, was brought up in another thread and I thought, whoaaa, now there is a name I have not heard mentioned on here in regard to who might be a great successor to HDN, when and IF, he goes anywhere. My first thoughts were, geez, wouldn't he and Reggie Herring make a great team? Mr. Wide Open Offense and Mr. I'll Kick Your Butt Defense teamed against the college football world? While Leach has a pretty dry personality and sense of humor, he is never, on the other hand, in the middle of any controversy. He recruits well in Texas but does not limit himself to Texas alone. He is not above going to California to get a great receiver if he feels he needs to. Granted, Texas Tech hasn't set the world on fire, but being placed in a better Head Coaching gig(Arkansas) and being teamed with our current DC, might just set the ball rolling towards us handing someone a knock out punch in the SEC Championship.

His numbers, averaged and compared to ours(offensively) from 2002 though 2006 are listed below.

                       Scoring Off    Pass Off      Total Off      Red Zone Off
Texas Tech          37.8            404.4          501.7             84.9%

Arkansas             28.8             165.5          384.2             78.3%

An average of 9 more points per game might have made a big difference in our record last year. Lost to LSU by 5, Florida by 10 and Wisconsin by 3? Might have been 12-2 or even 13-1 and with the twists and turns of a season, maybe even 14-0? And the fact that his offenses punch it in 6.6% more often that we have, just means more points. The one thing Leach has always needed and has never seemed to be able to have is a great RB. We have several. He knows how to develop QB's and WR's and with a strong minded DC like Herring to game plan against SEC offenses, it might just be a marriage made in heaven.

Your thoughts?

          

I'll Take the Mad Professor Mike Leach anyday anytime over the NUTTBOY!

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Wow.  I think this would be a horrible marriage.  I would put the same test that most apply to Nutt.  Don't look at results from non-conference and weak conference opponent games.  Look at the offensive numbers versus Texas, OU, and see if you still think it is a great system. 

The 2005 Bama team held them to 10 points in the cotton bowl.  The touchdown was a 2 play, 38 yard drive.   

I think this is just a factor of the mindset that "anything different is better" and "passing is better than running".  Otherwise, there's not a lot of merit to the pass, pass, pass offenses.  The NFL had it's stint of run and shoot teams in the 90s.  Nobody won a championship that way.  The system puts points up but has too many flaws.  You put a lot of pressure on your defense by having them on the field more.  Your defense is more apt to be soft because you're spending most of your practice time in pass coverage, so you can be more susceptible to the run. 

It works in some colleges against lesser opponents.  You can put up gaudy numbers in those games.  But when the athletes get faster on defense (therefore the field gets smaller) these teams always struggle.  I think it would be ugly in the SEC.

I would like to pass the ball more effectively.  I do not want Mike Leach.

Again, I am not advocating trading an ALL run offense for an ALL pass offense. This is exactly what many of Gus' detractors thought we were going to be getting into. I am not for throwing out the baby with the bathwater here. What I am for, is taking a great offensive mind(like Leach), putting him in a better program with much better talent overall, a better recruiting base to work with(and he can still recruit Texas) and teaming him with a great DC(which is something they have never had at TT) and affording him the opportunity to blend a solid passing game with our already solid running game to give us greater balance and take the pressure off of what are probably the best two backs in any one backfield in America today(the Dynamic Duo). Trust me, if we don't find some balance, as great as they are, they won't be "dynamic" for very long.

[djgaffer]

Wow.  I think this would be a horrible marriage.  I would put the same test that most apply to Nutt.  Don't look at results from non-conference and weak conference opponent games.  Look at the offensive numbers versus Texas, OU, and see if you still think it is a great system. 

The 2005 Bama team held them to 10 points in the cotton bowl.  The touchdown was a 2 play, 38 yard drive.   

I think this is just a factor of the mindset that "anything different is better" and "passing is better than running".  Otherwise, there's not a lot of merit to the pass, pass, pass offenses.  The NFL had it's stint of run and shoot teams in the 90s.  Nobody won a championship that way.  The system puts points up but has too many flaws.  You put a lot of pressure on your defense by having them on the field more.  Your defense is more apt to be soft because you're spending most of your practice time in pass coverage, so you can be more susceptible to the run. 

It works in some colleges against lesser opponents.  You can put up gaudy numbers in those games.  But when the athletes get faster on defense (therefore the field gets smaller) these teams always struggle.  I think it would be ugly in the SEC.

I would like to pass the ball more effectively.  I do not want Mike Leach.

Again, I am not advocating trading an ALL run offense for an ALL pass offense. This is exactly what many of Gus' detractors thought we were going to be getting into. I am not for throwing out the baby with the bathwater here. What I am for, is taking a great offensive mind(like Leach), putting him in a better program with much better talent overall, a better recruiting base to work with(and he can still recruit Texas) and teaming him with a great DC(which is something they have never had at TT) and affording him the opportunity to blend a solid passing game with our already solid running game to give us greater balance and take the pressure off of what are probably the best two backs in any one backfield in America today(the Dynamic Duo). Trust me, if we don't find some balance, as great as they are, they won't be "dynamic" for very long.

The difference to me is that we already know what Mike Leach is.  He throws it 50 plus times a game.  With Gus, we still don't know what he will evolve into as a college coach.  I have a tendency to believe that he wants to provide more balance.  Given the two, I would take an unproven Gus Malzahn.  I just don't like Leach's philosophy.  It's flawed with regard to winning.  Scoring points, sure.  But it doesn't win at a high level.

[Mr. Hog]

His numbers, averaged and compared to ours(offensively) from 2002 though 2006 are listed below.

But we could fire the Dork !  That would be nice.

During the same time, in the weak Big 12, Texas Tech is 42-22 overall, 24-16 in conference.  Thanks but no thanks.  Why replace Nutt with someone who, at best, would get us the same results, albeit with a different style?

[Mr. Hog]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

I'll take a good high school coach with good people around him anyday over Nutt !

Fire the Dork !

[Boner]

Mike Leach vs. Texas and Oklahoma

2-12

Average score

UT/OU - 39
Tech - 21

He can not beat the good teams.  And a lot of that is because those two schools have speed on defense and a running game.

[djgaffer]

Mike Leach vs. Texas and Oklahoma

2-12

Average score

UT/OU - 39
Tech - 21

He can not beat the good teams.  And a lot of that is because those two schools have speed on defense and a running game.

In four games, we have as many wins against UT/OU as TTech does in 14.  And our losses have been by 2 and 7 points.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

Well, ultimately, I have to agree with you. If we are going to get a new coach, let's get one that is a big name and a proven winner and pay him like the big time stud he is supposed to be. That would be the fastest and most productive way to get where most of us want the program to go.

[RazorRaider]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

Well, ultimately, I have to agree with you. If we are going to get a new coach, let's get one that is a big name and a proven winner and pay him like the big time stud he is supposed to be. That would be the fastest and most productive way to get where most of us want the program to go.

While agree with you on hiring a big name and throw the money he wants to make it worth his while let's look at U of A history.

For the most part the U of A is all about trying to hire on the cheap.

Why would they change that now?

[DOGALUM]

Won't work in the SEC.

Thanks for the insight Frank!

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

Well, ultimately, I have to agree with you. If we are going to get a new coach, let's get one that is a big name and a proven winner and pay him like the big time stud he is supposed to be. That would be the fastest and most productive way to get where most of us want the program to go.

While agree with you on hiring a big name and throw the money he wants to make it worth his while let's look at U of A history.

For the most part the U of A is all about trying to hire on the cheap.

Why would they change that now?

Hey Razor, I understand and you may not be far from wrong, but the only reason I wrote this thread the way I did, was to make people think about other options. It has stimulated some discussion and hopefully, will cause people to think seriously about who might be a good fit, just in case we need to go after one, in the near future. I am hoping. I'm just trying to stir it up a little.

[TX HOG]

Would I rather have Leach than Nutt?  YES.

Would I be truly happy with this hire?  NO.

[RazorRaider]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

Well, ultimately, I have to agree with you. If we are going to get a new coach, let's get one that is a big name and a proven winner and pay him like the big time stud he is supposed to be. That would be the fastest and most productive way to get where most of us want the program to go.

While agree with you on hiring a big name and throw the money he wants to make it worth his while let's look at U of A history.

For the most part the U of A is all about trying to hire on the cheap.

Why would they change that now?

Hey Razor, I understand and you may not be far from wrong, but the only reason I wrote this thread the way I did, was to make people think about other options. It has stimulated some discussion and hopefully, will cause people to think seriously about who might be a good fit, just in case we need to go after one, in the near future. I am hoping. I'm just trying to stir it up a little.

Ah I see.

Well while this guy isn't exactly big name yet.But that Petersen from Boise St. is who I would go after.

Let's face it if he can guide Boise St. to a BCS bowl win over OU think what he could do at a place with top notch facilities and a truly dedcated fanbase.

[ArkansasI]

Mike Leach vs. Texas and Oklahoma

2-12

Average score

UT/OU - 39
Tech - 21

He can not beat the good teams.  And a lot of that is because those two schools have speed on defense and a running game.

Well, what would we expect Texas Tech to do against Texas and OU?  Put him at the State University and see what would happen.

If Leach were at Texas or OU, do you think Tech would ever beat him?

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Leech is not the type of coach those that want Nutt out (myself included) would want coming in.  I want a proven winner.  By winner, I mean someone who is winning or has recently won a conference and/or BCS game (not counting the Big Least as it is not really a BCS conference in football).  Add to that the fact that maybe 10-15% of the roster on offense could play his style.  You would see a 2-3 year setback based on the lack of personnel alone.

Well, ultimately, I have to agree with you. If we are going to get a new coach, let's get one that is a big name and a proven winner and pay him like the big time stud he is supposed to be. That would be the fastest and most productive way to get where most of us want the program to go.

While agree with you on hiring a big name and throw the money he wants to make it worth his while let's look at U of A history.

For the most part the U of A is all about trying to hire on the cheap.

Why would they change that now?

Hey Razor, I understand and you may not be far from wrong, but the only reason I wrote this thread the way I did, was to make people think about other options. It has stimulated some discussion and hopefully, will cause people to think seriously about who might be a good fit, just in case we need to go after one, in the near future. I am hoping. I'm just trying to stir it up a little.

Ah I see.

Well while this guy isn't exactly big name yet.But that Petersen from Boise St. is who I would go after.

Let's face it if he can guide Boise St. to a BCS bowl win over OU think what he could do at a place with top notch facilities and a truly dedcated fanbase.

I think Peterson, while not an established big name coach, might be a really good choice. Personally(I will get dissed for this), I think we should change the way coach's are paid and give them a piece of the action. Their base plus a percentage of what the program makes(15% let's say) and go after Pete Carroll. That is a guy who has been there, done that, and knows how to do it again. For the kind of money I am talking about, say 4.5 million, plus their annual salary, of say $750,000, we could get anyone we wanted, including Pete Carroll.

Just my take.

[Stella]

I would take Leach in a NY Second to show some of these stuffy Hog fans what a real passing attack looks like.  Casey Dick would not be the quarterback for Mike Leach. 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I would take Leach in a NY Second to show some of these stuffy Hog fans what a real passing attack looks like.  Casey Dick would not be the quarterback for Mike Leach. 

You are correct Stella....he couldn't perform in that offense.

[Hugulus Hog]

I thought the big gripe against hdn is 1. no sec titles 2. no national titles.

The only thing Leach has shown is that throwing the ball 75 times a game doesn't win the conference or create a national contender.

Even though, perversely I'd love to see the same crowd trashing hdn for running all the time have to watch Leach throw all the time and get the exact. same. result.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I thought the big gripe against hdn is 1. no sec titles 2. no national titles.

The only thing Leach has shown is that throwing the ball 75 times a game doesn't win the conference or create a national contender.

Even though, perversely I'd love to see the same crowd trashing hdn for running all the time have to watch Leach throw all the time and get the exact. same. result.

I appreciate your viewpoint but that has been addressed earlier in the thread. I am not for ALL throwing anymore than ALL running. There has to be this thing called "balance". Leach could help us as long as we didn't go overboard with the throwing aspect.

[Boner]

I thought the big gripe against hdn is 1. no sec titles 2. no national titles.

The only thing Leach has shown is that throwing the ball 75 times a game doesn't win the conference or create a national contender.

Even though, perversely I'd love to see the same crowd trashing hdn for running all the time have to watch Leach throw all the time and get the exact. same. result.

I appreciate your viewpoint but that has been addressed earlier in the thread. I am not for ALL throwing anymore than ALL running. There has to be this thing called "balance". Leach could help us as long as we didn't go overboard with the throwing aspect.

What about Leach's history makes you believe that he'd be balanced?  TTech is one of the few schools that would rather have 3rd and 10 than 3rd and inches because they cannot run the ball to save their lives.  And no running backs (or defensive player for that matter) really want to play there.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I thought the big gripe against hdn is 1. no sec titles 2. no national titles.

The only thing Leach has shown is that throwing the ball 75 times a game doesn't win the conference or create a national contender.

Even though, perversely I'd love to see the same crowd trashing hdn for running all the time have to watch Leach throw all the time and get the exact. same. result.

I appreciate your viewpoint but that has been addressed earlier in the thread. I am not for ALL throwing anymore than ALL running. There has to be this thing called "balance". Leach could help us as long as we didn't go overboard with the throwing aspect.

What about Leach's history makes you believe that he'd be balanced?  TTech is one of the few schools that would rather have 3rd and 10 than 3rd and inches because they cannot run the ball to save their lives.  And no running backs (or defensive player for that matter) really want to play there.

I believe being in a different scenario, better program, better recruits overall, better talent on the team, and great RB's would change, to a degree, his overall offensive philosophy. More weapons gives him a greater arsenal to utilize. He is not a dummy, he is a smart guy, too smart to not use all the weapons at his disposal. In the Big 12, he had to recruit against the likes of Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Colorado, Oklahoma State not to mention out of conference schools like TCU and even Baylor(Big 12), has made tremendous strides in recuiting just because they are committed to stepping up their program. He would have just as hard a time if not more so in the SEC, but lots of kids are looking for the big bucks of the NFL and for WR's, and QB's who have NFL aspirations especially, the passing game is where their big bucks are.

He would not come here being all about the pass. He would utilize all the assets at his disposal, but that is just my take.

[RazorRaider]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Leach

Found that on Leach. After reading it I am not sure about his being able to bring balance.

I know wikipedia isn't always the most accurate on some things but if I read this correctly it appears he really is a pass heavy kind of offensive mind.

[bd93]

We need Butch Davis!  Not Leach.

[Boner]

I thought the big gripe against hdn is 1. no sec titles 2. no national titles.

The only thing Leach has shown is that throwing the ball 75 times a game doesn't win the conference or create a national contender.

Even though, perversely I'd love to see the same crowd trashing hdn for running all the time have to watch Leach throw all the time and get the exact. same. result.

I appreciate your viewpoint but that has been addressed earlier in the thread. I am not for ALL throwing anymore than ALL running. There has to be this thing called "balance". Leach could help us as long as we didn't go overboard with the throwing aspect.

What about Leach's history makes you believe that he'd be balanced?  TTech is one of the few schools that would rather have 3rd and 10 than 3rd and inches because they cannot run the ball to save their lives.  And no running backs (or defensive player for that matter) really want to play there.

I believe being in a different scenario, better program, better recruits overall, better talent on the team, and great RB's would change, to a degree, his overall offensive philosophy. More weapons gives him a greater arsenal to utilize. He is not a dummy, he is a smart guy, too smart to not use all the weapons at his disposal. In the Big 12, he had to recruit against the likes of Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Colorado, Oklahoma State not to mention out of conference schools like TCU and even Baylor(Big 12), has made tremendous strides in recuiting just because they are committed to stepping up their program. He would have just as hard a time if not more so in the SEC, but lots of kids are looking for the big bucks of the NFL and for WR's, and QB's who have NFL aspirations especially, the passing game is where their big bucks are.

He would not come here being all about the pass. He would utilize all the assets at his disposal, but that is just my take.

I'm not trying to be a smartass, so don't take it that way.  I appreciate all this info you provide around here.  But, to me, what you described is a coach who "does more with less."  The same thing Nutt is described as, and the same thing people hate Nutt being called.  I believe that Arkansas can do great things in the SEC, and on a national level.  But I see Arkansas::SEC is about the same as Texas Tech::Big 12.

This isn't meant to be a "poor little Arkansas" post, because I think we can be a national player.  But I don't think Mike Leach would all of a sudden have a bunch more advantages at Arkansas, than he would at Texas Tech.  I doubt he could all of a sudden recruit better by coming to Arkansas.  And even if he could, the talent level for all his opponents would be better than it is at Tech.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I thought the big gripe against hdn is 1. no sec titles 2. no national titles.

The only thing Leach has shown is that throwing the ball 75 times a game doesn't win the conference or create a national contender.

Even though, perversely I'd love to see the same crowd trashing hdn for running all the time have to watch Leach throw all the time and get the exact. same. result.

I appreciate your viewpoint but that has been addressed earlier in the thread. I am not for ALL throwing anymore than ALL running. There has to be this thing called "balance". Leach could help us as long as we didn't go overboard with the throwing aspect.

What about Leach's history makes you believe that he'd be balanced?  TTech is one of the few schools that would rather have 3rd and 10 than 3rd and inches because they cannot run the ball to save their lives.  And no running backs (or defensive player for that matter) really want to play there.

I believe being in a different scenario, better program, better recruits overall, better talent on the team, and great RB's would change, to a degree, his overall offensive philosophy. More weapons gives him a greater arsenal to utilize. He is not a dummy, he is a smart guy, too smart to not use all the weapons at his disposal. In the Big 12, he had to recruit against the likes of Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Colorado, Oklahoma State not to mention out of conference schools like TCU and even Baylor(Big 12), has made tremendous strides in recuiting just because they are committed to stepping up their program. He would have just as hard a time if not more so in the SEC, but lots of kids are looking for the big bucks of the NFL and for WR's, and QB's who have NFL aspirations especially, the passing game is where their big bucks are.

He would not come here being all about the pass. He would utilize all the assets at his disposal, but that is just my take.

I'm not trying to be a smartass, so don't take it that way.  I appreciate all this info you provide around here.  But, to me, what you described is a coach who "does more with less."  The same thing Nutt is described as, and the same thing people hate Nutt being called.  I believe that Arkansas can do great things in the SEC, and on a national level.  But I see Arkansas::SEC is about the same as Texas Tech::Big 12.

This isn't meant to be a "poor little Arkansas" post, because I think we can be a national player.  But I don't think Mike Leach would all of a sudden have a bunch more advantages at Arkansas, than he would at Texas Tech.  I doubt he could all of a sudden recruit better by coming to Arkansas.  And even if he could, the talent level for all his opponents would be better than it is at Tech.

Boner, to be honest, as I stated earlier, I don't really support Leach as the next HC. I only started this thread to spur conversation and make people think about who might be a viable alternative to what we have now. Threads like this make people start thinking, that was my goal and judging from the responses, people ARE thinking. Truthfully, if I were to pick someone that is not necessarily a prominent name at this time, I would pick Mike Stoops at Arizona. He is on the verge of a break out year in the Pac 10 and as far as being a defensive genius goes, he makes Herring look like a toddler. He is smart enough to know that he is not an offensive genius and that he needs to bring someone in who will insure that we score points and a lot of them. Defensively, he has got it nailed, better than what we have now. He has strong recruiting ties to the midwest, the southwest(he raped Texas in recruiting for years and made them like it), and the midwest and to some extent, the southeast. HE would be my dream pick for Arkansas and I promise you, he would have us in a NC within three years.

Just trying to stir up conversation and the thought process here.

Just my take.

[silvertip]

Reggie wouldnt like it for the same reason he didnt want Gus to run his offense.  Statistically that offense makes the defense look bad.  Its not that Texas Tech has a bad defense its just statistically bad because of the offense they run

And why do you think TT's offense makes the defense look bad? I would imagine you think that the strong passing game does not result in enough time of possession---thus putting the defense on the field too long?

2006, Time of Possession:

Arkansas......28:41--as usual, HDN's running offense LOSES the TOP. (98th in NCAA)
Texas Tech..27:42--about one minute= 3 more plays against their defense. (112th)

As usual, Nutt's offense is NOT clock-control. Anyone that thinks it is hasn't been paying attention. Typically, the better the Hog running game, the LESS TOP.

Reggie doen't like the passing game because he has his head in the same dark, smelly place that Houston does. And no, Reggie will not stay when Houston leaves.

[HOG RED UMP]

leach=worse loser than HDN and with an attitude...............he sucks