clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Mike Finger Needs to Stop

I ran across SEN's Mike Finger's latest article about coach Leach while making my daily stop at The Ticket's, Bob Sturm's Blog, and I have so many questions and comments.  The article essentially is a piece about how Leach should cut his losses here at Tech and run, not walk, to Miami for the beaches and sunshine.

First, after Finger makes the obligatory pirate reference, he references Iowa State's Dan McCarney:

That's why college guys like Nick Saban jump to the NFL, and why West Virginia's Rich Rodriguez is flirting with Alabama this week, and why Dan McCarney erred by not getting out of Iowa State sooner.

McCarney, who rescued the Cyclones from decades of misery, never took advantage of his breakthrough. In an admirable yet naïve display of loyalty, he shunned interest from other schools and stayed committed to the program he'd helped resurrect.

In doing so, to put it in terms Leach would appreciate, McCarney walked the plank.

Now, McCarney is out of a job, which is the way almost all of these coaching stories end. The age of Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno is over, and no one expects to stay in one place for much longer than a decade anymore.

I can't claim that I know a ton about Iowa State football, but is there really a comparison between the football at Iowa State and Texas Tech?  Finger advocates that if the opportunity arises, that a college football coach has got to take the leap.  I agree on some level, there are some schools that inevitably have the "stepping-stone" label, but is my bias so great that I don't consider Tech to be a real "stepping-stone" school?

Finger goes on about how Leach is not accepted at the school:

Leach isn't Spike Dykes, and he knows it. Tech alumni never have fully embraced him, his pass-happy offense or his eccentricities, and there's a feeling he's always just a bad season away from being thrown out on his peg leg. So who can blame him for trying to scoop up the treasure before it sinks?

I've got to be honest, I freaking love Mike Leach.  

I think he's funny, I love his offense, and I think his eccentricities make him the most unique coach in a very bland coach world.  

I've also talked to quite a few Tech fans and none of them express displeasure about Leach and the job he's done, and I've never got the feeling that he's "a bad season away from being thrown out on his peg leg."  That's just ridiculous.  I think Tech fans embrace the offense, because the offense allows a historically mediocre football school allows it the ability to compete at the highest level because of the system.

I wrote this on my previous blog:

Let's face it, I truly believe that the perfect thing about the spread offense is that it allows less talented teams to compete with more talented teams. A spread offense can take a quarterback with average physical skills, but a high football IQ and can turn this into a dangerous offense. This of course doesn't take into consideration the idea that as this team wins, more talented players will go to that school and eventually that team can compete with some of the best teams in the nation. I've always thought that this was Leach's plan from the beginning, and it's all starting to come into focus.

So where do you stand on all of this?  Does Finger have a point or is my bias a little much?