wilcocks to whisky
- Thread starter rodmansrage
- Start date
Yez
PurpleJ
New Fish
My point is that there are plenty of other programs that are just as dependent (if not more) on a great coach as USC. Especially when you take into account the kind of success that USC demands. Maybe you can argue that their boosters have gone a bit soft, but not on the coaching thing.
I'm right. I win
The debate is over its settled science
Fenderbender123
New Fish
Obligatory
GreenRiverGatorz
New Fish
Disagree. Here are his defense's FEI Ratings over the years (unfortunately these only go back to 2007, but we get most of his DC career, which started in '06):
2007 Boise St: 61st
2008 Boise St: 12th
2009 Boise St: 11th
2010 Tennessee: 57th
2011 Tennessee: 32nd
2012 Washington: 37th
2013 Washington: 24th
It's worth noting that Tennessee was 18th and 23rd in 2008 and 2009 with Monte Kiffin at the helm, so Wilcox did not improve that unit. But I wouldn't say he necessarily came in and had a negative impact either, as Kiffin was a legendary DC, and they lost Eric Berry and Dan Williams in the first round of the 2010 NFL Draft before Wilcox took over. A dropoff was probably pretty predictable given those circumstances.
Of course, what's most impressive is the job he did at UW. We were 72nd and 103rd in the two years prior to Wilcox coming in, and he immediately turned our defense into one of the best in the conference. Kwiatkowski has since come in and taken our defense to another level, but I don't think that diminishes the fact that Wilcox was ultimately a success in his short two years here. USC is his only true dud of a stint, and he has absolutely earned another chance with a major program.
@GreenRiverGatorz
Wilcocks was great against bad teams, the curse of Husky Football. The genesis of what are you going to say when Arizona hangs 50 on him came from this. iDawg was all excited because our tough D was killing it when I asked him that question.
Spoiler alert - Arizona hung 50 on him
The guy we got now is a good defensive coach heading to greatness. It is actually a difference. Everyone has noticed it
Wilcocks was great against bad teams, the curse of Husky Football. The genesis of what are you going to say when Arizona hangs 50 on him came from this. iDawg was all excited because our tough D was killing it when I asked him that question.
Spoiler alert - Arizona hung 50 on him
The guy we got now is a good defensive coach heading to greatness. It is actually a difference. Everyone has noticed it
whatshouldicareabout
Active poster
Wilcox was better than Holt at coaching defense (Sark is better than Ty POTD) but Holt was the better recruiter.
Look at the commits Holt brought into UW (Trufant, Jamora/Kikaha, Shelton, Peters, Sean Parker, Andrew Hudson, James Sample, etc.) versus Wilcox (King, Victor, Bierria, Mathis). Not saying that Wilcox's kids are bad, but he wasn't recruiting them at the same level as Holt.
Look at the commits Holt brought into UW (Trufant, Jamora/Kikaha, Shelton, Peters, Sean Parker, Andrew Hudson, James Sample, etc.) versus Wilcox (King, Victor, Bierria, Mathis). Not saying that Wilcox's kids are bad, but he wasn't recruiting them at the same level as Holt.
Gotta be a whoosheroo, but in case not, c'mon man, you know full well that USC is amongst the very elite. Regardless of hood, stadium, and facilities, they are still capable of recruiting better than any program in the conference and in line with programs like Alabama and Ohio State. Of course coaching makes a difference, it does with every program. The difference between USC and most other programs is that when they get the right head coach, they don't just win conference titles, they win national titles and lay down dynasties.
HuskyInAZ
New Fish
Your can't be serious.
In the P12, WSU is clearly the most dependent on great coaching. Same is true for OSU, Cal, Utah, Colorado, AZ, ASU, and even UW.
Yes, the Coliseum is a shit hole, but it has history. And yes, the hood around USC is bad. Their facilities, though, are certainly up to par. And their proximity to HS recruits is second to none.
And to suggest the B1G is a better conference...this year, probably. What about last year? For a poster who thrives on living in the past, why ignore it now?
Except for the fact neither of them did much recruiting. None of the "Holt" recruits were very good until he left. Trufant was a slightly above average CB until his senior year.
IMO, the Huskies have been recruiting pretty well on defense for some time now, but the coaching really took off when Kawasaki took over. A lot of players suddenly got better in year one, and it carried over to year two, that's a testament to Kawasaki's coaching, and a reflection of the lack of something under Wilcox.
SteveInShelton
New Fish
Wilcox was a big improvement over Holt just like how Sark was a big improvement over Ty.
NeGgaPlEaSe
New Fish
Hard to accurately judge Wilcox at UW with Sarks ball control offense, tbh