Husky Fan on Neuheisel

Editor's note: Portions of this post are reprinted with permission from dawgncarolina from the BRO free football board.

If you're interested in getting a good perspective on Rick Neuheisel, you should talk to Husky fans. They lived with Rick at the helm for four seasons and he brought them their last PAC-10 championship and Rose Bowl victory. Here is one fan's perspective on Neuheisel as a coach:

Neuheisel

I think Rick is a very good coach (though not great). He wins far more often that he loses. I think most of the criticisms of him are short-sighted, or just plain foolish. I'll list a few of my favorites:

He destroys programs

He was 15-10 in his last year at the two schools. Despite unceremonious endings that caused great upheaval, neither school had a losing season the year after he left. Washington hired two awful coaches who produced awful results with Rick's kids - Colorado hired a decent coach who produced decent results with Rick's kids (note that in the four years after RN left Colorado they went 29-21 with as many bowl births as losing seasons).

He doesn't recruit lineman / He over recruits skill players

There was one year at UW where he recruited a small number of lineman. According to sources, it was a tactical decision - that year was devoid of OL talent in the state of Washington, and the next year was stocked full of it. That one class that he pulled few lineman he signed 7 receivers. Of course, he had signed a total of 3 receivers the two years before.

I think there are some legitimate complaints about RN's recruting. First, I do think he recruits to himself rather than the university. This is fine as long as he's around, but if and when a new coach comes in he inherits a group of kids who were REALLY attached to the former regime. This is not a huge problem IMHO, but probably not a good thing.

Second, I think Rick's recruiting philosophy lends itself to unbalanced classes positionally. In his mind (and history bears this out) they even out over a two year span, but there may be something to be said for spreading things out a little better.

Overall, I think his recruiting philosophies are decent, and his salesmanship is top notch. At UCLA, he'd be a recruiting powerhouse.

He only wins with other people's players

Closely related to #1. I think this is just silly. Colorado was a top notch program when he came along, but Washington was mediocre. While he did perform better earlier on at both places, he still went 8-4 in his last year at CU and 7-6 in his last year at UW with almost entirely his own guys. Furthermore, both programs were ranked top 10 coming into the following seasons before he left. The perception nationally was that he was set to do serious damage with entirely his own guys. I think he would have.

He is dirty

I can't imagine that anyone has ever gotten such a horrible rep for doing so little. He was famously reprimanded by the AFCA (or whatever the coaches group is) for some illegal contact. At the same convention, Hal Mumme was given a full recommendation by the group after getting busted for paying players at Kentucky.

Rick is cocky and rubs people the wrong way, and they blow his transgressions out of the water. He is an aggressive recruiter, sure, but he's never been guilty of anything that lost multiple scholarships or cost a program bowl eligibility. He had some illegal bumps at Colorado and his first month at Washington contacted some kids during a dead period. He once played horse with a recruit.

Is he squeaky clean? No. But he's far from some rogue. He's not dirty enough to even survive in the SEC. Oh yeah, and he gambled on an NCAA tourney bracket when the NCAA's own website said it was okay. And he beat the NCAA (and UW) in court for trying to penalize him for this.

Seriously, look up his list of violations and explain to me what he's done that is so awful?

You can't trust him to stick around

Of all the criticisms of Rick, I think this is by far the most valid. It's no secret that he had one foot out the door the entire time he was at Washington, and this angered many UW fans to no end. IMO, this, more than anything else, is why the University fired him. He was not viewed as loyal, and to a large degree, I don't think he was.

However, I'd much prefer a good coach who has ambition to move onto better things than a mediocre coach who will happily suck your program dry forever. More relevant to this discussion, I think it's pretty likely that he would be content at UCLA since it's his alma mater, and since he's been humbled by being out of a HC job for five years.

Rick as a Head Coach

He'll give you four better years than you'll get out of just about anyone else. I think he's got the perfect personality for UCLA - he relates fantastically to kids and would relish the opportunity to take on Pete for recruits. I don't think he'd win most of the battles, at least not at first, but he'd win his fair share and CERTAINLY make UCLA the #2 PAC-10 destination at the very least.

Rick is highly motivational, which has it's pros and it's cons. The pros are that he can beat anybody at anytime, and that his teams are phenomenal in the fourth quarter. The cons are that when it's not a big game, against a worthy foe, his teams often sleepwalk through the first three quarters and have to pull it out in the fourth. They usually do though - it's very rare for Rick to lose a close game to anyone other than a top 15 program.

He does favor the passing game to the running game, but as evidenced by his willingness to run the option while Marques Tuiasosopo was at UW, he is adaptable and will run what works best for the talent at hand. His defenses were rarely great, though never terrible.

His development of QB's is absolutely sensational (IMO he's easily one of the top 5 QB gurus in CFB), but his emphasis on the position seems to overwhelm other positions, which don't get the same scrutiny or develop at nearly as quick of a rate.

Neuheisel at UCLA

Anytime you make a hire I think it's smart to look at best case, worst case, and likely case.

Best case - consistent #2 program in the conference with peaks at #1/poised to take over #1 consistently if Pete ever leaves USC.

Worst case - upper-mid level Pac10 (3rd to 5th) program with consistent excellence in recruiting, especially skill players, but leaves in 3-5 years after some secondary violations put UCLA on minor probation.

Likely case - consistent upper level Pac10 program (2nd to 4th) with big wins on the field and in recruiting sandwiched around the occasional disappointment. Lots of close wins over inferior teams. Consistent bowl team. Stays at UCLA for at least 6 years and longer if they're willing to pay him.