Jump to content

GaUSFBull

Member

GaUSFBull last won the day on September 17

GaUSFBull had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,831 Excellent

About GaUSFBull

  • Rank
    Gonna Play on Sundays
  • Birthday 11/03/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    North of ATL

Recent Profile Visitors

6,327 profile views
  1. Looks a little more than three inches ...
  2. GaUSFBull

    Cronkrite all around back?

    If it's about not actually winning games, it has to be Skip Holtz.
  3. GaUSFBull

    Cronkrite all around back?

    You can't even call it a myth anymore. It's a completely dispelled notion.
  4. Exactly. The rules have been bent toward offensive players in a major way.
  5. Never mind, I just looked it up. 930 was the minimum which USF had hit the year before Leavitt was fired. So it was already on the rise, in large part due to Leavitt, with the progress being continued with Skip.
  6. First, as it pertains to CousinRicky, whom I like and appreciate as a donor to USF athletics, everything he's heard about Skip getting a raw deal has come from him talking to Skip. And we're talking about a guy who received a new, more valuable contract coming off a year where we were beginning to trend downward. So the talk about Skip getting a raw deal sort of rings hollow in my ears. Fair point about APR jump in CJL's final year being half-credited to him. But are you telling me (and I'm asking for a lesson here, professor, because I genuinely do not know) that the difference between sanctions and no sanctions for the USF football program is an APR score somewhere between 930 and 973? Because Holtz split that gap in two in his first year, so you'd think at least 50% of the pressure to increase the academics of the football team should have been relieved in the first year, and at that point, he might have been able to take some more risks with a player for whom talent>grades. This is all, of course, if you actually buy into the notion that Skip's job description on his offer letter put a priority on better grades than football wins. So please, I welcome any hard evidence you have that USF was close to sanctions, which would have been avoided AT LEAST by year two of the Holtz regime, if all of the above is true. If nothing else, they'll put on your tombstone, "Master of Sarcasm and Hyperbole, but Not a Great Reader of Message Board Posts."
  7. GaUSFBull

    More Excuses

    I have heard that our meal plan is rather lacking ...
  8. Offense sells tickets, and defense wins championships ... at least that's how it used to be. Defense is going by the wayside, and not just in college, but in the NFL too.
  9. HOLY CRAP! So USF's biggest jump was a 22 point improvement in the 2009-2010 season, which was LEAVITT'S last year here ... But I thought Skippy was responsible for the APR improvement ... hmmmm.
  10. Who knows why anyone does what they do? Probably didn't feel good to get fired. Sometimes when that happens to someone, they develop explanations for why it happened that may not be entirely true as a defense mechanism. Just to be clear, I don't think he is a bad guy or intentionally tried to suck at USF. I just grapple with any notion that a football coach's prime directive is academic success over on-field success, unless I hear it from the guy who hired him.
  11. "He was told" is the part that is hearsay to you. "His words" is the part that is hearsay to us.
  12. Sorry Ricky, but this is the very definition of hearsay. I guess I'll have to hear it directly from Doug Woolard in order to believe it.
×