bullsbucsfan426

I have been reading the "behind the paywall" stuff over at Rivals and all in all it is actually pretty good content, not necessarily elite booster level content but significantly more than the average fan would get. I don't know if board donors here get to hear anything similar if they've donated enough. 

All I'll say is that MK is working his way down the list, the hire may come out of left field, and at least 3 of the top candidates that have been mentioned have already said no. It's mostly 247 and the TBT working the CWT angle.

At this point I want to see Leavitt if he's open for it just because of the shot in the arm the program would get for a year or two. The Big East fan base would show up just because of him, at least until they realize what a rebuild we have in store. 

5 minutes ago, Mission9 said:

I loathe Deckerhoff, did not enjoy how FSU fan has acted in my section of the stadium, and do not personally know any recent players.  Given that,  there is noone who I would listen to from your "recommendation".  I would prefer to listen to former USF players, or better yet, remember what actually happened here after we had a Skippypoo soft team. 

Agreed. 

I read back in 2013 that while the team was utterly lacking in talent, an opposing coach described them as difficult to beat simply because they battled their hearts out every single game. Had they been in proper conditioning that year and had good coaching, the 2013 team would have at least gone bowling. 

2 hours ago, usf97 said:

Note in that TDS article "Sources close to former South Florida Bulls head coach Willie Taggart told The Daily Stampede that he’s very interested in returning to Tampa as the next head coach."

You see where this is coming from correct? Confirms this doesn't tell us anything about which way MK is leaning so this is just noise. 

I am sure sources close to Steve Spurrier could say his visits to Tampa were the happiest times in his life in order to get Scott Spurrier a set up gig. 

Media noise. 

Won't say where i heard it but Spurrier did reach out to USF with that exact idea in mind. 

1 minute ago, JTrue said:

So what did I miss in 19 pages? We've got one group saying "get over it" and another with mega-xCJL boners? 

And some insightful commentary in between. 

I'll go on record and say that I'm good with any hire as long as there's a reasonable basis for it, but that's normal. We have to have a high quality guy coaching the team. 

2 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Adams said he wants to coach the WRs.

Perhaps my verbiage was wrong, but I was stating that. I have seen the same tweets you have. 

3 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

I'm probably misremembering but didn't Grothe help oust Leavitt?

Flowers, Mack and Rodney Adams have probably never met Leavitt. I'm sure they wouldn't care less.

I don't recall seeing Grothe playing a role in Leavitt being gone. Perhaps I missed it. 

Flowers and Adams have both begged USF to get them involved with the program. Flowers has been publicly tagging Kelly on his twitter posts asking for a meeting with him and Rodney Adams is interesting in coaching the WRs (although I suspect that if he wants to coach, they would get him involved as a GA or similar first). Flowers actually had a post out there where he tagged Kelly, Mack, and Grothe, and Adams. Grothe was all over it. 

Just now, WWMJD said:

This was my first thought. Was the first statement wrong or does this mean we already have a hire? The latter seems impossible unless they are moving at a breakneck pace (which may not be a bad idea).

It would be insane if the hire was already made. I mean, I feel confident that Kelly has had his rolodex open all year because he know there was a good possibility he'd have to conduct a search, so he could have already set a list in place. 

Leavitt as a DC at Oregon and Colorado was decent but not excellent. He allowed about 20 PPG over two years at Oregon (with the caveat that the defense looked a lot better in key games in 2016), but he allowed 26 PPG over two years at Oregon (and yes, I know they were rebuilding). I'm wondering if that is a key factor in him not getting another HC opportunity just yet. I do need to point out that Oregon let him go after 2018, he did not leave on his own terms. 

Would he succeed at USF? I think he would, but it would be an uphill climb for two years. The damage to the program right now is pretty bad and Leavitt is not going to be able to fix everything in one off-season. I have already written off the game against UCF next year, and for Leavitt that would suck as they finally have the "Leavitt doughnut" off their back. I also question his ability to get good coordinators. Towards the end of the Leavitt Era, he was having to replace coordinators regularly, and he would need to have good coordinators. You may almost want to keep Kerwin Bell if Leavitt comes back because then there's some stability on the coaching staff. Shaun King absolutely needs to stay, he coached Flowers and Flowers was fantastic, he's coached the RBs, and it seems like we've just churned out good RBs year over year (even Sands wasn't bad this year, and Joiner and Ford go without saying-at least when Ford got on the field). 

That said, watching the engagement on Twitter, the massive enthusiasm from past players, fans, and alumni about a potential Leavitt return-it could very well be worth it. Rehiring Leavitt would provide a huge shot in the arm to USF's community engagement. and you know that he will do the work to rebuild the program-I have to believe he is still passionate about USF football. I had a conversation with Michael Kelly earlier this year at a basketball game-Leavitt carried the torch for this program tirelessly. He went to every Rotary, Kiwanis, and Chamber of Commerce event in the Tampa Bay area. He pounded the ground for this program to try and get fan support. He's still 62 and if he plays his cards right he could be here another 12-15 years, it's not uncommon for coaches to coach into their 70s if they're successful. He would also have something here that we never had in his first go around here-a stable conference with clear opponents. He would not have to try and face the Big East with C-USA recruits again. You bring Leavitt back, then you have Matt Grothe and so many others pounding the ground. Flowers, Mack, and Rodney Adams have all expressed some desire to be engaged with USF and that would happen under Leavitt. Selvie and JPP could be involved as well, and also Kawika Mitchell and Stephen Nicholas, these guys would all be ambassadors for the program. I would also point out here that we would all but seal up Immokalee, where D'Earnest Johnson's high school for the foreseeable future as Louis Gachette is head coach there. 

15 minutes ago, Fold FB Invest in BB said:

Those are some bold words, but I must have missed the part where he was advocating for increased student fees to help with the buyout and/or the IPF. It’s really easy to suggest how other people should spend their money.

The students already contribute nearly 20 million a year to the athletics budget. At what point is it fair to ask them for more? 

He may be looking for loopholes to push strong out at lower cost. 

29 minutes ago, lotsofbull99 said:

I miss CJL's offensive coordinator, what was his name?  We used to complain about him back in the day, but looking back he wasn't that bad.  Does he still have any tread on the tires?

Mike Canales had great games against cupcakes, almost never did anything vs. good teams. His O was pretty much Grothe scrambling, three level routes, and running the ball a ton. He currently coaches at UTEP, where his offense is pretty much impotent. 

30 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

If anybody has a couple, thanks

I'm going to be in MBA classes all day, won't make the game. Message me 

3 minutes ago, brybull1970 said:

You are using total yards allowed (#47), I am using total points allowed (#57). but I'll let you use the better of the two numbers but it still doesn't support your argument of one of the top defenses, again unless you think that being in the top 40% of defenses in one category means they are a "top" defense.

And your argument about beating P5 schools with more resources in defense is a straw man argument - if this defense played a P5 schedule they wouldn't be in the Top 50 or 60.

If this defense was in the P5 Strong would  be attracting the type of defensive talent that would rank us top 5 in the country defensively. We'd likely be like Auburn-not good enough to beat anyone with a pulse on defense, but good enough to cause problems for pretty much anyone else. 

Fools should have had to come to Tampa. They didn't even belong on the field against this USF squad. 

1 hour ago, Jonesy Bull said:

With all the UGLY that is been going on overall with USF sports lately, these are 2 teams that are really worth celebrating.

Women's BB continues to roll!

Women's Soccer has a HUGE game tomorrow night at UF in the NCAA tourney....GO BULLS!

Lets at least celebrate the good things we have going for us, until the Men start turning things around, which I have to believe will happen eventually.

I'll celebrate that they're in the tourney, but it's a little ridiculous that we're not hosting given UF is worse. Stupid NCAA. 

Just now, NovaBull said:

Ugh, not a great first half against a pretty bad team. 

Missing Yetna and Kiir really hurts our defense as we don’t have our two best rim protectors, so the opponents can drive and hit layups or dish to a wing. 

Also, we look super selfish and slow on offense. We need to swing the ball around the perimeter and not just dribble in place while everyone stands around.

Lastly, I’m sorry and normally don’t say this about players (coaches are fair game) but Marcevic isn’t a D-1 basketball player. It’s not his fault ands he definitely gives max effort, but he can’t be in the game as he’s a major liability on both ends of the floor.

 

 

In fairness it should never have been him. Yetna and Kiir are the top 2 bigs. One is injured, the other seems to have pulled a Johnny Ford. 

4 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

If a team is smart they will put Q on the line every time. I’ve never seen him hit two in a row. 

I'm almost tempted to say we should design plays that force the opponent to foul excessively in the first five minutes. If their starters are in foul trouble then our starting five can pull away early. 

4 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

We look terrible so far 

Yes, and this isn't just missing Yetna. Just no sense in terms of passing or play. 

21 hours ago, goingbackbull said:

It looks like we are getting a big.  We are hitting Oak Hill again with a 6"9 kid.  Only rated 2 stars but I trust Gregory.

We've been in on 3. Losing battles to ACC schools on them. The Oak Hill guy is the third. 

2 hours ago, usf97 said:

LOL

I wonder if we can make a parody of that for Strong. 

1 hour ago, DELdaBull said:

We need Durr to be more of a monster this season.

I didn't like that we were doubling the post when Durr was on that guy. He is a 7 foot sophomore center. He should be able to handle his man. 

Durr would likely score 60 points per game against the WBB schedule. The best women's centers wouldn't even be able to touch him in the post. 

The ability of this defense to force turnovers is the most concretely real part of this turnaround. They've forced turnovers against literally every team we've played. It would have been nice to be 5-3 going into the bye with a chance to repeat 2015 (getting bowl eligibility against Temple). 

With a bye week to heal up I wouldn't rule us out against Temple and Memphis, but we have to understand that Memphis is a very good football team and there is a reason they are 7-1. If the turnaround is real, we could very well be 5-6 going into a tough road game at UCF, but I'm not ready to believe until we beat Temple. God that GT loss sucks! 

13 hours ago, TheGreatOutlaw said:

Can Charlie donate his whole salary this year to the IPF to show fans he is serious about turning this around? It will be a nice tax write off.

He'll get a 60% of agi deduction so he saves 22.2% on his tax bill. I say why not. 

4 hours ago, brybull1970 said:

A couple of thoughts I will add:

"USF Athletics has mismanaged money you have given to it previously." 

• the examples given are a bit ambiguous and providing a cost value with each would allow readers to understand the order of magnitude. Otherwise this just sounds like someone complaining without laying out the financial impact in dollars

"And if you follow him on social media, you’ll see the level of interaction has never been higher."

• Don't we have a thread on this board indicating he has gone radio silent on his Twitter account? Is Collin inferring that he has fired up his MySpace account?

"USF has underinvested in the history of the program. It would make sense that the Bulls are behind UConn with their history and tradition in terms of athletics budget. But being more than $10 million behind Temple in operating income is inexcusable (they’re north of $60 million, we’re around $50 million)."

• Mr. Kelly shared with me, and I am paraphrasing, that it's unrealistic for people to think we will compete with SMU on the football field if they have revenues/operating budget $30M more than USF. And that <1% of all former USF students have ever donated money to the Athletic Department. I agree that the issue is a real one.

Lastly, I shared with Mr. Kelly, I don't donate money, I invest money. Show me where my money is going and what we should expect to see it produce, and I'll then be able to make an educated decision on if/how much of my money to invest. USF athletics cannot keep going to its limited, deep pocket donor base to solve its problems - the answer isn't how does the USF Athletics department get more people to donate, but how does USF Athletics department get more people to WANT to donate.

MK has been responsive to private messages, even as he doesn't comment much publicly (I've exchanged messages weekly via twitter PMs). He did speak up after the BYU win. 

It is hard because all the momentum that was built up between 2015 and 2017 got fizzled by that six game losing streak. That was three years of hard work and rebuilding the fan base-only to see it get wasted. They managed to rebuild a ton of that with promises of improvement over the offseason (hence the fairly strong attendance for WIsconsin), but the team going 3-10 over its last 13 games and getting smacked when they had an opportunity is very damaging. They're going to have to win even more than they won in 16 and 17 to have a chance at rebuilding this base. 

41 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Most top level hires are expected to make immediate results and if you don’t care for that pressure you can always stay entry level but even then you would have some expectations of ability and progress should you like to make it thru your 90 days. Maybe in academia you can survive on theoretical achievements but here in the real world you should be expected to be measured by your results. The only reason we are discussing KB in detail is because his first 6 games are far below average we are a bottom quartile offense and even if our talent is lacking it’s not in the bottom quartile. KB came out of training expecting our offense to be humming with the talent he has in place, that it isn’t certainly leaves him open to criticism. Please let me know what random game you find acceptable to start acknowledging his incompetence.

Key word: Most

For whatever reason, college football coaching results are judged not on the result of 1-3 games into the year, but rather the entire season as a whole (barring no progression at all throughout the first 2/3rd of the season). This isn't an accounting firm, most new hires during the tenure of head coach are made for one of two reasons-incompetence on the part of the previous staff, or success resulting in a bigger job for the previous staff. The only thing a coach can be judged on in his first six months on a job (given there are no games) is the cultural progress the team made. In Bell's case, he was hired because of Gilbert's incompetence, as was Darveau (for Mattox). By all accounts the culture was a lot better, until WIsconsin smacked the offense in the face. I'd still say the culture is better, because Strong and staff are still trying different methods to fix the culture that was previously so horrid. Now, it may be doubtful that Strong can do it, but we still have six games left (at least) to see if what the team is doing now is real or just the result of weak competition. 

I'll note something else here-if we went by Strong's first six months or year here, then we would have been marveling over his results. I was very much in favor of his hire, I felt he must be more the coach we saw at UL, now I've seen that he isn't, and all we can do is wait for him to either reinvent himself as Taggart did and start winning something, or for Kelly to get rid of him.