Taggart in film room for national championship

[MMW]

12 hours ago, CPR said:

I'll never understand the asking of posters to admit they were wrong, or the people that come on here to brag about how they said something 2 years ago and they were right, eat crow type of crowd. It's a dang sports message board. Who cares who's right and who's wrong. I like the posters that dislike Taggart that can back up why they don't like him. I also like the posters who love Taggart and can explain why. I'm still in the middle crowd of I don't love, but don't hate Taggart. I don't really know where I'm going with this point, but I had a point in the beginning.

It is not about eating crow.  He doesn't think Taggart is a good coach and I do - right now.  One of us has been wrong over the passed few years but there is not indisputable evidence either way at this point.  It is just opinion based on what we know of sport etc.

If it turns out that Taggart got lucky in the second half of the season and really is not a good coach I will concede.  I am not entrenched.  That being said I was curious at what point he would re-evaluate his position.  

Edited January 13, 2016 by mark_my_words

[The Sheriff]

Consistent winning next season would be tangible proof for me (at the end of the season). I'll attempt to get back on the bus that broke down in season one, week one against McCheeseburger State.

[Triple B]

30 minutes ago, The Sheriff said:

If being honest is being demeaning, then make yourself better so you can change the perception (I know - we won eight games this season - do it again then and I'll recant my statement). Unfortunately, our society is filled with a bunch of sensitive Nancies that can't take criticism. The comments made by Rutgers players about preparing for Jim Leavitt teams year in and year out was extremely demoralizing (imagine being a player on those USF teams). The same statement could definitely apply to Saint Jim. 

You called him a fool. Pretty sure the only ones perceiving him that way are you haters ...

[TromBull12]

13 hours ago, The Sheriff said:

There's nothing wrong with arguing - however I'll argue you're incorrect in your conclusions on multiple issues if you agree with Sellular1's blanket statement. Only Marge Schott lacked diversity in her hires during her tenure. Donald Sterling and Bruce Levinson were quite the opposite and their track record proves it. Levinson leaving was a total media witch hunt fueled by the clueless left that believe all white people have an agenda against people that are a different skin color.

It has gotten real old honestly. I see it on Facebook and other social media - people talk about their personal struggle and white privilege. I can't recall someone giving me a free pass in life because of my skin color. Everyday has been a battle to make money and to separate myself from the rough neighborhood where I was raised. If others in my neighborhood didn't have the same drive to separate themselves from our rough upbringing, that's their own **** fault. I made more than both my brothers last year combined. Where is their white privilege? There isn't any. They are good people - but they've made poor choices in life and now have to live with those choices. I said it previously - surround yourself with people that want to win at life - they come in all colors. They don't make excuses and they get things done. My father-in-law told me not to make my problems his problems when I married his daughter. It's not that he wouldn't gladly help - but he wants me to take the initiative to figure things out on my own first - that's how he was raised and that's the expectation that has been placed in front of us as we move forward in life.  

I'll try not to argue whether or not White privilege exists. I will say that there is about a 200 year head start in America that some took advantage of. Looking at the judicial system and how it treats it's people of color is eye opening. Especially the disparity in how those laws are applied and who they protect. I tend to lean more towards systemic racism myself, when you look at who gets government assistance, government backed business and home loans, the interest rates attached to said loans... There are exceptions to every rule and opportunities are out there. But to say skin color doesn't affect how someone is viewed in America and what doors may or may not be open to them isn't entirely true.

[MMW]

13 minutes ago, TromBull12 said:

I'll try not to argue whether or not White privilege exists. I will say that there is about a 200 year head start in America that some took advantage of. Looking at the judicial system and how it treats it's people of color is eye opening. Especially the disparity in how those laws are applied and who they protect. I tend to lean more towards systemic racism myself, when you look at who gets government assistance, government backed business and home loans, the interest rates attached to said loans... There are exceptions to every rule and opportunities are out there. But to say skin color doesn't affect how someone is viewed in America and what doors may or may not be open to them isn't entirely true.

Probably why impending demographic changes scares the crap out of some people.  

[Paisa el Toro]

20 hours ago, The Sheriff said:

Why are we flat out wrong? I still believe they extended him too early. The guy couldn't win for almost 2.5 years and then we miraculously catch some overrated cupcakes and get some W's (thanks to the play calling of someone not named Coach Taggart). I'm not caving to the madness on here. I haven't seen enough on here to believe Coach Taggart is the guy that will get us to the next level. Next season if we're sitting on one or two losses at the end of the year (and we have the talent to be in that position), I'll take back what I've said.

I just don't see it though with Coach Taggart. He's a great recruiter, but X's and O's "in the moment" aren't his game. People keep saying a great leader sits back and doesn't say anything... I call BS. Leaders lead and set themselves apart - they don't sit behind drawn curtains.

I'm leaning more that it was better for Coach Taggart to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.  

Your boy, Seth Greenberg, was a fantastic orator. IMHO, he wasn't great at the X's and O's either. I'll take Taggart's quiet leader approach, as long as the results on the field keep trending in the positive direction. I think his extension was merited, in light of the slight, upward trend that was the 2015 season. I see much more merit in Taggart's extension than in Holtz's, who was totally trending in the wrong direction.

[Who'sYourData?]

17 hours ago, Azmodi said:

Have you read the entire thread?

Cambodian36 wrote: It doesn't really seem like he's on the same level as these guys. Very much offense, but he's never seemed like he has a great deal of coaching acumen. This is why I hope USF can continue to win in spite of him, rather than because of anything he does coaching wise to win games.

slick1ru2 wrote: I've only heard Taggart say um hum and yes. Been watching the last 10 minutes. If this is a job interview for a distant future spot on ESPN someday, not impressive.

Those posts are degrading him for his participation. They may not have said they felt embarrassed but, they implied as much. I won't argue semantics. The fact is people were posting about his performance despite the fact it was his first such engagement and that he was chosen over many others whom many deem more qualified or worthy. My point is for them to shut up and look at the event in it's entirety. Look for the beneficial effects of this event as well as the negatives before casting any disparaging remarks.

I don't post here much as it appears to be a ***** session more so then a sports forum. This is my observation and nothing else. I decided to post as I'm not really a CWT supporter but, I thought he did fine all things considered.

Maybe for Cambodian you can make a case for that being a degrading post.  

Slick was saying the same thing I was, Taggart was quiet.  Quiet people don't make good TV analysts.  This has nothing to do with how smart Taggart is or how good is coaching is or anything like that.  That post isn't the least bit degrading or negative.

[Who'sYourData?]

6 hours ago, Bulls_Fan09 said:

I feel like being an introvert would help with recruiting if anything. With all of these college coaches throwing information at you about why their college is the best and why their team is the best, I think it would be nice to have a meaningful conversation with a coach that actually  listens to you and I think it would make a recruit feel more appreciated.

Being an introvert has nothing to do with whether or not you are personable or likable.  Plenty of obnoxious extroverts that couldn't lead the lunch line, and plenty of introverts that are well liked and fantastic leaders.  

[GaUSFBull]

46 minutes ago, Paisa el Toro said:

 I think his extension was merited, in light of the slight, upward trend that was the 2015 season. 

Slight upward trend?  CWT has done nothing but double his win total every year since season 1.  Not sure I would call that a slight upward trend.  

One thing I am sure about is that guys like DataBull will be lambasting CWT next year for not doubling last year's win total.  

[Paisa el Toro]

1 minute ago, GaUSFBull said:

Slight upward trend?  CWT has done nothing but double his win total every year since season 1.  Not sure I would call that a slight upward trend.

One thing I am sure about is that guys like DataBull will be lambasting CWT next year for not doubling last year's win total.

Yup, one good season out of three does not a long, consistent trend make.