With Smith hired: I have 2 season tickets 4 sale

[Guest S.  Bien]

Speak out all you want, I would encourage that.  But anyone that makes a decision to withdraw financial support based upon this hire is NOT A FAN.  There is NO ACTION WHATSOEVER THAT YOU OR ANY OTHER SO-CALLED FAN CAN DO TO "RIGHT THE SHIP".  Get off your high horse if you think that you know more than Coach Leavitt on how to run a college football program.  Be a fan, not a fool.

Agreed.

Amazing how many people make assumptions and rash judgements on limited to no information.

Even when explained the general facts of the situation on these boards they simply rebuff and continue on their ignorant rants.

[lotsofbull99]

Amazing how many people make assumptions and rash judgements on limited to no information.

Hey now, I base my life on assumptions and rash judgements!

[FreaKnight]

Matt, you really hit the nail on the head.  With PJ and banks as our QB's the last two years it was really difficult to make a determination on the scheme and play calling for the OC and QB coach.  These two are just not QB's, and in PJ's case at least not up to this point.  It's like going into a gun fight with a knife.  We run a pass orientated offense with two QB's that are poor decision makers, that lack confidence and a full grasp of the offense not to mention their passing is below average.  It's miraculous that we won 11 games the past two years.

If I were a USF fan, the main criticisms I would like the USF coaches to answer for lies in 2 areas:

1)  Where was the QB talent the past few seasons since MB left?  Has it been that difficult to find a talented player at the QB position?

2)  Up until last year, the USF defense was a staple, something to count on.  Last year the defense imploded.  What happened?

For the 1st question, it looks like competition at the QB position is greatly improved in 2005, and from that mix, a productive player should emerge.  The 2nd question obviously will be answered on the field, but it looks like the segments will be stronger in 05 than 04.

[S p e n c e]

Agreed.

Amazing how many people make assumptions and rash judgements on limited to no information.

Even when explained the general facts of the situation on these boards they simply rebuff and continue on their ignorant rants.

Bien if you had your way, Hobbie would still be the OC, PJ will be starting this season, and we will forever run the spread offense.  So your calling others ignorant is rich...

And what general facts are you claiming were simply rebuffed?  The two issues of debate are 1) was Rod Smith a poor choice for OC and 2) if it turns out he is a poor choice this coming year and CJL refuses to make a move will the possibilty of not renewing season tickets come into play.  These are both matters of opinion on both sides of the debate, what "general facts" were brought into this?  Does MikeB's "definition" of a "real fan" pass as fact now?

[Bullpride08]

Bien if you had your way, Hobbie would still be the OC, PJ will be starting this season, and we will forever run the spread offense.  So your calling others ignorant is rich...

And what general facts are you claiming were simply rebuffed?  The two issues of debate are 1) was Rod Smith a poor choice for OC and 2) if it turns out he is a poor choice this coming year and CJL refuses to make a move will the possibilty of not renewing season tickets come into play.  These are both matters of opinion on both sides of the debate, what "general facts" were brought into this?  Does MikeB's "definition" of a "real fan" pass as fact now?

Your posts are ignorant, and ridiculous.  "My way" wouldn't have Hobbie here, or PJ here if I thought either was ineffective.   Now, if you'd quit putting words in my mouth, and had half a clue, I will help you articulate and understand the situation, and my position.  

First, my position on PJ has been very accurate, and it's based on more than just some game opinions- or a knee-jerked reaction to a loss.  It based on the coaches opinion, seeing him practice, and hearing third hand about the kid.  Simply put, he's an excellent athlete that's playing this position years before his time.  His best position probably isn't QB, but by necessity, for the assistance of our team he has stuck it out at QB and tried to make the best of it.  Because of that point the development process was expected to be long, and arduous, which it has been.  Smith and crew didn't even know if he'd be a good QB, much less expected him to start before 2005.  Well the rest is history.  Obviously I will completely agree that PJ was largely ineffective the past two years, and most of that had to do with the raw skills, and playing well before his time (pre-season of 03' we all expected Banks to be our starter for two years, and PJ wouldn't be seeing the field until this season).

Second, i am not a huge fan of the Smith's hire, but not because of the stupid knee-jerked, uninformed, half-cocked, ignorant responses about QB development, or because he was with Hobbie in developing the schemes so he must suck.  I felt Hobbie was effective with the right personnel.  He did a fine job directing our offense in 01, and 02 (and if you come at me with some stupid crap about MB was the reason....).  It wasn't until the QB position faultered did the offense faulter.  Our offense very heavily on a QB's football skills, and acumen (this is an undisputable fact, if this position isn't playing well then the offense will have trouble).  Banks didn't have it, and PJ was put in that position years before he was ready.

If you want to point fingers and try to solve the real problem with our offense then talk about recruiting.  Anyone with some decent footballl IQ can actually pinpoint the real problem not join the pack and point at Hobbie.  If you've got any clue about this program then the names below will mean something to you.   That's been our QB selections over the past 5-6 years.  What a crew, the big name of the bunch was Waechtler but he went baseball.

1.  Doug Waechtler

2.  Evan Kraky

3.  Kevin Patullo

4.  David Mullins

5.  Ronnie Banks

6.  Pat Julmiste

7.  Louis Gachette

After looking at those names some would have to agree that it's almost scary to believe that this was the best we could muster up over the past five years (sans Waechtler of course).

Now, as for knowing the facts why this hiring "Is what it is" then you need to read up on the following points regarding the OC hiring.

1.  Interim

2.  No qualified alternative

3.  Dimel wasn't coming

4.  Franks didn't want it

5.  Leavitt's Offense in-place

6.  Scheme's already in place, cannot change.

7.  New wrinkles already in the offense

8.  Familiarity and willingness to run offense in-place.

If you actually took the time and took these eight points into account which are all factual, and all have been reiterated from sources, then you would agree that there is no productivity in complaining because this choice was nearly forced upon Leavitt, and thus the best idea is to hope Smith picks everything up quickly.  

In the end you're going to have to trust in Jim Leavitt!  Scary proposition when it seems you know everything.

[Bullpride08]

If I were a USF fan, the main criticisms I would like the USF coaches to answer for lies in 2 areas:

1)  Where was the QB talent the past few seasons since MB left?  Has it been that difficult to find a talented player at the QB position?

2)  Up until last year, the USF defense was a staple, something to count on.  Last year the defense imploded.  What happened?

For the 1st question, it looks like competition at the QB position is greatly improved in 2005, and from that mix, a productive player should emerge.  The 2nd question obviously will be answered on the field, but it looks like the segments will be stronger in 05 than 04.

Freak, you about hit the proverbial nail on the head.

If anyone wants to complain to our staff's then those are the two reasons for complaint.

1.  QB recruiting.

2.  04' defensive productivity.

I mentioned above, but our QB recruiting since 1999 has been even worse then atrocious, and in some cases embarrassing.  However, reason for optimism rests with what's in camp, and coming.  We've even got Pat Carter transfering in, who albeit will be as a WR, I am sure if all the QB's faulter then he would be itching to get another shot at QB.

Defensively last year we had some disappointing losses that really led to our defensive let-down.  Johnny Jones gun shot wound, Tim Jones red-shirting, Kenny Robinson quiting, Djuan Brown broken arm, the Mompremier fiasco, Devon Davis fiasco, and the fact Coach Kravitz was pretty sick the latter part of the season.   We have all those guys returning so now we can hope that things will be back on track.

[BULLheaded]

bien, your arguments would have much more weight behind them if you didn't call everybody who has a different opinion then you as ignorant. Actually your opinion that PJ and Banks were obviously completely uncoachable is just as ignorant as those of us who feel that given a better coach they could have developed into a servicable QB. It's all opinion and unless you've seen them play under someone elses tutelage it's really hard to accept your "opinion" as fact and frankly typing a 50 page thesis on the subject wont change that. I don't like this hire, and as many have said there was absolutely zero reason I can see that it was earned. However, what you keep saying about Leavit's complete stuborness to change "his" offense is even more disturbing to me since IMO that is a big reason why coaches have failed throuought the history of the sport. I'll never understand why these defensive coaches always seem to think they are some offensive genious and are completely close minded to allowing someone else who knows better to run things. Of course to cut you off, NO I am NOT predicting failure neither am I trying to imply Leavitt should leave or any such nonsense, but going by what you say I am bothered by what could be a damaging closed minded approach to the offense.

[Bullpride08]

bien, your arguments would have much more weight behind them if you didn't call everybody who has a different opinion then you as ignorant. Actually your opinion that PJ and Banks were obviously completely uncoachable is just as ignorant as those of us who feel that given a better coach they could have developed into a servicable QB. It's all opinion and unless you've seen them play under someone elses tutelage it's really hard to accept your "opinion" as fact and frankly typing a 50 page thesis on the subject wont change that. I don't like this hire, and as many have said there was absolutely zero reason I can see that it was earned. However, what you keep saying about Leavit's complete stuborness to change "his" offense is even more disturbing to me since IMO that is a big reason why coaches have failed throuought the history of the sport. I'll never understand why these defensive coaches always seem to think they are some offensive genious and are completely close minded to allowing someone else who knows better to run things. Of course to cut you off, NO I am NOT predicting failure neither am I trying to imply Leavitt should leave or any such nonsense, but going by what you say I am bothered by what could be a damaging closed minded approach to the offense.

Well let's see, part of the reason for that type of response is because of the callous and indignant way many of them attack Leavitt and the Program without any fact.  In some cases it becomes down right sad; people threatening to drop support, fire the guy, calling it "Bush League", calling him "Bush League".  

Sorry, but many of us, including me, started out trying to be very easy going and tactful in explaining why this occurred.  However, some simply castigated our posts and continued attacking the program.  My post before Spence's response wasn't directed at him, but he decided to take exception and attack.  And so we danced.

When really truly get down to the route of the decision it's somewhat easier to stomach at this point.  I had my favorites- mostly not in the program- however no one was biting, not this late in the game, not with so many stipulations.  We're all going to have to ride it out with Smith, I am not particularly excited about it, however I understand it's necessity and I do believe that Smith has as much potential to do well as he does to do poorly.  I really believe anyone even, grad assistant Chad Barnhardt, could have run this offense if we had a productive QB.  That's my biggest prayer right now.

As for Leavitt's stubbornness to change the offense, well here's the thing "Bullheaded" he did change it.  Maybe not to your liking, but there will be quite a few new wrinkles in it from last year.  This is his approach, and he knows it works when a competent QB is at the helm, he knows because he took it from some great offensive minds.   You're entitled to your opinion about the spread, and I know some guys will never get use to it, they love the 'three yards and a cloud of dust' type offense.  However, this is Leavitt's choosing, he'll be the first to tell you he likes a wide open, attacking, pressing offense which is why he chose this one.  Quite honestly, when he gets a decent QB running the system again things will change rather quickly for the positive- providing Smith's playcalling is as competent as Hobbie's was.

I don't think you can necessarily fault Leavitt for being stubbornly optimistic with this offense.   We had great success with it in 01, and 02, and when our QB's heads were on straight we were able to be truly deceptive with it in 03, and 04- TCU (04), UL (03), UAB (04)- other than those games our QB's struggled so bad during the other games that they're hard to criticize the staff against.  Given some pass successes, with the new tweaks, and new QB recruits ready to assume control (who are all tailor made for this type of offense) I think it's good Jim's been stubborn and hasn't spent two years trying to re-create the wheel or tweaking a system to death.

We shall see, but one thing is certain that Grothe, Hill, Denson, and Pat Carter all have experience in a shot-gun spread.  The last time we had a QB with that type o previous experience was Blackwell.

[BULLheaded]

Your just too sensitive bien, I haven't seen any "calling out" as you put it. I've seen many people express a disdain for this hire and really what do you expect? Do you honestly feel that anything smith has done should make anyone feel optimistic about his abilities to lead the entire offense? This is a message board and I assume that still means it is a place to discuss opinions and guess what? It's ok to disagree with the powers that be and alot of people do just that and it obviously irks the hell out of you since the "ignorant" word comes out from you in every single topic you disagree with someone on.

Now, on to your point about you and others starting out trying to be easy going...ummm, you mean until you realized that others didn't agree with you no matter how much you typed they then became ignorant right? Some people just need to wize up and agree and we wouldn't have this problem! geeesh.

As to the stuborness, I'm not talking about adding a few wrinkles to the system, hell I'm not even talking about changing the offense per se. What I'm talking about is what YOU said that we should all forget about any decent names out there as OC and should accept Smith for the sole reason that Leavitt will not change so deal with it. To me the reason that is closed minded is you basically said that he is so attached to HIS offense that he'd rather have an incompetent run what he likes then a talented coach running something he may not prefer. I'm sorry but that is stubborn and worrysome sign. Of course I also need to follow your other words and not believe everything I hear since there is a good chance you actually don't know what the heck you are talking about and I could be worrying for nothing.

There is no doubt we have some great talent coming in, hopefully we'll have someone in Smiths old position that can develop that talent instead of rely on it.

[Bullpride08]

Your just too sensitive bien, I haven't seen any "calling out" as you put it. I've seen many people express a disdain for this hire and really what do you expect? Do you honestly feel that anything smith has done should make anyone feel optimistic about his abilities to lead the entire offense? This is a message board and I assume that still means it is a place to discuss opinions and guess what? It's ok to disagree with the powers that be and alot of people do just that and it obviously irks the hell out of you since the "ignorant" word comes out from you in every single topic you disagree with someone on.

Now, on to your point about you and others starting out trying to be easy going...ummm, you mean until you realized that others didn't agree with you no matter how much you typed they then became ignorant right? Some people just need to wize up and agree and we wouldn't have this problem! geeesh.

As to the stuborness, I'm not talking about adding a few wrinkles to the system, hell I'm not even talking about changing the offense per se. What I'm talking about is what YOU said that we should all forget about any decent names out there as OC and should accept Smith for the sole reason that Leavitt will not change so deal with it. To me the reason that is closed minded is you basically said that he is so attached to HIS offense that he'd rather have an incompetent run what he likes then a talented coach running something he may not prefer. I'm sorry but that is stubborn and worrysome sign. Of course I also need to follow your other words and not believe everything I hear since there is a good chance you actually don't know what the heck you are talking about and I could be worrying for nothing.

There is no doubt we have some great talent coming in, hopefully we'll have someone in Smiths old position that can develop that talent instead of rely on it.

You've got a better grasp on the english language.  I was simply using a slang term when stating "calling out".  You said it better with "Disdain" yet in your infinite wisdom you failed to rationalize that essentially they mean the same?  So instead of 'calling out' someone, you prefer that many despise, scorn, or hate their coach without provocation, or a real understanding of the facts or reasons behind this move.  They simply instigate the situation, and attack the coach without all the facts instead of ruminating over the topic and awaiting until all the information, or more is readily available.

Again, the 'disdain' is unwarranted, and unsubstantiated.  Criticize as you wish, but when I am speaking the truth and get chastized then that's when I decide to go on the offensive.  Mr. BULLHEADED, as you definitely are in keeping with your moniker, you seem just as willing and aggressive when it comes toward getting your point across.

My position doesn't come from the basis of 'opinion', but if you, and other would prefer to seeth on the basis of insinuations, and half-cocked opinions then so be it.  You and your ilk seem to denounce and discredit anyone that speaks positively or against your position with an incredulous tone.  As if to say, "We don't want to know the facts, we hate it and no one can tell us differently."  A rather bad-mannered approach to supporting a position.  

No one is telling you, or others how to think, act or base an opinion on.  However, to create an insidious persona about this decision, and continually pouncing on any positive points, or points otherwise taken by myself or others, because they happen to not take on the straight negative tone of your view points, is just as bold and arrogant as your accusations directed toward me.

But please, by all mean give me the old "I know you are but what am I" routine.  You've carried it on well thus far.