2009 "Problems"

[Mission9]

Just a tidbit I have thought of while we are on the subject.  Anytime I think of Taggart's last 2 seasons as possibly putting him at the top of the heap of coaches we have had, I have to temper that thought.  The problem with constantly moving up (as great as it was) was the fact that once USF had entered the what is now called FBS, the only years which the team had a full 4 classes of recruits at the level they played in  for Leavitt were '08 and '09.  The other coaches did not face such a hurdle and you can even say the team was always stepping down in class as the years went on. 

[Brad]

26 minutes ago, Triple B said:

At the risk of invoking some wrath, there apparently wasn’t enough motivation/emotion to overcome the deficiencies that kept them from closing out most seasons. 

Yes, I think that has mostly been attributed - in dozens of discussions - to depth.  You can motivate Grothe in a leg cast, but he can't scramble as well.

[MaltLiquorBull]

2 hours ago, Mission9 said:

Just a tidbit I have thought of while we are on the subject.  Anytime I think of Taggart's last 2 seasons as possibly putting him at the top of the heap of coaches we have had, I have to temper that thought.  The problem with constantly moving up (as great as it was) was the fact that once USF had entered the what is now called FBS, the only years which the team had a full 4 classes of recruits at the level they played in  for Leavitt were '08 and '09.  The other coaches did not face such a hurdle and you can even say the team was always stepping down in class as the years went on. 

Yep.  Here is another interesting spin.  We started BE play in 2005, right?  So let's say since the 2005 season until the end of the BCS era, we were in a "BCS conference."  During Leavitt's tenure (beginning in 2005), I believe it's true that we never lost to a non-BCS team (any team "below" the level of a BCS conference member).

Let me look at our "non-bcs" games:

2005:  We beat UCF and FAMU

2006:  We beat McNeese, FIU, UCF, ECU(Bowl)

2007:  We beat Elon, FAU, UCF

2008:  We beat UTMartin, UCF, FIU, Memphis(Bowl)

2009:  We beat Wofford, WKU, Charleston southern, NIU (Bowl)

NO LOSSES TO ANY TEAM BELOW BCS LEVEL.  IT WAS UNHEARD OF AND WOULD HAVE BEEN UNACCEPTABLE.

We kept this trend alive in the first 2 years of the Holtz New Error until he blew it in 2012 to Ball State.  I guess I don't really have a point except to say that every team in our conference (with the exception of Cinci who is leaving) was a team that we would find unacceptable to lose to until 2012.  

Do you think our 2007-2009 teams would dominate in the conference we are in today, or do you think all these mid-tier teams just got that much better over the years?  Either way, we certainly should be competitive in this conference and not the doormat.

 

Edited October 19, 2021 by Brad
Removed extra spacing

[NewEnglandBull]

17 minutes ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

Yep.  Here is another interesting spin.  We started BE play in 2005, right?  So let's say since the 2005 season until the end of the BCS era, we were in a "BCS conference."  During Leavitt's tenure (beginning in 2005), I believe it's true that we never lost to a non-BCS team (any team "below" the level of a BCS conference member).

Let me look at our "non-bcs" games:

2005:  We beat UCF and FAMU

2006:  We beat McNeese, FIU, UCF, ECU(Bowl)

2007:  We beat Elon, FAU, UCF

2008:  We beat UTMartin, UCF, FIU, Memphis(Bowl)

2009:  We beat Wofford, WKU, Charleston southern, NIU (Bowl)

NO LOSSES TO ANY TEAM BELOW BCS LEVEL.  IT WAS UNHEARD OF AND WOULD HAVE BEEN UNACCEPTABLE.

We kept this trend alive in the first 2 years of the Holtz New Error until he blew it in 2012 to Ball State.  I guess I don't really have a point except to say that every team in our conference (with the exception of Cinci who is leaving) was a team that we would find unacceptable to lose to until 2012.  

Do you think our 2007-2009 teams would dominate in the conference we are in today, or do you think all these mid-tier teams just got that much better over the years?  Either way, we certainly should be competitive in this conference and not the doormat.

 

Man, I remember that Ball State game. It was devastating as we had not lost that type of game before. It was definitely an “o’**** moment” as we knew things were changing. 

[Outlaw]

2 hours ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

Yep.  Here is another interesting spin.  We started BE play in 2005, right?  So let's say since the 2005 season until the end of the BCS era, we were in a "BCS conference."  During Leavitt's tenure (beginning in 2005), I believe it's true that we never lost to a non-BCS team (any team "below" the level of a BCS conference member).

Let me look at our "non-bcs" games:

2005:  We beat UCF and FAMU

2006:  We beat McNeese, FIU, UCF, ECU(Bowl)

2007:  We beat Elon, FAU, UCF

2008:  We beat UTMartin, UCF, FIU, Memphis(Bowl)

2009:  We beat Wofford, WKU, Charleston southern, NIU (Bowl)

NO LOSSES TO ANY TEAM BELOW BCS LEVEL.  IT WAS UNHEARD OF AND WOULD HAVE BEEN UNACCEPTABLE.

We kept this trend alive in the first 2 years of the Holtz New Error until he blew it in 2012 to Ball State.  I guess I don't really have a point except to say that every team in our conference (with the exception of Cinci who is leaving) was a team that we would find unacceptable to lose to until 2012.  

Do you think our 2007-2009 teams would dominate in the conference we are in today, or do you think all these mid-tier teams just got that much better over the years?  Either way, we certainly should be competitive in this conference and not the doormat.

 

We beat UCF and every other below BCW team because we had a great and underappreciated coach.

[Mission9]

Good points by MaltLiquor.

Funny you guys bring up that Ball St. game.  It seems that almost every loss  brought up which happened during the Big East years forces me to remember some of the unreasonable opinions which were posted then.  Some wanted to pin the loss squarely on B.J. Daniels that day.  Now, Daniels was never going to play the perfect game.  He just was not that type of QB.  Still, I thought he played pretty well and I believe he threw for over 300 yards and ran for over 70. I think USF had over 500 total yards.   He had 2 interceptions, one on a long pass at the end of the half (trying to make something happen) and one as time ran out in the game (having to make something happen).  If any ire was to be directed, it should have been directed towards the defense which could not stop the Cardinals. Sometimes I felt like we were watching different games. 

 

[Orlando Bull]

5 hours ago, Brad said:

Yes, I think that has mostly been attributed - in dozens of discussions - to depth.  You can motivate Grothe in a leg cast, but he can't scramble as well.

Anyone remember the 2007 Cincy game where Grothe threw like 12 picks? Remember who the WRs were that day? It was bad, and I am certain at least a couple of those were due to WR running the wrong route. QB takes the blame... But, even in that game, as bad as it was, Grothe put a ball in the endzone at the end that would have won it or tied at least... it was PI that wasn't called, but also could have been caught, I think in later years, Mitchell would have come up with that one, but as a freshman, he couldn't win the battle.

Anyway, for those of us reminiscing about those times, the current state of our program is painful. Forget about how you feel or felt about Leavitt, he wasn't gifted a whole bunch of blue chip recruits. He developed most of the talent we had and maximized it, we won't sustain success again until a coach comes in and does the same. If Scott turns it around, great. I am just not seeing the improvement yet.

[NewEnglandBull]

29 minutes ago, Orlando Bull said:

Anyone remember the 2007 Cincy game where Grothe threw like 12 picks? Remember who the WRs were that day? It was bad, and I am certain at least a couple of those were due to WR running the wrong route. QB takes the blame... But, even in that game, as bad as it was, Grothe put a ball in the endzone at the end that would have won it or tied at least... it was PI that wasn't called, but also could have been caught, I think in later years, Mitchell would have come up with that one, but as a freshman, he couldn't win the battle.

Anyway, for those of us reminiscing about those times, the current state of our program is painful. Forget about how you feel or felt about Leavitt, he wasn't gifted a whole bunch of blue chip recruits. He developed most of the talent we had and maximized it, we won't sustain success again until a coach comes in and does the same. If Scott turns it around, great. I am just not seeing the improvement yet.

I think you can also give credit to JL in hiring the right assistants. They too did a great job in developing talent. I really think Scott made a mistake with a few of the assistants on this team. 

[Rocky Style]

15 hours ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

We kept this trend alive in the first 2 years of the Holtz New Error until he blew it in 2012 to Ball State.

Wow I blocked this out of my memory.  The pain!

[Orlando Bull]

11 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

I think you can also give credit to JL in hiring the right assistants. They too did a great job in developing talent. I really think Scott made a mistake with a few of the assistants on this team. 

One of my biggest gripes, which I expressed to Woolard in an email in 2012 when it was clear Skip had to go... was that Leavitt's pool of $$ for assistant coaches was awful. Skip got like double what Leavitt had and promptly went out and gave all of his buddies 50% raises to come with him. Yes, Leavitt worked wonders getting assistant coaches for peanuts compared to what they could get at another BCS school.