Jeff Scott's Farewell

[Rocky Style]

We would have to just hope it doesn't end up like Schiano II: The Deuce.

[SilverBull]

10 minutes ago, Rocky Style said:

We would have to just hope it doesn't end up like Schiano II: The Deuce.

Eeewwww!

[Friscobull]

It is a nice thought and I agree with Brad on this one but it won’t happen, Kelly lacks the stones to make this hire.  He is risk adverse and likes to operate in a safe space even if he is unsuccessful. He wants to surround himself with people just like him, non descriptive white guys with no personality (see Scott and CBG).  

[Rocky Style]

7 minutes ago, Friscobull said:

non descriptive white guys with no personality (see Scott and CBG).  

Wow lol.

[bulloni]

58 minutes ago, Friscobull said:

It is a nice thought and I agree with Brad on this one but it won’t happen, Kelly lacks the stones to make this hire.  He is risk adverse and likes to operate in a safe space even if he is unsuccessful. He wants to surround himself with people just like him, non descriptive white guys with no personality (see Scott and CBG).  

In a way Leavitt is less risky than other candidates.

No other coaching hire would result in such an immediate uptick in season ticket sales and inspire more OCS donations, which we desperately need.

In Leavitt's last 3 P5 games we averaged 57,395 in attendance. In our first 3 P5 games right after Leavitt we averaged 41,742. The team had the same record in the same conference too. We absolutely lost fans in our handling of Leavitt that would be re-interested in the program if we brought him back.

[Brad]

2 hours ago, Triple B said:

You kinda took that out of context. My "they just want him back period" was in reference to y'all not giving a **** what anyone else in the outside world thinks about the hire, you think he's the answer and you want him back. I do get where you think I'm simplifying things with some of my comments but I completely understand that you want him back because you think he's the only answer right now ....

Thank you for the clarification.  Yes, if I were the decision maker, he is the answer.  I don't know what anyone in the outside world thinks, or how they came to think it.  But I know it's my ass on the line, I'm going with the winner.

[zarnozdabull]

1 hour ago, bulloni said:

In Leavitt's last 3 P5 games we averaged 57,395 in attendance. In our first 3 P5 games right after Leavitt we averaged 41,742. The team had the same record in the same conference too. We absolutely lost fans in our handling of Leavitt that would be re-interested in the program if we brought him back.

Well, the last three P5 home games under Leavitt were against #20 WVU, Louisville for homecoming, and #19 Miami.

The first three P5 home games in 2010 were against Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt.

A more accurate analysis would be to see the attendance for the non-important games at the beginning of each season and that attendance is at par at around 40K in both 2009 and 2010.

Quality of opponent definitely matters with attendance. We probably did lose some fans due to Leavitt's firing, but I don't think we lost 16,000 fans cause of it. I would think it had to do more with the demotion from BCS to G5.

Regardless, making amends with Leavitt and having him back in some capacity for USF football is definitely a plus in every way.

 

Edit: Obviously, the only reason we had that many fans to begin with was Leavitt's work anyways. So yeah...

Edited November 11, 2022 by zarnozdabull

[Rocky Style]

1 hour ago, bulloni said:

We absolutely lost fans in our handling of Leavitt that would be re-interested in the program if we brought him back.

I think this would be a limited impact though.  WE would be excited and interested about Leavitt coming back.  A lot of old fans who remember and were turned off by things that happened after.  However for the normal passers by, we will be handicapped by playing these teams that no one has ever heard of in a cavernous pro stadium in the near future.  

[Brad]

Because this board has been around, there are members here that have spoken up that would be re-energized if Leavitt were back.  That's probably true of many of the OG fans, certainly on the Twit too (except the very young that don't know what a Leavitt is).  Many want to see both a revived program and Leavitt.  It's just a matter of doing it.

Trying to revive a program with a cookie cutter coach with Leavitt in a fundraising capacity won't work.  You can't have a coach hired with the FOUNDER looking over his shoulder, perhaps CARING more than he.  So this "compromise" of "yeah I want Leavitt in some role but not coach" shouldn't happen.  That would be a dumb move.

I think it's the golden ticket.  I thought that three years ago.  Enough time has passed, but time is also running out.

[CousinRicky]

5 hours ago, Friscobull said:

It is a nice thought and I agree with Brad on this one but it won’t happen, Kelly lacks the stones to make this hire.  He is risk adverse and likes to operate in a safe space even if he is unsuccessful. He wants to surround himself with people just like him, non descriptive white guys with no personality (see Scott and CBG).  

This decision will be agreed upon by MK, RL and WW.  You get bet your a$$ on that.