And the line opens at...

[belgianbull]

11 minutes ago, USFRaider said:

I just think the Powers that be will allow Kelly’s hire, Golesh, to have three seasons, before they make any decisions on Kelly. If Golesh ends up being another Charlie Strong or Jeff Scott then Kelly won’t be hiring the next coach.

I think that would be a mistake since an average hire can come in in this AAC an easily win 4 games year 1. If Golesh can't do that then I think Kelly didn't hire the right person for the now. That doesn't mean he can't learn on the job and win eventually for us. But if it takes 3 years, and it took Kelly 8 years to have us win in football again then I believe he wasted all of our time. While Golesh deserves 3 years Kelly doesn't 

That said I see us winning 4 games or more

Edited July 4, 2023 by belgianbull

[Triple B]

9 minutes ago, USFRaider said:

I just think the Powers that be will allow Kelly’s hire, Golesh, to have three seasons, before they make any decisions on Kelly.

Exactly. If there's any decisions to be made on MK's job security based on on-the-field/court results, it's not happening for at least 3 years. To think, or hope, otherwise goes against any common sense and is just crazy talk ...

[belgianbull]

5 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Exactly. If there's any decisions to be made on MK's job security based on on-the-field/court results, it's not happening for at least 3 years. To think, or hope, otherwise goes against any common sense and is just crazy talk ...

Kelly has been with the program 5 years, and on field results have been disastrous. His hires this year were lackluster at best. If he goes 6 years ( let alone 7 years) with losing records in both men's basketball and football and he doesn't get fired then I just don't know what to say. If Golesh can't win 4 games this year, Kelly again whiffed on an hire .No other program that wants to be taken seriously would tolerate this.

[belgianbull]

15 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Exactly. If there's any decisions to be made on MK's job security based on on-the-field/court results, it's not happening for at least 3 years. To think, or hope, otherwise goes against any common sense and is just crazy talk ...

I would love for you to be my employer. Thinking that after horrid performance for 5 years I would still get 3 years to prove myself would sound amazing.

[Outlaw]

24 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Exactly. If there's any decisions to be made on MK's job security based on on-the-field/court results, it's not happening for at least 3 years. To think, or hope, otherwise goes against any common sense and is just crazy talk ...

Sadly ad mk should not have been allowed to hire a new football coach.  He went young limited experience oc with a fired fau dc again...

[puc86]

6 minutes ago, belgianbull said:

I would love for you to be my employer. Thinking that after horrid performance for 5 years I would still get 3 years to prove myself would sound amazing.

You need the be aware that if you go to work for Trip the pay is going to match the expectations 

[WoolyBully]

As of July 4th, 2023 at 3:44 Eastern: Draft Kings [OVER] @ 4 & Caesars [OVER] @ 4.5.

Just curious as to why some would think that winning over four games this season should be the expectation. Although sentiment may hold that these AAC teams are terrible, I would point out that, us aside, when looking at USF, we too are terrible. "New coach! So what? Go ahead and pencil that game against USF as win". And you know, that's what gets said. 'Cause we're all kind of alike at this point in the year. 

[belgianbull]

13 minutes ago, WoolyBully said:

As of July 4th, 2023 at 3:44 Eastern: Draft Kings [OVER] @ 4 & Caesars [OVER] @ 4.5.

Just curious as to why some would think that winning over four games this season should be the expectation. Although sentiment may hold that these AAC teams are terrible, I would point out that, us aside, when looking at USF, we too are terrible. "New coach! So what? Go ahead and pencil that game against USF as win". And you know, that's what gets said. 'Cause we're all kind of alike at this point in the year. 

Last year we almost ( I know I should never use the words almost) beat Florida, UCF, Cincy, and Tulsa. We were also verry competitive in the first half against Tulane until our starting QB went down. I think if last years team played this year's schedule we would have won more games. Rice, Charlotte, FAU ( first year coach), UAB ( first year coach) are replacing our games against Cincy, UCF, and Houston. Add to that games against UConn and FAMU and I think at the very least 4 wins should be our minimum expectation. Anything below that would be considered failure.

[Bull Matrix]

3 hours ago, CousinRicky said:

North Texas and Charlotte will have their chance to prove you wrong (if we're playing either this year).

I believe USF dodged a bullet with UNT not on schedule this season.  UNCC is on the schedule and I have it as one of USF’s wins 

[belgianbull]

10 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

I believe USF dodged a bullet with UNT not on schedule this season.  UNCC is on the schedule and I have it as one of USF’s wins 

This is probably true and proves how far we have fallen in the last 5 years. The turn around has to start this year. We cannot afford a slow rebuilt. I do believe that we will win at least 4 game this year and then make it to a bowl game next year. But if we don't we need to see change at the top.