Fire Skip Holtz Billboard

[cmhatter]

https://www.cbsoutdoor.com/

Already sent an inquiry to the company. Viable options include Calvin McGee and Bobby Petrino. Petrino already knows he's walking on egg shells... you think he would set himself up for failure again. The guy is a winner and an offensive genius. McGee is an offensive genius as well and can recruit the talent in Florida. He wants to be at USF. It's time he got his chance.

Keep us posted

[BullFan98]

i'd pitch in for the billboard but I'm selling my FSU tickets to fund a weekend spree of booze and hookers to relieve my stress from this **** team.

Lol.

[Leviathan]

So let it be written.

So let it be done.

Fire Lou's first born son.

[Blackice12]

Never understood why people compared Holtz to Kragthorpe. But now I get it. If Holtz does not turn things around on the football field their records could be similar in three seasons. The difference is USF will stick with him for a few more years, my guess is at least 5 years for Skip.

Steve Kragthorpe (15 - 21)

• 2007 Louisville 6–6 (3–4)
  
• 2008 Louisville 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2009 Louisville 4–8 (1–6)
  

Skip Holtz (15 - 14)

• 2010 South Florida 8–5 (3–4)
  
• 2011 South Florida 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2012 South Florida 2–2 (0–1)
  

Edited September 23, 2012 by Blackice12

[Triple B]

Never understood why people compared Holtz to Kragthorpe. But now I get it. If Holtz does not turn things around on the football field their records could be similar in three seasons. The difference is USF will stick with him for a few more years, my guess is at least 5 years for Skip.

Steve Kragthorpe (15 - 21)

• 2007 Louisville 6–6 (3–4)
  
• 2008 Louisville 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2009 Louisville 4–8 (1–6)
  

Skip Holtz (15 - 14)

• 2010 South Florida 8–5 (3–4)
  
• 2011 South Florida 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2012 South Florida 2–2 (0–1)
  

Compare the 3 seasons directly preceding both their tenures and maybe you'll see why Skip would get a longer leash ...

[MikeG]

Never understood why people compared Holtz to Kragthorpe. But now I get it. If Holtz does not turn things around on the football field their records could be similar in three seasons. The difference is USF will stick with him for a few more years, my guess is at least 5 years for Skip.

Steve Kragthorpe (15 - 21)

• 2007 Louisville 6–6 (3–4)
  
• 2008 Louisville 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2009 Louisville 4–8 (1–6)
  

Skip Holtz (15 - 14)

• 2010 South Florida 8–5 (3–4)
  
• 2011 South Florida 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2012 South Florida 2–2 (0–1)
  

Compare the 3 seasons directly preceding both their tenures and maybe you'll see why Skip would get a longer leash ...

what would that have to do with anything?

[Reliable Source]

Never understood why people compared Holtz to Kragthorpe. But now I get it. If Holtz does not turn things around on the football field their records could be similar in three seasons. The difference is USF will stick with him for a few more years, my guess is at least 5 years for Skip.

Steve Kragthorpe (15 - 21)

• 2007 Louisville 6–6 (3–4)
  
• 2008 Louisville 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2009 Louisville 4–8 (1–6)
  

Skip Holtz (15 - 14)

• 2010 South Florida 8–5 (3–4)
  
• 2011 South Florida 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2012 South Florida 2–2 (0–1)
  

Compare the 3 seasons directly preceding both their tenures and maybe you'll see why Skip would get a longer leash ...

what would that have to do with anything?

Edited September 23, 2012 by Bullwinkle

[gobulls83]

Never understood why people compared Holtz to Kragthorpe. But now I get it. If Holtz does not turn things around on the football field their records could be similar in three seasons. The difference is USF will stick with him for a few more years, my guess is at least 5 years for Skip.

Steve Kragthorpe (15 - 21)

• 2007 Louisville 6–6 (3–4)
  
• 2008 Louisville 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2009 Louisville 4–8 (1–6)
  

Skip Holtz (15 - 14)

• 2010 South Florida 8–5 (3–4)
  
• 2011 South Florida 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2012 South Florida 2–2 (0–1)
  

Compare the 3 seasons directly preceding both their tenures and maybe you'll see why Skip would get a longer leash ...

what would that have to do with anything?

Kragz took over a team that had gone 32-5 the previous three years. Expectations were much higher. There was a much further fall for him than for Holtz, primarily because his team started higher to begin with. Holtz went 15-12 his first two years - USF was 16-10 the two years (24-15 going back three years) before that. Not that much of a dropoff, comparatively.

Not defending Holtz, just explaining why the situations are different. Holtz deserves to be fired if the team does not go to a bowl game this year, even though it seems unlikely that he will be.

Edited September 23, 2012 by gobulls83

[Blackice12]

gobulls83, good point. So USF gets another 2 years of Skip and the losing continues, season ticket sales will go down, recruiting will be impacted and USF football will be less relevant than it is today. (No chances of moving to a better conference)

If USF athletics can deal with this financially then I do not see a problem.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Blackice12

[MikeG]

Never understood why people compared Holtz to Kragthorpe. But now I get it. If Holtz does not turn things around on the football field their records could be similar in three seasons. The difference is USF will stick with him for a few more years, my guess is at least 5 years for Skip.

Steve Kragthorpe (15 - 21)

• 2007 Louisville 6–6 (3–4)
  
• 2008 Louisville 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2009 Louisville 4–8 (1–6)
  

Skip Holtz (15 - 14)

• 2010 South Florida 8–5 (3–4)
  
• 2011 South Florida 5–7 (1–6)
  
• 2012 South Florida 2–2 (0–1)
  

Compare the 3 seasons directly preceding both their tenures and maybe you'll see why Skip would get a longer leash ...

what would that have to do with anything?

Kragz took over a team that had gone 32-5 the previous three years. Expectations were much higher. There was a much further fall for him than for Holtz, primarily because his team started higher to begin with. Holtz went 15-12 his first two years - USF was 16-10 the two years (24-15 going back three years) before that. Not that much of a dropoff, comparatively.

Not defending Holtz, just explaining why the situations are different. Holtz deserves to be fired if the team does not go to a bowl game this year, even though it seems unlikely that he will be.

seems like you inflated Holtz first two year numbers somewhere-- he has 27 games somehow?

he was 8-5 in 2010 and 5-7 in 2011 --- two year record: 13-12 (one less bowl game)

I think this stuff is less important to the decision than the overall financial situation. No doubt we are still amortizing the Leavitt payoff./