Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 11/01  at  04:14 PM

Mike, that’s a compliment to Burnham. It means he knows so much football, he’s forgotten more than others have ever known. Hendrick missed some time early in the preseason because of his health.

Posted by  mike,  on 11/01  at  02:10 PM

Brett,

What do you mean forgotten more football than most coaches ever know? I like he and Canales both. I agree Canales was fall guy and got a bad deal. I would imagine Burnham is having to coach some coaches this season due to inexperience. I hear Patrick’s name but what about Hendrix…is he not contributing as a coach because of his health????

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 11/01  at  10:01 AM

Mike, let me emphasize: I am not knocking the assistants. As I said earlier, some were only available to USF because they were out of work or had just been fired. Again, it was because the assistants salary pool was so low. You mentioned Burnham and Canalas. Burnham is the top asst. to ever work at USF. He’s forgotten more football than most coaches ever know. The defense is taking some lumps this year, but it doesn’t mean he all of sudden can’t coach. Gone are 2 NFL CBs & Moffitt, who Burnham said would be the key loss this year. When I wrote that some said it was coach speak - I guess it wasn’t. And Canales was another great hire. Stoops made him the fall guy at Az. & has a ton of college/NFL experience.

Posted by  mike, florida on 10/31  at  09:23 PM

I do agree that some of the hires have been questionable and have not understood some of them. However, there are 2 proven coaches with many years of experience and success on that staff in Wally Burnham and Mike Canales.  I do think you are knocking them. There are many coaches without a job every year who get hired by someone. Burnham is a great coach and I don’t think he was a charity case. Unfortunately, the hires Leavitt could not have made his job easier. Having another experienced coach like McCarney had to be helpful. Mike Canales was fired from Arizona before returning to USF but doesn’t make him a bad coach or a charity case either. He was a known quantity.

Posted by  Rich, Tampa on 10/31  at  08:54 PM

No Allen, in fact he is their Head Coach. He also makes $450k less than Leavitt and has a top 10 team in the toughest conference in football. His only loss is to the #1 team in the country by 4 at their place. And I’m willing to bet $100 bucks his OC doesn’t make 1/10th what he does. I bet their total coaches salaries are comparable to USF. Some coaches are willing to sacrifice for the good of the program. Our coach hires castoffs because they are cheap so he can get paid $1.5M. we have a d-line coach that was out of football for 10 years and we wonder why we can’t stop the run or get a pass rush.

Posted by  Dale, New Jersey on 10/31  at  06:46 PM

I blame USF’s offensive problems on Rich Rodriguez and the low assistant coaches salary pool. When RR pulled Rod Smith and Greg Frey from the USF in 2006 he solidified WVA as 1 of the best team in B.E. and put USF’s offense in retrograde. Currently none of the offensive coaches have any past experience running a spread offense. CJL will either need to change the offensive staff or change the offense next year to prepare for the 2009 season.

Posted by  Alan Ledford, Tampa on 10/31  at  05:13 PM

Just for factual purposes Gundy is OK States offensive coordinator.

Posted by  Rich, Tampa on 10/31  at  04:50 PM

Brett,

I understand that it’s up to the school but I’m sure Leavitt has a say in how the limited salary pool is distributed, including his own salary. The school may have $3M (??) for coaches and CJL decides he needs half.  Look at Gundy at Ok St (makes $1.05M ). I’d like to see what percentage of the total coaches salary pool his salary commands. I can’t imagine his OC makes 1/10th of what he does like ours.  I think it’s better for the program to pay CJL less and assistants more. We don’t need medical salesman coaching our d-line so CJL can be paid as much as Joe Pa.

Posted by  Mike Singletary, San Francisco on 10/31  at  03:44 PM

I think I know why your team didn’t come back to win the game in the second half.

Coach Leavitt didn’t drop his pants to motivate the players at halftime.

Jim, headbutting your players is so passe.  Go with the pants dropping gimmick next time.

Posted by  Keith Olbermann, NYC on 10/31  at  03:37 PM

It’s all George Bush’s fault….along with John McCain.

They pulled the plug on this economy just in time to keep USF from hiring new assistants.

Under Barack Obama’s plan, USF will be able to hire Urban Meyer for the offensive coordinator spot, and Bob Stoops for the defensive coordinator spot.

Plus, Obama is sooo dreamy!

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 10/31  at  03:31 PM

Dan, yes, Leavitt has an agent. And yes, the more money for assistants, the bigger pool of candidates to chose from. Remember, USF also got Dan McCarney after he was fired at Iowa State, but he left for a better opportunity at UF this year. The thing is, I don’t see USF making a huge increase in money for assistants, especially in these economic times.

Posted by  Dan, Tampa on 10/31  at  03:26 PM

Brett, a real eye-opener comment re: USF asst coaches. Maybe Leavitt uses a recruiting agency or an agent, or himself (do you know?), but two things pop out: more money draws more interest from more parties, and maybe our recruiting of coaches has been off. Fix the recruiting of coaches and you fix a lot of problems. Leavitt may have taken the best of who was obviously available instead of trying for the best. As a manager, the hardest thing to do is recruit for replacement - be looking for guys when you’re fully staffed. But that’s what the best do… Maybe Leavitt lacks that skill. Who would help him, the AD?

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 10/31  at  03:21 PM

Rich, I would be shocked if Leavitt took money away from what he was making and gave it to another assistant. It probably would cause more internal problems with the entire staff. The (fill in the blank) assistant would be upset he didn’t get more money when the (fill in the blank) assistant did. Not unless, Leavitt was able to bump every assistant - and, again, I think that would be very, very doubtful. In fairness to Leavitt, that’s for the school to determine if they want to pay the coaches more money - not up to the head coach to take it out of his salary. Now, of course, you can argue, he could have initially got the assistants more.

Posted by  Rich, Tampa on 10/31  at  03:19 PM

I also find it disturbing that leavitt is fine picking through the castoffs. He needs to hire people that have been successful at lower levels. Start cherry picking successful coaches like the big programs do.

Posted by  Rich, Tampa on 10/31  at  03:13 PM

Brett,

I know they have been bumped but I think Leavitt needs to think about sacrificing some of his pay to go out there and get somebody to run this offense. Maybe take $1.2M per year like Wanstadt or kelly and put that $300k back into assistants. Even Stewart sacrificed his pay for better assistants. I know we can’t hire away from the big boys but I think UF pays Mullen $290k. Add $130k to GG salary and we should be able to find somebody competent. Rice, Houston, Nevada,Ball State,etc. There has to be a young, dynamic, up and coming OC out there somewhere. Heck the ball State HC “only” makes $240k per year.

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 10/31  at  02:38 PM

Hector, great, great question. However, even if Leavitt does have changes in plan already for next season, he won’t share those publicly. I’m not sure what personnel changes you would see (other than seniors leaving) - they would have made them by now if they thought it would help.

Posted by  Hector Jimeenz, Forsyth, GA on 10/31  at  02:30 PM

Brett….I know we are all disappointed, none more than the players and coaches.  What changes do you forsee coming for USF in the offseason?  A classic offensive attack, a true spread, coaching and personnel changes for a new system. 

I realize that Leavitt will be given every opportunity to stay, he built it and he will leave on his terms, but if we see it he has to see that changes need to occur at USF.  And again, they don’t just have to be on the coaching side, maybe a different O system or players we go after.

Great coverage and blog!

Posted by  Patrick O'Rourke, D.C. on 10/31  at  01:52 PM

Brett…

Wow.

That rundown of the assistants your provided there is truly eye-opening.  I THOUGHT your were on to something when you first espoused that theory, now I KNOW you are.

It’s going to be hard for many fans to keep supporting this program with big donations if it’s going to be the Jim Leavitt Charity Ball.  The consequences of such a philosophy are only now beginning to show themselves…and it aint pretty.

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 10/31  at  01:45 PM

Rich, until recently the assistants were the lowest paid in the BCS (as I’ve written before). Leavitt’s latest contract bumped them up just below the average of the BCS schools. But if/when you’re replacing assistants, you’re unlikely to get someone from a Texas, Bama, etc. because those schools pay so much more and it would be a pay cut to work at USF. And, I realize, just because someone makes more money doesn’t make them a better coach, but it certainly gives you a bigger pool of candidates to choose from. Don G., someone who’s opinion I value very much told me the Sun Bowl was the worst prepared game he’s seen at USF - and he’s seen nearly all of them.

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 10/31  at  01:40 PM

USF95, I don’t think Clemson will go after Leavitt. And Allen, you want a rundown on the assistants: Burnham fired at SCar 98, hired USF 00; Canales fired at AZ 07; hired USF 08; Douglas left Indiana in 05; was in running for North Texas and some other jobs; hired USF 06; Franks fired Duke 04, hired USF 05; Gregory left Ohio 03 out of coaching a year; hired USF 05; Hendrick left S.C. State 07; hired USF 08; Patrick out of coaching 10 years; hired USF 08; Scott GA at USF 06; hired USF 07; Simmonds GA at USF 06; hired USF 07.

Posted by  Allen Brown, Tampa on 10/31  at  01:31 PM

I’m just saying you don’t have to steal coaches from other schools to get quality guys.

You accused Leavitt of getting guys that can’t get another job just so they are loyal to him.  That’s ridiculous, especially considering how much turn over there has been in the coaching staff.

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 10/31  at  01:26 PM

Doug, interesting comparison between Leavitt and Seth. There are some similarities there, but I think Leavitt has progressed the program further than hoops - but then again this is a football state and recruiting hotbed. And, I know you’re kidding (I think), but there’s no way, USF would turn down a bowl bid. Allen, I’m asked questions, so I answer. I’m sorry you don’t like the answers. UC, you bring up a good point. How will recruits view this team? You can’t tell a RB or WR you’ll be “the man” because of USF’s RB/WR by committee. It will be an interesting challenge.

Posted by  Patrick O'Rourke, D.C. on 10/31  at  12:42 PM

Spoken like a true USF homer, Allen.

Very nice.

Posted by  Allen Brown, Tampa on 10/31  at  12:22 PM

yeah, Leavitt only hires people down on their luck so that they will be loyal to him.  They are all terrible at their jobs.  Wow.  Keep piling it on, Brett!

Enjoy the down times while you can, I guess.

Posted by  Eric S, Tampa, FL on 10/31  at  12:19 PM

Brett, your analysis on why Leavitt assistant coaches with those backgrounds is very interesting. I never thought of it that way.  Only Leavitt knows if it is true or not, unless some disgruntled assistant talks out about his boss.

Your report on Eddie Cardieri a few years back was some great reporting, no matter how many feathers it rustled.

Your non-biased analysis is appreciated.  As an alumnus I know I could never analyze the the situation at USF from a non-biased viewpoint.