In denial no longer - 2016 was mostly Leavitt

[MiamiBuffs]

16 was an anomaly. An aberration.

Accidental success is the best kind.

 

[777BuffFan]

Elliot was a disaster at KU and was out the door when MM hired him. Two years out and KU defense is much better in the SEC........which is a bit better than the PAC-12. Just sayin

 

[Ralfie]

Accidental success is the best kind.

CU is a big believer in the adage, “It’s better to be lucky than good”.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Not buying the leavit thing. His current defense - by direct comparison - is worse than the Buffs. Even with oregon's super duper top qb in the draft bolstering the oregon D.

What are you not buying? Leavitt’s performance at Oregon this year is irrelevant to his performance at CU in 2016, or at all for that matter.

 

[hawg1]

Hugh Freeze?

Any takers?

 

[onealcd]

We didn’t want to pay what it would have taken to keep Leavitt so he left for Oregon. Instead we had to resort to hiring a guy who oversaw some bad defenses and lost play calling duties at a basketball school.

It was you who commented on how Leavitt wasn’t earning his pay so I’m asking you how that switch to Eliot has worked out.

I don’t care how his defense at Oregon has performed, his defense at CU was great and so he was probably worth more to us than he was to Oregon.

You change arguments more than a menopausal woman.

 

[SINKRATZ]

You change arguments more than a menopausal woman.

I have no idea what you’re talking about but I’ll ‘splain my argument to you nice and simple:

This thread is about Leavitt being a primary reason for the success we had in 2016 which I agree with.

Some people (like you) want to argue he’s not really all that good based on how Oregon’s defense has performed this year.

I’m arguing that his performance this year is irrelevant to how impactful he was at CU in 2016. His performance at Oregon doesn’t mattter - he performed really well HERE, which is all I care about as a CU fan.

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

What are you not buying? Leavitt’s performance at Oregon this year is irrelevant to his performance at CU in 2016, or at all for that matter.

Irrelevant? So any argument that actually looks at the facts is irrelevant? The fact is that Elliott’s defense in 2018 is better than Levitt’s defense in 2018. So your argument that Levitt is a better coach than Elliot really isn’t valid, based on the facts of 2018.

It is really simple logic

 

[gobuffs58]

Irrelevant? So any argument that actually looks at the facts is irrelevant? The fact is that Elliott’s defense in 2018 is better than Levitt’s defense in 2018. So your argument that Levitt is a better coach than Elliot really isn’t valid, based on the facts of 2018.

It is really simple logic

elliott isnt in the same zip code as leavitt

 

[Agent Dave Kujan]

elliott isnt in the same zip code as leavitt

I like Levitt. But the facts do matter

 

[Deleted member 807]

I have no idea what you’re talking about but I’ll ‘splain my argument to you nice and simple:

This thread is about Leavitt being a primary reason for the success we had in 2016 which I agree with.

Some people (like you) want to argue he’s not really all that good based on how Oregon’s defense has performed this year.

I’m arguing that his performance this year is irrelevant to how impactful he was at CU in 2016. His performance at Oregon doesn’t mattter - he performed really well HERE, which is all I care about as a CU fan.

To build further on this line of logic, Levitt’s 2016 performance as a DC is also irrelevant to any future impact that Levitt might have at CU as an HC.

I believe that Leavitt did an outstanding job with the talent that was assembled in 2016. This is talent he didn’t necessarily acquire, but did develop. His ability to call up blitzes AND have a lockdown secondary was amazing. His Twitter game was strong, including showing off his fortitude cooling down in Boulder Creek. He love(s/d) Boulder. But he’s a mercenary whose loyalty is most aligned with Diet Pepsi and wads of dead presidents.

Leavitt was no recruiting mastermind. He didn’t stock CU’s cupboard with talent that lived on after his departure.

It’s been 9 years since he’s been an HC at SFlorida. At 61 years of age and spending nearly a decade as a mercenary in search of a higher paycheck, he might not have the connections and personality necessary to assemble a competent staff that is effective and plays nice amongst CU’s power hierarchy. I’d see him, at best, as a 5 year coach. At worst, he’d leverage CU as a stepping stone to get back to Florida or Texas or some place that pays more.

If this is presented as some binary choice between Leavitt and MacIntyre with money being of little consequence, then by all means, get Leavitt. But in the real world, I’d rather have a younger target that shows better recruiting chops and a longer horizon to be the face of the program.

 

[onealcd]

I have no idea what you’re talking about but I’ll ‘splain my argument to you nice and simple:

This thread is about Leavitt being a primary reason for the success we had in 2016 which I agree with.

Some people (like you) want to argue he’s not really all that good based on how Oregon’s defense has performed this year.

I’m arguing that his performance this year is irrelevant to how impactful he was at CU in 2016. His performance at Oregon doesn’t mattter - he performed really well HERE, which is all I care about as a CU fan.

This thread is about how impactful he was here in 2016 and it is becoming clear that it really wasn’t him, more about the talent he had here that year and a perfect storm. You can clearly tell he isn’t an elite coordinator by watching his time at Oregon and how he left the talent in the program here. You bring up random stupid **** all the time in every argument you make like trying to justify Leavitt making 1.3 million a year. He isn’t performing up to expectations but if you want to stay on that train go ahead.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

To build further on this line of logic, Levitt’s 2016 performance as a DC is also irrelevant to any future impact that Levitt might have at CU as an HC.

I believe that Leavitt did an outstanding job with the talent that was assembled in 2016. This is talent he didn’t necessarily acquire, but did develop. His ability to call up blitzes AND have a lockdown secondary was amazing. His Twitter game was strong, including showing off his fortitude cooling down in Boulder Creek. He love(s/d) Boulder. But he’s a mercenary whose loyalty is most aligned with Diet Pepsi and wads of dead presidents.

Leavitt was no recruiting mastermind. He didn’t stock CU’s cupboard with talent that lived on after his departure.

It’s been 9 years since he’s been an HC at SFlorida. At 61 years of age and spending nearly a decade as a mercenary in search of a higher paycheck, he might not have the connections and personality necessary to assemble a competent staff that is effective and plays nice amongst CU’s power hierarchy. I’d see him, at best, as a 5 year coach. At worst, he’d leverage CU as a stepping stone to get back to Florida or Texas or some place that pays more.

If this is presented as some binary choice between Leavitt and MacIntyre with money being of little consequence, then by all means, get Leavitt. But in the real world, I’d rather have a younger target that shows better recruiting chops and a longer horizon to be the face of the program.

I don’t think anyone is advocating for Leavitt as HC, but I could be wrong.

 

[buffaholic]

How many points did Leavitt give up vs AZ 8 days ago?

 

[Deleted member 807]

I don’t think anyone is advocating for Leavitt as HC, but I could be wrong.

Why else would his name be floating around at this point in time? Is it simply to undermine MacIntyre’s claim to fame as the 2016 COTY? Is it to cast shade on CU’s decision to extend MacIntyre?

 

[SINKRATZ]

Irrelevant? So any argument that actually looks at the facts is irrelevant? The fact is that Elliott’s defense in 2018 is better than Levitt’s defense in 2018. So your argument that Levitt is a better coach than Elliot really isn’t valid, based on the facts of 2018.

It is really simple logic

Holy s**t dude. Read my post again. Leavitts performance this year is irrelevant to the job he did here in 2016 which this entire thread is about.

I can’t believe you’re actually going to use one year to prove that Eliot is a better DC than Leavitt - I suspect every P5 coach in the country would take Leavitt over Eliot right now in a heartbeat (this season notwithstanding).

 

[SINKRATZ]

To build further on this line of logic, Levitt’s 2016 performance as a DC is also irrelevant to any future impact that Levitt might have at CU as an HC.

I believe that Leavitt did an outstanding job with the talent that was assembled in 2016. This is talent he didn’t necessarily acquire, but did develop. His ability to call up blitzes AND have a lockdown secondary was amazing. His Twitter game was strong, including showing off his fortitude cooling down in Boulder Creek. He love(s/d) Boulder. But he’s a mercenary whose loyalty is most aligned with Diet Pepsi and wads of dead presidents.

Leavitt was no recruiting mastermind. He didn’t stock CU’s cupboard with talent that lived on after his departure.

It’s been 9 years since he’s been an HC at SFlorida. At 61 years of age and spending nearly a decade as a mercenary in search of a higher paycheck, he might not have the connections and personality necessary to assemble a competent staff that is effective and plays nice amongst CU’s power hierarchy. I’d see him, at best, as a 5 year coach. At worst, he’d leverage CU as a stepping stone to get back to Florida or Texas or some place that pays more.

If this is presented as some binary choice between Leavitt and MacIntyre with money being of little consequence, then by all means, get Leavitt. But in the real world, I’d rather have a younger target that shows better recruiting chops and a longer horizon to be the face of the program.

And nowhere did I say I think Leavitt should be our HC.

 

[Duff Man]

How many points did Leavitt give up vs AZ 8 days ago?

Slightly more than defensive geniuses MM/DJ Eliot.

 

[Duff Man]

Why else would his name be floating around at this point in time? Is it simply to undermine MacIntyre’s claim to fame as the 2016 COTY? Is it to cast shade on CU’s decision to extend MacIntyre?

I think Nik's post was pretty clear.

 

[SINKRATZ]

This thread is about how impactful he was here in 2016 and it is becoming clear that it really wasn’t him, more about the talent he had here that year and a perfect storm. You can clearly tell he isn’t an elite coordinator by watching his time at Oregon and how he left the talent in the program here. You bring up random stupid **** all the time in every argument you make like trying to justify Leavitt making 1.3 million a year. He isn’t performing up to expectations but if you want to stay on that train go ahead.

So Leavitt’s defense this year proves he isn’t a good DC and wasn’t the reason we were good in 2016? Ok guy. Believe it or not even good coaches have up and down seasons. He has a career spanning 30 years but if you want to draw conclusions based on this season and how many points his team gave up to arizona one time knock yourself out. We’re not going to agree on this and that’s fine.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Why else would his name be floating around at this point in time? Is it simply to undermine MacIntyre’s claim to fame as the 2016 COTY? Is it to cast shade on CU’s decision to extend MacIntyre?

I mean, nik decided to start a thread basically stating that 2016 was an aberration for HCMM and the catalyst for success that season was JL. I don’t really see anyone in this thread arguing or advocating for JL as HC.

 

[The Ogre]

This - especially the bolded. That man's energy and excitement was (and I assume still is) infectious. Would it age well? I don't know, but coach dad pants seems to still be doing ok (in college), so maybe there's something to it (in college).

So much about successful head coaches is about "fit." It's why the same coach can be very successful at one stop and a failure at another, or vice - versa.

Would Leavitt be a good "fit" as HC at CU?

Part of me thinks he actually would - but not in the way we would expect.

He would be a good fit not because he is such a close match to the university's culture, but because he isn't.

Think back to the first coach Mac. Tell me, do you seriously think he was a cultural match for the University of Colorado at Boulder?

Where we are right here, right now, I think Leavitt would challenge the culture at CU in a positive way. The school's culture really is somewhere in whatever the millennial version of "trust fund hippie" is.

A coach that produces a team that is tough, one that's not "charmin soft," is going to be one that challenges the university's culture. And that's probably a good thing.

CU's great teams have never really "out finessed" anyone, which is probably what would match the university's culture. But we don't have a competitive advantage there - we'll always be behind Oregon, or UCLA, or even USC if we try andcompete on that dimension.

The successful Colorado teams punch you in the mouth, and then get up and do it again. That doesn't exactly match Boulder's culture, does it?

But it's where our competitive advantage lies: top notch public school in great location (lots of those in our conference) that plays smashmouth football (not many of those). And, lucky for us, the only other conference schools that come close to those descriptions aren't in our division.

The right "fit" for a coach at CU is going to challenge the university's culture. Whether Leavitt is the right coach for that role or not, I'm not sure. But he definitely ticks a lot of the boxes.

I agree with a lot of this, especially the bolded. As much as some like to write off the effects of the altitude, it is an advantage - even if mostly mental. Being pushed around and smacked by a more physical team that still has some speed, can wear down opponents as well or better than our current offense, imo. A head coach who instills a killer instinct in his team is a lot of what is lacking right now. Levitt would bring that, but his deficiencies are just too much for me to hope he's a top candidate when the job opens. Can't imagine a scenario where he limps back here as DC.

Isn't it bam ba lam?

He's Betty's child, he should know.

 

[Deleted member 807]

I don’t think anyone is advocating for Leavitt as HC, but I could be wrong.

I think Nik's post was pretty clear.

RE JL as HC - See posts 42, 43, 46, and 79. I’ve said my peace in response to the HC discussion.

As for the OP - I’m in the camp that 2016 had synergy that includes Leavitt’s charisma, intensity and play calling on D. Of course MM was instrumental in Leavitt’s arrival in Boulder.

Sefo and Lindsay were also spark plugs on the Offense. The RISE video series added a sense of destiny that added to the self-fulfilling prophesy. So was the energy around the new locker room and brand spanking new facilities.

TL;DR - Leavitt was a critical ingredient of the 2016 gumbo, not the chef.

 

[Duff Man]

RE JL as HC - See posts 42, 43, 46, and 79. I’ve said my peace in response to the HC discussion.

As for the OP - I’m in the camp that 2016 had synergy that includes Leavitt’s charisma, intensity and play calling on D. Of course MM was instrumental in Leavitt’s arrival in Boulder.

Sefo and Lindsay were also spark plugs on the Offensive. The RISE video series added a sense of destiny that added to the self-fulfilling prophesy. So was the energy around the new locker room and brand spanking new facilities.

TL;DR - Leavitt was a critical ingredient of the 2016 gumbo, not the chef.

Cool.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Cool.

Thanks for keeping me on a leash.

 

[onealcd]

So Leavitt’s defense this year proves he isn’t a good DC and wasn’t the reason we were good in 2016? Ok guy. Believe it or not even good coaches have up and down seasons. He has a career spanning 30 years but if you want to draw conclusions based on this season and how many points his team gave up to arizona one time knock yourself out. We’re not going to agree on this and that’s fine.

Umm, not just this yeAr man. They weren’t great last year either. I’m not saying he is terrible but the crowning of him as an elite DC is premature, especially because he doesn’t recruit worth a ****.

 

[WarBuff]

because he doesn’t recruit worth a ****.

Given this fact, I cannot understand why MM wanted him gone so badly. Seems to fit MM's MO.

 

[Duff Man]

Thanks for keeping me on a leash.

Thanks for being you.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Umm, not just this yeAr man. They weren’t great last year either. I’m not saying he is terrible but the crowning of him as an elite DC is premature, especially because he doesn’t recruit worth a ****.

It’s just pretty amazing he’s been able to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes over a 30 year career but finally now he is being exposed for the mediocre DC he is!