"I'd like to see a better athlete at his size," said Rick Swain, who coached Schmidt in 2002-03 at Boca Raton High School. "He put on a ton of weight and strength here, and they're getting a great kid."
The bad news? Four more players who signed with USF in February aren't on the fall roster, likely meaning they failed to qualify academically. The new four -- center Kevin McCaskill, lineman Jeremiah Warren, safety Jerrell Young and defensive lineman Joe Jackson -- now bring the total to nine players gone from the class introduced in February, as well as commitment Robert Spann.
Two returning scholarship players who were projected as backups -- offensive tackle Jerome Springfield and defensive lineman Paul Uhatafe -- are no longer with the team as well. We broke news last week about Bradenton Southeast's A.J. Love joining the Bulls in place of teammate David Fonua, and he is officially on USF's fall roster -- but as a defensive back. Former Armwood receiver Mat Brevi, who had committed to USF and participated in summer workouts, is not on the roster.
Check back tonight for more news on a few more additions to USF's roster.
Times sportswriter Greg Auman, who covers USF, will post news and thoughts on the Bulletin and we invite your participation in the comments area.
Why doesn't USF give attention to the kids that walk in there on their own and who have more talent than most of the recruits anyway. And who by the way want to be there to play football and get an education. Maybe they should reward them with some of these scholarships!!
Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2006 at 09:04 AM
My brother-in-law is an FSU grad and, therefore, keeps up with his alma mater very closely. He told me yesterday that he can't ever remember FSU (which is notorious for signing guys who don't make it) having as many as 10 players not on the roster in the fall. He also said their inability to retain these guys over the past few years has been one of the main reasons for their relative struggles in the past few seasons. Something to think about as we continue to sign questionable guys....may not hurt today, but foolish decisions have painful consequences sooner or later.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2006 at 08:14 AM
12 comments! Woohoo! And if you check the blog, it's up to 10 kids gone from the recruiting class. Makes for a lot of wasted energy in the short term, but a lot could be back at USF, many as soon as January.
Posted by: Greg Auman | July 11, 2006 at 12:37 AM
most people that are complaining prob didn't understand the amount we can sign and see that we knew not everyone was going to make it to campus. every university signs kids that don't make it on campus. there is nothing to worry about, its just the way recruitung goes
Posted by: Anonymous | July 11, 2006 at 12:12 AM
Leavitt apologists? Debacle? Is that what losing 9 of 30 commitments is? You're only allowed to sign 25 kids a year anyway. And it looks like Leavitt has a few transfers lined up to fill the holes. If he still ends up with more than 20 kids in the '06 class - how is it a debacle?
Posted by: tbever | July 10, 2006 at 11:54 PM
To the naysayers who prefer to ASSUME the worst out of everything and accuse everyone else of being "apologists" or "downplayers":How about you stick with facts instead of constantly interjecting your negative opinions into everything. You folks don't care what happens, all you do is complain, bunch of crybabies. Instead of attacking anyone who disagrees with you, why don't you try SUPPORTING our program. I know that's a novel idea, but our program needs your help, not your ignorant whining.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 11:47 PM
I just love all you guys who are trying to downplay this mess. This is nothing but a big debacle, and coach Leavitt & Co. had better figure something out before the recruting season starts for this upcoming year. If they have another 9-10 losses from next year's class, we'll be in HUGE trouble. Would you Leavitt apologists please wake up and tell it like it is?
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 11:08 PM
UCF may have seven verbal commitments to date for the 2007 season, but you need to look at the quality of those recruits. Rivals has 1 of those recruits at 3 stars, 2 at 2 stars, and the rest are unrated entirely. Most quality recruits are going to take all of their recruiting trips, and make their decisions later in the year. Quality over quantity. UCF isn't our benchmark, other BCS schools are. Keep your eye on the real ball.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 06:18 PM
O'Leary is getting commitments from players, for the most part, who were jumping at what could be their only official offer.What matters is who remains committed and signs in February. I'll take quality over quantity any day. Let's see what happens after USFs 7 on 7 camp.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 05:13 PM
Hey, Anonymous, who's the 2007 recruit? That's one more than I know of so far ... more to come tonight guys ...
Posted by: Greg Auman | July 10, 2006 at 04:32 PM
wow 9 players lost and what, 1 2007 recruit commited so far?We're a BCS school and being shown up by George O'Leary's program. They have a bunch of recruits 2007(per rivals) and I haven't read anything on their sites or the Orlando Sentinel about them losing kids for 2006.We own them on the field, and we're going to need to do it again this September to keep any credibility. Obviously the BCS advantage isn't going to separate us as quickly as I had hoped, at least in recruits eyes.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 04:21 PM
wow 9 players lost and what, 1 2007 recruit commited so far?We're a BCS school and being shown up by George O'Leary's program. They have a bunch of recruits 2007(per rivals) and I haven't read anything on their sites or the Orlando Sentinel about them losing kids for 2006.We own them on the field, and we're going to need to do it again this September to keep any credibility. Obviously the BCS advantage isn't going to separate us as quickly as I had hoped, at least in recruits eyes.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 04:21 PM
Nine recruited players lost for academic reasons ? Sounds like somebody is not doing their homework ; coaches and players. How are these kids graduating from highschool and not meeting minimal requirements for college admission ?
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 12:48 PM
What happened to Springfield? I thought he was in the running for a starting line position.
Posted by: tbever | July 10, 2006 at 12:48 PM
The football team is starting to lose players at a rate that Coach McCullum would be proud of
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2006 at 12:35 PM