Leavitt talks about USF's rotating RBs

There's obviously been considerable conversation here about USF's practice of generally rotating running backs with each series, and Bulls coach Jim Leavitt discussed the rotation at length at Tuesday night's practice. Easiest thing to do here is just print what he said and let you guys read it that way.

Me: Seeing how well Jamar Taylor came back Saturday, do you have a sense for what he might be capable of doing this week,in terms of taking on a larger role?

Leavitt: Well, we're rolling three backs, basically. That's Mike (Ford) and Mo (Plancher) and Taylor, with Lindsey (Lamar) being a guy in there as well. Will we feature one guy? I don't see that happening right now. I really don't. I just don't.

Trib's Gregg Becnel: Why is that?

Leavitt: They're all different. They all have different roles. They all are different guys. Lindsey's small and he's very fast, and there are different things he does. Mike's big and does different things. Taylor and Mo are more alike, those two rotate in there. In different situations, we use different guys and all that stuff. We have used one back here, obviously, with Andre Hall, and Dyral McMillan, if you go back some years. We haven't lately. Mike we couldn't play early, Lindsey was young. We used Mo, and then Taylor got hurt. Taylor was out. Why did we bring Taylor back? He's healthy and ready to go.

Me: On Saturday, Taylor comes in and runs for 8 yards, runs for 19 and it gets called back. Obviously he's running well, but because of the rotation, it's another 40 minutes before he's back in the game. Do you see why that might throw off his own rhythm?

Leavitt: Yeah, I think that's fair. Why wouldn't you go with Taylor all the time? I think that's a fair comment. He's one of our top guys. The answer, I'd say, is Mo's really pretty good, too. He runs hard and does a real good job. He's had some great runs already this year. Everybody wants Mike Ford, because he's such a big back, so you usually see Mike in there in short yardage, goal line, things like that. It's a fair question. I understand why we're rotating. Will one of them break out of this thing? Maybe. Maybe. We may end up going with one here this week or next week, if we really feel like one's really playing much, much better than the others. Would I rather do that? You need them all available, because look at what happens. But you probably go with one or two backs as much as possible. But they're all good players. (Demetris) Murray's a good player."

Comments

[Jupiter Bull]

It's not just a Lamar example. We ALMOST blew the FIU game last year by giving a slow developing, DEEP hand off to Ford. When on the 1 or 2, your life needs to push, and you need quick hitting plays that don't need to develop. They rarely break big, but do give you 2 or 3 boring, but much needed, yards.

[Richard Todd]

ESPN(Chris B) was the only one saying - "IT COULD GO ALL THE WAY" Now eveyone says it so someday we all may be calling the trailers the Ponderosa. Actually USF could have some fun with that one. Ben -Hoss-Adam & Little Joe. Who plays which parts.

[David Weber]

The Lamar thing in the Florida State is a great example of how Leavitt and Canales just don't seem capable of adapting to the game. Not like refusing to throw against the worst secondary in the conference, but just an example of the lack of thought that goes into things.

Lamar may have broken a big run, but common sense says that a bigger back for that situation.

If the rotation works, then no one complains. But if something isn't working, that means that an adjustment is needed. It is true that no one has stepped up and deserves to be the clear #1, but the strict rotation by series just isn't working well enough to keep trying it.

[Dave Glaser]

The problem with having "situational" running backs is you tell the defense exactly what to expect based on who's in the game, don't you?

[G.A.]

Another thing that always amuses me about the ESPN trailer-footage fetish is that the announcers always call it "The Ponderosa." I've been on the beat six seasons counting this one, and I think the only time I've heard it called that was on ESPN. And they do it every time, like it's what everyone calls it.

[MeSoDumb]

ESPN, I wanna see pictures of the Ponderosa again and again and again.

[G.A.]

I think Nathan has a good point. Fans aren't objecting to the rotation because of its nature as a rotation; they're objecting because the offense isn't in rhythm and the rotation might be a part of that. There's little to show the Bulls stick with a hot running back when there are consistent good runs from one player.

I think sometimes the coaches adhere to the rotation when situational logic would seem to suggest they step away from the scripted rotation. Having Lamar in from the end zone against Florida State, etc. ...

[Tampa Tad]

How about rotating QB's, BJ against UC ran twice as much as any 1 RB, against Pitt 3 times as much...... How about let the QB play QB and RB play RB, oh yeah, that part of BJ's game, well if I was a top receiver or RB the last team I would be looking at would be USF.

[Nathan]

First, let me clarify that I agree with the general sentiment that the Bulls need to pick one or two backs and give him/them the preponderance of the carries.

That said, no one in Gainesville complains about the Demps-Rainey-Moody three-headed running back attack—each of whom is a slightly different back from the other and brings different strengths to his carries. Likewise, no one in Tampa would be complianing if Plancher/Taylor, Ford, and Lamar were all averaging 7+ yards per carry, each bringing a different strength to his carries.

[Ken]

I guess I'm not surprised that he frames it so clearly as being fair to all the runners who are very close in overall ability or putting in the right guy who has a unique contribution to make in a particular play. As others observed, if they are in for particular plays, that's a big tipoff to the defense. And And it is hard to see why LL was in on the 1 or 2 yard line at FSU and nearly cost us a safety. As to the fairness rationale, hey, the players are close at all the positions, but part of the coaches job is to determine who is best for the team and play them as long as it is good for the team. He's thinking of equality and fairness when he should be thinking about making a decision that will help the team.

[SJT]

We got too many good backs but cant run the ball as a team. CJL is really clueless on rotation of RB's. I cant think of any team rotating 4-5 RB's in a game unless they running a wishbone attack similar to Georgia Tech. Same deal with our receivers and thats why the offense is struggling.

[Taurean]

Levitt sounds like a stumbling foool. "Maybe. Maybe. Gee,l I don't know."

Memo to the Leavitt: You're the coach. Make a decision about the RB situation. We cannot have three or four guys all "in it." You have to tell the other RBs if they want to be the feature back, work harder in practice, impress the coaches and BEAT the other guy(s) on the roster. You can't just have four or five RBs all within a series of getting unearned playing time.

Leavitt, pick a guy and stick with him. It would do wonders for our offense!

[BullsBulliever]

Well whatever we are doing Coach seems to feel it is working good enough. So, I guess it's good enough for me.

Meanwhile some ramblings...Memo to Coach - may as well rotate QBs too. I know BJ needs more reps but put Evan in there every couple of series too. Let them both play until one proves they are the best starter.

BTW- who are our top WRs? We rotate them pretty well too.

AND I have not thrown in the towel (yet) because if we found a way to run the table and finish 10-2 it would be our best season ever. So hope is not lost yet. (Gotta find a way to be an optimist)

[Bobby B]

If i was a running back the last school i would go to is usf. pick a guy and go with him. at least limit the rotation to two guys the way EVERY OTHER MAJOR PROGRAM AND NFL TEAM DOES IT.

[USFShep]

Espn just replayed how Coach Mike Leach at Texas Tech called out his players. Said they need to quit listening to their fat little girlfriends telling them how good they are and how easy it is going to be for them. Coach said they keep thinking they can win all these games but they don't go out on the field and play to win!

Hmmm.....sounds like a message our team might need as well. Think CJL would ever....nevermind. Nah, but by he'll make sure they play hard.

[G.A.]

Kelly has played a little in every game this year -- he's worked as an H-back, a hybrid FB/TE position.

[Done with the Jim]

"how a coach answers questions to the media has no bearing on his ability as a coach" usfmikeb

-----

That's true, it's teams performance on the field against conference opponents and his record that count. His BE record speaks for itself, MEDIOCRE. His teams performance in the BEast last year, and this year is too painful to describe.

USF deserves better, he needs to go.

[Bulls '04]

And we already have three rb's committed for next year.....i think we need to focus on recruiting big linemen both defense and offense

[USFShep]

Hope the Zooker gets us a win Friday. I think the bottom line of his response is he really just isn't sure what he wants to do. That much is obvious and that is what concerns me. He does not have a plan to get this team where they are capable of going. Make sure they play hard Zooker!

[jg233]

I think the coaches want to be able to use a different back on every play in the game next year...Ford, Taylor, Lamar, Kelly, Samuels, Murray, Battles, Bellamy, Powell, Shaw...why not move Victor Marc to RB cause we lack talent and depth?...LOL! Message to the coaches...we dont need anymore RBs for like 2-3 years...find other positions to recruit.

[Rick]

Thanks, coach, for explaining how good we have it today, with multiple skilled backs. Yes coach, we remember those days when all we had was one feature back, like Andre Hall. I'm glad those days are long gone. Yup, we better off now coach.

[Rick]

You guys don't understand CJL: we got a stable of good backs, deeper than ever before. They're all darn good and skilled. We got one for each situation that might present itself ... TOO BAD WE DON'T HAVE A RUNNING GAME.

[werbito]

GA, good job asking questions the people want asked.

[Cat]

LOL at Ari. I'm OK with giving Taylor the ball. Or Ford honestly. Is it Friday yet?

[Cat]

Not seeing what CJL said as so bad. He conceded that if one back starts playing much better than the others, they may go with one feature back. He also pointed out that all the running backs have their unique skills that they want to try to utilize. He was being somewhat noncomittal, so we'll have to wait & see on Friday what happens. Thus far, obviously the rotation of backs hasn't worked so wouldn't surprise me to see more of a feature back in our next game.

[Ari Hinkelberger]

Jamar Taylor is our best running back. I don't have a damn clue what Jim Leavitt or any other honkey tonk on fowler avenue is seeing - but it is clear as day that Jamar Taylor is a our best RB.

This rotation is just plain stupid. Dumb Dumb Dumb.

Give the damn ball to Taylor 20 times and lets get on with it.

You can't be all things. If you try to be all things you end up being no things.

GIVE THE BALL TO JAMAR TALYOR FOR GOD SAKES!

[The Hood Rat]

We need to identify ONE Running Back as the lead. Give him a chance to get on a roll. Musical Backs is for little league.

[Turd Ferguson]

Yeah, Mike...don't stop believin', baby.

Love it.

[USFMikeB]

I'll repeat this again for the folks that are slow on the uptake: how a coach answers questions to the media has no bearing on his ability as a coach.

Look, I'd like a straight answer as well, to many questions. However, Leavitt's responses don't mean that he can't coach. Trying to link the two together is foolish.

There are enough questions out there about Leavitt right now. Trying to say that this is another piece of evidence is a stretch.

[Jupiter Bull]

GA, wish you asked about Kelly. At UCF last year, he was a MONSTER, blocking & running. I thought we discovered another Mike Alstott...but I don't think I've seen him in the backfield yet. Heck, even the idea of Ford as a fullback is interesting (not in the I maybe)...you could run some misdirection.

Great comment re: the OL's issues with rotating RBs, and with "situational" RB's tipping the defense. Pick a back...run him till he's gassed or ineffective (but give him 7-10 carries first).

Leavitt's answers are circular and borderline evasive. There's no shame in getting good counsel for outside, whether it's another coach, GA or Turd...we can all learn from "fresh eyes" or new perspective. The idea that nothing's wrong makes we worry WVU will be meltdown #3. Chin up & green on...I'll be there with you fans, SCREAMING. Let's play at our potential & come out (and stay out) at our level of skill. 6-2 would be sweet now, and set us up for a nice finish.

[David Weber]

I meant to add that Graham also gets carries once Lewis is gassed (After 5 or 6 carries, he comes out for a breather, and Pitt runs Graham right off the bat to keep the secondary honest. Then Lewis comes back once they're in the red zone). They also have some nice prospects in Chris Burns and Cam Saddler, but they don't worry about feelings. Once Lewis and Graham established themselves, that was it. The competition was over, and look what's happened.

Again, though, Pitt's run blocking is very strong. Lewis always breaks or jukes at least one guy, though, so he does get a lot of credit from me.

[David Weber]

I like Pitt's rotation of Lewis and Graham, with a mixture of Hynoski better. Lewis is the main guy, Graham is the luxury, and Hynoski is normally in, if not touching the ball. We can do the same thing. Taylor or Plancher could win the primary job and Ford can become more a fullback type (or we could use Kelly more) that can be used in short yards, but still gets reps blocking.

We need to learn how WVU uses Jock Sanders and copy that method with Lamar. Lamar isn't Devine- no one is, but he could be a Sanders type. Those quick passes that WVU has are really nice on first down for picking up 7/8 yards. We lack that dimension in the playbook, but we clearly have the guys to do it. WVU used to do it with Reynaud, who was a little bigger, but the idea was the same.

As far as the current rotation goes, sitting 40 minutes is absurd. It's like using your starting pitcher after a two hour rain delay. He's already cooled back down, and finding another rythym will be difficult. We could alternate series until we find the hot hand. Taylor ran well, but he has a bad habit of missing the hole. Plancher dances too much. I'm not sure what's wrong with Ford, other than he never gets a chance to beat down a defense. Lamar hasn't figured out that forward is the best direction to run if you want a first down. So early in a game, see which guy isn't making his normal mistakes, and go with him until he becomes ineffective. That might mean that someone else doesn't play, but winning is more important. It isn't 5th grade soccer. We need to have the most effective players actually playing.

No running back is good without blocking though, and we struggle mightily in that area.

[Bill B.]

Bob, that is why I stated both ways Unable or Unwilling. South Carolina had a messed up program when Spurrier did QB rotations. RB by committee only works when you have a real good pass game. Some game changes can work such as Mo in a primary for the first half and Ford in for the second half to pound a tired defense. I believe we did something like that last year with Ben and Mike.

[Denver]

Lamar shouldn't even be carrying the ball this year. Put him to catch passes in the flat or screens. That's it. He can be tackled with one hand.

[Thumper]

Obviously, coach went to the George Bush school of elocution. Also, his facial grimaces and sideline tantrums are disturbing. I wish he had Bobby Bowdens personality, but FSU fans are now saying they wish Bobby was more like coach Jim. I know coach was an honor student in college. He has a master's degree, and has completed work on his doctorate. He must be fairly intelligent. He must show: 1. he can correct first half mistakes, and make adjustments for the second half. 2. Fix problems from earlier games, so that the team shows improvement in the latter part of the season. I haven't seen either in the past 3 seasons.

[Turd Ferguson]

I'm sorry, but the notion that because the coach doesn't answer a question with a straight forward answer in a fashion that fans want is not a determinant of what level he should be coaching. That is simply ridiculous, Turd. I know you hate the guy, but that's grasping at straws.

Posted by: USFMikeB | October 28, 2009 at 04:15 PM

---------

Mike, I'll say this again for those who are a bit slow on the uptake like yourself: I like Leavitt in a lot of ways. I've met him, talked with him a bit, and I love his passion and loyalty to USF.

I do not like him AS A HEAD COACH. I started seeing problems in his ability to manage a game when TCU came to Tampa many years ago. Since then, I've seen a mounting body of evidence that he's in over his head.

His answer to this question shows that he cannot deal with challenging inquiries that show disagreement with his philosophy. He's been saying "maybe someone will emerge as the #1 running back" for THREE SOLID SEASONS. How many weeks are in three years? Over 150. You mean to tell me there hasn't been ONE WEEK out of 150 in which a running back emerged as the #1???

Someone else hit the nail on the head: He's treating this like a youth football team in which everyone gets playing time. Make sure everybody gets some carries so you don't get a call from the parents!

He's not cut out for a head coaching position at this level. Fans are now realizing this in bunches.

[bob]

"I'm sorry, but the notion that because the coach doesn't answer a question with a straight forward answer in a fashion that fans want is not a determinant of what level he should be coaching."

It's not that he's not answering the question in a straight forward manner, it's that he doesn't seem to have a logical reason for the rotation. What other good program in the country has a screwed up philosophy (or lack thereof) like Leavitt??

[Bill B.]

"there all good"....news alert, that is how they got on the team. Team is not about each one of them it is about the team. What is best for the TEAM? Jim Levitt did not answer that question. I don't know if can't answer that question or is unwilling to answer that question in public. Maybe the real truth is he does not have that much faith in any RB at this time for what ever reason.

[USFMikeB]

I'm sorry, but the notion that because the coach doesn't answer a question with a straight forward answer in a fashion that fans want is not a determinant of what level he should be coaching. That is simply ridiculous, Turd. I know you hate the guy, but that's grasping at straws.

Greg, great reporting! Looks like you guys were hammering him...

[Norb]

I also say try Lindsey Lamar on either kickoff returns or punt returns. See what we can do with a real speedster in there. Hey, we might actually get starting position past 20yd line on kickoffs.

[Turd Ferguson]

Leavitt's inability to answer this simple question satisfactorily is a PRIME EXAMPLE of why he is not a good BCS-caliber head coach.

He needs to either be a 1-AA head coach or a 1-A defensive coordinator.

His basic philosophies are faulty. He's got to go.

[chris]

How about this. Give Ford and Taylor all the reps for the WVU game unless of an injury. After the game see how we did. If there needs to be a change Give Mo and Lamar all the carrys in the next game. This way everyone gets a chance to play and at the same time has the chance to get in a rhythm. What CJL is doing now isn't working.

[Joe B.]

Great questions Greg. This is what we need. Unforunately though, you got the typical Leavitt response. "Well, this guys is good, this guy over here is good, and this guy over here is average...actually, he's pretty good too." The other explanation is that we're simply playing to each back's strength. Well I guess that explains why you'd run Lamar up the gut...guy's just too slow to get out in space. And since when did Ford become just a goal line guy? I guess that's a 2009 thing?

[cg]

Oh, and NYCBull, everyone is an agreement but the coaches. Guess that's why they get the money.

[cg]

Or, if he is healthy, I wouldn't mind seeing Taylor first. He's explosive and has good vision.

[chris]

it seems if each back is used for a certain purpose it will only help the opposing defense better predict the play. having 1 or 2 primary backs would be more effective in getting them on a rythm and keeping D's guessing. the others of course could be rotated in here or there for specific things or to give the other guys a breather. But it seems more or less they just alternate drives so nobody really gets to establish anything.

[Norb]

Another issue I see with rotating backs is that it also puts more pressure on the O-line. Now they have to remember who is carrying the ball every time & block accordingly. If the back is North & South, make your blocks and he's either thru the line or you're on your next down. Is it a back that will wait for a hole to open up, then keep running your blocking scheme. Is it a back likely to change directions immediately if the hole isn't there?

O-line has to help the backs but I can't see how always changing the backs could possible help the O-line do their jobs to the best of their ability.

[NYC Bull]

I'm glad the world is in agreement here. Keep two guys in rotation, Ford and Taylor/Plancher and run the ball until it's flat. I wouldn't mind if we kept Ford in there for an entire game. Ford's performance at Auburn was breakout and then he was put put back on the shelf. He's too big and strong not to get yeards after the tackle and he's got that seeming desire for contact to wear out defenses remeniscent of Ricky Williams. Ford needs to start and this is the perfect opportunity.

[Mark]

So if a guy comes in and runs for 8 yards and then rips off a 19 yard run what exactly does he have to do to prove he has "break out of this thing"?

Wow. sounds like coach went to the Casey Stengel school of coach speak.

[Gobulls03]

I love how the whole article Leavitt talks about Ford, Plancher, Taylor, and Lamar and runs circles around his words, then at the very end he says Demetris Murray is a good player. What does saying that have to do with anything? It seems like he just keeps getting dumber and dumber every week. One thing's for sure, he is always good for a laugh on a down day..but it's too bad we are laughing at him, not with him...