I will go on the "I think he was a nice guy " list. It's a quality missing in a number of people and coaches. I wanted him to succeed, just as I wanted Akers, McWilliams, and Mackovic to succeed. I wanted the rules of conduct to succeed.
Of all of our head coaches, current and ex, I would have a coffee or sit down to dinner with any of them except Mackovic. Just because I don't want to have a conversation with a self-important jackass.
Now, if I may vent. To say Charlie is an awful head coach is an understatement of historic proportion. I think he would have done better without Patterson as AD (who wouldn't), but STILL would have FAILED MISERABLY! UCLA game left me with an awful feeling of foreboding. I turned out to be even worse than that. So while I would have a coffee with him, there are phrases he could say that would make me leap across the table and go after him... "we just have to play better!", ANYTHING containing "It's ALL about... (line work, turnovers, running the ball, stopping them on 3rd down, takeaways, ball control, keeping them off balance, fill in the blank). ", or ANY mention of having baked a cake.
I give ZERO credence to the whole "previous coach left him with nothing" argument, that's someone being an apologist for a bad coach. Good coaches take what they are given and show improvement game over game and season over season. Yes, other factors come into play, but we got worse, a LOT worse as we went along. USF is now experiencing the same thing, the explanation is so obvious it's painful.
Thank you for putting up with my venting, I feel better now.