SoTampaBull

Before this year, who would have expected that the AAC West (C-USA West) would be the conference's strongest division? Like you said, huge win for the AAC today. Would love to see Temple surprise Notre Dame when they play in a couple weeks.

A must win today, and the Bulls made it happen. All wins are good, but this was a good win due to it being an away game and in a stadium that has not always been that welcoming to USF. USF had a seldom seen 461 total yards of offense, and did so on what has been a pretty good UConn defense. Granted, a bunch of those yards came from a couple plays of busted coverage by UConn's secondary and that one trick play for the TD, but they made the yardage nevertheless. Like others, questions continue about how far Flowers can take this Bulls' offense? One area of concern is the 528 total yards (365 passing) given up by USF's defense. SMU is coming in with an offense that can put up some yards and points (but give up a bunch too), so hopefully USF's athletes matchup well against SMU's skill players? As for contract extensions for Taggart, let's not again be premature with handing out extensions before real and consistent improvement is seen.

I did not at first, but after leaving my comment, I found the site where that chart was posted and then saw that Tuesday date. However, it seems that if Hoggins has been one of the starting CBs, I wonder why he's not showing up as the starter in these Depth Charts?

I'm not sure how accurate these Depth Charts are? Aside from Gibbons, there's no changes from the Memphis Depth Chart. Additionally, I thought Lamar Robbins was suspended?

Again, if Steve felt that he was being abused, then why did some of my "bunch" hang out with Steve at tailgates? I think that you are taking what occurred much more serious than what it was. Now, I'm sure that it most certainly appeared that way (abuse) to anyone on the outside, but again, it was much more show and blog shtick than anything else. Believe what you want, but that's the truth. I miss Steve and think about him often, and all of us in my "bunch" who still communicate miss Steve a lot. I'm also the guy who organized last year's Steve O'Neal Memorial Tailgate, and I coordinated that with his family - whom I meet several times while tailgating with them. If they thought that we were overboard disrespectful to Steve, then I doubt that they would have associated themselves with us. We would drink beer and share blog combat stories at the tailgates and really have big laughs. So I think that you are being overly sensitive to what was occurring, although, I can see how you would come to that conclusion while not knowing us. As for Daniels, yes, I agree that some of the comments posted were less than flattering to him, but look at what's being discussed on this site currently w/r/t Flowers. There are many people with opinions about certain limitations that come with him (Flowers) at QB. I frankly don't see much difference now than what went on re: Daniels' time at QB.

I guess when I mentioned that some here really take blog opinions personally, you appear to fall into that category? Sorry if your icon B.J. Daniels was "bashed" (as you described) during some old blog sports commentary, but it all worked out for him fairly well since he's now playing his more natural position in the NFL. Yes, you are right that Matt Floyd was not much of a QB when replacing Daniels, but with a combined 3-9 record in 2012, was there any real significant difference b/t QBs w/r/t the season's results? Lastly, during 2011 and 2012, some stated that their concern was that Daniels was so entrenched as the starting QB, that Leavitt and then Holtz could not sign a legit QB recruit. That of course was speculation, as who knows what transpired with those coaches and their attempts to procure a solid QB recruit.

Makes you wonder about the the level of play displayed by the QBs on the Bulls' roster during USF's pre-season camp? If Bulls lose to Cuse, and Taggart gets the pink slip, it'll be interesting to see if the interim HC stays with Flowers as the starter? Of course, at that point, I'd think that most believe that chances would be slim to none that USF could pull out five wins in last seven games to become bowl eligible. So, in that case, would bringing in Bench to start the remainder of year provide any value-added when considering that Flowers could return next year with the additional game experience he'd have if he played out the year as the Bulls' starter?

Outstanding and very funny! We are also big Michigan St fans, as the wife is a Sparty grad. So, yes, to Michigan with him!!!

Well, your memory is for the most part semi-correct; however, a trip down memory lane is needed to put my/our observations into proper perspective. First off, all of us were definitely on-board and excited about Daniels when he really emerged in 2009. As you recall, Daniels enjoyed a fairly good "second" freshman year while throwing for nearly 2.000 yds and rushed for nearly 800 yds while leading Bulls to a 8-5 record. However, some of his down sides began to emerge in his sophomore year when his TDs passes per game dropped, and he had more INTs than TD passes and his rushing yardage dropped by about 500 yds. Although, while the Bulls went 8-5 in 2010, I believe it was the majority opinion that USF appeared to be stalled at 8-wins, and the feeling was that it was either Leavitt and/or Daniels that had peaked. Granted, we would kill for that 8-wins now, but back then, USF's football program was on the rise, and expectations were much higher than they are now. As his career progressed from there, wins started to decline and you'll recall that USF went 5-7 in 2011 and then went to 3-9 in 2012. So, yes, some of us started to question the decisions to stay put with the status quo. However, that assessment was not our initial observation on Daniels, but came about when Daniels was having his pedestrian sophomore year followed by two losing seasons when everyone believed a higher bar was very reachable for USF's football program. Lastly, some of our blog posts were also done as blog shtick just to get a rise out of the now deceased Steve O'Neal - who was, btw, a friend of mine, and someone that I'd tailgate with and sit with to watch USF home games. We had those long-running blog battles mainly for blog shtick just to add some spice to that blog. Yes, we disagreed on several things - well, make that, many things, but we engaged in our blog battles primarily for entertainment purposes. Oh yeah, and a few of us purposely disparaged Daniels' play just to irritate BradentonBull because BradBull was such a huge Daniels fan and generally sided with O'Neal on the blog. I'm sure that BradentonBull thought we were a bunch of jerks, but much of what we did was again, blog shtick just to mess with people. I no longer do that stuff, as people take these blog debates personally. So, I no longer purposely try to stir the pot - but obviously, I still have that ability when I'm not even trying.

There are many here who feel the same as you. However, as also the case here, many prematurely anoint the next savior for USF (typically QB) before they've had sufficient time to see the player perform. As a result, many of those same folks are hard tied to their initial opinion and continue their support regardless whether the evidence does not support their conclusions. Wear it as a badge of honor, my friend. When I attended open practices last year, I reported here that Q. Flowers was not the high-speed QB that many were saying or hoping for as USF's new savior. The comments I received were the typical semi-disparaging remarks from folks that could not handle being told something different than what they wanted to hear. Funny seeing how many folks here now appear to be changing their opinion about both Taggart and Flowers.

Yep, I agree. Both the Houston and SMU QBs play at a higher level than Flowers, and most importantly, both team's offenses can put up scores. I suspect that both will easily exceed 17 points tonight.

Yes, but only to a team in need of a losing streak....

Maybe it's because Flowers is having trouble seeing the opponent's Defense - at least based on the following excerpt from interview with Taggart: Taggart reiterated how important it will be for QB Quinton Flowers to utilize TEs Sean Price and Kano Dillon consistently against the Orange. "For a quarterback that can't necessarily see over the line all the time, it's great to have some big targets to throw the ball to,"

From recent story posted by Joey Knight (written by J. Odom), there appears to be another concern about Flowers, and this time, the concern comes from Taggart about Flowers' inability to see over his OL: 'Taggart reiterated how important it will be for QB Quinton Flowers to utilize TEs Sean Price and Kano Dillon consistently against the Orange.' "For a quarterback that can't necessarily see over the line all the time, it's great to have some big targets to throw the ball to." Full story: http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bulls/

Now that would be a "tail"gate to attend..... or at least a pretty good name for that scandal ......