dclenden

4 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Ok, that’s understandable and I appreciate that post and your explanation. I apologize for my rudeness to you.  

Thanks NEB for the apology.  Its not necessary.  I was in truth hoping that the perceived gap between UCF and USF was simply conjecture.  The numbers don't lie.  I wasnt truthfully aware of them. That said, I have no doubt UCF numbers on all of those fronts fall off precipitously when UCF eventually like all programs underperforms.  Bad timing for USF, to be sure.   I attended the Auburn and FSU wins and it seems like a lifetime ago.  I didnt have grey hair then, not the least of which recently was undoubtedly contributed in no small part by USF football the last ~5 years

Just now, USFBULL_08 said:

troll 101.

Provide any information on why you think USF has a better chance than UCF? If any that you can find.

Sadly, particularly after seeing attendance, contributions, budgets, I don't have one unfortunately.  In truth, the numbers came as a surprise to me as I was hoping the numbers were closer than they were between institutions.   Admittedly, all of these numbers are being contributed to while USF football is on its back- even places like Auburn and other schools see a tapering off in football contributions during low times.  My suspicion is that they will improve as does our performance on the field.  I would be curious to see how UCF's numbers mentioned (attendance, $, etc) faired during their 'dark years'.  Im guessing not very well.

1 minute ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Who is shouting? You make your annual appearance on the board looking for someone to do your homework (a vet ucf move). Now come back next year…

Show some civility and courtesy- Im a USF fan, college, medical school and residency- 13 years total.  I asked a simple question pertaining to numbers regarding attendance, contributions and others were kind enough to provide- ones I was not aware of- an effort to fill in my knowledge gaps on the topic  Openly, perhaps to your dismay, you're not my performance metric.   

Just now, NewEnglandBull said:

My team? You’re not a USF fan? If you’re from another school you can piss off. 

Your and my team.  Take a deep breath and shut the TV off....it'll ease the pain.  More importantly stop shouting...

Ill overlook your foul mouth and poor attitude on account that your team is getting eviscerated.  Tough pill admittedly.   Just this time however....

28 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Jesus dude do your own homework…

There's that snide condescending tone ....shouting from your front porch with a bald head and your eager tone..... well done and thanks for supporting my point.  More importantly stop calling me Jesus, my son.

6 minutes ago, footnfan1 said:

From the AAC website

University of Central Florida

http://cafidatabase.knightcommission.org/sites/default/files/styles/institution_logo/public/132903.png?itok=V975gYUc

SUBDIVISION: 

FBS

CONFERENCE: 

AAC*

# OF TEAMS: 

16

# OF ATHLETES: 

479

TOTAL ATHLETIC REVENUES [i]

	2014	2019	Change from 2014-2019
Institution	$49,764,152	$69,121,887	39%
FBS Median	$55,448,564	$70,406,613	27%

TOTAL ATHLETIC EXPENSES [i]

	2014	2019	Change from 2014-2019
Institution	$45,327,168	$67,916,343	50%
FBS Median	$52,460,204	$70,797,326	35%     University of South Florida http://cafidatabase.knightcommission.org/sites/default/files/styles/institution_logo/public/137351.png?itok=T95_9VGu SUBDIVISION:  FBS CONFERENCE:  AAC* # OF TEAMS:  18 # OF ATHLETES:  463 TOTAL ATHLETIC REVENUES [i]   2014 2019 Change from 2014-2019 Institution $48,383,928 $55,045,769 14% FBS Median $55,448,564 $70,406,613 27% TOTAL ATHLETIC EXPENSES [i]   2014 2019 Change from 2014-2019 Institution $46,829,647 $53,569,756 14% FBS Median $52,460,204 $70,797,326 35%

Thanks Foot for the serious reply minus the snideness this board has developed a reputation for.

I can’t imagine any program not seeing a surge in revenue in years their football team has successes.  I would be more interested in seeing program numbers in years teams are lackluster.  This would be a better metric for long term success for inviting a team into a conference in my mind considering there is only one winner of it all each year.

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Where exactly have they made those decisions and who exactly are these people?

+1

my point.

I have never seen a bunch of more pathetic, meek, apologetic group of twinks in my life.

Send me your addresses and I’ll quick shipping you apologists a UCF jersey.

pathetic 

12 minutes ago, ArmyBull said:

We have been at this for years.  For those wondering the how, why, and what reasons of ucf being all over the expansion news and not us... you simply have not been paying attention or you are being intentionally dense.  Number one, they have been winning (and winning when it matters) and we have not.  Number two, they have built facilities and we have not (not even going to go into the cultural and fan interaction benefits that an OCS would have done for us the past decade).  Number three, look at the donor base (embarrassing).  Number four, the coaching hires were just bad luck, but while we were firing coaches, ucf's coaches were leaving for better jobs.  Number four, attendance, again embarrassing and the reasons don't matter, because it is what it is and it has been what it is for a long time.  Number five, our administration could never produce the vision that was happening to the East and in all honesty, I blame them the most.  Judy, Woolard, Harlan, just bad decision after bad decision.  

What are attendance number comparison- again data? Share it?

how about the ‘donor base’ your talking about? Have actual Numbers?

Im genuinely  asking for the ACTUAL numbers.  I’ve not seen them.  If you don’t know them, that’s ok too.  I haven’t seen them.

 

Just now, UrsidaeBull said:

This is the main reason... 

 

How much does UCF bring to the table versus USF? Over the past 10 years.... 

so no real numbers.

rinse, wash, repeat.

1 minute ago, Triple B said:

Nobody can truthfully answer your excellent questions until UCF is chosen, we're not, and their new conference explains why they were chosen. Up until then, it's all ******* up a rope ...

Indeed, and well said.  It’s what I figured. No one has a clue.  At some point one has to challenge ‘propagation of conjecture’ as just more of the same nonsense- truth is, ‘no one has a clue’. As was previously pointed out in this thread, sports writers have an uncanny knack for writing and propagating previous conjecture born of previous conjecture- rinse, wash, repeat. Clickbait.  Unless someone has measurable data on what makes UCF>USF by a P5 suitor (which I’m open to hearing) short of the win-loss ratio of the last 48 months, I’ll wait to react to an actual announcement.

4 minutes ago, bulloni said:

they probably have over the last couple years just because a result of being good is more high profile games. Bu do the powers that be just judge the last 3 years? Or the last 15? Probably somewhere in between. One thing I don't understand is the love affair with Cincy. Sure they have football success, but in 2019 they won 10 games and we won 4 and we averaged basically the same in attendance. Would assume conferences want a team that proves it makes money even when it sucks.

Michael Kelly is a smart guy though, I'm assuming this is part of the pitch

Sounds to me that the body of this ‘UCF football superiority’ over USF’ is based largely on conjecture and not hard data.  I’m not saying UCF doesn’t get selected over USF by the B12, just for every true data point that UCF>USF there are 200 pieces of conjecture.  Perhaps there is more of a ‘USF inferiority complex’ than a UCF superiority complex- we’ve been bad recently thus who could possibly want the USF product in their P5 portfolio.  I’ve yet to see hard data that UCF has a larger fan base, athletic budget or other  that would substantially tip a P5 suitor’s scale to pick UCF>USF.  Admittedly, I’m sure some hard data exists, I just haven’t seen it functionally hit this message board.  I’ll remain open.

Just now, bulloni said:

expansion candidates are just judged on money generated. So attendance numbers and tv ratings are really all thats considered. Academics used to be a consideration but not sure if thats still the case

Thanks for the serious reply B-  is there then objective evidence of UCF generating more ‘money and TV viewership’ or is conjecture?

Having witnessed the replies to this expansion thread for some time, a serious question constantly comes to my mind.  Notwithstanding the ‘OCS’ and a recent ‘winning percentage’, what specifically are people referencing when they claim that UCF has ‘surpassed’ the USF football program in attractiveness to a P5 suitor?  While I recognize our recent failures on the field, what exactly distinguishes UCF over USF as being a potentially better candidate for P5 expansion?  I see people write this endlessly on this board, but in truth, I’ve missed the specifics?  Is it season ticket holders?  An actual, objectively larger and measurable fan base?  An OCS?  Athletic budget?  Team revenues?  Can anyone offer specifics, or are there any any I stead people are relying on recent perception based on recent winning percentage.  Serious question.

3 minutes ago, WhoRUSF said:

I've seen plenty to indicate that people touch their face more when you have mask mandates. 

Sweeden didnt close anything or have a mask mandate, and have a much lower infection rate and less people dead from it on a per population basis. 

I'm sure you'll be like "oh Sweeden is less populated" well Stockholm is more densely populated and more total population then the Tampa Bay area. 

There are also examples in America that didnt shut down, and it seems to have no correlation to infection rates unless you watch CNN and they nit pick data for you. 

You're correct, I don't doubt you've seen people touching their face with a mask on- I do it myself.  Too often.  Though in aggregate, masks mitigate covid transmission even with people grabbing their masks and the science supports it.  Reference the evidence I provided. This is why its important that its been studied and not connected to anecdotal 'evidence' or what people 'think' or 'see' people doing.  Masks mitigate transmission- that is not refutable at this point.

Here's where you're correct: As for Sweden, you're right, they didn't 'lock down' everything.   Though early timing of a lock down is probably as important as the actual lockdown itself.  Early lockdown matters. Late lockdowns are disastrous.  Deciding to lockdown  too late makes a lock down ineffective and likely not worth the financial aftermath.  Locking down two weeks later than you should is akin to deciding to sweep dust in a wind storm- the key is to start sweeping well before the wind appears.  The US locked down was far too late sadly.

What Sweden did that most other countries didn't do early was eliminate contact with their most vulnerable very early- nursing homes, care facilities went into full lockdown- and early.  Most countries, including the US, were far slower to react.  Sweden made a decision early not to lock down and to essentially run the herd immunity experiment and has seen fewer deaths per capita than the US.  This is true.

Here's where you're not correct: Sweden likely did not have a 'much lower infection rate' per capita as you suggest than the US.  Instead, since the US tested at a rate of almost 100% per capita more than Sweden, the US will detect more cases that will eventually go undetected in Sweden.  This is likely supported by the death rates per capita  in Sweden not matching the infection rates per capita, because if so, Sweden  probably would expect to see a death rate  around the ~350 range per million and not the 586 per million that they actually had.

                              infected per million              deaths per million              tests per million

US:                               26,431                                             692                                           395,651

Sweden:                    10,929                                             586                                           199,026

This has been a helpful site for me to keep track how other nations are doing compared to the US:  

Sadly, this global site reveals that the US, despite only having ~4.5% of the world's population, holds about 25% of the world's covid deaths.  Naturally, some say that 'its because other countries aren't reporting their deaths like we do' and that may in fact be the case to some degree.  I, like most infection disease doctors I work with,  just have a hard time believing that all of the other 194 countries on the earth are in cahoots and are collectively underreporting their covid deaths leading to the US death rates being disproportionately high.  This is hard to fathom. Sadly, I believe there is a greater degree of truth to the US  holding a disproportionate number of the world's covid deaths than we would like to admit to- and its secondary to our late response.

Good discussion and I'm grateful for it from you guys- sorry for getting into the weeds a bit.

24 minutes ago, El_Toro_86 said:

I understand the science behind it but the way I see most people wearing masks these days I just don’t think it does much good.  

ET86- agreed on at times poor mask compliance.  Wearing it on one's chin is not effective, we can agree on this.   Just know that the more compliant we are the more effective they are.

For comparison, in the U.S., there are 10 immunizations required of you from the time you enter grade school- polio, diptheria, tetanus, pertussis, etc- those things we have had since we were a kid.  If you dive into the compliance for any of these vaccines in the US, we still only vaccinate 70-90% depending on the vaccine series. This doesn't mean that because we only capture  in aggregate 70.4% of series-7 vaccine (2018) compliance, that the US should throw the vaccines out due to a lack of 100% compliance.  Instead we should work towards 100% compliance. The same rules apply for face masks. Not everyone uses them correctly admittedly, however,  each person that does aids in disease prevention and mitigating this awful illness - identical with vaccinations.

6 minutes ago, DJBulls said:

You countered with a point not related to what he was talking about...did he say he didn't believe in mask whatsoever?  Can you point that out to me?

Sure, DJB, here is El Toro's comment about devaluing the efficacy of  masks suggesting that their value was limited to a 'fashion statement' which I responded to :

'Show me one study that says these masks make a difference.  Masks have become a fashion statement and a way to virtue signal.  Some are bedazzled, some are crouched, some are buffs worn as masks and most people don’t wear them correctly anyway.' -El Toro

21 minutes ago, El_Toro_86 said:

Now if you can get everyone to wear it properly rather than as a chin strap...

You're right, the chin strap doesn't work.   It is important that we work together on this however.  Masks work and they've been politicized sadly, by both sides, but they do in fact work to prevent illness.  This is no longer refutable.  I am sorry that you got sick and am glad to know that you are ok.  I know that having COVID can be hell- glad you're on the mend, my friend.

8 minutes ago, DJBulls said:

When you're spaced 50 ft apart?  That's his point...sorry let me add...outdoors...

I understand. This is also my point, yes, there is evidence that having ANY face covering keeps people from touching their face, nose and mouth and potentially transmitting the virus to hard surfaces where it can be picked up by others.  Remember this is NOT only airborne but can be picked up from a surface so a fitted N-95 while likely better isnt the only way to mitigate it.  Researchers were initially adhering to 'only a fitted, N-95 works' and were eventually surprised to discover that any face covering mitigates transmission, admittedly, more than others. MASKS WORK and in ways we don't even fully understand.  

Can we now please move on to more depressing topics than death and covid, you know, the state of USF football?

35 minutes ago, El_Toro_86 said:

Do yourself a favor and stay in Spain.  Show me one study that says these masks make a difference.  Masks have become a fashion statement and a way to virtue signal.  Some are bedazzled, some are crouched, some are buffs worn as masks and most people don’t wear them correctly anyway.  If the entire nation wore properly fitted N95 masks that would make a difference, but thats not happening is it.  The whole thing is a sham to get people to live in fear because when a society is in fear they can be controlled.

And just for the record I’ve had the China virus and I’ve donated plasma.  So STFU!

I can not provide you with one study to support masks work, El Toro, though we now have over two dozen as I am a physician.  Here's the evidence summarized in perhaps the most prestigious  journals in the world, Nature, JAMA and PANS . I recognize that it doesn't fit your thesis that 'masks are a fashion statement'.   I'm honestly not here to argue with you but misinformation is just that and must be corrected so others don't propagate stories that are untrue.

1. Nature: Oct 6, 2020

Summary: 'The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on'.

Face masks: what the data say

---

The science supports that face coverings are saving lives during the coronavirus pandemic, and yet the debate trundles on. How much evidence is enough? The...

2.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America: April 10, 2020

Summary:  'Our review of the literature offers evidence in favor of widespread mask use to reduce community transmission'.

https://files.fast.ai/papers/masks_lit_review.pdf

3. Journal of the America Medical Association

Summary: Universal masking at MGB was associated with a significantly lower rate of SARS-CoV-2 positivity among HCWs

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768533

27 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

I hope one day I can be a hero like you 

Take my purell-ed hand my son, I shall lead the way....

27 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

I hope one day I can be a hero like y

This is a pathetic conversation, to be sure.  At face, a grown man who knew the rules acting as if he was put out to wear a mask because he was so offended and it was so hard.
 

One last thing, the anti-masker crowd is pathetic.  I’m in Spain where not virtually a single face is without a mask for the love  of their country and fellow countryman. They actually take pride in it.  Love your country.  The least patriotic group of Americans I’ve ever witnessed are this group of Americans generating any excuse to not wear a mask despite the scientific  evidence to the contrary. People acting as if wearing a mask is a ‘big lift’ for them.  They’re so ‘put out’.  You know, like they’re being forced into donating pooled plasma without consent or donating a kidney for their fellow man.

Grow up and be an American. You’re honestly pathetic.

4 hours ago, Triple B said:

This is what happens when you belong to a society. Society has rules and it's rare when everyone agrees with all the rules. You want to "live and let live", find an island where you, and anyone else wanting to live like that, can flourish ...

Wait- society has rules? Like seatbelts, taxes and rules against ****?  f-ing democrat socialists.  Wait, I have to pay taxes for kids to attend public education- but I dont have kids- who do they think they are- commies.

6 hours ago, Joe said:

Nah. It’s just dumb to be angry. We’re in a global pandemic. You’re in a public venue. They told you before you went in what the rules are.

The fact that you’re shocked they enforced them...

He'll have plenty of time to ponder the ridiculousness of his refusal when he's in the ICU having his tracheal deep suctioned through his endotracheal tube while he's attempting to mouth the words 'I cant breathe'

I seriously cant deal with the asinine nature of this non-sense anymore.  More dead Americans than died in all of WWII come March- sure stick to your guns on this, makes you look American.

Yes. Baby it’s me baby bear taka-the-teet and shush.....