BrassBulls12

Walk, error, walk. Crazy how one leads to another. All with 2 down. Bases full of Bulls. 

2 BB and a bunt single ........

Pretty young lineup 

14 minutes ago, puc86 said:

 

Maybe you guys our right and CJS was simply fortune’s fool and there was really only one QB available 7 out of 9 games but it certainly looked like we were, since we obviously were not trying to win, trying to develop JM. That he is now with another team and we made no attempts to keep him certainly calls into question the purpose of the last year. If the only other option is a true freshman, why not get him some more game experience if you know JM is not your future? 

He didn't necessarily need to be the "only "QB" available but the most consistently available. Offenses need rhythm and playing musical QBs is never a good option. So yeah maybe last year was a lost year from the QB perspective, unless you consider the fact that at the very least Fortin and Marsh got to learn the system, but, maybe the other offensive players that are coming back had a better chance at developing themselves due to there being some sort on continuity under center. I also agree on the Last posters comment on Fortin, I believe he was supposed to be scotts guy and it just couldn't get him healthy and available to develop any chemistry.   

End of the day, there's so much we don't know about who was available day in and day out (not just on Saturday) to know for sure what was going on.

47 minutes ago, puc86 said:

The thing that is in question is why start JM almost every game if he quite clearly wasn’t the answer? How was it not abundantly clear at some point earlier in the process?

Maybe he was the best one that was consistently available? I have heard several great coach use the phrase, "the best ability is availability" 

9 hours ago, JoeB said:

Surprised Collin Sullivan isn't at least the Sunday starter. 

Surprised by that as well. I thought he would at least get first crack at a weekend rotation spot, No one matches his experience and it's not like anyone is coming in with an dominant resume.  

**** sully. 

1 hour ago, NewEnglandBull said:

They are having to wait until July as the individual is completing work for a state system and he will be vested at that time.

What did you say? 

I figured it was an obligation to a former Job, but Bentley just lost his in December when Beamer didn’t retain him. Is he working at a high school for the spring, or is it not him? That’s kinda what I’m asking. 

Wonder who the New WR coach is, I have seen the Bentley Reports, but not sure why he would need to wait. 

5 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Yes but they are constrained by needing to have a certain number of home games as well as needing to play a certain number of conference games on certain days. If we remove constraints we have a market differentiation that should make it easier to do business as well as provide a location where people would like to have an occasional game to bring recruits to. I really do not think our market value drops to zero as long as we do not sell at that price and our leadership have diamond hands, to your point though MK and CJS do look like they would have paper hands.

well getting rid of our constraints does not change theirs, what happens in the middle of the year when most of them are playing in conference? and yes, they would want to come occasionally, but we need consistency from some of them. you can' just fly by night schedule 10 games. you need some sort of continuity. Notre Dame has found a way to do this by hoodwinking the ACC. BYU uses the PAC 12  

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I don’t see how thinking independence could work is really any more of pipe dream than thinking we can win our way into relevance in this market by beating AAC teams (or that the current dynamics will really even lead to that).

It seems to work for the AAC teams that win.  

and as I pointed out earlier, I think we should focus on being able to beat the AAC  before we think it's holding us back. 

5 minutes ago, puc86 said:

There are 65 P5 teams plus Notre Dame that need to fill OOC every season plus a few G5 teams that are actually interesting. If someone thinks they can get games to travel for free they are welcome to try but I don’t think that’s what the overall market would dictate as they are going to have to give up a game or give some money to someone. With an open schedule it simply opens up our possibilities and we can be the most flexible with our offers, which do not simply dry up when the aac goes away. I doubt most ads that schedule us are even aware that we are even in the AAC if they are even aware that the AAC actually exists.

Its not as easy as you think it is. Scheduling takes two interested parties both of these parties have their own interest in mind. the one that is desperate gets screwed. Keep in mind all the P5 teams are really only looking for one to two games per year with team like USF, and there are 57 G5 schools and a slew of FCS schools trying to get those spots 

Just now, puc86 said:

Are you counting streaming on espn ocho?

Not sure if you have noticed, but streaming actually looks alot like TV, in fact, I stream all of my TV. 

Just now, puc86 said:

They invented these new things called televisions which when you don’t play AAC teams you apparently get on and most people actually prefer the game experience of over the stadium. Scarcity and a lack of over production of unwanted items will typically help drive demand more than decrease it. The value of a ticket in a 70k person stadium that has 20k people show up is effectively zero dollars where as the less opportunity to go and the playing of more intriguing teams should help drive up demand. 

What was our last AAC game that wasn't televised in some form? and ho many since the formation of the conference? I venture to say very few. 

Winning culture solves everything, If we take this approach and lose we still aren't generating the attendance numbers. What happens when the big dawgs say yeah, we can do a 2-1 but since we are generating the money we will need a good portion of the gate? no deal? cool go play an AAC team.

2 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I think if anyone has any games circles as a reason to come here it would be the Alabama and Florida games and I do not honestly think they care where they are. If kids are truly in love with playing the AAC home slate simply because their family and friends can come to more of them I’m not sure how that can be fixed but the unfortunate fact of the matter is that the stadium looks like those are the only people interested in going to those games. As for how much they would pay us because of leverage it would be a dollar less than their next available option. 2-1’s benefit both parties and that dynamic does not change simply because it is scaled. No one grows up dreaming about playing an AAC slate unless that dream starts with a little girl singing 1,2 Freddy is coming for you. And most players and fans would prefer to play teams that they have actually heard of before.

How often are Alabama and Florida coming here? How often do we play them at all? In all honestly those might just be one game. The leverage doesn't have to be the bottom dollar amount, maye they get a deal with no opt out clause because we have to have a game that season. Maybe its hey, you need the game, come for free or don't play. It's easy to deal with those risks when it accounts for 1/5 of your schedule. 

Just now, SittingBull said:

“Absence makes the heart grow fonder.”

or sometimes "out of sight, out of mind"

7 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I think it’s simply because we are looking at the math wrong and it’s a universally held position that home games are the greatest good. Our current home games are holding us back from a balanced budget and it does not improve engagement because most people have no desire to watch 7 of these teams at Ray Jay. Our goal should be how to generate interest and balance the budget and if we figure out those things we can then start worrying about luxuries like how to play more games at home. If we had to pay $2-3 million a year to have a stadium to pay for that obviously changes the math but as it stands in reality we pay more to play more and the more of them that exist the more we pay and the less likely anyone is to commit to going to them.

How much do you think teams are going to willing to pay us to come play when they know we need them? I realize it looks good on paper, but that's just paper, we need cooperation from outside of USF to make it work and we have nothing to offer and excep saying hey, we will come cheaper than the other guys. 

I don't see how you generate interest by playing away from home. it not like we are the only form of entertainment in town, it's not people will suddenly be feeling the urge to go to USF games by taking them away. 

It would also work against out general recruiting strategy, how can we tell Bay area kids to stay home if we aren't gonna try and play here as much as we can.

I also think we should prove that we are better than this conference before we act like it. 

1 minute ago, puc86 said:

I would be perfectly happy with zero home games and getting checks for buyouts which if we really wanted to we could sweeten the pot for a new deal if we really didn’t want to keep and balance our budget with. We seem to have no issues finding decent out of conference games with our current constraints and there really is no reason to believe it couldn’t be enhanced with every game open and not trying to protect more home games than people actually want to come to.

Well it's a lot easier when you are only having to fill four OOC games per year. Not sure where no issues comes from, teams aren't knocking down the door to come here and play and we end having to pay a few just to fill the four. We have to sweeten the deal to get the big names here and the reality is we aren't going to see all of the ones have scheduled play. The zero home game year is a very real possibility if you have to use 2-1s are your primary scheduling tactic. 

it's just a bold move cotton, not sure we are in a bet on yourself situation.  

3 minutes ago, puc86 said:

It is my belief that we currently are bound by the classical approach to scheduling which says that home games are a good in and of themselves. It is also my belief that home games as they currently exist in our schedule are actually a net negative. If we recognize life as it is and not as we believe it ought to be we would realize that having an unbalanced schedule with fewer home games would actually net positive for us.
When we give up the dream of having 6-7 home games getting more of the 2-1’s with actually attractive opponents seems more possible than it does when you are trying to hold onto home games. As for a famu payday game for an extra home game I think you would be surprised by how many people would actually be more interested in that than our typical conference game.
The market has spoken and not enough people have any interest in AAC teams, something has to change at some point. Being a renter uniquely positions us to be nomadic road warriors and we should use it as an advantage to change our station and the local interest in the games. 

Look at New Mexico State, that is much closer to what our scheduling would look like as a independent. We would still be playing mostly AAC, Sun Belt, and CUSA teams except we would need to do it on their terms because we need them, with no conference kick back money and no tv deal.  Again that all sounds great in theory but you have to have the name value to consistently get the games of value on the schedule to make it feasible or you end coming back hat in hand to conference you left an the AAC might not take us back. 

2-1 is not sustainable for a ten game season especially when the schools can just say, naw here's some money we aren't coming. 

9 minutes ago, puc86 said:

But they are taking a classic approach where home games are of value, I believe that if we focus on 2-1’s, pay games and Florida schools our budget would be more healthy and our 4-5 home games would actually have more sold seats at a lower operating expense.

again, 10 games per year. You can't fill that on 2-1's, a couple are a good thing and when you take a couple you have to understand that that is going to set you back in terms of home games, it's not sustainable as primary scheduling practice for ten games. Now to your theory, can 4-5 big name home games be more valuable than 6-7? yes, but that is IF you can get four to five big names to come in every year, Right now we struggle, its not like all of OOC games are big, some are Howard and FAMU. You also have to account that leaving the AAC gives up all TV revenu. Are we a big enough name to get our own TV deal? or does going independent mean you give all that up and does the big name games cover that?  

It all depends on IF you can consistently get the big names to come here to play. Its basically putting our entire future in the hands of P5 saying "Please sir, play us so we don't die". 

It works for them because of their history and name value of their own, you can't look at them and say we can do that too, we can't. 

14 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Perhaps but I still think with our location and the fact that the current home games are negative equity for us and we do not have to worry about debt service for a stadium makes us uniquely positioned to get creative with scheduling and have more games people cared about rather than 7 games that have zero interest in the area.

That maybe true in theory but you are essentially rolling the dice on Teams wanting to play in Tampa. Its not the only great place to play so its not like its that unique. Without a conference we would have to try and fill a ten game schedule, so how many big dawgs could you ge to play on a year end year out basis? The reality you are probably filling a lot more home games with FCS schools. The only two examples of successful independent scheduling are teams with historical prestige. 

8 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I wonder how they are able to make the impossible happen and schedule games as an independent 

probably the reputation that comes with 23 conference titles and a national championship.