GarySJ

Oooo, can I get in on this?

I made this awhile back, in tribute to UCF's fine 2004 season:

More archive footage of Cincinnati's Art Long:

Oh for Chrissakes, the opponent is N.C. State. It's been online for at least half an hour.

http://ncstate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=487181

That's it. I'm officially embarassed to be a member of this forum.

Here's another look at my Charlie Bradley-era old school idea, in case USF football ever decides to have Retro Day:

Hey, are those spikes above the numbers supposed to resemble the horns on the Iconic U? Because they do.

Those are some good ideas there Shoop, my previously-expressed dislike of modern looks aside. Nice job on the artwork too. I like the idea of using the font in the "USF" logo for the numbers. It might be impractical to use for the nameplate though. "Grothe" is so big it barely fits, how are we going to get "Mompremier" on there.

I'd like to take your graphic and suggest a few changes to it. Give me a day or two.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05290/589890.stm

Redshirt QB will start

Monday, October 17, 2005

By Chuck Finder, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

No matter how West Virginia quarterback Adam Bednarik's sprained right foot feels or heals by Saturday, redshirt freshman Pat White apparently will get his inaugural college start at South Florida.

"More than likely, it looks like Pat White's going to start regardless," Mountaineers coach Rich Rodriguez said yesterday. Bednarik "will be very limited throughout the week. It looks like he's going to miss a lot of work. We're not sure he can play (Saturday)."

Bednarik started each of the 20th-ranked Mountaineers' games this season and rotated to varying degrees with White. Bednarik sustained neck and shoulder injuries before his foot was sprained on the fourth play of the fourth quarter, with West Virginia trailing Louisville, 24-7, in a game that White won in relief, 46-44 in triple overtime. White completed 4 of 9 passes for 53 yards, rushed eight times for 64 yards and conjured a handful of critical plays on third and fourth downs, not to mention the winning points on a 2-point conversion pass to Dorrell Jalloh in the final overtime.

Louisville players and coaches contended that White found success because of his crisp legs against a stale defense. Said Rodriguez, "Obviously, whether he's fresh or not, he's pretty fast. He gives you another weapon."

There was one play where the announcers made a good point about USF's passing game. I forget exactly which play it was, but the point was: USF is keeping the tight end and the running back into block, which means there are only two receivers in the pattern, which leaves the QB with no one to throw to and is easy for the defense to cover. Which was correct. So maybe part of the problem in the Pitt game was poor offensive line play.

We do not suck on the road. USF's historical road record has been fair, when you account for differences in talent level (i.e. going to San Diego State as a I-AA team). Not scintillating, mind you, but adequate. In 2003-04 the Bulls won at Memphis, UAB, TCU, East Carolina, and Army. That's better than a lot of teams. And not too many teams anywhere win in State College or the Orange Bowl.

USF does, however, have a tendency to play one really awful road game per season. I'm going to hope that this was it.

If Carlton Hill were a better option at QB than either Pat Julmiste or Courtney Denson, he'd be playing already.

Up-to-the-nanosecond Big East standings:

West Virginia 3-0, 6-1

Rutgers2-1, 4-2

Pittsburgh 2-1, 3-4

Connecticut 1-1, 4-2

South Florida 1-1, 3-3

Cincinnati 1-1, 3-3

Louisville 0-2, 4-2

Syracuse 0-3, 1-5

You can't think in straight-line terms. The Big East now looks like the classic ACC. You know, Georgia Tech beats Virginia, Virginia beats Clemson, Clemson beats NC State, NC State beats North Carolina, North Carolina beats Georgia Tech, and everybody ends up 7-4.

The only difference is that this will be used to prove the weakness of the Big East, instead of the strength of the ACC. :

So basically what you are saying is that because you don't agree with my position that I need to change it so I am in line with you?

No.

Come on... seriously. Aren't we allowed to have our own opinions without being bashed by the site admins?

Of course you are. There is no "party line" here. However, those of us who happen to be site admins reserve the right to express our personal opinions, including disagreement with other posters.

If I am ever speaking as a moderator or in an official capacity on behalf of this website, I will say so. Otherwise, anything I express is my opinion only. Note also that I am not alone in this position.

Besides, if I wanted to abuse my position as a mod, I could just delete the thread But we don't do that here.

I believe you have me confused with someone else. I certainly have not called for Leavitt to be fired after every loss. Maybe once last season I argued it was time to reconsider Leavitt.

That's two times too many for my taste.

How hard would it be for you to simply disagree with my argument with a smart, intelligent response instead of dragging me through the mud and telling me to "get a clue."

My intelligent response is that the question does not deserve an intelligent response. Jim Leavitt's suitability as our head coach is so self-evident that it does not require justification.

What I think has happened which is understandable is that the Louisville win messed up all of our preseason expectations.

And well it should have. It was a complete pimpslapping of a team that was supposed to be God's Gift to Football, and against a school with a long history of believing that we didn't deserve to breathe their air.

Personally, I tend to expect the worst since I grew up watching the Leeman Bennant and Ray Perkins Bucs.

That's another great point. Given the overlap of the South Florida Bulls/Tampa Bay Buccaneers fan bases, why do the USF football fans automatically expect such great things when it's going well? If anything, I'd expect our fan expectations to be more tempered than usual, not less.

I think it is our emotional attachment to the team that does make us believe we are better than we are when we win, and worse than we are when we lose.

Yes, but that's true of any fan base. I'm just wondering why our fan base has to go to such

EXTREMES.

D Backs- need to play man on man and play them off the ball. This playing 5-15 yards off is killing us. Other teams do, why can't we.

This is a great point. Our DBs gave the Pitt receivers way too much room. We needed to press them more.

God, everything USF did on defense played right into Wannstedt's scheme. His offense is a square peg, and we give him a square hole. I'm just shaking my head.

Relax, would you? I am on this site constantly during football season and don't always post negative stuff.

For a site admin, you sure don't make people feel welcome here, do you?

You know what I find unfriendly? Starting "Fire Leavitt" threads every time we lose a freaking game, ignoring everything the man has done for our football program -- you know, like when we were the talk of the college football world way back in September 2005.

As for my earlier comments, "get a clue" is just a concise way of saying "Please re-evaluate your position, as its flaws are self-evident."

College football seems to stir a rare level of emotion in its fans. People live and die with their teams much more than in any professional sport, or any other college sport.

This is especially of that segment of the fan base that is diehard enough to devote time to discussing every aspect of the team, on a internet forum such as this one.

But I don't think there's any fan base that goes through bigger emotional swings than the fan base here at the University of South Florida.

In three weeks, this forum has gone from "Miami has no chance" to "the new Temple," a phrase that's been invoked by two different people in the last hour.

Think about that for a second. Miami. Temple. Miami. Temple.

Transitioning from one state to the other, whichever direction you're going, can take decades. Even the greatest reversal of fortune in recent history, Northwestern in 1995, didn't do it in a year.

So might I suggest that the USF program didn't do it in 60 minutes?

Here's a radical idea. Maybe we're not as good as we think after a win, and maybe we're not as bad as we think after a loss.

Just something to kick around, maybe, while we're discussing who to fire, who to kick off the team, and how many million dollars to spend trying in reversing this horrible turn of events.

yeah cause blowing his redshirt season now would be a brilliant move

See Also: Moffett, Steven.

he outcoached leavitt today

Good Lord. And you actually coach football?

Wannstedt ran the same predictable offense he always does. You know, like simple draw plays on 3rd-and-6. The only problem was, USF COULDN'T STOP IT.

USF's inability to put any pressure on Tyler Palko, or stop Pitt's A-B-C running game, played right into what Wannstedt wants to do. And give the Pitt offense credit. The OL played very well after the first couple drives, and in those rare cases where they actually threw downfield, Palko delivered a good ball.

This one's on the players.

Take off your rose-colored glasses, Gary.

Yeah, that's what people like you say about everyone who doesn't want to fire the coach after every loss -- which, interestingly, is the only time we ever seem to hear from you.

To repeat myself: get a clue.

Bottom line: I know will be criticized for this, but if USF doesn't make a bowl game this year I think it might be time to let Leavitt go.

Please get a clue.

Did anyone get that ESPN 360 thing to work?

I did, but I keep getting disconnected.

spike Pitts gatoraid with exlax... ;D

That should be #1 on the list of "57 reasons we're going to beat Pitt."