WoolyBully

Yeah, that works...right up until the end.

Yes, we were quite something thirteen and fourteen years ago. Getting back to that form would be great.

Interesting podcast diatribe this morning against the "belong" argument vis-a-vis academics and who plays who in football. College football is a business, first and foremost, and playing on the field and generating revenue is the nut. It's not whether we're all AAU schools or whether conference mates are somehow beneath "us". No, the academic argument rings hollow since it is mostly important to the presidents when gathering at the annual elbow-rub-and-cocktail-swill soiree.

My line of thinkin' is that FAMU, Rice & Charlotte are doable. Next would probably be Temple to get to four wins. Which, interestingly, would be four times the number of wins from last season. That fifth win...what would that be? UAB? Navy? I dunno. I think four wins would be pretty dang good.

Would that necessarily, in the grand scheme of things, be such a bad thing?

That seems like a million years ago. It really does.

I already put a c-note on the under for 4.5. College Football Odds: Over/Under Win Total Odds Over 4.5 wins: -102 Under 4.5 wins: -120 https://clutchpoints.com/usf-football-win-total-odds-over-under-prediction-for-2023

I can't see the ACC taking on either Stanford and/or Cal. Face it, those football programs leave a lot to be desired. And the ACC has - at minimum - two disgruntled employees who have made it known that they need to get paid above and beyond the hoi polloi or be allowed to seek their fortunes elsewhere (and by elsewhere, I don't see UF welcoming FSU into THEIR conference with open arms). What possible motivation is there for the ACC to incur the added expense of those two programs when, quite possibly down the road, the ACC disintegrates to be absorbed by the Power II (or III). Does CalFord appear to be some sort of salvation? A life raft of sorts? I don't think so. I just don't see where they bring more to the table than they take. I think that CalFord may find themselves playing some of the neighborhood boys, who up until now have been viewed (from Palo Alto & Berkeley) as second-class citizens. You may be brilliant. You may be rich. But at this particular juncture, you're also suspect.

I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over it. Soon as the smart kids in the lab get the kinks fully ironed out, our reporting and commentary can be farmed out to AI. Yep, you carbon based life forms can pick up a box for your personal effects. Just leave your card key with the receptionist.

Now, now! Don't make me go into the storage room and get those EEO complaint forms! We've gone over this!

If we are defining success as based on revenue, yes. Why? Because football is king in the US of A. How-ev-ah, if you live out there where all that wheat grows, you're in the pipeline for wrestling, not only here, but for the international stage as well. I've run across a lot of guys whose take is "Oh yeah, football". Similar to Stanford in producing Olympic athletes. Context. And in the context of Stanford as a value-added component in realignment, I think you are correct that the absence of football success is a part of the equation. And let us not forget, a lot of those WTF sports exist BECAUSE OF FOOTBALL. Football produces sufficient revenue that we can have these other sports and of course retain our TITLE IX compliance (very important).

Wonder how all of this is going to impact basketball? Listening to the talking heads this morning and they floated the idea that the NCAA/TBS agreement - which expires in 2032 - might look like the HAVES running their own tournament and leaving everyone else to deal with the NCAA. Don't particularly like that, given that the first couple of days are the most entertaining.

I think it depends on how you define 'culture'. I'm just guessing - don't know for certain - that there are schools out there where the wins are few and far between, and when they do happen, they're not giant killahs. But what if this program has - for lack of a better term - 'outreach' to making a positive impact on the lives of the impoverished youth, molding better citizens, etc. (I know you've heard all of this before, it's for the children). In the grand philosophical sense of "culture", what if those impacts are more important than wins and losses - and the participants know this up front? There used to be a Netflix series, Last Chance U, from a few years back that focused on this. You have to differentiate between which definition of 'culture' you're applying. If you're losing on the field, week in and week out, you have to sell the better-citizen culture. When you're winning - week in and week out - you don't have to pull from the second page bullet points. How would we describe the Crimson Tide culture? Is that one of winning? How would we describe the 'culture' of USF, if we are going to 'change' it, how is it currently defined and what do we want to change it into?

Carrollwood AD, Dean Robinson, quoted as saying "It's more likely than not that the sun will rise tomorrow. But we are still considering all options".

Well, what else can he possibly say - with any measure of credibility? All it says is that 'we're discussing amongst ourselves', and the opposite would be 'we're not discussing any of this expansion business'. How well would that go over? It's not like its breaking news. Well, maybe in this environment it's what passes for news. No decisions...but we haven't shut off the lights and locked the door.

Yep, but is that enough? How much of this is taking inches when we really want miles? Is it just access to the playoffs, or do we really want to be on the good side of the velvet rope? How long would we be satisfied lounging about the AAC? Would another decade be palatable? The reason I think along these lines is due to the incredible inventory of college football teams in existence and the growing chasm between the haves and have nots. I can't envision any sort of miracle that will narrow that gap or suddenly leverage a G5 to be on par with P(x). It's not like "Oh, this P5 school joined our conference, so that makes us a P5 conference. Now, where's my chair?".

I don't see a lot of good solutions for CalFord. Those are smart-kid schools, stuck out west. I wonder how Stanford views the idea of being independent, like their old drinkin' buddies at Notre Dame? Why would I want to wing across the continent for the sake of a ball game unless I'm getting mega-paid to do so? When we speculate on joining the AAC, how is that fundamentally different than just waiting to merge with the select schools of the MWC? Nope, complicated times in Berkeley & Palo Alto.

Out of all the stuff that's been floated, I think the above scenario looks to be the most reasonable.

"Luncheon host and former USF linebacker Sam Bellington (left) and head coach Alex Golesh (right) gave guests a glimpse into what fans can expect in the 2023 season. ORACLE PHOTO/JUSTIN SEECHARAN" I'm thinking that name should be Sam Barrington.

So, let's look at last season's football records to get a feel for what that could develop into...

Chris Iskra.

I would be EXCEPTIONALLY careful bandying about those terms. If we use the poll from AAC media day (July 25th, 2023) here's where teams rank. Now, exactly which BOTTOM schools did you have in mind? There's a mirror in the bathroom down the hall... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_American_Athletic_Conference_football_season