WoolyBully

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

I think this is where our paths might diverge. I'm a big CFB fan, and was long before USF played, and am a USF fan (think Venn diagram). As for 'heard of our opponents' I felt the same way when USF first started playing. I was plugged into Charlotte since the 70's, since that's where a number of my friends went to school, and of course, playing USF in days gone by (hoops). It's not like USF has been taking the field against the likes of Michigan, Texas and UCLA with any regularity. UAB? Hand me that atlas. I remember when we had a game against ECU, and (not naming names) was looking into rooms for a potentially great road trip. Unfortunately, he was looking into Greenville, South Carolina rather than Greenville, North Carolina. Glad that cleared up beforehand.

Yeah, that's where the podcast world pays dividends. Don't really dig current events / news commentary mucking around in the sports telecast. But it is 2023 and the market research indicates that our desirable target demographic wants . . .

We catch Gameday every Saturday - but, then again - we watch a lot of college football (basically all-day Saturday is a guarantee and throw in some mid-week games). Sad but true, the past few years I've been catching USF's score on the crawl.

Yep, because it's all about interest. Interest and discretionary spending on behalf of your fanbase. We've beat this dead horse for decades. Start winning, produce an experience that is worth the outlay in time and money to the fans and things will right themselves. The relentless whining and crying "Mommie! They won't let me play! They won't let me play!" gets old and eventually falls on deaf ears. College football is a business that rewards the successful and does not reward the struggling. Especially now when we look at conference realignment. Would USF be in a different position had we done XYZ in years past? Maybe. But there's nothing to do but go forward and make decisions and investments, and it will be uphill, that pay off in the future. Win in the AAC, build a program that is attractive to recruits, and build the fanbase for the next generation of Bulls fans. We've already run through a quarter century of football. We can't rely on winning the lottery* as a strategy for success. * falling into a Power confernece as filler

What does that mean? Does it mean that you'll finally have to say in open court that "Yes, in-deed-ie Your Honor, this is now, and has been for some time a business. I'll admit, we throw out all kinds of jib-jab about being compassionate souls interested in shaping the lives of young men, but - and it's not really news - we're a bottom-line business. Wanna watch football athletics for the sake of football athletics? Drive down the street, take a left and whip into the parking lot on Friday night. Otherwise, just accept the fact we're in the money-making business. And we've all, every one of us, been in on it for a long, long, time. Can I hop off the stand, Your Honor. I've got a donor's banquet to get to and a bunch of media folks have some presentation they want to give ...".

And remember kids, when we're talking CREAM of the Crop, Cash Rules Everything Around Me ... dollah, dollah bill, y'all! Respectfully, W-TC

Perhaps...but you have to consider who is doing the 'dangling'. Is it anyone in a position of executive decision making, authority, documents signing m**** f***** or is it the nebulous twittersphere (was I s'posed to say Xosphere?) and multiple instances of "I know a guy, who knows, a guy, who heard", or just wishful thinking? We've had basketball for half a century and made The Tournament thrice, making it past the first round but once. Waiting is what we do best. I think we're going to be waiting for a considerable time to come before we look attractive to THEM. Face it, at this point in time there are quality, established programs that are standing on shaky ground, so getting miracled into the P5 (perhaps I should start saying A4...assuming it doesn't drop to A3) is not an agenda item.

It seems to like all of the realignment vis-a-vis USF relies completely on a galaxy of stars lining up and USF being the last kid picked because we are in fact the last kid. It's unfortunate, but maybe that's our lot in life. Just the way things shake out that we're not a real value-added commodity at this point in history. What happens, after this round of realignment, if we are still right where we are today, in the AAC? 'cause if I had to put money on it, that's where my chips would be. I'm thinking that, all said and done, we're in the AAC for the foreseeable future. All I've seen thus far is P5 (soon to be Autonomous Four) shuffling around at their level - no outreach or expanding outside their strata. No real reason to.

Well, maybe - just maybe - all of this USF conjecture about if FSU does this, and Miami does that and Stanford does the other thing is, nothing but wishful thinking. If you are not a USF fan, how do you look at the program and say, objectively, 'sure, USF is a value-added component' at this point in time. There's probably a very good reason why the only ones mentioning USF in relation to realignment is - us. It makes us feel good. It's a fun exercise. The alternative is to look back at how miserable the previous seasons have been or hope for improvement going forward. Sometimes just pondering winning the lottery is all there is. A necessary exercise.

So why, given the ACC issue regarding disgruntled members and equitable (you define that) revenue distribution, would the ACC even bother adding Cal & Stanford? We are awash in tweets and hot takes every time someone has a meeting or makes a call. 'Explatory', 'no vote', 'still evaluating'...literally - no news, same scenario as yesterday.

See, gotta tweak that playoff formula now that one of "our" six may not retain Platinum status!

Would that be so bad? Really, just think about it for a second. What do we really want to watch (and wager on)? Is it the best of the best? Or do we get some warm fuzzy feeling when the throw-the-dog-a-bone team suits up, all in the interest of 'fairness'? Trust me, nobody wants a fair fight. I want to be bigger, faster, stronger, and meaner than my opponent (Georgia 65 - TCU 7). On the field and at the negotiating table. How long (don't answer out loud, just think of how you would answer) before U of SF is part of the playoff conversation? I think this current round of realignment will reshape the playoff configuration, especially if the P5 is P5-1 on game day. Gotta reword a few paragraphs.

Regional Rivalries: yeah, those were good days. But this is a bottom-line business, and we can't afford to factor in, or give as much weight as we used to, to the athletes or fans. That ship has sailed, at least as far as football is concerned. If you're gonna triple my take to forsake a rivalry, gotta decide which matters more. Would I look like an idiot to stay on a sinking ship? What if I just said I had some sort of duty to maximize returns, would that make me look bad? Maybe...short term. But once the games get played a lot of the angst will dissipate. Our rabid fans will embrace the new product. Not saying it's a finished product...just that it's the new product. Might have to schedule a realignment release V2.0.1 down the road.

Now, when you say 'believe'...you're not using that synonymously with 'hope', right?

Yeah, I can see that on the agenda down the road. Basically we (and you know who we are) want to consolidate the best of the best into our product and, should the need arise, have some programs pick up a box at the receptionist desk for their personal effects. I suspect that every school already is thinking along those lines and, if they can't compete (bring in revenue) they know that they should collect as much of a benefit as possible right now until the gravy train comes to a screeching halt. I know I can't wait for the Maryland USC or the Rutgers UCLA games...just not sure they're gonna be a permanent fixture.

Hmmmm...that reminds me of me. That's very much how I felt...just riding the tide. A win for USF - regardless of opponent - was always a reason to feel good about what next Saturday would bring. But the past six years, at some point, that connection to outcome pretty much disappeared. Not that I didn't care - at all - just that the amplitude of emotion was reduced, for both wins and losses.

Navy plays football in the AAC but all other sports in various conferences, much like Wichita State being a member of the AAC - just no football team. Again, the only value to going with the PAC 2.0 would be if somehow that new conference held onto the auto-bid playoff (as configured for a 12-team playoff) spot. Kind of like a low-rent way of a seat at the Big People's Table without the risk of having to play a real P5 (P(x) - however you wish to identify the conglomerate) schedule week in and week out. I wonder which AAC schools would be of interest?

How so? How is PAC 2.0 considerably different than the AAC? Do we have some reason to believe that, if we are thinking in terms of playoff access, that the revised version will be a better opportunity? These look very similar to me, quality wise. Not seeing any geographical advantage to flying out to California and Oregon as opposed to just stopping by in Texas, as is currently the case.

I don't think the Pac 12 Networks really panned out quite like it looked on the whiteboard.

Greatly reduces the odds of me being the lead story on Newschannel Eight.