Cubanbull

30 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

Correct. The legal dispute is whether they can break the GoR or not. Some say yes. Some say no.

To resolve the legal dispute, they agree to terms. FSU gets more money, which is what they want, but they also agree to stay in the ACC. The others keep the conference going for another decade, which is what they want, but with smaller payouts. That’s all I’m saying. 

Do FSU, UM, et al have landing spots in better conferences? Who knows. That’s the bluff/leverage these schools have against the rest of the ACC to renegotiate the GoR. Sure, the other schools could sit back and do nothing, relying entirely on the strength of the GoR (figuring FSU can’t leave even if the Big Ten or SEC would take them). But what if FSU sues under some clever legal theory? Do the other schools want to defend a lawsuit that could drag on for years, even if they’re right? And what if they’re wrong and FSU wins? That’s a lot of uncertainty.

Just my two cents.

I completely understand what you are saying. But my point is so fat no one has found a way to break the GOR. So if that’s the case why give yourself a cut if they can’t leave. You know if they could break the GOR and SEC or Big came calling they would go regardless of whether they were making unbalance amount

14 minutes ago, TallyBull said:

The agreement I’m suggesting would be that FSU et al would NOT leave before 2036 in exchange for their getting bigger pieces of the pie. I anticipate that the “have-nots” will make significantly less money after FSU departs than they would if FSU stays, even if they get smaller pieces of the pie through 2036. But maybe I’m wrong about that. 

But once again my premise is that IF they could break the GOR they would be gone. The only thing that keeps them together until 2036 is the fact that they can’t break it. So why give the more money when you know they will bail as soon as they can. The key is can they break the GOR, so far from what we have seen from Texas, Oklahoma and the ACC, the answer isNo.

1 hour ago, TallyBull said:

Lower payments through 2036 and a stable conference would seem to be a better deal for the "have-nots" than an unstable conference today. Believe me, FSU and the other "haves" aren't going to just drop it and, whether it be next week or in 2036, it seems there's little prospect of the "haves" sticking with the "have-nots" in the ACC.

Agree so if the outcome is that they will leave as soon as they can, then why give take a payout if it doesn’t solve the situation and they will leave regardless .

1 hour ago, John Lewis said:

Clemson and FSU do not add any value to the SEC. UNC and Virginia would be better targets for them.

I think the SEC would take those two to keep BigTen from getting them. You really are taking the best two athletic programs in ACC. But I agree that Virginia and UNC would bring them new markets.

1 hour ago, TallyBull said:

Interesting. It appears the ACC GoR is pretty solid though. All I hear from FSU fans here in Tallahassee is that FSU (along with several other ACC schools) has been trying to figure a way out of the GoR but that it's ironclad. Perhaps if the ACC voted to dissolve they could get out of it, but there aren't enough votes for that (at least, not yet). It seems like the more likely ACC outcome is a renegotiated GoR that pays the "haves" (FSU, UM, Clemson) more and the "have-nots" (BC, Duke, Syracuse) less, such that the "haves" are satisfied that it is financially unnecessary for them to bolt for another conference. We'll see what happens. 

Problem with that, is why would the others agree to that if they know they can’t get out until GOR runs out and there isn’t any guarantee they would stay when that runs out. Would you agree to lower payouts for13 years for nothing?

9 hours ago, Bull Matrix said:

Bottom line is that USF had their chances while in the Big East but they blew it with not winning enough. They were fools to get pulled into this media vs Leavitt and made a coaching change and brought in a Holtz New Error. Facilities didn’t have much to do with USF’s fate as much as it was to get rid of the coach that got USF into the Big East. To me that is old news and we are moving on to better times imo. Have faith & Go Bulls!!

It wasn’t just one mistake, it was a combination of many.

#1 Bringing in Holtz and other coaching changes 

#2 Becoming complacent in BigcEast, rather than looking to dominate it and look beyond it. Our administration acted like we had reached our final goal by just getting there.

# 3 Facilties for football were not continued

#4 Don’t forget the Academic Committee that blocked recruits from coming in.

As I said our biggest issue was complacency on just playing in the Big East. That can’t be the attitude. We need to have the attitude and expectations that we will dominate any league we are in. Let’s start with the AAC, which as many here act like we are beyond it, we still can’t win it. 

7 minutes ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

I don't think it's carrying NYC market with regards to fans, the New England area is definitely more academic/professional sports focused, more of getting that market to carry the B1G network on standard cable packages. Same with Maryland and the DC metro. More so, if you're the B1G, you're saying "what schools can we add to boost TV revenue and engage more with our alumni, on top of academic notoriety and athletic success". It was quoted when adding USC/UCLA that LA was the largest metro of B1G alumni not in their current footprint. Have to think cities like Seattle, Boston, Atlanta, Charlotte, Phoenix, and Tampa/Miami are on that same list (not counting Dallas/Houston cause those markets are locked up). 

If we find success, and find it fast, and want to position ourselves for the B1G, I think our main competitors for the next round of expansion are - 

1. Notre Dame (no brainer)

2. Miami (to pair with ND)

3. UNC (#3 target is my guess)

4. GaTech (underrated with B1G expansion in mind, Atlanta + academics, comparable add to Maryland/Rutgers)

5. Washington (similar to GaTech but much more isolated)

6. Boston College (this one is a bit more out there but checks the boxes of what B1G has looked at for expansion, see: Maryland)

7. UVA (similar to Boston College - great school and better athletics but no true market as they own DC with Maryland already)

8. ASU/UA (same distance to LA as San Fran)

9. CU (see: BC)

The reality is that we may be at or near the bottom of this list, if we are a thought at all. One caveat - new B1G president may see things differently for expansion moving forward. We see how Yormack is expanding the B12, with a heavy focus on basketball. That was not the rhetoric pre Yorkmack at all. 

Yormack new emphasis on basketball,tells me he realizes that football wise the SEC and BIG are not catchable and will pull further ahead. So he is going to try to make the Big12 the top basketball conference. Two things he is not calculating 

#1 As the SEC/ BIG keep opening the gap with money that will also go to basketball 

#2 Basketball is not the big tv moneymaker that football is.

35 minutes ago, michibull said:

I agree with you and everything said said was correct. The only thing I see that could hold us back is history and reputation. Winning wasn’t important to them when they added Rutgers and Maryland, but they do have a lot of history. I believe we are a sleeping giant and IF they added us, we could see 2007 type of support come back fast!

We must win and the longer FSU and Miami are trapped in ACC, the better for us in regards to BigTen. If they managed to get out, then we are looking at Big12 or ACC 

Getting into AAU, is a great accomplishment for USF and it will help increase research money and ability to recruit quality faculty and students.

The effects on athletics or alumni will be minimal.

So as an alumni, I celebrate the accomplishment. 

13 hours ago, John Lewis said:

It's going to be really something when we have that national TV audience for the Alabama game and we can run our AAU spot for the entire country.

And hopefully our new OCS renderings. USF on the move

Need to start winning in football, everything else is there

Might need to start a new thread once transfers are done and start looking at our depth chart

8 hours ago, Triple B said:

If I understand the rules correctly, if he's not a grad transfer he'll have to sit out this coming year because he entered the portal after May 1st ......... that sound right?

Don’t think it matters looks from his interview that he is looking at an FSU type move. 

20 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Is he a grad transfer?

Senior I think. Was CUSA All Defense team. I hear FSU is after him

Notice Teja Young safety from FAU just went into Portal. Has good stats including 5 interceptions last two years, returned 4 for TDS. Wonder if we can get him

51 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Yet he accomplished more than any other USF FBS football coach not named Leavitt and  he didnt even get a chance to turn it around for a second season which Mohl already has got and failed.

35 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

No but he didnt get a chance to turn it around.  Mohl did and the team got worse. 

Guess you missed these two replies.

6 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

I replied to you saying Leavitt was the only winning coach in football which he was not .  Only three coaches have bowl wins in FBS football at USF Leavitt, Weist, and Strong.

Whatever, you can go back and reread your answers to my posts and mentioning Mohl.

But whatever I’m done with this, not going anywhere.

7 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Never said you were. 

Well you kept mentioning him when replying to my posts, so didn’t know why you would do it unless you thought I was.

Just now, Outlaw said:

No but he didnt get a chance to turn it around.  Mohl did and the team got worse. 

Once again. I’m not defending Mohl.

3 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

4-8. Different season. He had one losing season. Never had back to back losing seasons.

So guess you would had been ok with him having another season, with a 4-14 slide.

Ok guess we will disagree on this. 

5 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Yet he accomplished he didnt even get a chance to turn it around for a second season which Mohl already has got and failed.

Not defending Mohl. Just pointing out that Strong was on a  4-14 slide when he was fired

Just now, Outlaw said:

Just to clarify Charlie Strong had a winning record as well and was the only other football coach to be over 0.500 in USF history.

Yes but we know the trajectory he was going when he was fired.

9 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

Even in the golden age of football, his head was being called for ...... like Brad said, there's lotsa people out here.

Yes, but that doesn’t fail to disprove that our major sports have not had great success lately. The only one I can think of that some called for his head while having a winning record was Leavitt and some of that were from his antics with players. Other than him, name one with a winning record at USF?

5 minutes ago, jjlovecub said:

I’m trying to think of the last coach that we had in any major support that people did not call for them to be fired. 

That just goes to show you how well we have been doing in those sports