Bullshiznitz

2 minutes ago, chapelbull said:

Is this legit "rumors" or message board fodder

Message board fodder.  But from them, so figure they may be more likely closer to it then us just wishing that were true.  

Rumors from Clemson that Chase Brice may transfer and follow Scott.  They believe he may be on track to graduate this year, so could be a Grad Transfer.  

29 minutes ago, Ghost said:

I like the hire. The only "concern" is the rumor that he was not the playcaller for Clemson, so not sure what to make of it. But honestly, a guy WANTING to come to USF is worth a lot more than people give it credit for. I mean, isn't that why we wanted CJL back? Someone who actually wants to coach here? 

After I thought about that, I kinda started leaning the other way.  Scott was more the program "manager" then while Elliott was the playcaller.  As far as experience for a head coach, thats probably more beneficial then the gameday play calling experience (as long as he brings in a good OC that is).  I think his dad coming along is another nice little cherry on top of this hire.  Brings a ton of experience to help mentor his son on being a first time head coach.  

https://twitter.com/MiNombreEsTommy/status/1202239096145494016

Don't know this guys contacts, but interesting...(sorry couldn't figure out how to make the twitter post just appear in here)

5 minutes ago, Gatorbull325 said:

We werent a G5 school going against the P5. CJL was on the SAME playing field for 5 years and couldnt do more than be "competitive" every once in a while. Save the argument buddy.

Yeah except that is not remotely true.   Again, for those of you with difficulty reading, when we joined the conference, the upperclassman were recruited when USF was just a I-A independent.  A vast majority of the remaining roster was recruited when we were just CUSA.  So we had a roster of 90% players from "G5" level recruiting going against teams with full "P5/BCS" rosters.  It would be no different then taking our current team and throwing them in the ACC or Big 12 next year and then wondering how we haven't won that conference in the first 3-4 years.  We are not on the same playing field.  Being on the same playing field is brought Leavitts highest recruiting class in 2009.  And the roster he left Skip still had talent like BJ, Barrington, Kayvon Webster, Lindsey Lamar, DeDe Lattimore, etc.. 

9 minutes ago, Bullrush33 said:

They don’t have ears to hear. Jimmy is their god. 

Or....Or.....have a realistic understanding of the situation back then.  

Leavitt Era (2005-2009) Big East - 5 Seasons :  Faced 17 teams who finished ranked  :   Faced 6 teams who finished ranked in the top 10 :  Conference Champion Avg finishing position #8.4 (5, 6, 6, 8, 17)

Post Leavitt Era (2010-2018) Big East/AAC - 9 Seasons :  Faced just 15 teams who finished ranked : Faced just 5 teams who finished ranked in the top 10 : Conference Champion Avg finishing position #15.8 (and thats being generous as twice the conference champion has finished unranked and I assigned a #26 value for that).  

The conference was much more difficult back then.  You had peak level WVU (rich rod years), peak level Rutgers (Schiano), peak level Cincy (Mark Dantonio and Brian Kelly years) and peak level Louisville (original Petrino years) in that span.  

The 2005 team had upperclassman who were recruited when USF was an independent who just moved up to I-A football facing off against teams who had been recruiting for "BCS" level forever.  We were a completely unknown commodity back then.  Leavitt was just starting to hit strides in recruiting in the later years.  We had the #29 recruiting class in the nation in 2009 with 5 4 stars.  

31 minutes ago, Bullrush33 said:

And also lose to a completely inferior opponent. 

Ive seen a lot of people say this on here and twitter, but realistically thats just not true.  From 2005-2009 USF lost a total of 24 games in 5 years.  Of those 24, half (12) were against teams that finished the year ranked.  And of those 24, only 3 losses came against teams with losing records.  2 of those ( 5-6 PITT & 5-6 UConn) came in 2005 when we were just a 6-6 team and first year in the Big East.  The only "bad" losses really were maybe in 2006 against 6-6 Kansas (and that was on the road) and 2008 against 5-7 Louisville.  Our schedules were just much more difficult back then. 

11 hours ago, Triple B said:

We've been constantly told here lately that the program is on life support. If the roster is 2 seasons away, what better way to keep from unplugging that plug than with the OBC. Have a coach-in-waiting come on board with him ....... I think I'm talking myself into loving this idea.

Its actually not a bad idea.  Spurrier and Kelly together would be huge for fundraising (ensure that the IPF gets built (groundbreaking) next year).  If you bring Larry Scott in as OC / Head Coach in waiting and somehow keep Shaun King on board you'd have a seriously strong recruiting staff as well.  

14 hours ago, BullyPulpit said:

The more I ponder the issue, I wonder if Boise State's deal with the MWC could ultimately lead to them wanting to join the AAC. As it stands, BSU makes about $3 million annually, while the rest of the MWC teams make only $1.1 million. In a desperate attempt to keep the conference in tact the last time the winds of expansion were blowing, the MWC allowed BSU to retain exclusive rights to its home football games in PERPETUITY! BSU and their 4 conference road games add very little value to the MWC contract, which many predict won't net much more than the current TV deal.

I don't know that BSU will see a bump in the asking price for their 6 home games per year. Would BSU be willing to bring just their football program to the AAC in exchange for $4 million annually? They could have the rest of their sports remain in the MWC or move them to the WAC. In that scenario, the AAC nabs the best G5 program available and each conference team still makes an extra $300,000 annually out of the deal.

For competitive balance you move Navy from the West to the East and BSU takes their place in the West. You would have BSU, Houston, Memphis and SMU/Tulane competing at the top of the West and UCF, USF, Cincy, and Temple at the top of the East.  I could get behind that setup. 

Just wonder if they would be OK putting themselves on such a big island (no conference opponents even remotely close).  I think if you want Boise, you figure out what 14 team expansion works for atleast keeping the conference contract at the same per team.   Maybe adding Boise, Colorado State, and BYU (and if you can't entice them, then Air Force)

35 minutes ago, Gatorbull325 said:

Here are my picks. For some reason, I dont think Taggart wants to take a chance on us. Here are teams I found that fit our schedule that will give us a home game in 2020 and fill in the rest of our needed schedule - 

1. Arkansas has a million openings and would be a perfect easier SEC win. https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/arkansas/

2. Kansas Jayhawks - Easy P5 victory and CCS gets revenge on his worst loss at Texas. https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/kansas/

3. Kansas State Wildcats - They have no away games from 2020 to 2022 and only 1 away game in 2023. https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/kansas-state/

4. Baylor Bears - Room on their schedule https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/baylor/

5. Minnesota - Space on their schedule https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/minnesota/

6. Indiana Hoosiers - They stole our Defensive Coordinator and once in a while steal our recruits.....they deserve a beat-down from us. https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/indiana/

7. Texas A&M - Why not?  https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/texas-am/

8. Washington Huskies - https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/washington/

9. Washington State- https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/washington-state/

 

 

 

Most of those can't do a 2020 game. The Big 12, Big Ten and PAC 12 all play 9 conference games.  So they only have 3 non-conference games they have to fill.  

I tried to look ahead to see what team would be best guess for "one more big splash", and FSU appears to be the most likely.  I'm assuming Kelly would love to get a P5 team at home here for 2020.  FSU is about the only big team I can find that still has an opening in their schedule for that year, and they are also one of the few P5 teams that still has a lot open beyond those years.  Say a 2-1 where FSU opens that deal up by playing in Tampa in 2020, and then road games at FSU in 2023 and 2027 (we'd have to move or buy-out the road Northern Illinois game) or 2028 (although we'd put ourselves in a bind already having 2 road games then).  

And looking at future schedules, it looks real likely that no matter who it is, that away Northern Illinios game in 2027 will need to be bought out.  Need that year for the flexibility in signing a big 2-1.  

If 2020 is out, and we fill that with an FCS team at home, then other possibilities would be: 

Georgia (home in 2022, away in 2023 & 2027) - they seem most likely in this scenario as they already have 3 home non-conference games in 2022 (can afford to schedule an away) and need home games in 2023 (have 2 away non-conference games scheduled).  

LSU (home in 2022, away in 2023 & 2027)

Auburn (home in 2022, away in 2023 & 2027)

That might be about it.  The Big Ten is tough as they play only 3 non-conference games now, and the big teams only schedule big non-conference P5 on the road.  Michigan and Ohio State have openings, just don't see anything in their scheduling philosophy that would have the play a road game against a non-P5.  Clemson is filled up nonconference through 2025, Va Tech is filled through 2024, WVU is filled through 2024.  Oklahoma's openings as far as away vs home just don't seem to match up to our needs, and the same with Tennessee.  

I'm not happy with yesterday's press conference nor what I've heard from former players.  That's not even getting into the product on the field.  But i'd be: 

1) Holding closed door meetings with current players, making sure to have a sampling of players graduating (those who can speak their mind now), and freshman/redshirt freshman in the program.  

2) Making phone calls late tonight or tomorrow to former players (MVS, Q, etc..) who played under this current regime.  

I'd need to know whether this locker room has been lost from top to bottom.  I don't see a recovery being possible if Charlie has a mutiny on hand.  Or I need to find out if its just a few bad apples (Gilbert) poisoning the whole well.  There's something rotten going on in the locker room and no system change is going to work unless you rectify that first.  

I see zero reason in waiting til after the bowl game to make a decision.  I need to know if this locker room is lost, and we need to cut ties now and do damage control to keep the talent on this team together, or I need to give a Charlie an ultimatum in getting rid of those bad apples.  Wait too long in this process and you run the risk of not only losing current players, but have recruiting take a dive.  What offensive talent in Florida is going to see that offense and be like thats the system I want to play in.  

We wasted tremendous offensive talent last year under this system.  No one wants to see a repeat next year with all the talent that is returning.  

Just as a reminder that we were a 9-2 team last year (regular season), who lost the following: 

3-year starter and  All Conference starting QB

Top 3 rushers, including all rushing TDs

Top WR

Top tackler and starting MLB

Top D-lineman

That's not including that our new starting QB has only been with the program for a few months and that we seem to be unlucky with the injury bug this season.  

All that, and this young team still has a possibility to match those 9 regular season wins - I'd consider that a pretty good rebuilding year.  I think we've been spoiled the last couple years since the core of that team was starting when they were freshman/sophomores and haven't witnessed a rebuilding team in a while.  Its definitely frustrating to watch at times, but new starters and freshman are going to make mistakes.  All things considered, no matter how heart-attack inducing some of our games have been, I'd call this season a fair success at this point (and likely the same by the end of the year). 

7 hours ago, FazaUSF said:

With all due respect to young children who are welcome to wave whatever they want at football games... 

"War flamingo" is plainly and objectively idiotic. With our new academic logo, it is quite clear that the university would have picked up "war flamingo" if it had a 0.0000001% chance of being something that adults with ANY IQ points to spare would get behind. It did not, and does not, and never will. Please stop beating the very long dead war flamingo. It is sad to see members of our amazing fan base stray so far from 

War Flamingo aint havin none of it from the no fun police

On 9/19/2018 at 8:58 AM, NewEnglandBull said:

Exactly. A NYD bowl game would be icing. But winning a conference championship is paramount. 

Winning a conference championship means didly squat if you don't get the NYD bowl.  Who cares if we win the conference but are relegated to the who cares bowl vs 7-5 Duke.  

I'll never get the people who are determined not to admit this is a rivalry.  IT IS.  And that is good.  College football is about rivalries.  Thats what keeps fan ticking even for teams that never accomplish anything.  You always have that rivalry game to root for.  

And the whole thing smacks of our fans thinking small time.  Just like we hate the whole P5 thing, its time to move past the "big 3".  The reality of it is that the USF v UCF game was the biggest (most impactful) rivalry game in the state of Florida last year.  More important than FSU v UF.  More important than FSU v UM.   And for the 2nd year in a row, thats likely to be true again this year.  The arrogant big 3 fans can scoff all they want, but both UCF and USF were better than both UF and FSU last year, and likely again this year (and arguably as good or better than Miami both years).  And the way both teams are constructed, they very likely may still be better than them all for the 3rd year in a row next year.  

Ask yourself....what would mean more this year?  Beating UCF on Black Friday, or beating FSU in a bowl game this year?   

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

Not sure what "final rankings" you're talking about but if it's the only ranking that matters, here's the correct breakdown:

Clemson beat 4 not 2 (Auburn, UM, VT, NCSU)

Oklahoma beat 4

Georgia beat 3

Alabama beat 2

UCF beat 2 (Memphis twice) USF wasn't ranked

The only thing that matters about that ranking is if you're listed 1-4.  Anything after that is as relevant as the AP or Coaches poll.   

6 minutes ago, Apis Bull said:

I'm stunned that anyone would prefer the Big 12 over the ACC.  The ACC is a better fit geographically and like you said, you get Miami, FSU, Clemson, and GT.  That is no small thing.

Except the ACC is never going to happen.  If they ever go to 16, it will be ND and one of UConn or Cincy.  

33 minutes ago, JoeB said:

Hate the Adidas football uniforms.  The numbers and nameplate fonts are not unique to each school.  Therefore a school like Indiana looks exactly the same as FIU or Northern Illinois

Not just the numbers and font, but seems the recycle uniform designs as well.  (same road tread or whatever its suppose to be design):  

Would not be a fan of the move from UA to Adidas

16 hours ago, ArmyBull said:

I would take into account that in ALL of those games, the 2s were playing for the gnats in the entire fourth quarter and a portion of the 3rd.  It is really tough to infer that because we had similar margins of victory that we are similar teams.  I have no idea what is going to happen this Friday.  Truth is that this will be our first significant test of the season.  We could win, or we could get blown out.  I am not sure any result will surprise me.  

We had a lot of our second string playing in most of those games 4th quarter as well.  

To account for that: 

After 3 quarters, USF led those opponents by +97

After 3 quarters, UCF led those opponents by +106

A 9 pt difference, or again, about 2 pts a game.  

Also, USF out-gained those opponents by 891 yards,  UCF by only 464.   

Not trying to do an indepth analysis here, just really pointing out that by common opponents, these are two very evenly matched teams, and any perceived "divide", may just be that.... perceived.... and not reality.  We'll find out in a few days. 

Until the playoffs are tied to conference champions, then none of the them truly matter.  

On 11/14/2017 at 3:24 PM, bullsbucsfan426 said:

The Liberty Bowl and Independence Bowl are our backup agreements. They have seven bowl agreements and six currently eligible, but K-state and Texas tech are one win from a bowl. I don't think we should count on the Liberty Bowl. 

They have only 5 eligible as of now with Texas, Texas Tech and K St at 5 wins.  And they all (Texas - WVU/Tx Tech,  Texas Tech - TCU /Texas, and K St - Okie St/Iowa St) end the year with a difficult path.  Very possible that the Texas/Texas Tech winner is the only add of eligible teams to bring them to 6.  And if they place Oklahoma into the playoffs, then they only have 5 available for 7 agreements.  

You also have a similar case with the Big Ten.  They currently have 7 eligible teams with Minn at 5-5 (and they close @NW and Wisc - two possible losses).  If Minn doesn't get another win, and if Wisconsin or Ohio St make the playoff, they will have 6 eligible teams for 8 bowl agreements.  

Anyway, hopefully this is all for other teams to care about and we handle business in Orlando and against Memphis.  

I forget, can we shun are AAC bowl tie-ins in favor of filling other conference tie-ins where they don't have enough teams?   The Big 12 looks like a real possibility, if Oklahoma gets into the playoff, and TCU gets the NY6 bowl, they are looking at possibly 4-5 more teams bowl eligible with 6 bowl tie-ins.  All 6 bowl matchups are slated against P5 conferences. 

3 hours ago, goldenbrahm1996 said:

There is a legit chance we get sent to the military bowl to play FSU. The tie in is for AAC vs ACC. Usually it is the 2nd/3rd best AAC team vs the worst/one of the worst bowl-eligible ACC teams, much like the Birmingham and SEC. Here would be the list of likely oppenents.

FSU 6-6

UVA 6-6

BC 6-6/7-5

Wake 6-6/7-5

G Tech 6-5

Duke 6-6 (most likely not getting to 6 wins though)

Louisville (most likely gonna finish 8-4 but always a chance they lose to Cuse and/or UK)

 

Thats not a bad list.  We've beat 8 of the 14 ACC teams atleast once (Clemson, Miami, FSU, Pitt, Syracuse, UNC, NC St, & Louisville).  BC, UVA, Duke or Wake would be good to mark off our list (we'll get Ga Tech here shortly on our regular schedule).