USFreak

it is an away game-- it's UCFs job to promote this game.

True, but why would they want to promote the game at USF. That would only bring more USF fans in, not UCF fans, which would defeat the purpose of the home-field.

Moot point.  This game will require no marketing.  The media and O'Leary will make sure the I-4 corridor knows about this one.

USF Freak-  You mistakenly (Bullheaded) quoted me, I think... I have said many things but never have I taken ucf lightly or talked much trash that anything wasn't payback for something directed at me... You meant to quote Bullheaded I believe... that's cool I just wanted you to know about misquote.

Sorry about that.  I was actually agreeing with you, but stating it to those who think this game is meaningless.  Obviously I didn't state it very well.

I agree with you.  Two I-AA games in a season are meaningless.  A legitimate game vs. a I-A opponent that can use a win over you to bolster their own program is not meaningless...anything but.   It is funny that folks treat this game like it is nothing.  I hope it is only our fans being that cocky.  If USF walks into Orlando that cocky and overconfident they might walk out on the short end of the scoreboard.  Now that Grothe is the QB I don't think that will happen, but UCF will be nothing short of geeked for this game.  It is a very dangerous game.  I can't believe they put it at 2:30.  Their boisterous crowd was the 12th man and they handicapped it by putting the game so early.

it is an away game-- it's UCFs job to promote this game.

Exactly.

By the way, if everyone in the Tampa Bay area is so geeked up to play UCF, why would they need to market it? :-X

No marketing necessary anyhow.  The Sentinel, Tampa Trib, St. Pete Times and the George "Tim Hortons" O' Leary will provide all the marketing necessary.  

I imagine the Oracle and that dude (the one that lost the bet and never showed) from the UCF paper will even throw a few barbs.  God knows the Oracle could hang that (a welched bet) over their head.

USF should be promoting the HOME game vs FIU which will bring money in our pockets. The UCF game is their home game does nothing for our pockets. So any promotion by USF would be for fan support at the game nothingelse.

Youll probably see some after the FIU game but they wont go overboard nor give discounted seats because that would mean USF paying the balance.

I'd agree that it makes perfect sense to go into promotion mode after FIU.  No sense in promoting the second next big thing before the first next big thing shows up.  That said, I doubt you'll see too much circling of the wagons for UCF -- at least from non-student entities.  USF has intentionally downplayed this game for some time now.  I don't see them putting any endorsement or effort into it....beyond that it makes them no money and the press (for that week) should be all the marketing that game needs.

I GUARANTEE it will be a three-ring circus.  There will be no shortage of ink from Tampa or Orlando and I imagine O'Leary will fire the first barb no sooner than 1 hour after they get it handed to them in Gainesville.

The 2:30 start time is going to be the killer for UCF.  They'll lose 10-15,000 fans just from that. Why they agreed on that start time is beyond me.

guess nobody gives a **** about this game like you thought. So much for this big "rivalry" LMAO. Just like I figured, once the novelty wore off the game would just be another against a crappy team that nobody cares about. Practically a home game and people would still rather watch us play a 1AA team. Can't wait till this series is done with and we can fill the schedule with a real team.

This is just big, big talk.  God, I hope USF wins with talk like this.  The novelty will have certainly not worn off if the Bulls lose.  It is entirely possible.

If Montana State can beat Colorado anything is possible.  

here's a thought-- before we go bashing the USF fan base, how about we get an OFFICIAL response about how many tickets have been sold through USF.

I'm not sure you'll get that.  There seems to be some sort of effort to underplay this game.  The extension was slid under the rug and it just seems like there is hesitation to acknowledge this game.  I guess that's what getting boxed-in does. :-)

I'd actually be surprised if there is any sort of real promotion about UCF coming from the school.  I realize Miami was a bigger name/game, but back a few weeks before that one we heard a lot more promotion-wise.  There were bus trips and all that good stuff.

Maybe it is just on its way (after FIU), but it seems a lot more quiet for a game that is so reachable for the masses.  It could be just around the corner, though.

I don't see any game the BULLS play as meaningless.

Seriously.  If it is so meaningless don't even turn your TV on that day.  

I'll tell you when it will have meaning.  When the Bulls lose.  Amazingly the game that had "no meaning" is now the catalyst for a mass suicide watch.

I almost want to see them lay an egg just to see how much of that egg ends up on people's faces. :-)

USF fans aren't buying tickets to this game because it's a meaningless game to them.

A game at UCF is worse than playing a 1-AA at home in the mind of most of our fans.

That's true.  But the more accurate statement would be "USF fans aren't buying tickets to this game because most of them are meaningless to them."

USF fans don't exactly go gangbusters buying tickets to an away games at all.  If they can't represent 60 miles away I imagine that's a pretty good barometer of where the USF travel base is.  UCF is a D1 opponent, a team that played in a bowl last year and, at this point, the closest thing USF has to a rivalry game.

I agree with a lot of posters on this board -- there will likely be a decent showing at this game from USF, but it will be mainly through channels like SG or via game day sales.

The one with the truck leaving the campus and roaring into downtown Tampa?

If so, can you post it on YouTube or Google Video?  Or if somebody from athletics has access can you post it?  That is still among the coolest things EVER put together.

Anyone hear how many we have bought ... estimates ?

E.T.  - Why don't you do a count type thing on this site like Brad did last year for the Bowl game (top of the msg board).  I imagine there's probably 300-400 going to USF just that frequent this board.

am i being too optimistic or are we not doing enough to attract our graduating students?

That's the $64,000 question.

USF has had almost 50,000 graduates since 1999, but season tix are still down.

Both UCF and USF have had a hard time getting recent alumni, who either didn't have a football program for long (USF) or with UCF had down years and/or played mostly minor schools (aka MAC), how does one tap into this HUGE market of tens of thousands of Alumni at either school that don't seem that interested in spending $$$$ at their Alumni program?

Sports Illustrated did a feature story almost 20 years ago on student "apathy" (even at top programs across the country) that if you don't turn on the students to sports DURING their collegiate lifetime...it will be almost impossible to turn them on AFTER they graduate.

That's why student attendance/support is SOOOO important at each school...and with almost 30,000 full-time students at each school (part-timers and grad students attend sporting events at a much lesser rate), both schools know that how goes student attendance....is how future attendance will/will not grow.

KL

PS. Maybe both Athletic Depts should spend more $$$$$ on involving current students...instead of throwing marketing $$$$$ to alumni...who were never interested in sports when they were students.

KL,

I think this is a very good post.  There are certainly different opportunities here, but I do agree that the adoption rate of 'new' graduates will vastly outnumber the old-timers that never had football.  It would be great to attach a metric to it....

Either way, I think that the new graduates may not have the deep pockets of the old timers, but I reckon you could capture a greater percentage of them and, in time, they grow to be a very big part of the progam.

Good post, though.

That could be it Freak, but I heard very recently, once all this Huggy wave hit, that this guy is damaged goods.  I would be shocked if a BE team would be allowed to hire him.  I think your theory about the NBA would be accurate.  This guy might win a few 20 game seasons then immediately jump to the NBA.  That's where he's probably destine to go, grab $5M a year coaching prima donnas then retire into the sunset.

Yup, you don't have to be a saint to go to the NBA.  In fact, Huggy might fit well there.

I do get a kick out of everybody up in arms about what he is doing, though.  That is what he does.  It is no mystery.  He's built good ballclubs that way over the past decade and a half.

Let's not get all offended that he hasn't changed.  He'll build a good team that will be competitive immediately.  He'll skirt the lines, but likely not cross them.  He's a big ego and he'll make waves, but that's his M.O.  You get bad with good with Huggy, but what you don't get is boring.

It's good press and gives the program legitimacy. If one of these three kids blows up and becomes the next Lebron James or Carmelo Anthony as some "experts" have predicted I'd imagine that there would be a rush on USF jersey's across the country. That builds the brand and if it takes Huggins getting mentioned first so be it...There are a lot of programs around the country who are built around the coach.

Yeah, but that is a slippery slope.  Huggins would be a calculated risk by anybody's estimation.  I think he can deliver a winner, but at what expense.  I think it comes down to how desperately a team wants to win.  That goes for USF or anybody.

I'm not sure I'd equate it to the Terrell Owens incident, but there are certainly parallels.   Would you want T.O. on your team?  He's a great player, but the baggage just isn't worth it.

Now I'd argue that T.O. can absolutely ruin a team chemistry, though.  Huggins, you would assume, is controlling that team chemistry.  Most kids that sign on with Huggy know what they are getting into.  Same with Knight for the most part.  Huggins plays intense defense and demands 120% from every player on that floor at every time.  If he doesn't get it he'll punch you in the mouth - literally.  

Cincinnati had a reputation and it was well-deserved.  The Oakland Raiders of the NCAA.  Now with that reputation came a lot of postseason appearances and Cincy could be qualified as a great team with some absolute studs passing through -- Van Exel, Kenyon Martin, etc.  

Tough call, though.  I'm not sure every basketball player out there is ready to play for Duke with stellar academics, suit and tie and can flat out hoop it up.  I mean honestly even McCullum has made some boneheaded signings.  Guys he thought were quality and could turn it around, but in the end needed to get the boot.

The difference may just be that Huggins can play and coach this brand of renegade.  Probably most of them wouldn't last a day in Roy Williams system, but Jim Calhoun can always coach them. :-)

I have a feeling it wouldn't have been "USF in hunt for Top 3 players in the country" but rather "Huggins in hunt for Top 3 players in the country". It all would have been about him.

For sure.  Nobody is saying any different.  I think the consensus was wherever Huggy ended up would enjoy the spoils -- good and bad.

Again, I agree.  However, this is not an argument of legal or illegal.  If you ask Huggins, he'll say there is nothing wrong with it.  If you ask Bobby Lutz he might well feel differently.  I would.  I would be angrier at Dalonte Hill selling out than I would Huggins though.

Bottom line is that Huggins is resorting to practices only a small percentage of coaches would reduce to.  Yes, his desire to win, even at the expense of turning the knife in the back of a friend, is great and it paints an accurate portrayal of the stuff of which he is made.

Lutz apparently gave his permission for Huggins to talk to Hill.  It is like one of those situations where Charlotte may not like the outcome, but in major college sports that's how it goes down.  Coaches of mid-majors and successful assistants (and assistants with 'extras') are ripe for the picking from bigger, more traditional programs.  The thing is Huggins has been recruiting a bunch of these guys for years -  Mayo has been in the pipeline since middle school.  That was all done on Cincy's dime.  Does that mean Cincy has some claim to him?  The reality is if a coach goes to another school some percentage of past work goes with him as well.

I'm sure Lee Roy wasn't nuts about giving Alabama permission to talk to Leavitt either.  Charlotte will still have a decent program after this episode.  USF would have just been decimated if Leavitt had left at that point.  Not because of the recruits, but moreso just because at that stage in USF's history a coaching change would have just been bad timing.

It's not the same Freak.. If your publisher advanced you the money for your next book and you went to another publisher and took that book with you, you would be sued.  Assuming you still write...of course...same would happen if I took company materials to my new job.  Hell I have a clause that says I can not bring customers or even contact them...there would be a lawsuit.

I would, but then again I would also have a contract and a lot of that would be in writing.  If the publisher gave me an empty promise of "hey, we'd really like to see your next book"...well, then that is different than here is a signing bonus and a contract to publish your next book.

You are referring to a non-compete clause in your job and I've signed a few in my day.  One difference, though.  I actually signed something.  It wasn't a virtual document, but a real one.  You signed a real one too.  That is binding.

Bailey hasn't signed anything.

Until the rule is changed the rule will be exploited.  It is that simple.  I'm trying to get my bearings on this thread.  Are people trying to say, "see, I told you Huggins was a guy that deals in the gray areas and is a little shady?" or "see Huggins is going to build an instant winner?"

If it is either of those you are both right.

Again, it does happen all some of the time, but I can not say that your example passes the apples to apples test.  I do not believe Mosley and SoJo were committed (verbally or otherwise) to a school Brunell WORKED FOR before Brunell was hired at USF.  They were ready to move to a DI-A school and moved with Brunell.  It's not like Brunell worked at FSU and took them to USF.  they were leaving DBCC, it was just a matter of whereto.

It's just a matter of where one chooses to delineate fair and ethical play.  Legal, sure - the writer points that out.  Would a majority of coaches approve such a practice?  I doubt it.

I guess I don't understand how it is any different than a kid changing his mind on signing day.   The situation is fluid right up until the signature hits the paper.

Huggins was given the money and had the connections to make it happen.  Nobody forced anybody to do anything.  I mean obviously the Zabian episode at USF was somewhat similar.  A commit to USF on USF's dime and Greenberg took him to VT and he turned out to be a pretty good player.  USF never sued and never really made a stink about it and that was a head coach.  Assistants, I'd argue, have a lot less cachet than a head coach and should probably be less accountable in terms of the program.  They don't get the contract guarantees and all that good stuff.

Just because Zabian verballed a month or two ahead of signing day doesn't mean he has to do anything until signing day.  

Much ado about nothing...

This happened at USF, but just a much lower level. Didn't we sign a coach from DaytonaBeach CC, who also happened to be the coach of Solomon Jones and B-Mo? Maybe those kids would have signed with USF anyways, but hiring Frank Brunell surely didn't hurt.

Furthermore, this happens ALL THE TIME in college basketball (see Louisville and Memphis.)

Right, and I guess that was my point.  There are countless examples.  I've seen more than a few with so and so's dad getting hired by this staff and so on.  That one the NCAA probably needs to address.  The problem here is that these are just concerning the No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3 players in the country.  That will come with some scrutiny.

I know Huggins was never coming to USF, but could you imagine that headline in a Tampa paper?  USF in hunt for Top 3 players in the country?

That would be hilarious.  1-15 to that mentioned as a possible recruiting class.   Gerard Arcement would have nothing on that class.

Greatest Recruiting Class Ever?

Not my words, but Charlotte follower:

http://charlotte.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=528598

Of course they have to qualify.

I don't know if he'll build a winner in Manhattan, well let's say I don't know if that's such a foregone conclusion.  Sometimes a guy can skirt the rules in a smaller conference and no one is the wiser, and frankly most won't shutter for fear of rocking the economic engine that's keeping that conference afloat.

Heading into the B12 Huggins is going to find a lot more opposition from his peers.  They're going to be talking to conference officials more and more about Hugs antics, and you can bet they'll take a hardline approach.  This is the B12 not C-USA, they don't need KSU to rise to power they've already got Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma, Missou and the like.  No one is going to bend over for his antics in that conference.  Also, KSU isn't going to embarrass itself among it's conference peers either.  They'll step on Hugs if he gets out of line or if enough conference foes bark.

I find more times than not these 2nd and third stops end up being a little less exciting, or rather anti-climactic then their original place.  No one will deny Bobby Knight isn't a great coach, but quite frankly at Texas Tech he hasn't set the world on fire either.  He's had a few good seasons, but some average ones too.  Hugs is coming in, but you can bet your ass that guys like Self, and Knight, and Anderson, and others will give him the business if things get fishy.  Also, from I've read is those Cinci kids are not a lock to go to college either.  Both are supposedly borderline eligible, and if doesn't sign either of those guys then what?  He's back to square one recruiting against in-state power "rock chalk, jayhawk."  

My bet is he'll have some decent seasons at KSU by KSU standards but once things tapper off he'll be a middle of the B12 packer.

I actually don't think he'll be at Kansas State long enough to make it an issue.  He'll win quickly and likely only be there 3 years.  One or two early NBA announcements and he'll move on.  Enough time to make a quick mark, build up some 'good behavior' capital and end up in a major media market again....or so my theory goes.

After all, have you been to Manhattan, KS?  I have a friend that goes to Antartica for years at a time.  I could understand working the summer there (4 mos. rotation), but she goes for years.  To be honest Antartica seems a lot more inviting than Manhattan. :-)

My true theory is if the WVU position comes open that is where he'll be to finish his career.  He may be a little shady, but he's an alum and maybe you treat your school better than you treat your employer?

Simmonds and Clark are not relevant examples, because they are actual coaches, and in Clarks case he's a college coach, and in Simmonds case he has bonified coaching experience in the NFL, and has worked in college as a grad assistant before.

Taking a coach who's someone's guardian is a different animal all together.  If that isn't blatant and black and white then someone is just trying to muddy the debate.

The fact is the Tribune was completely inaccurate on their depiction on what occurred and how this went down.  I know this for fact.  Also,  I can't seriously see how USF would have offered him even if there was any teeth to the rumor.  I would be willing to bet that the BE Commish or our President would have squashed before it got any legs.

In any event effort achieved Hug's goal of keeping his name out in the public to secure a big conference job.

I agree with everything said.

I'm not sure we are debating the character flaws of Huggy.  The guy is clearly controversial and has a bunch of warts.

But he'll build a winner.  Don't question that for a second.   My guess is he'll keep his nose clean (well, as clean as he can).

Of course USF was never in the race, but look to Manhattan in a year or two if you want a glimpse of what our lineup could have been if he had been. :-)  Risky, for sure.  Fun, probably.

It's locked because I don't want to debate Huggins here.  I can't speak for Clark or Simmonds as I am not aware of any recruits already verballed that they are bringing.  Maybe we'll see a five-star from FIU come here...but I doubt one exists.  Simmonds was high school...so that doesn't count at all.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but it isn't right - as the writer says.  I agree that you do hire assistants for their coaching AND recruiting abilities, but to hire an assitant to get a player is unethical.  Afterall, in Dalonte Hill's case he did all the recruiting work on Charlotte's dime.  I wish charlotte could sue him.  Bailey has verballed to them.

Yes Greenie did something very similar on his way to Va-Tech, and we all thought he was a ethics violating dirtbag for doing so.  Did he do that coming to USF?  I do not recall us taking any commits from his hired assistants' former schools but I could be wrong (zimroth, magadan, dixon, uh..umm).

My point is that these guys have connections.  Simmonds and Clark don't have kids in their pocket, but they'll make inroads with kids.  They are assistants and frankly if a guy has verballed....well, it is a verbal.  Nobody is bound by anything until the ink is dry.

In reality nobody can stop Dalonte Hill from continuing his career and obviously the kid feels strongly enough to go with him.  Now Charlotte landed him based on Hill's work, but a lot more dimes were spent by other schools that swung and missed.  Same with O.J. Mayo.

Until the rule is changed Huggy is operating within the letter of the law.  And it happens a lot of places.  I actually wasn't referring to Zabian and Greenie, but rather Greenie hiring some kid's dad for a position.   I may have my coaches mixed up, though.  Possibly another sport or team.

Listen, you guys don't want to talk about Huggy and that is fine -- he isn't our coach.  But the guy is going to build a winner.  We know that.  When it was rumored he was looking to come to USF what was on the table was a winning program.  It would cost a few dollars to get Huggy here and there would be certain risk, but the guy will build a winner.  

McCullum may build that winner too and more power to him if he does, but the fact that Huggy is going to build an instant winner

Huggy is the program and Huggy is doing it in Manhattan, Kansas of all places.  KState has been a perennial bottom feeder and frankly I can't see anybody wanting to go there.  I think that was the majority of folks point in terms of Huggy.  The guy is large enough to add instant attention and instant oomph to a program that has no recruiting wheels.  Greenie said it best, "kids don't grow up wanting to be Bulls."  A shot for sure and sort of a stupid statement, but it is fairly true in hoops.  A marquee coach that is bigger than the lackluster name of the school can change that in a real hurry, though.  

I think Huggy is just doing what most expected him to do.  The media will be in tow for sure, but that's part of the allure.  

Huggy was never on his way here at any point so it is all mindless banter, but I think the Kansas State experiment will certainly show the heights USF could have risen too if he was (of course that goes the other way as well if he screws the pooch and gets in trouble again).

As always - time will tell.

It appears to be locked.

Is this different than hiring somebody like Mike Simmonds or Bernard Clark?  Maybe, but in all honesty you hire assistants as much for their recruiting as their coaching - sometimes more.  I imagine we'll see a few Jefferson kids come through the gates of the practice fields in the next few years.

Are Huggy and Lutz friends?  I don't know, but it is a cutthroat business.  We know that.  Jim Leavitt and Mike Stoops may be best buds, but I imagine if Stoops made Leavitt's assistant Kravitz an offer he couldn't refuse to come to Oklahoma...well, if a blue-chipper came with that it would only sweeten the pot.

I'm not defending Huggins here, but I guess from following recruiting that seemed to be always part of the biz.  We've seen this before at other programs and I think - somebody will have to point out where - we've even seen it at USF.  Didn't Greenie do something very similar?

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/polls

1 Texas  

2 USC  

3 Virginia Tech  

4 Penn State  

5 LSU  

6 Ohio State  

7 Texas Christian  

8 West Virginia  

9 Georgia  

10 Alabama  

11 Miami (FL)  

12 Auburn  

13 Wisconsin  

14 Texas Tech  

15 Boston College  

16 Florida  

17 Oregon  

18 Tulsa  

19 UCLA  

20 Oklahoma  

21 Notre Dame  

22 Toledo  

23 Florida State  

24 Clemson  

25 Boise State  

26 Louisville  

27 Michigan  

28 Georgia Tech  

29 Northern Illinois  

30 Nebraska  

31 Fresno State  

32 Nevada  

33 Iowa  

34 Virginia  

35 Kansas  

36 Missouri  

37 North Carolina State  

38 Northwestern  

39 Iowa State  

40 Arizona State  

 Rk Team

41 Minnesota  

42 UTEP  

43 Central Florida  

44 South Florida

45 Central Michigan  

46 Colorado  

47 South Carolina  

48 California  

49 North Carolina  

50 Memphis  

NO RESPECT, NONE.  UCF higher than USF.  It reminds me of when they had 22 AP votes and we had zilch.

You may be upset because of the rivalry. :-)

It's more like beating up your little brother (or sister, actually)..

I know about your 28 page discussion...

Wouldn't that be 'sibling' rivalry?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibling_rivalry