MikeG

We haven't always had a "Parade - After Party". That is the new event she is speaking of for this year.

Sorry that is a problem for you but you could go to a bar and see all the games.... maybe that is the point from a local tavern perspective.

I think Houston is a solid team. Remember-- they went from scrubs in 2002, got a great new coach in Briles, and then qualified for a bowl last season. The other thing they seem to be doing is keeping USM guessing what is coming next and taking the number of risks necessary to move the ball. I wouldn't be surprised to see USM make a come back in this game-- they look fired up after that last Houston score.

Let me just say everyone has a right to their own opinion on things aand they also have the right to disagree. There is always room for improvement for the Bulls IMO-- that not withstanding, there are realistic expectations and then there are flat out over inflated opinions of where we are supposed to be in our 8th year of football. The only reason I say this Steve-- is that you leave zero room for screwups-- any chance you see even the slightest problem, you want to pounce on it and rip on someone for it. I believe that regardless of how well you coach, recruit, or whatever-- at some point or another the human element of imperfection is going to raise it's head and show up. It can come in spades or trickles-- but it will happen. As long as we win-- no one minds some of the bad things like happening anywhere near as much (results oriented society-- and rightfully so). On the other hand-- imagine that our team did not move along at the fast pace we have already gone through--- at what point can anyone say with any certainty that something is clearly wrong in that situation? It is easy to point at the penalties or other mistakes and inadequacies. I just want us to also take stock of the good things along with the bad. Our last game was bad-- too many mistakes bit us in the ass in a game we might have been able to win. But we didn't get stomped to death and there were a couple of moments that made us proud too. This isn't what I term a "sunny all the time" attitude so much as it is a fair assessment of our strengths and weaknesses. If you don't look at both sides of the coin and allow some room for error, I think you get a skewed idea of what our team is capable of accomplishing today or in the near future.

to no one in particular Why should someone with a learning disability be precluded from going to college? There are all types of conditions that are called learning disabled such as dyslexia (sp), or slow learning-- but those people who do not have football skills or other types of skills colleges want-- they have routes to getting a college education. Sometimes it takes them longer to get through it-- but they can also specialize in the field of learning disability andbe a contributing member of society. We can't all be brain surgeons-- so if the kid wants to try it out ANYWHERE-- I say let him try. Maybe it is something he can overcome with the proper assistance. If he never plays for USF, I would still want the guy to have a fair shot of making the most of himself. Shame on the UCF poster who automatically assumes we are out to snag a player and then push him through school without helping him out as well. I'm sure UF was trying that AND that they and other schools that recruited him knew about this condition. If it is so bad that it is impairing his ability-- then that would show up in interviews with coaches/teachers/family. Even if he ends up at UCF-- let's hope for the best. Most people who have talked about him say he is a real good kid.

I don't see it this way. Yes-- it does cost money and many of us give lots fo money to the school trying to help make our teams the best they can be. But that's where I separate the cash from the action. I do not expect everythign to be perfect and when things go great-- it is a seriously great bonus. One of these days-- the Bulls will suffer through some ugly seasons (hopefully a long long time from now). But I will not stop giving to the school or buying my season ticket allotment. I'm locked in on that situation and do it because I will watch Bulls football no matter how bad the team does. It is something I care about-- plain and simple. I do not expect guarantees that we produce a winner. But opinions vary.

When it comes to comparing the the program now with what it was like in 2002-- you have to remember that was the culmination of a lot of years of growth. We also weren't playing the same level of teams for the most part that year. Many of the teams we beat weren't exactly tearing up the football world (some were). Since then, we have had to deal with true conference play which in it's own right is a different animal. This (and last) year is a struggle where lots of young guns are trying to get up to speed in a hurry. So while some may see us as regressing somewhat (based more or less on output and records)-- I can see us improving in certain aspects-- like depth for one. I've never been around a program that has moved along as fast as we have in terms of conference affiliation, division level changes, building facilities and other services-- you name it. It would be great to revisit the 9-2 days of 2002. But I wonder if that is a bit unrealistic in the short run. I doubt it can be done this year (7-4 would be a great year for this team). And in 2005, we will see perhaps another bump in the level of play in the Big East. So it may take several years for us to blossom. It could be shorter but I will not consider us as failing until we show true signs of a program in trouble. That simply isn't the case. This may not be directly related to what you were saying wildrover-- just some thoughts about what we can expect out of our team for the next couple of years. We have plenty of hard work ahead of us before we get to that level.

Does Football 101 include a section about sometimes you just get beat? It is possible that this is not strictly a lack of discipline issue and sometimes is a matter of being outplayed by equal or better athletes. This is a game-- not rocket science. There is no perfect formula for success-- only theories, practice, and then application. We cannot control the defensive alterations, only contingency plan for them.

I never saw a tucked shirt make a tackle or touchdown. But I understand your point about discipline. On the other hand, it is far easier to complain about this aspect of USFs performance than to look at the other real performance problems I mentioned above. Penalties can happen to the best of teams (try watching any game and not see a penalty). Lose a game and act like a whiny fan-- I get it bulls96go.

I'd put down who I am rooting for if 1) it made a difference in the outcome 2) anyone really gave a crap 3) I really gave a crap Like some have said-- we need USF to win. The other teams makeup can change at any moment via injuries, upsets, and other intangibles. I'd like to see any team in the Big East do well this year as long as it is not at USF's expense. Determining that formula is a little more complicated than necessary to watch Thursdays game. If USM somehow loses to Houston (a longshot at home), I will be amazed. Houston has a good QB but a suspect defense. USM seemed to have a solid team all around-- very few weaknesses that we could exploit. and I will agree that UL has all the tools to make a run. Some of those tools were present last year and somehow we still beat them. So anything is possible.

Some penalties just happen in the heat of battle-- others are avoidable. Taking your helmet off is a well known no-no-- that one is pure coaching and a maturity issue. The substitution errors are on the coaches more or less. These are the type that are frustrating. The holding penalties can be called just about any play but usually (provided the refs are unbiased) it has to be something pretty blatant to draw a flag. Some of the penalties have little or no impact. Like the delay of game type when you are trying to give your punter room-- these type would be piled on wrongly if you wanted to make someone run for them. Others like offsides late in the game when you are up a couple of touchdowns-- those don't seem all that infuriating. It has been a while since we had the luxury of a big lead though. I don't know what upsets me more-- a bad penalty at the wrong time (roughing the kicker against USC) or getting picked off 4 times. In either case, they are mistakes and young teams are prone to them. That doesn't exclude the offensive line from getting called for holding or offsides on occassion-- that is going to happen in a lot of games-- it just seems wrong to hold one person to blame (like what is being to Levi Newton in the Matt in the Box piece). I know these guys don't want to get the penalties-- I just don't know how anyone can coach them from doing them or falling into them. Some of those line holds, had they not been comitted might have ended up in more sacks. The bottom line seems to be we need to play better in all facets of the game-- penalties are just one more aspect. Drawing attention to just the penalties ignores missed blocks, dropped passes, fumbles, interceptions, bad call playing, etc-- there are plenty of errors going on out there, penalties just happens to be the most obvious and easiest stat to find. It hardly is our only problem though. I haven't looked at the worst offenders in terms of penalties, but I would imagine there are a couple of really good teams listed there as well. That's not an excuse--just a thought that focusing on penalties may not our biggest problem. Most reoccuring problem perhaps-- but not the one that is solely responsible for losses this year.

Typical of Rivals-- a player they rate as #9 gets lowered as soon as he commits to a "lesser" school. The rating systems are so full of this same type of discrimination towards schools like USF. I don't think they understand how this lessens the importance of their own ratings when they obviously try to mold their ratings to make the traditional powers appear to be out recruiting the other teams. That has been my pet peeve about Rivals from the get go-- they just don't give USF any credit and lower the ratings of players committing to us as soon as they see we have locked in on someone. IF-- god forbid-- the Gators sway Carlton Hill over to their camp, you watch the reaction on Rivals-- Hill will be back to his previous rating (if not higher). PS-- It is Courtney Denson, not Henson.

If our verbal commits come through and Denson tries his hand at QB, we will have no less than 5 QBs in 2005. If there was a year to use a redshirt-- it is this year provided he is ready to play. I'd much rather give the guy a shot in one of our wide open games to get him the experience and see what he can do with the ball than make him sit out while healthy and later need that redshirt if he gets hurt in the future. Just an opinion. Others have epxressed concern that the coaching staff did not properly prepare Ronnie Banks leading up to his junior year because he did not get the reps in games except during limited garbage time. Not that Gachette is the answer so much (IMO)-- but the kid deserves at least a look at the position if we have a decent opportunity. Both RB and PJ are one play away from not being available so the argument about the 3rd stringer that TCU has had to go to is valid.

I think you may be giving chit to the wrong party. USF is not at the controls on the replays-- that would be someone at Brighthouse in charge of that. Last I checked USF is not directly involved in any replays except the ones they used to do on WUSF. But it does kind of blow when these little blips happen. Dont' feel slighted though--- they probably happen to all the other schools at times as well-- we just aren't watching those replays anywhere near as closely.

I would not mind seeing Gachette get some playing time if we have the chance to let him get some experience. Not so much because he is the next great QB-- he could be, ya never know--- nope--- simply because if the verbals come in plus Denson stays with QB-- he will be one of 5 or 6 players vying for QB. Imagine that this kid can play like Vick. Can you imagine the controversy if he played at the end of the Army game and went wild? The fans would be sold pretty easy. If Lou G goes in and lays an egg, no doubt these same folks will ruthlessly tear him a new #*$%#%!@ and just say-- "tough crap" about him only being a TRUE FRESHMAN the next time he played and didn't deliver. This is their nature-- they cannot see the future-- it doesn't exist. Only the here and now. They do not embrace the vision that Leavitt has for the program and are unwilling to wait one second longer than they have to see things change until we win every game-- even if those actions hurt us in the long run. That's been my take on fans who call for the axe to fall on the younger players who have barely started developing into the palyers they can be with a bit of patience. But I am for putting Louis Gachette in there if possible against-- not start, just fill in-- so he at least can say he played a real game this season and we can all know if HE has any promise. Once the rest show up-- he may never see the field at all for USF-- like Kraky.

So I take it that Gipson is officially back on defense full time then? That move (despite the interference penalty) makes sense as BG seemed to be having trouble catching. The apparent loss of Johnny Jones at USC may have made it a necessity to fill some holes in the defensive backfield (not that he is a safety-- that's where Danny Verpaele is playing). We seem to be having trouble getting pressure on the QB as well. USM had a huge OL (most are huge these days)-- so I'm starting to wonder if we are little undersized on the D-line at this point-- the speed factor isn't producing the pressure we've seen before. Oh well-- it's still early in the season. 2-2 is not a bad start all things considered and bowl chances may still be possible if we can post a 4-2 record against the rest of the schedule or get past Pitt. At this point-- I would take 7-4 in a heartbeat. 6-5 seems more like what we are looking at though unless we can get this offense working consistently.

Then you are in luck as there are nearly 24,000 one line posts that "keep it real" so you can feel like USF sucks. I lump you into the same group-- almost all of your posts include some sort of whining or problem you have with how things are going. Have fun living under a freaking rain cloud the rest of your life. If you didn't find the USM game at the very least ENTERTAINING, then you must not like watching football very much.

Fujita got hurt and he played the rest of the game. He had a nice tackle on Jamal Lewis at the goal line but Lewis extended the ball over the line. He also played pretty well in nickle coverage. Not a great game but good enough-- Chiefs really needed that win, just like the BUcs still do.

If you haven't figured out that smazza will blame anyone he can anytime USF loses in anything, you just haven't been paying attention. The worst part of losing is having to read his flurry of doomsday threads when we lose. Take that any way you want Steve but you know it is true. You seem to enjoy a loss more so than a win since it gives you the ammo to fire away at anyone you want to that is associated with USF. Your glass is perpetually half-empty when it comes to USF IMO. Think about it this way-- we were something like an 8.5 point underdogs in the game. We beat that spread-- a moral victory perhaps-- but it does show that our team at the least showed up to make it close. We had lots of opportunities to win. But if you choose to look at everything as being doom and gloom-- so be it. Had we won the game-- do you think anyone would have been so down on the team? Hell no. The last time we hosted USM, we made just as many mistakes if not more. But we pulled that one out barely and suddenly everyone talks about what a great win it was. There is a fine line to doing what is acceptable to some "fans". EDIT -- Steve Mazza-- do not take this as a personal attack. I am also referring to other fans who suddenly show up any time the tide turns against USF. You are by no means alone in this task and some posters simply love to talk about the negatives of our program. Those same people are much less likely to talk about what is going right. I can only imagine how many of the posters who love to use the old "Shankiago" term are just dying to throw that one out this year when he finally misses a kick that is important. So far, he has done well except for some fairly long FG attempts (perfect on extra points I believe). But hopefully you understand what I am referring to -- there are certain players, coaches, etc that certain posters can't wait to ***** about when the opportunity arises. Last week-- Julmiste had a great game for the most part and was instrumental to that victory. He wasn't perfect by any means but without a loss to provide the proper back story to why "so and so sucks"-- that post doesn't get made. The penalty issue seems immune to this however and has been a fan favorite when it comes to beating down the Bulls (and perhaps rightfully so as we have to get that under control-- somehow). Anyway-- I appreciate it when you don't just throw out a comment like-- "where is the talent" without adding some sort of commentary to back it up. When I think about the talent-- I think about the progress SJ Green has made this year-- he has done great compared to last year. Others have also had their moments and I find more people willing to talk about what is wrong with this program and ignore those things that are going right. Short of the handful of holding penalties (or what was called a penalty) on the offensive line-- they have done the job this year. They can't pass the ball though-- they can only give protection to our QB. As a team sport-- any number of items can derail a team. Our problem isn't always a consistent one that can be pointed to (some might argue the QB is the only problem) and when the offense is clicking-- their are no visible problems to be found. But one weak link on any given play can cause a breakdown. That is a performance issue no doubt and something we need to get better at-- something that may only get better via experience/time. So the talent can be there-- but without the experience, it can be nullified. Lastly-- comparing USF with USC is beyond ridiculous. We do not get the talent level they have-- they are the best or one of the best teams in the country. When someone says we have great talent-- they are not saying we have Miami talent-- but we have CUSA/Big East level talent. That isn't the greatest or even equivalent to SEC talent. But the trend is upward and as we grow, so does our recruiting and talent level. The key is having the patience to understand that every game is just another step on our path to getting to the top of the food chain. The leaps we took early on were far easier to achieve than the ones as we get close to the top level. It is the law of diminishing returns in full effect. We truly are in a baby steps type of scenario IMO. There will be plenty of disappointment along the way peppered with times of joy. If it were easy to do, wouldn't all the other schools be able to do it, afterall?

smazza's passion? It is obvious to me that smazza enjoys it when the Bulls lose because then he can make all these hateful comments. I did not see many comments from him after the win against TCU. Seems like when we win-- if it is not some great effort or complete drubbing-- out come the smazza posts about who should be fired, or where is the talent, why didn't we win by XX numebr of points, or where is this, that and the other. that is just my observation from the past 4 years-- and I'm sure I am not alone.

Yeah-- I saw that. Did you happen to notice we were on OFFENSE at the time? Get a clue and only try doing a goofy wave when we are on defense. The wave SUCKS! And our BAND still hasn't learned to NOT play music when we are on the goal line.

No team is perfect and we certainly didn't take advantage of the numerous opportunities this game presented to us. At the same time, fans need to have a little more understanding when it comes to giving up on a team. Yes-- we played poorly all things considered. But we also did some things the right way and had a chance to pull out a win even after they went up by two TDs. Things just didn't work out for us. If fans want to claim that the Bulls suck or that they are underperforming or not meeting your expectations-- I guess that is your right to have that opinion. What I saw was simply a case of bad timing-- costly penalties, missed passing attempts, fumbles, and some so-so play calling in goal line situations. I don't know if we can point the finger at anyone in particular. PJ will no doubt get the brunt of the blame in the passing dept but overall-- everyone on the team had a rough night and that can happen anytime you pay a quality team. If you don't think Southern Miss is a quality team-- you don't understand football IMO. Could we/should we have beaten them? Of course we could have given all those excellent opportunities. BUT-- they can easily say the same thing because they did not play a flawless games themselves (i.e. the punt snapped over the punters head etc). Bottom line is that in any game-- any number of things can go right or wrong. Great teams plow through those adversities or limit how many they face in the first place. USF is not a great team at this point and if you are objective about it-- you realize just how many young guys we have playing for us right now. Many lack the experience to avoid the dumb penalties or mental gaps that while they don't happen in bunches-- add up for the team as a whole. As for BB2000's assertion that USF can beat anyone left on our schedule-- that is true in some respects. To beat UL at this point though would take an almost perfect game by our team. The others are equally tough games and we better not go into games against ECU or Army thinking just showing up is enough. ALL wins will have to be earned.

I really wish the fans on this board would mellow out a little when it comes to stuff like this. We seem to take this stuff so personally. The fact is simple-- he shouldn't have made a commit so early to anyone, let alone the Bulls. He has a lot of playing and growing to do still. Some of the comments may seem like he has an attitude problem. But let's be realistic-- this kid could see some offers from the Big 3 and should consider them if he does. He also has offers from out of state teams already as well. I was surprised to see a Junior commit to anyone-- that is rare. But at the same time-- I'm glad he gave this matter some thought and decided to make the decision later. If he becomes a Bull-- great. If he doesn't, I wish him well in his career. That's the type of approach we fnas should have when it comes to recruiting. Hating on some kid because he changed his mind just makes us look emotionally unstable. We are still in the mix and if CJL and company want this kid-- let's let them deal with the situation and stop belittling someone who I can assume very few if any of us have ever even met personally.

What sucks for teams like USF and USM is that when you beat a team like Nebraska (or any other big name school)-- the media considers it a fluke, an aberration, something wrong with the big name team and NOT something the little squad did. What gets talked about after a win like this (as we saw when we beat Pitt) are the excuses as to why powerful Nebraska could lose to such a nobody team. That sucks and it is exactly this attitude that makes it nearly impossible for a team not in the BCS to ever make any noise for a national championship attempt or any of the other major awards. I thought the win of Nebraska was impressive and worthy of respect. USM definitely has my respect going into this game and we will really need to bring it if we want to come out with a victory. And where the hell is ET anyway?

I agree with Biens assessment for several reasons. The spread was very effective under the proper conditions/situations. Those being a smallish OL, a QB with wheels and a good arm, and a stable of RBs. It did its job and got us plenty of wins while all those elements were true. Now we have an experienced and larger line who can run block as well as pass block. Let's use this and stop taking silly chances on 3rd and 2-- get the first down! And keep running until they stop you cold on the run. As for anyopne who feels like getting Gachette in there--- well-- the one thing that the Tenn QBs have on Gachette (beyond perceived talent) is that they came to school early and learned the new system very quickly. Our scheme is overly complicated but easy to defend (as Bien shows in his examples). Gachette may be able to run the old spread, but I would question putting him in toa hostile environment like USC. It would have made a lot of sense to let him get some reps against TTU though. Let's face facts-- Gachette needs to start playing some this year. With all the stud QBs (Denson, Groethe, and Hill) already slated to be here (and who knows who else might jump in)-- wasting a redshirt this season seems fairly illogical to me. Even if you don't have him play QB-- you could mix stuff up by flanking him and opening a new pass option. Yes-- gimmicky but what the hell. The guy seems like a fine athlete so let him try to help out. Is it the best answer to the PJ/RB debate? Not at all-- one of them will have to step up and the coaching staff will need to retool our offense if we are going to get better production. The phrase "put in your work and you'll see the production on the field" doesn't apply when you put the wrong people in the wrong situations. This isn't simply a performance issue-- it is a general offensive scheme that has failed the past two seasons. Had we simply run the ball every down last Saturday, who knows how we would do. I know the SC defense would have been on the field longer and ours off. That alone should be a good reason. We very easily could have burned clock like crazy that game but kept trying to pass. The turnovers that resulted killed us and the TOP was also killing our D. Like I said after the spring game-- we need a two back set. The comments about huddling up-- hell yes-- why not. The defense is not concerned with getting their team in to play anymore. The way we lollygag with the no huddle VERY CONSISTENTLY never catches any defense off-guard. Simple fact-- we call the play in from the sideline-- line up--- look at the defense-- adjust somewhat-- then see the defense doing exactly the same thing-- playing the second adjustment. We are an easy team to read. That said-- there is no reason to throw in the towel just yet. The game was a real downer--- but like any game, whether the score is 34-3 or 7-6, an L is an L. DId anyone expect us to win this game--- I mean seriously after seeing our performance last week? I sure didn't and USC's game versus Georgia was a huge indicator that they have a solid team. So don't let this one payday game (and that's what it really was-- sad but true) get you down. We have plenty of time to improve this season. We just have to hope the coaches start being more realistic about what will work on offense (and in turn help out our defense). Lots of people used to ***** about the Bucs crappy offensive output these past few years-- with the exception of the Super Bowl year. But the Bucs offense did one thing right quite often-- they took few chances, they turned over the ball infrequently, and they ran the ball and worked the clock well, despite not scoring much.