SANJAY

Watched parts of the game. Looks like Memphis had success running but went away from it completely. I think being one dimensional against this UCF defense will lead to failure. 

I bet FCS playoffs get fewer viewers than the Lawn Mower bowl. I don't know the answer but segregating ourselves into the G5 will have negative impacts on the program including lessened alumnis, student and community involvement (and yes it can be worse).

2 hours ago, Triple B said:

I'd watch it. As far as TV goes, are the FCS  playoffs not televised?

Do you watch the FCS playoffs? I will flip through but have never watched those games front to back. I know TV will televise, that's why my question is what will TV pay. My guess is FCS doesn't get paid much in the grand scheme and a G5 playoff would get not much more than that.

I just completed this quiz.

On the G5 playoff, who here is going to watch an 12-1 USF team host a sunbelt team in the G5 semifinals? What's TV going to pay for that?

5 hours ago, Triple B said:

Your honesty is refreshing ....

You seem surprised. 

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

 

Neither of them addressed the fact that it would be a 10-0 UCF  vs a 10-0 USF not ...

 

I thought about it but didn't have that level of passion or commitment to the bullspen this morning.

1 hour ago, charsibb said:

We're top 25 in defensive numbers because we've lpayed 4 teams in the bottom 100 in offensive numbers...

We haven't really been tested yet on D.

Agree on the not being tested. However, what do you think last year's defense would have done with these 4 teams? My guess is around 100 which was an improvement from last year.

10 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Wrong...they went to the military bowl (and lost). 

My bad. 2015 and 2016 all blended together. 

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

If the NY6 doesn't work out, I'd hope they make an exception and send us back to B'ham, hopefully against another SEC team ..

The conference champs last year went to Boca.

9 minutes ago, flsportsfan83 said:

I had suggested before the season started that we need to lower ticket prices for Season Tix's and that they cost here more per ticket than UCF, GT, or UM. Many of you thought there was no problem. Does our lack of attendance change anyones opinion?

 

Honestly there is no reason we are not promoting and offering $10 tickets at the ticket window on game day. The fact that the cheapest tickets are $27 for a team that is lucky to draw 20k in a 65k seat stadium is ridiculous.

Is there any price at which they could sell season tickets that you would buy them?

5 minutes ago, El_Toro_86 said:

has even said if he was designing a D to stop Flowers he would take away the run and make him throw.

 

He'd be good at that. They've designed an offense to stop Flowers.

Yikes. The only WRs that have shown any explosiveness have been him and Antoine. We need him back.

1 hour ago, Apis Bull said:

We did whup Temple.  I saw it with my own eyes.

You know what I mean.  

15 is too high. However, those that just look at the score will think we whupped Temple.

13 minutes ago, GaUSFBull said:

Flowers' first pass that was caught by Alaka was an absolute shot-down duck.  Proofs to Alaka for actually making the catch. 

I believe it was tipped.

9 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

Not concerned but I would like to see a few more easy throws early to build his confidence. 

We're busy testing the DTs early. And late. And part of the middle.

4 hours ago, Orlando Bull said:

First 10 quarters of the season... QF was bottled up, not having a lot of fun... last 2 quarters, he seemed to have felt more freedom and thus started having more fun. It looked like to me that the coaches were telling him to pick a lane, get what he can get, and go down. In the second half last week, he started bouncing around and changing direction a bit to free himself up more. He's always had a knack for avoiding big hits, so, he's going to get down when it's appropriate, but, he wasn't changing direction very much until last game.

I think the last drive of the second half with Q scoring with no time left was when the joy kicked back in.

44 minutes ago, charsibb said:

If it went to a straight-up vote, they'd lose.

 

But it never would. If it for some reason did the real power schools would take their ball and break away from the balance. Look at the way the votes for full cost of attendance went. The majority could have stopped it but they didn't.

2 hours ago, Triple B said:

At the risk of getting SANJAY's dander up again, I'm thinking the lawyers would never allow what happened to Temple happen again ... especially with the longer tenured P5 potential bootees.

Lawyers doing deals are not decision makers. They can explain pros and cons and legal issues but ultimately clients make decisions. Unless in house counsel has been given authority to make decisions the lawyers are just doing what the clients (conference, teams or individuals) want to do. No dander up.

1 hour ago, Who'sYourData? said:

I didn't call out you specifically...

In that case carry on.

28 minutes ago, Who'sYourData? said:

Ha!  Have you ever tried to get lawyers to agree on even the most simple of contracts?  This doesn't happen that quickly, my friend.  Conference opponents have all sorts of contracts already in place.  A contract between two non-conference opponents with as much money as would be at stake here is no simple matter.

Yes blame the lawyers.

42 minutes ago, charsibb said:

No worries. MLB and NFL both got exemptions. NCAAF could get one too

The big teams don't want to obtain such an exemption. They've had 33 years since the Supreme Court decided that.

42 minutes ago, charsibb said:

Instead of divvying up the TV funds by conference, we should do all TV contracts through the NCAA, and get to some sort of parity.

Each team/ conference can keep all their licensing/ ticket/ concession sales, but the TV $ should be targetted at parity.

That would be an antitrust violation. 

"NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) television plan violated the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts. These antitrust laws were designed to prohibit group actions that restrained open competition and trade." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_v._Board_of_Regents_of_the_University_of_Oklahoma