gobulls83

No way USF could get him even if Heath were fired.

What did they mean, sell the naming rights? Something along the lines of what they have in England - the Barclays Premier League? I've not heard that suggestion before, but if it was something that could even come at all close to closing the gap in TV money, that is brilliant. Would all depend on how much a company would be willing to pay - obviously just like TV deals, it's something that would come down to a question of the league's prestige. After such a disappointing TV deal and decimation of a once semi-proud conference, it could be an opportunity to be innovative and ahead of the curve for once and gain a leg up on the league's new competition in the lower tiers of college football. I'm surprised it hasn't been done already by one of the bigger leagues, frankly.

All the players for the next incoming basketball recruiting class have already been signed, right? So there's no worries there.

USF is not going to "bring in top-shelf recruits" in any meaningful number if it is not one of the schools with a realistic chance at a championship. USF is not going to have "enough money" to do anything if the television contract is for games that have no bearing on the title race. What you are saying makes no sense. How many Sun Belt or Conference USA teams in the past decade have had all this financial success you describe? The answer is zero, and why? Because fans and players do not want to watch or play in meaningless games, which is exactly what they are once you acknowledge that they have no chance at being considered champions. On what basis is it realistic to expect all this if USF has no access to meaningful postseason accolades, considering the school struggled to draw fans, recruits, etc., when it DID have meaningful access? You are right that money without title game access would be fine, the problem is, that's actually not possible. Or at least, there is zero evidence to suggest it is possible, and plenty of evidence to suggest that it is not. The only way what you're saying is plausible is if USF's long-term ambitions are to be competing with the Tulanes and Tulsas of the world permanently, and ... that's gross. Gross and stupid.

It's crap now but when we were part of that big boy group it was fair...no wait it wasn't. It's amazing how much differently our fan base views things now that we aren't gifted an opportunity to play on the highest stage every year. The BCS system that is now going away is/was imbalanced but still infinitely more equitable than the set up that the powers of college football are trying to broker.

You're just now noticing that this whole conversation is based on nothing at all? It has been particularly worthless discussion since the thread was brought back from the dead a few days ago, all over a sourceless, baseless blog post by someone going by the name "tuxedo yoda." Nothing that has been offered since that post has had any relevance to anything at all ever.

This whole thread is full of stuff that makes no sense to me, so I don't know if this is serious (and I *really* can't tell if the first person who responded to your question was serious or making some joke that made no sense/flew over my head). But if it is serious: Lynch is a defensive end from Cape Coral who transferred to USF from Notre Dame before last season, sat out 2012 and now is the source of some optimism among USF fans.

Blackwell was the QB in the Bowling Green game, which was coached by Urban Meyer. I wasn't taking anything away from Blackwell, who was awesome. Just clarifying a couple of milestones in USF's history.

Pitt was not ranked in 2001 when USF beat them. USF's first win over a team ranked in either poll was the Dec. 2002 win over Bowling Green, which was No. 25 in the coaches poll but unranked in the AP poll. The first win over a team ranked in the AP poll was the 45-14 thumping of No. 9 Louisville in 2005.

Yeah, just like that school in Orlando that started out in the late 1970s and yet fell behind 1997-born USF in the college football totem poll. (That means you are wrong.) orlando school caught usf now that we are in the same conference They didn't catch up to USF, USF was relegated down to their level. Orlando U has caught USF the way you might catch up to someone if you sit idly in your car while they drive in reverse straight toward you.

I agree that there are lots of problems, particularly cheating, with the move to online-based classes. That's a fair discussion. I think some classes, particularly courses that involve a lot of writing and discussion, can be fine. But anything that allows students to sit together with their laptops and simply tell each other "A" and "B" for 30 minutes is just pointless. Anyway, all that aside, it's not fair to single out this one dude because he happens to be a star football player. LOTS of students do this. If this isn't really being a college student, then there are a WHOLE lot of people who aren't "college students," and many are collecting free government money to do it. It's even greater if you consider people with one class on campus once a week and the rest online, of which I know a few. It's unfair to hold him to a higher standard than any other student.

Yeah, just like that school in Orlando that started out in the late 1970s and yet fell behind 1997-born USF in the college football totem poll. (That means you are wrong.)

That batting average analogy is up there on the very short list for most ridiculous things you've ever posted on this board. Derek Jeter has a lot more control over his own batting average than a college basketball coach does his team's winning percentage. USF had a history of losing when Heath came on board. He started in the hole. This is WAY more of a problem for a college basketball (or football) team to have than for a pro team, because of the nature of recruiting and how revenue is generated in college sports. Derek Jeter doesn't start every at-bat with one or two strikes against him already, and that's more akin to what Heath took on here. Jamie Dixon is a fine coach, but he didn't start in this six-foot hole that Heath did when he took his current job. Dixon way back in 2003 took over a team that had gone to back-to-back Sweet Sixteens and won consecutive Big East titles. Jay Wright took over a crap team and turned them around almost immediately - by which I mean they went to the NIT his first season, went dancing the next year, then he got caught up in a scandal that led to almost half his team being suspended. Just like a big-time program I guess. Anyway, the team he took over still wasn't the perennial basement dweller that USF was when Heath came on board.

I'm may not have a basketball mind, but it never seems like we run any type of organized play. Just 4 guys watching 1 guy dribble until someone has to throw up a desperation shot before the shot clock runs out. It's called Heathball. Stan has been blessed to still be coaching this long. Very, very few if any ever get the opportunity to still call the shots with a resume even remotely close to Heath's. Now it helps tremendously to work for an AD like Doug Woolard who certainly wouldn't rank up there with many in job satisfaction. I'm very worried about the future of USF basketball under the leadership of Heath and Woolard. Because we have such a great history in BB that they've run into the ground. Wow!! are you saying it is OK to win 1 game in conference and have the worst offense in the Big East because that's our history!! No, he's saying to expect the team to go from among the worst in a major conference to perennial NCAA tournament team overnight is dumb as hell. This season sucks, but it's not shocking that it happened, and it doesn't suddenly undo everything that was awesome about last season. Try and gain some perspective.

No, you just know about every little thing at USF because that's the school you pay attention to.

I still go back to my initial post, which was where was all the fan angst? You do not care that we are the laughing stock of the big east in our two major sports now? When are we allowed to have this conversation? Are you just choosing to ignore the several people who have pointed out how *incredibly* idiotic it is to lump USF football and USF basketball coaching situations together as if the two have the same history? Your question of "when are we allowed to have this conversation" has been answered repeatedly - and that answer is "not when USF is less than a whole year removed from the best season in its history by a sizable margin." You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

This is amazing.

Take it up with your girlfriend, this board is for talking about sports.

Decent?? He's got an 83 winning percentage at the mid major level .... Which will suit us just fine in a couple of years. LOL at saying KSU is mid-major and we're not. We are mid-major,like it or not. Mid-major is a conference description. Kent State is not in a major conference, USF is (for now).

1) Don't know 2) Don't know 3) Aaron Rodgers

Well he led USF to their best season ever, has what I assume is the team's most exciting recruiting class ever coming next season, and in general has brought the team back from the dead. So whatever label you want to put on him, there is no reason to believe any other coach USF could land would do any better. Heath's tenure has been the best anyone could have asked for at the time he was hired. Kentucky is not the standard when judging USF basketball - that would be the decade of mediocrity that preceded two postseason births in three years. And predicting that Heath isn't going to get fired this year is as bold as predicting the sun is going to rise in the east tomorrow morning. He's not going to get fired because there are actually zero legitimate reasons for the school to fire him, or even consider it as an option. And this team would have to be a lot worse than it is right now for firing Heath to even be an option next season. Heath has earned a great deal of job security, even though he wasn't won six straight national titles.

So you're saying that last year's team had tons more talent than the one we'll have next year if we don't get Henry .... Funny, I don't really ever recall you raving that much about the talent back then. Facepalm is probably your safest response because you have no other logical one. I have already said what was needed this tread and the ones in the past. The BS replies you continue to come up with are old, predictable, and meaningless to me. The twisting of words and off topic stuff...come on man you rightfully earned that facepalm. I didn't twist anything. It's called logical progression, something you obviously don't have a clue about since you keep making the same stupid assertions. You are implying that next years team, without Henry, won't be as talented as last years. Do you really believe that? It won't be as experienced, but not as talented? And next years without Henry will only be marginally more talented than this years?? Your obsessive hate for Stan makes you throw **** out there without really thinking it through. Stick to digging up articles on basketball recruiting, which you're really good at, and leave the assessing of Stan and USF basketball to those familiar with the situation. I don't think it's any obsessive hate with Heath as much as it is Vega wanting to think he knows more about the game or sport than he actually does. Heath is obviously doing a very good job here - there is no other credible way to interpret his time at USF, given the history he inherited. But for Vega to continue clinging to his deeply held but ultimately false belief that he actually knows something about the sport that others don't, he has to take the contrary position just so he has the potential to say "I told you so." That's how it seems to me, anyway.

Is this a joke? Parody? Had you seen a USF basketball game before 12 months ago? You can't see the difference between Holtz taking over a competitive team and running it into the ground, and Heath taking over a team that was already in the ground and producing the best season (and two of the four or five best seasons) in the team's whole history? The trend for Holtz's whole tenure was downward - there were big moments, especially the Notre Dame win, that for short spurts could trick you into thinking there was progress, but overall the team got worse throughout his tenure. With Heath it is the exact opposite - the team has gotten better throughout his tenure, even if there are times when they aren't playing well. You don't go overnight from basement to consistent postseason team in any conference, let alone the Big East before all the good teams leave. For Heath to be fired, it will take: 1) A lot more than one bad season - enough to change the overall trajectory of the team from improving to getting worse 2) Some credible reason to believe there is a better option out there

I don't follow recruiting much, so sorry if I'm stating the obvious, but this guy and Derrick Calloway have pretty impressive lists of offers if the list on Rivals is correct. Oklahoma, USC, Ohio St., Florida, and other powers were among the offers for one or both of them. That is way more exciting to see than four stars next to their name. Hopefully they can live up to that, I'm excited to see them in action.

Well of course you don't. If you were able to see it coming, it wouldn't be a surprise.