BaltoBull

Wow. This is exactly what I wanted to see. I know most of you hate this, but I think this is the first step of the splitting of the "P5" from everyone else. Good riddance. Good riddance? So u want to permanently on the wrong side of the divide? Sorry, I don't. I don't think it is a game we can win. I am of the opinion that perception will always be against us. Sure, we would be making more $$$ as part of a "P5" conference (I still wish the ACC would have blown-up), but I believe USF will still always be behind the 8-ball. A selection committee choosing USF over a 'brand' school that the networks will want to bring in interest and ratings? Come on. Even if we went in guns blazing and winning games, I don't believe we will be given a fair shake. Let's assume we make it to the B12. When will our coaches, facilities or tradition rival Texas, Oklahoma, OK State, et al.? We might convince a few recruits to stay at home - most of them will go to the "legacy" schools, don't you think? We were supposed to have the advantage keeping recruits at home in the Big East. How many players did we lose to Rutgers, West Virginia and Louisville? What's going to happen when a kid is approached by the Longhorns or the Sooners? As unfair and Texas and Oklahoma-centric as the B12 - realistically, the only "P5" conference we could land in is, do you see USF being a serious contender? I understand is about prestige and wearing green and gold t-shirts around the 'cool kids'. I have just come to think of all of this expansion nonsense differently. I too was ready to give up on USF, even posting at one point if we weren't included in realignment, I would be unable to continue following the Bulls. I remember several of the responses saying something to the effect, "Bulls fan no matter what" and "Don't let the door hit you...". It's ironic how the tables have turned.

Wow. This is exactly what I wanted to see. I know most of you hate this, but I think this is the first step of the splitting of the "P5" from everyone else. Good riddance. This is the first step to splitting the P5 from the rest?! Losing a match up between the #6-9 team in a power conference against the AAC champ (a game the P5 team definitely was not looking forward to) is not going to be a factor. I know there's a group that would just rather throw in the towel and play in what is now 1AA and be happy with that, but you'll see fans disappear en mass. I'm not sure how long I'll hold out and go to games if we're done with the big leagues for good. Sure I'll still watch games on the tube when I can, but it just wont matter anymore. Yeah, I think so. If you see the AAC, MWC, C-USA and others start to schedule more bowls with one another because 'marquee' games only want "P5" teams - I think eventually the haves will separate from the have nots. I still think the Gang of Five should be more proactive and start coming up with something new. The ratings and the cash won't be there of course, but at least we won't be the "P5's" b****. If our champion (or best available) plays the champ (or best available) of the MWC, who is #2 and #3 going to play? In what bowl? The BCS slot will not be up for grabs forever. Eventually, the networks will demand a 'brand' team in every bowl game to maximize their return of investment. I believe the split is coming, in one form or another and I think it will happen sooner, rather than later. Then again, I could be wrong.

Wow. This is exactly what I wanted to see. I know most of you hate this, but I think this is the first step of the splitting of the "P5" from everyone else. Good riddance.

I'd rather him say, "screw the whole deal, it's biased and unfair anyways". Let's get the MWC on the phone and come-up with a new, nationwide league with a regional semi-final and championship game. I know none of you like this idea though.

Some of us paid up early. Does that count? hmmmm I think that may squeak by Just saying that lots of ppl like to talk a big game and complain about our athletics on here, but few give. Even $100 is better than nothing and helps. For the record Hem, I shared my name and shared EXACTLY where I am at previously. You failed to retort with any sort of significance - neither name or contributions. Care to now, "big game" man?

Not that any of this will ever come to pass in my opinion, but Boise to B12 would be very interesting. It could get the MWC out of the deal that favors the Broncos and it might open the gates for that conference to expand big time to fix the mistake they made, or may not have made before. As long as we're going hog-wild with speculation, Boise bolting could finally bring about Aresco's vision for a nationwide conference. But like Hem said, "Who knows?".

Not instigating anything with you, honest - But, what do you think this means? Lose who to what, exactly? If say, Cincy, SMU, USF and Houston bolt, where do they go? Do they start another conference? What guarantees do they have that what they start will be better than what they have now? Who else is there to align yourself with that offers value? It's not like if they leave the AAC, they will be snapped up by 'P5' conferences, right? The only option I see is trying to join the MWC if they are taking on teams, right? I'm having a hard time understanding what these posts mean. Please explain.

We cannot create too many bowls - I simply don't think we have that luxury. Really, 2-3 bowl for this conference, tops. No one will travel to any bowl lower than that - AAC #4 vs. Sunbelt? Don't bother. There is no exposure earned from that game and we will need the savings. I think we need something 'big' with the MWC. It's looking like our bowls are going to be line-ups with C-USA and MAC unless am AAC team scores an at-large bid.

I have thought for a while, and I still say we need to be working on relationships with the MWC. I'm fine with the AAC developing a bowl as long as it is with them. I would rather our champion play their #2 and vice versa with the highest ranked getting the 'mythical' bowl bid. I don't think more than 3-4 AAC teams should go bowling anyways. The payouts for any more games than that won't be great, be lost in the shuffle and the schools will more than likely lose money on the venture anyways. We can do things different, so why don't we? Our number one playing like, the SEC's #6 or something feels cheap. No one will care and if somehow an AAC team did win, it will be because the SEC (or other 'P5' team) just couldn't bring themselves to show up to the game. It's a can't win. I don't buy the. "Oh, it's our chance to make a statement" argument. No one will have our back and the media will discredit the win once the whistle is blown.

I would love to see these "multiple funds towards an OCS". I realize it's in the long term plans but every day you wait to actually make it official is a day wasted for donations. Like I said before, if it was announced when we first joined the BE we would have a stadium by now. It does no good to announce it 5 years from now and say you have to wait another 5 years for donations to reach an amount that allows breaking of ground. That's 10 years wasted waiting instead of what could be only 5.... Perhaps if you had ever been honestly interested, you would have your money where your mouth is by now, though it is never too late. If you would love to hear about the opportunities for donating to the future OCS, you've only got to pick up the phone. Questioning the information I offered on a fan message board doesn't prove anything other than your misplaced negativity. True, the university could potentially have been marketing a fundraising campaign for an OCS. But if you were a USF Athletics employee, and at the moment I am glad you are not, then you would have to consider things such as the many other priorities for facilities and budget, the message it would send to TSA and the Ray Jay, and the few larger USF donors available to squeeze for priorities before exhausting their generosity. The OCS has been seriously discussed, and our leadership has determined that the deal with the Ray Jay is goon enough for now that more pressing matters require donor campaigns for the time being. However, if you would like to donate specifically for the future OCS, Athletics will be happy to help arrange it for you. I do donate already but since I'm still a student it's rather hard to throw any major money at the school outside of tuition. Worried about the message we would send to TSA? An OCS will drive support from donors like a wild fire only to improve everything about our school. We are under contract through the 2016 season at Ray Jay. So if funding began this year you have 4 years to acquire funds, pay for the 2017 season at Ray Jay while an OCS is being built and it opens in 2018 exactly 5 years from this season. Considering the importance an OCS plays into expansion, I think it's foolish to not announce anything. We can't exactly take our football and other programs where we want at our current pay grade with the AAC. I'd hate to see what it's like in 10 years if we don't jump to a better conference. If nothing is done in the next 10 years it might be too late, hell even in the next 2 years it might be. Not moving forward with a public announcement, ideas and ACTUAL large scale driven funding are only hurting us in the long run. Ah, sometimes I forget this board is not confined to crusty old alumni, which I am on my way to becoming in my start to my 4th decade. Of course, as a student, it is difficult for you to donate. However, consider joining the Student Bulls Club, if you haven't already. You will be considered a donor and start adding consecutive years of donating. But, now that I see your suggested 5-year plan, I suspect that debating with you about donations and an OCS (which has been beaten to death for years on this board) as it relates to getting left behind in realignment (the topic of the thread) will not be a good use of board space. USF has received nearly $600 million since 2006 for Unstoppable and $40 million of that towards athletics. That's $40 million raised in 6 years for scholarships, operating support, and the new Athletics District. I would wager we could receive close to $75-$100 million in a similar or slightly less time frame if an OCS was announced and that wouldn't even included naming rights money. Indeed, however, go ahead and parse out the money from big-dollar donors. If you removed the Mumas and the Morsanis alone, I gather that $40 million is nearly cut in half. Frank Morsani has given at least $11 million to USF Athletics within that time (over $20 million to USF, if not more) and the Mumas have given the better part of $10 million to Athletics alone, though that is all based on memory and I'm sure you could find concrete figures with a Google search. There are also about 40 million-dollar-plus donors to that campaign who aren't going to be repeating such donations annually. So, you'd be pretty hard pressed to come up with even $20 million over 8 years without those folks (and fine, perhaps new ones would step up, but hard to count on). In addition, I think you'll find considerable resistance among our alumni, our fan base, and the leadership of the university if you propose a $75-100 million stadium, which will barely afford you the tin can that UCF has. No, we'll need somewhere in the range of $200 million+ considering the plans for preparing a location of a new stadium in addition to the cost of building alone. The OCS is in the 20-year-plus plans for the university. Sounds about right.

Thanks for 'keeping it real' Hem. No getting anything by you. And our dance continues...

Hi Hem. I see what you did there with those quotes. You and I still disagree on the idea of USF being competitive in a Power 5 conference. I just don't see it. Again, when given the chance to show what "Florida Talent" could do in the Big East, we were less than spectacular. As far as being in a "Big Boy" conference, what "really" matters? You do realize the 'conferences' are just vehicles to promote and legitimize the most popular brands, don't you? In a 'real' conference, this school will contend for a national title? When? You honestly don't see the gaps that exist? Even if we were pulling in B12 money, in the grand scheme of things, we are VERY FAR BEHIND. We have hardly any name recognition, no history, no super donors, etc. Why are you so eager for USF to become the poor stepchild of a 'Power' conference? I suggest to you when re-alignment happened, we didn't make the cut for a reason. I'm not happy about it, but I recognize it for what it is. I am most jealous of Louisville. They were in a similar situation than us, but apparently did everything right where we did everything wrong. Furthermore, let me go on record stating, if we were in a "Power" conference, I do not believe we will ever be in serious contention for a national title.That game is not for us to play in. Give me a break. You have a committee choosing which schools will be anointed and you believe no matter how good USF's record is they would be chosen over an Alabama, Texas, Florida or other legacy school with a bigger 'brand'? We were looked upon poorly when admitted to the BE in the first place. What do you think the perception of us will be when we (if we ever do) get an invite to the "Power 5"? Remember - perception is everything.

It is a blast. I have purchased many a great Bull related item at this event. If you haven't been, you should go at least once!

Right on! I've always wanted to got to Memphis!

Exactly. Even if we were at their level, we still wouldn't be at 'their' level - we'd be making what they make, but they would still have far more in merchandise and other revenue as well as booster donations. Ask Iowa what it's like trying to be competitive with Texas within the B12. I just want to play schools we can be competitive with and have some fun.

And in the end, that and the netwworks being happy are the only things that truly matter. We're close to having a 1 (Big 5), a 1A, a 1AA...... And that might be the best thing that will come of this.

Sorry to add this late, I can't edit at this point. I did find this thread, from the WVA Scout board as well - started yesterday: http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=159&f=4582&t=11509037&p=1 Man, these WVA guys are into expansion WAY more than we are it seems. I'm still taking all of this with a grain of salt though.

I've been looking around - does anyone have any link that features anything more substantial than what this dude, Tuxedo Yoda is saying or is this simply conjecture? Nothing on the main Rivals board. Nothing on CSNBBS. Nothing on Texas' board, Orangebloods. Some mention of things, but nothing specific here, on the WVA Rivals board: http://westvirginia.rivals.com/forum.asp?fid=2824

Maybe because at last, realignment is over for the foreseeable future and there is nothing left to ruminate or work ourselves into a frenzy about moving to a P5 conference any time soon.

I guess I just have a different opinion than you. Part of me does not measure success simply by who I am associated with. Yeah, it would be nice to sit at the same table as Texas and Oklahoma, but if they disparage you the whole time and you can't afford your part of the check, how successful are you? Really, the money and the notoriety would be great, but I think the AAC playing like-minded and similar institutions is where we should be. I don't think it's striving for mediocrity, for right now and most likely the foreseeable future, it's being a realist. And, if we were "more than competitive", explain to me how we never sniffed a Big East Conference title. No, we never had our asses handed to us regularly. We were competitive at the beginning of the season, never by the end. To me, competitive means you win the games you should and a few games you shouldn't. We struggled to win the games we should have sometimes. I watched Boise "reach for the stars" and I can't see what it got them. Some of you can convince yourself they are not in a different conference because of their location. I'm not so sure that's the case. Cincy, a legacy 100+ year old program, also 'reached for the stars', posted better records than us and played in two BCS bowls in the last five years - where are they now? In the "A group" of the AAC, slightly ahead of us. I guess I look at this realignment thing differently than some of you. You don't have to agree with me. No one has to agree with me, but this is how I feel.

Sure, our records may reflect that, but in the eyes of the media, did we get better? In the eyes of the BE, did we get better? Did ESPN say USF got better? No. Anytime we gained any momentum at all, we laid an egg in front of a national audience and went right back to where we started. The bowl appearances - eh. Many posters on this board are of the opinion winning is all that matters. Not winning a conference championship or BCS bowl when we had the opportunity and were running with the "big boys" suggests to me that no, we did not get any better - not with all the supposed "advantages" our program had. And until we do something - anything, like winning any conference we are in (CUSA, BE, AAC), I do not understand the enthusiasm expressed by some that if we keep increasing the amount of competition, we will improve. To me, history does not suggest that. If we couldn't compete annually with Louisville, West Virginia and Rutgers, what suggests that we will compete with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU on a regular basis? As I've said, getting paychecks from the B12 would be nice, but I am perfectly content being in the AAC. I want to see us be competitive. I, for one don't think we were competitive in the Big East. We might have scared a few teams going into the season, but every year, come midway - we fell apart. This, to me, also does not suggest "better", in my opinion. You can argue our records have improved, but as a program - Honestly, no Hem, I don't think we got better and that is one of the reasons we are in the predicament we are in. I've come to expect you to have an opinion opposite my own. Let's consider this another opportunity to agree to disagree, shall we?

Now there's a very good question... Hmmmm....let's suppose that the current conference configurations are stable for the next decade. That's ten more years of the AAC...that's ten more years of NOT being in a P(5) conference. And given the absence of hard and fast dates - that I've seen in writing, not rumored, not supposition, not a dependency on the relationship between Jupiter and Mars - that could very well be our reality. I sincerely doubt we are going anywhere anytime soon. The question posed is: are you happy with the new neighborhood? What is the alternative to being 'happy' with it? You can accept that this is our lot in life for the time being and making the best of a less than optimal situation is all we can do. The alternative, being dissatisfied, will make for an exceptionally long decade of pining and fantasizing about where we THINK USF should be. Now far be it from me to tell anyone how to spend their time (as we plod towards 200 pages), but realizing there's nothing USF can do to influence the time table for our potential inclusion, I am resolved to, for lack of a better term, 'be happy' with where we are. Maybe happy is the wrong word...how 'bout, 'accommodating'? Accepting? Tolerant? Point being...I'd rather be elsewhere, but I don't see that on the horizon and a little time in the minors might just do us some good, for when the phone does ring. Great post - +1!

I agree +1 Which is why I am perfectly content in the AAC. It's only a matter of time before the big boys break away and we form an alliance with the MWC or something. I really do want our champion and their champion playing for 'something'. Once everyone else realizes we are just fodder for the 'established' programs with 'brand name' recognition and we are not part of what really, is the "Elite 16" or so in college football, things will be a hell of a lot easier. The B12 would be nice, a truncated ACC would have been better but, for all intents and purposes, we are where we need to be. Completely wrong. Was TCU where they needed to be? If we get to a better conference and we will we will eventually get better. That's the same thing we said when we went from CUSA to the Big East. I submit to you we never got better. For all the hype, the supposed potential and the advantage of location, can you say we got better? If USF could not perform in the Big East when given the chance, what makes you think we are going to compete with Texas, Oklahoma and West Virginia (again)? I don't buy it. I truly believe if we were in the B12, we would be a doormat. Texas and Oklahoma own that conference and I don't see USF making too much of a dent. Sure, it would be nice to get the checks, upgrade facilities and enjoy the other perks that come with being a member of a P5 conference, but I just can't see us competing in the B12. I think there is already too much of a gap within the conference and 'catching up' is not likely. I could be wrong.

I agree +1 Which is why I am perfectly content in the AAC. It's only a matter of time before the big boys break away and we form an alliance with the MWC or something. I really do want our champion and their champion playing for 'something'. Once everyone else realizes we are just fodder for the 'established' programs with 'brand name' recognition and we are not part of what really, is the "Elite 16" or so in college football, things will be a hell of a lot easier. The B12 would be nice, a truncated ACC would have been better but, for all intents and purposes, we are where we need to be.

Right now here is breakdown with 10 teams, ESPN and Fox pay $200 million a year to Big 12 for the 10 teams $20 mil each for Tier 1 & 2 rights. The schools control their own Tier 3 which is breaking down from approximately $5-$15 million a year for just Tier 3 TV and other parts are additional (Radio, Marketing and such) Bowl money that is for Sugar Bowl (the new extra big game) and the BCS money (new way of paying) is guaranteed to pay the Big 12 conference approximately $92 million a year (~9mil a school per year) Note: This does not count other bowl game money sharing, and NCAA tourney (Bball) sharing Thus for a school like WVU whose Tier 3 (total package tv, radio, marketing) will be signed soon for approximately $11 mil a season will get a revenue of guaranteed money of ~$40 mil a year ($20+$9+$11) and not including a few more million based on other bowl games. Now the way I understand it in order to add teams value must be added and thus more money per team must be made. Therefore with a conference game and new teams to Tier 1&2 contracts Fox (and/or ESPN) must add some money. ($25 million per year is thought) because Tier 1&2 - $25 mil Sugar bowl and BCS bowl game is still guaranteed $92 mil but divided by 12 teams meaning each team gets $7.6 mil And Tier 3 remains the same (WVU $11 mil) Therefore the new amount would be $43.6 million dollars to WVU (an extra $3.6 mil per year) Therefore Fox (and/or ESPN) would need to poney up $100 mil a year to pay the existing 10 teams $5mil ($50 mil) more each and then the 2 additional teams (USF/UCF) $50mil ($25 mil each) *** That is why I posed the question if you were Doug or Judy would you take less - say $7.5 mil for Tier 1&2 TV instead of $20 mil if Fox only offered $65 mil a year extra*** Got ya - I think I have looked at it a different way. My first question is how much more value needs to be added to get at the same level the teams are at now for Tier 1 & 2(3 is what ever each school gets and really has no impact on the calculation). At this point they are paying ~292 million and for 12 teams to maintain the 29.2 mil per team you would need ~350 million. So that means you need an extra 58 mil to get back to 29.2 mil per team Your question works under the offer assumption of 65 mil more from Fox(I assume you are including the additional revenue from a conference championship) which would add about 7 mil total or less then 500k per team which I don't think gets anyone to excited. So my answer is in part a question. How much does it take to get the Big12 conference teams interested/excited ? So just for discussion I will say 3 million per team per year. So the noobs get hit with 23 million a year less and that would leave them at 17.7 mil per year and I would say go for it. At some point revenue sharing should change but something similar to the way WV did it and doesn't have to start at 17.7 but has to be at least that by the second year. My other answer is a strong and clear no. At 7.5 mil per team you could not even be competitive. No way to keep coaches, facilities or anything else up to the level needed to compete in the Big 12. The noobs would be the laughing stock of the conference I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12. +1