CRBULL

ND already has Greg Bryant and Jamel James.

Oregon already has Thomas Tyner and Dontre Wilson.

We don't have anyone at this point. Tarean would be right up front for playing time in an offense that features a strong running game.

Got your wish. Pro Style offense here we come! Smash mouth running and play action ftmfw!

He must be confident he can recruit for it.

The article lost all credibility when he said Colorado was a big time coaching job. Really Tom ? Really ? Really ? Colorado - the most irelevant team in the Pac 10 for decades.

It's relevant when they supposedly offered Butch Jones $2.7 million a season. ($13.5 million five year deal).

There's far more potential for success at USF, but I don't see USF throwing down that kind of money. So, it's hard to argue that it's not an equivalent job.

You might be surprised. When Doug offered the considerations for the future coach to the media, one of the key things stated was that money is no object.

I just take a look at brian kelly. Look no further to see how a real coach looks. This guy is tough as nails. I bet this guy is a blast to play for because he knows when to relax but you never want to make a mistake for him. He will chew your butt out on the sideline but coach you up when neccessary. This is at Notre Dame too. You would think he would be more conservative but he is still himself. The guy calls an incredible game. There is no doubt we are lacking a coach who gets the most out of his players. On top of not getting the most out of his players their is no system in place that is designed offensively or defensively that is appealing to a kid to play in. We do not put up alot of points with designed plays. I could live with not executing plays but seeing an offense that looks like it has an identity and creativity. I can telll when cosh is mixing it up and blitzing and i can take big plays when we do that but not that generic sit back and get shredded approach we have all seen...I look at Penn st...BOY DID THEY LUCK OUT..what a coach they got. That guy is incredible. You could watch a penn st offense what used to be majority run and very boring and basic now running a very NFL patriot like offense and its fun to watch. They might not go undefeated but you know they got a good coach.

Or Snyder at K State.

Record and Scout recruiting rankings over the last eight years:

‘12 – 10-1 +

‘11 – 10-3 – #85

‘10 – 8-6 – #61

‘09 – 6-6 – #99 (Snyder Hired)

‘08 – 5-7 – #112

‘07 – 5-7 – #45

‘06 – 7-5 – #55

‘05 – 5-7 – #48

This team lacks speed and confidence. At times they have misplaced confidence, almost like they are trying convince themselves they are good.

My point is that what you see on the field is a culmination of all the time and effort put in coaching the player off the field. If he looks bad on the field, a large portion goes to how he is coached in all those hours off the field and the motivation/mentality he is given to perform on the field.

Mark Snyder just made it look better than it was.

I'm confused. Last year everyone said that Snyder was terrible.

Obviously now seeing Cosh in the same defense and Mark Snyder doing well at Texas A&M we can see who the common denominator is.

So everyone was wrong last year when they were melting down demanding that Snyder be fired? And wrong two years ago when everyone was melting down demanding that Coach Heath be fired?

I'm seeing a pattern.

The difference with Heath is where he started and what he had to work with.

Holtz is another story, as I was saying to Grouper a while back when pointing a finger at the upper classmen:

That's a pretty bold statement to make considering the upward trend in talent in those classes that make up the upper classmen on this team. Isn't it up to coaching to take potential and mold it/inspire it to fit the next level of play. For example, take elite programs that make a bad choice at coach (e.g. ND prior to Kelly and 'Bama prior to Saban). Their recruiting classes are top notch, but take a look at only the performance on the field and you will probably say the players are just not very good. In reality the potential was there all along and it's up to the coaching staff to tap it by motivating it and scheming to its strengths. In other words, you can start with top notch recruits with great potential and point to them in their junior/senior years and call them a failure if they haven’t had the right coaching.

we have talented players. we just don't put them in situations to be successful.

Talented players don't look this bad, regardless of situations we put them in. Talented receivers don't routinely drop passes. Talented running backs don't routinely fumble the football. Talented CBs don't resort to interference every time a ball is thrown their way. These aren't situations coaches are putting the team in. We have problems in the head coaching slot for sure, but don't kid yourself. Bear Bryant couldn't win C-USA with this years team!

I beg to differ. If you're saying that it's mainly the players then Holtz deserves to stay at least another year or two to continue recruiting and straightening things out. A lot of the other things being pointed out are secondary (lots of coaches make plenty of gameday mistakes if you analyze the games closely) and would not warrant removing him in and of themselves.

As I said in our past debates, if it was poor players/attitude with an average coach I would expect a 7-5, maybe 6-6 season with our schedule. That is what you see with underclassmen heavy teams or a coach coming in to right the ship. Saying anything else means you should feel Holtz warrants at least another year - if so come out and say it. A 5-7 season followed by a 3-9/4-8 season with upper classmen heavy teams points squarely to the coach.

I'm curious how many coaches have had back to back 5-7 and 3-9/4-8 2nd and 3rd seasons, and then gone on to win a conference?

2. I knew you would probably bring up caliber and I almost mentioned something about it. True they are a different caliber, but there is a range and it is dictated by your recruiting capability. Ours is in the upper third of the BCS teams and we should reflect that in our play on average, just as theirs is in the upper tenth and they should reflect that. What does that mean? It means finishing in the top of our conference on a regular basis (half of our conference does not recruit as well, and we should be competitive with the rest) and beating teams that recruit lower than the upper third of the BCS (Nevada/Ball State/Temple/Syracuse).

How are you arriving at that we're in the upper 3rd of the BC teams in recruiting capability? By my math, there are currently 69 BCS teams. Upper 3rd would be in the 20-25 range ... I don't see it.

BCS, AKA FBS, FKA Div I-A

I don't think it would take more than consistent 8-10 win seasons to get our recruiting in the top 20-25 regularly, though.

After looking up those K State records it made me curious about what Snyder is doing over there. An answer to the 'how' question when talking about Snyder being an example of motivating average players to be good and good players to be exceptional can be found in the following article - definitely worth reading the whole thing

http://sports.yahoo....m-20432109.html

It ties into the points on #3 & #4 above.

I think Holtz tries to emulate that style a bit, but unfortunately without the same results at this level.

(1)The measure of a recruiting class is how that class performs during its junior and senior years. This current class has been the biggest disappointment in USF history. Sure we have had less talented teams, but as far as where we are as a program, this recruiting class has far and away been the most underperforming. That isn't information you can pull from recruiting sites. It is not about stars, it is about performance on the field.

(2)You are comparing a completely different caliber of program. There are only a handful that fit the mold of legendary program and they will get solid recruiting classes year in and year out. For the most part they also field solid teams. It is far and few between you see loses like Michigan had to 1-AA programs. (3)Int he case of Kansas State I think it is a collection of things... they are a very good program and have been for some time. Things came together for them this year and in general their recruiting classes get underrated by more coastal focused recruiting services. Again, in general, I think it is short-sighted to judge an incoming class by the number of stars. Mostly those stars are blindly generated based on number of offers and kids that grow-up and stay in the mid-west don't often bother to take official visits to USC or Michigan.

(4)As I said in my original post, talent development falls on coaching as well. But we seem to be in the mindset that we have the talent on the field, they just aren't being put in a position to win. Maybe that is the case, but from my seats I can't see that. I saw a defense that couldn't cover in any scheme - not in zone, not in man. The blitz was more effective against UCONN only because they seemed less able to make the quick reads, but had we pressed more against say Rutgers we'd have watched them beat us in 1:1 coverage all day.

1. My point in bringing up ND and ‘Bama was that you can start with top notch recruits with great potential and point to them in their junior/senior years and call them a failure if they haven’t had the right coaching and motivation (i.e. the years prior to their current coaches where ND and ‘Bama were 6-7 wins or less).

2. I knew you would probably bring up caliber and I almost mentioned something about it. True they are a different caliber, but there is a range and it is dictated by your recruiting capability. Ours is in the upper third of the BCS teams and we should reflect that in our play on average, just as theirs is in the upper tenth and they should reflect that. What does that mean? It means finishing in the top of our conference on a regular basis (half of our conference does not recruit as well, and we should be competitive with the rest) and beating teams that recruit lower than the upper third of the BCS (Nevada/Ball State/Temple/Syracuse).

3. Kansas State has definitely not been good for some time, at least not prior to Snyder coming back. When you look closely at their record and Scout recruiting rankings over the last seven years, it makes what Snyder has done even more impressive.

‘11 – 10-3 – #85

‘10 – 8-6 – #61

‘09 – 6-6 – #99 (Snyder Hired)

‘08 – 5-7 – #112

‘07 – 5-7 – #45

‘06 – 7-5 – #55

‘05 – 5-7 – #48

I don’t think you can look at that and say it isn’t all about the coaching. This is an example of motivation making average players good and good players exceptional.

4. Again, if you looked at ND’s recent 3-9 season, would you say that those seniors and juniors were a disappointment? My point is that what you see on the field is a culmination of all the time and effort put in coaching the player off the field. If he looks bad on the field, a large portion goes to how he is coached in all those hours off the field and the motivation/mentality he is given to perform on the field.

To sum it up, even if the seniors aren’t as good as advertised it should mean a 7-5 season, not a 3-9, 4-8, 5-7 season given our recruiting base and conference. A 5-7 season should be part of bringing a program back from a rebuild, not the precursor to a worse season. When you take a team to 5-7 or below in consecutive years, there is a high probability you are going to be the problem the next guy is fixing - and it’s probably not your recruiting if you’re in the BE.

Virtually everyone wanted him. "Dainels sucks, let's see Floyd" people here you go. A kid that can't take snaps from under center to end the game. He had to take them from the gun. Wow. This should be great. Hey, Matt, use these two weeks to take snaps from under center.

daniels doesnt suck

he was never a d 1 qb

i dont know is floyd is the answer

we know know daniels wasnt

IT IS ALL ABOUT THE QB IN COLLEGE BALL

On the spot commentary.

it's obvious you 2 don't watch college football. take a peak at the top 10 and then look at some of their QBs. just watch an sec game. mediocre qb play for the most part.

you need a great defense to win in college

I agree, but Oregon would beg to differ. Just saying.

I believe Skip will still be here. Cosh, I hope is gone. If Cosh is gone, I'm okay with giving Skip another year. I know a lot of you will disagree, It's just my opinion.

I agree with you on this.

Depends on who will be available to be HC after this season.

I hope this is how they are approaching it. If the right coach is out there snag him now and cut your losses. If not, don't hire a maybe that you have to give a few years, wait to see if there are better options next year or if Holtz can turn things around.

Wrong, schemes that don't play to your team's strengths or make any sort of logical sense can absolutely make you lose to teams like Ball State. Players are a problem, but my god coaching is a bigger one right now.

You saw George Baker last night, right? You saw the rest of the defensive secondary throughout the second half? That was 100% scheme that kept us in that game. There is no strength you can play to on that... ask the CBs to press and we get interference all after interference call. Ask them to play back and you watch the opposing team go up and down the field, 8 yards at a time. There isn't a scheme to correct that. It goes back to recruiting and talent development (both of which fall to coaching staff). I honestly think we are all just grossly mistaken on how good of a team we have. THe future is bright, the talent coming in looks much better. But clearly our 2007 - 2009 recruiting classes have missed the mark.

I'm not sure if you're serious on this. Though I'm not calling the recruiting sites the best evaluation of talent on each individual at their position, that's a pretty bold statement to make across a full recruiting class and across multiple years considering the upward trend in talent in those classes.

Along the same lines but a separate point, isn't it up to coaching to take potential and mold it/inspire it to fit the next level of play. For example, take elite programs that make a bad choice at coach (e.g. ND prior to Kelly and 'Bama prior to Saban). Their recruiting classes are top notch, but take a look at the performance on the field without being aware of the potential from the high school performance and you will probably say that the players are just not very good. In reality the potential was there all along and it's up to the coaching staff to tap it by motivating it and scheming to its strengths.

Motivation can make average players good and good players exceptional. Look at Kansas St and their recruiting classes over the past few years and tell me it's not coaching that is providing the right kind of motivation and scheming to strengths that has put them in the position they are in.

Of the things to be concerned about right now, this one is down there on the list. If the BE sports a team most feel is worthy they will be in the playoff.

Strange topic, isn't that the point behind going to a playoff format?

I see where you're going with all this while making an outrageous statement that no top flight coach would want to come here. I'll say this:

• Why keep arguing Leavitt, it's over and in the past.
  
• Doug Woolard has shown that he would go all out for a top flight coach with what he has done for Holtz & staff and I'm sure we would stretch it farther if necessary.
  
• The point on bringing up those other programs is 1) with the right coaches they have achieved without even our level of recruiting and 2) with even that level of success (winning in our conference) our recruiting would be even better. If your definition of competing in the state is what we did with the 2009 class, we could easily meet that or do better with success in our conference because of our good fortune to be in the great city of Tampa. From there it would build on itself if performance continued to get better as the recruiting classes got even better.
  

Based on that we have every reason to believe the next up and coming Brian Kelly, Mark Dantonio, etc. or floating established coach would seriously consider USF. The weather, new facilities, growing campus, investment in the program (athletics is a priority), etc. is all icing on the cake.

Half joking, if it comes down to dropping the current staff we should consider outsourcing our next coach selection to Cinci with the success they have had.

The failure of Hotz is not USF's biggest problem...Doug Woolard is.

See my post above about Cincinnati. Brian Kelly inherited a bowl bound team and then took the first train out of town.

If that's your rebuttal all I can say, and I think many on here would agree, you have little basis for your arguments.

What is the national perception of USF Football right now?

Can you answer that question?

I think we would both agree it's in the tank. Where I think we differ is on what it would take to change it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just as upset about it as you. I just don't think it's as dire a situation as current emotions in the thick of the situation might indicate. With that said, if Holtz can't pull this season out I am all for ousting him with full confidence that one of the options out there (we may not pick the right one) has the potential to carry us to success in the Big East, resulting in top 25 recruiting classes and the potential for sustained success.

None of that will change the perception of USF Football nationally or with recruits in Florida for at least the next 3 or 4 years. It's simply a stain that will take years of the right treatment to get out. The question is, will Doug Woolard choose the right treatment or will he make another bad choice?

Yep and time will tell. As a fan even those years on the way back up can be exciting. Here's to seeing them sooner than later because we know USF has the potential.

I see where you're going with all this while making an outrageous statement that no top flight coach would want to come here. I'll say this:

• Why keep arguing Leavitt, it's over and in the past.
  
• Doug Woolard has shown that he would go all out for a top flight coach with what he has done for Holtz & staff and I'm sure we would stretch it farther if necessary.
  
• The point on bringing up those other programs is 1) with the right coaches they have achieved without even our level of recruiting and 2) with even that level of success (winning in our conference) our recruiting would be even better. If your definition of competing in the state is what we did with the 2009 class, we could easily meet that or do better with success in our conference because of our good fortune to be in the great city of Tampa. From there it would build on itself if performance continued to get better as the recruiting classes got even better.
  

Based on that we have every reason to believe the next up and coming Brian Kelly, Mark Dantonio, etc. or floating established coach would seriously consider USF. The weather, new facilities, growing campus, investment in the program (athletics is a priority), etc. is all icing on the cake.

Half joking, if it comes down to dropping the current staff we should consider outsourcing our next coach selection to Cinci with the success they have had.

The failure of Hotz is not USF's biggest problem...Doug Woolard is.

See my post above about Cincinnati. Brian Kelly inherited a bowl bound team and then took the first train out of town.

If that's your rebuttal all I can say, and I think many on here would agree, you have little basis for your arguments.

What is the national perception of USF Football right now?

Can you answer that question?

I think we would both agree it's in the tank. Where I think we differ is on what it would take to change it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just as upset about it as you. I just don't think it's as dire a situation as current emotions in the thick of the situation might indicate. With that said, if Holtz can't pull this season out I am all for ousting him with full confidence that one of the options out there (we may not pick the right one) has the potential to carry us to success in the Big East, resulting in top 25 recruiting classes and the potential for sustained success.

I see where you're going with all this while making an outrageous statement that no top flight coach would want to come here. I'll say this:

• Why keep arguing Leavitt, it's over and in the past.
  
• Doug Woolard has shown that he would go all out for a top flight coach with what he has done for Holtz & staff and I'm sure we would stretch it farther if necessary.
  
• The point on bringing up those other programs is 1) with the right coaches they have achieved without even our level of recruiting and 2) with even that level of success (winning in our conference) our recruiting would be even better. If your definition of competing in the state is what we did with the 2009 class, we could easily meet that or do better with success in our conference because of our good fortune to be in the great city of Tampa. From there it would build on itself if performance continued to get better as the recruiting classes got even better.
  

Based on that we have every reason to believe the next up and coming Brian Kelly, Mark Dantonio, etc. or floating established coach would seriously consider USF. The weather, new facilities, growing campus, investment in the program (athletics is a priority), etc. is all icing on the cake.

Half joking, if it comes down to dropping the current staff we should consider outsourcing our next coach selection to Cinci with the success they have had.

The failure of Hotz is not USF's biggest problem...Doug Woolard is.

See my post above about Cincinnati. Brian Kelly inherited a bowl bound team and then took the first train out of town.

If that's your rebuttal all I can say, and I think many on here would agree, you have little basis for your arguments.

The state of FL, the ****** watered down Big East, the new practice fields, the other new facilities, the increase in pay pool for assistants. You know, pretty much all of the stuff WSU doesn't have besides an OCS. But give it 3 years and Leach will have them in the thick of the PAC-12. Probably not on the level of Oregon and USC, but he'll be in the mix like he was with Texas Tech vs. the rest of the Big-12.

The State of Florida?

If you are a Top 10 recruit in the State of Florida why would you choose USF over Florida, Florida State or Miami?

Does USF have better facilities that these other schools have (including practice fields and OCS)?

Does USF have more TV exposure?

Does USF have a history of going to BCS Bowls?

How many NC has USF won?

Pay for assistants? I'll bet USF ranks pretty low in that category and below WSU.

.

.

Who said anything about us competing with UF, FSU, Miami? My point was, imagine what a coach of Mike Leach's caliber, someone who turned a horsefeathers Texas Tech program into a a VERY competitive team against Texas, Oklahoma, and the rest of the Big 12. You don't think he could do more than Skip ******* Holtz has done with what he has here? And for the exact same pay. And from a admittedly simple google search, our assistants make the exact same as those at WSU, including Cosh's $325,000 for a DC. If you think what we're getting for our money is equal to what they are, I'd like to hear why.

You are extremely simplistic and naive when comes to college football. Recruiting is the lifeblood of college football. It doesn't matter how great of a coach one is if they don't have talent to work with. It's true some coaches can motivate, teach and outmaneuver other coaches to a limited degree, but if a coach doesn't have talent he will not compete and succeed consistently on the highest level or even in the lowly Big East.

A top flight college football coach will not take a job just for the paycheck. A top flight college football coach is in high demand and has his pick of offers. A top flight college football coach is competitive by nature and those kind of guys want to win a NC. And you can't win a NC without top flight talent. If a top flight college football coach has no chance competing in the school's homestate for talent, he will not take the job.

So, yes...If USF wants to win, they must compete with Florida, Florida State and Miami in salary, facilities, history, tradition, organization, money and most of all recruits. Even at Kentucky Mike Leach had a future No 1 NFL draft pick in Tim Couch. At Oklahoma he had Josh Heupel and at Texas Tech he had the likes of Michael Crabtree.

Oh...one more thing. Leach and Leavitt are good friends and talk regularly, especially after both of them got hosed by their respective schools. I can assure you Leach has a very, very low opinion of Doug Woolard.

Uh, not quite. I wouldn't be so quick to put someone down based on your opinion or perspective. Yes recruiting is the bottom line, but look at the success Cinci and Uconn have had in the Big East and tell me their recruiting has been better than ours - that is what people are frustrated about. Look at programs in other conferences like Boise, TCU, BYU, etc., (just naming big ones, but there are plenty others) and tell me their recruting has been that much better than ours.

Again, recruting is the bottom line, but we don't have to match tradition, history, championships, etc. with the other big programs in the state in order to recruit in the top 25-30. With momentum from consistent winning seasons and some chanmpionships we could regularly be in the top 25 because of the location we are in. Given that high probability with moderate success, we are a prime option for a coach looking to make a name or increase his stock.

Uh...well...recruiting was getting pretty good and USF was even competing with UF, UM and FSU for recruits due to an unusually loyal, smart, obsessed, workaholic,coach. Then Doug Woolard smeared and fired that coach.

So...What top flight coach would want to work for an AD like that?

By the way...Cincinnati is located in Ohio. Do you think they may have a lot of good football players in Ohio? How many D-1 schools compete for those recruits in Ohio?

Last I remember when UConn finally played a real team in the 2011 Fiesta Bowl they got their ass whipped 48-20. In 2007 they got man handled by WV 66-21 and then Wake Forest kicked their ass in the Car Care Bowl 24-10.

I see where you're going with all this while making an outrageous statement that no top flight coach would want to come here. I'll say this:

• Why keep arguing Leavitt, it's over and in the past.
  
• Doug Woolard has shown that he would go all out for a top flight coach with what he has done for Holtz & staff and I'm sure we would stretch it farther if necessary.
  
• The point on bringing up those other programs is 1) with the right coaches they have achieved without even our level of recruiting and 2) with even that level of success (winning in our conference) our recruiting would be even better. If your definition of competing in the state is what we did with the 2009 class, we could easily meet that or do better with success in our conference because of our good fortune to be in the great city of Tampa. From there it would build on itself if performance continued to get better as the recruiting classes got even better.
  

Based on that we have every reason to believe the next up and coming Brian Kelly, Mark Dantonio, etc. or floating established coach would seriously consider USF. The weather, new facilities, growing campus, investment in the program (athletics is a priority), etc. is all icing on the cake.

Half joking, if it comes down to dropping the current staff we should consider outsourcing our next coach selection to Cinci with the success they have had.

The state of FL, the ****** watered down Big East, the new practice fields, the other new facilities, the increase in pay pool for assistants. You know, pretty much all of the stuff WSU doesn't have besides an OCS. But give it 3 years and Leach will have them in the thick of the PAC-12. Probably not on the level of Oregon and USC, but he'll be in the mix like he was with Texas Tech vs. the rest of the Big-12.

The State of Florida?

If you are a Top 10 recruit in the State of Florida why would you choose USF over Florida, Florida State or Miami?

Does USF have better facilities that these other schools have (including practice fields and OCS)?

Does USF have more TV exposure?

Does USF have a history of going to BCS Bowls?

How many NC has USF won?

Pay for assistants? I'll bet USF ranks pretty low in that category and below WSU.

.

.

Who said anything about us competing with UF, FSU, Miami? My point was, imagine what a coach of Mike Leach's caliber, someone who turned a horsefeathers Texas Tech program into a a VERY competitive team against Texas, Oklahoma, and the rest of the Big 12. You don't think he could do more than Skip ******* Holtz has done with what he has here? And for the exact same pay. And from a admittedly simple google search, our assistants make the exact same as those at WSU, including Cosh's $325,000 for a DC. If you think what we're getting for our money is equal to what they are, I'd like to hear why.

You are extremely simplistic and naive when comes to college football. Recruiting is the lifeblood of college football. It doesn't matter how great of a coach one is if they don't have talent to work with. It's true some coaches can motivate, teach and outmaneuver other coaches to a limited degree, but if a coach doesn't have talent he will not compete and succeed consistently on the highest level or even in the lowly Big East.

A top flight college football coach will not take a job just for the paycheck. A top flight college football coach is in high demand and has his pick of offers. A top flight college football coach is competitive by nature and those kind of guys want to win a NC. And you can't win a NC without top flight talent. If a top flight college football coach has no chance competing in the school's homestate for talent, he will not take the job.

So, yes...If USF wants to win, they must compete with Florida, Florida State and Miami in salary, facilities, history, tradition, organization, money and most of all recruits. Even at Kentucky Mike Leach had a future No 1 NFL draft pick in Tim Couch. At Oklahoma he had Josh Heupel and at Texas Tech he had the likes of Michael Crabtree.

Oh...one more thing. Leach and Leavitt are good friends and talk regularly, especially after both of them got hosed by their respective schools. I can assure you Leach has a very, very low opinion of Doug Woolard.

Uh, not quite. I wouldn't be so quick to put someone down based on your opinion or perspective. Yes recruiting is the bottom line, but look at the success Cinci and Uconn have had in the Big East and tell me their recruiting has been better than ours - that is what people are frustrated about. Look at programs in other conferences like Boise, TCU, BYU, etc., (just naming big ones, but there are plenty others) and tell me their recruting has been that much better than ours.

Again, recruting is the bottom line, but we don't have to match tradition, history, championships, etc. with the other big programs in the state in order to recruit in the top 25-30. With momentum from consistent winning seasons and some chanmpionships we could regularly be in the top 25 because of the location we are in. Given that high probability with moderate success, we are a prime option for a coach looking to make a name or increase his stock.

Even if they don't pull it out, look at the energy and passion they are playing with.

Looks like wind may affect the passing game...

I've been thinking the same thing. We lost our mojo. Dr. Luo himself says motivation is the most important factor and we seem to be lacking.

When can we start wearing these??

This could make USF football fun

Anyone else see the guy drinking beer through his eyehole?

The option kept him home against Nevada.