GoBulls84

11 hours ago, Outlaw said:

So you officially didn't rule out stadiun renderings.

I laughed

15 hours ago, belgianbull said:

Is it really all about conference payout? Personally even if the money is similar, or even a bit less due to travel costs I still think the amount of fan excitement and prestige would be much greater in a PAC/MW/AAC conference versus a depleted AAC.   Being in a conference with Boise State, San Diego State, Fresno State , WSU, OSU, Air Force, Memphis ,Tulane, and Navy would make so much sense and would be beneficial for USF no matter the payout.

Among the Mountain West teams that absolutely nobody in USF fandom will care that we're playing:

UNLV

San Jose State

Wyoming

Utah State

New Mexico

Hawaii

Nevada

Arguably Colorado State (could throw them in the "Maybe if they're good that year" category)

Air Force (for the military factor and that's it) and Boise State would be a draw. Fresno State and San Diego State would be in the category of "Maybe if they're good that year". Nobody in USF's fandom is getting excited to play the current 3-8 San Diego State. I think you're overestimating, just a tad, how excited anybody in our fanbase would be to play those teams. Also, while the diehards would be like "Hey cool, we're playing Wazzou and the Beavs", those teams are still not bringing out the casuals unless they've got Heisman candidates in tow.

All I need to know about the defense is to watch some of the absolute moon shots Frank Harris threw that only went about 25 yards downfield and some of our guys still didn't have the speed to close on them. I'm willing to give Orlando another year because A) there are very few "dogs" on this team. That talent and depth are not where they need to be. And B) going to a 4th DC in 4 years is going to help with the same level of talent either.

20 minutes ago, UCF_rustbucket said:

I think $15M is still pretty high if we math it out. 

 

A 14 team conference paying $15M each is $210M a year for the whole conference.

The 12 team MWC currently gets around $4M a team, so $48M a year total. 

Subtract $210 - $48 and that's the value that OSU/WSU are adding. Which is $162M, so each of the PAC leftovers would need to bring $81M/yr in tv value each to raise the existing MWC deal to $15M/yr per team. 

If we're generous and say they're worth the $30M ESPN first offered the PAC, then we have $48M + $60M. Divide that by 14 and we have $7.7M for each team in the new PAC/MWC.

Yeah, that's why I said maybe. I don't see them getting $15M per when the MW wasn't getting close to that and the real value from the P12 is already gone. For tradition's sake, I hope they can keep the Pac-__ moniker alive, but I think people are kidding themselves if they think the next long-term contract the Pac gets (assuming they land one) will be demonstrably higher than the AAC. And joining that conference would mean any marginal increase in payout would be offset by increased travel costs to send all our athletic teams out west.

On 11/17/2023 at 4:54 PM, Triple B said:

Wonder what the tv contract will look like for the PMWAC? That's where the real separation will be ....... as long as there's still 6 auto qualifiers for CFP. May even help in that regard.

They were looking at $30M per year with most of their "premium" teams still in the fold (after USC/UCLA announced they were leaving). Maybe they get $15M, but I can't see it being much more than that. There's a reason Wazzou and the Beavs were left out in the cold: the media companies just don't value their brand like that. Adding an entire G5 conference isn't gonna change that, but at least they'll be stable.

1 minute ago, 350_BULL said:

LMAO we are currently in such bad shape. Pretty much the entire MWC is getting a life preserve off the realignment Titanic. Holy ****.

Wow if this happens what a blow that would be. Pretty much being left in the dust by the likes of Nevada and San Jose St... FML.

Going to make a wish to the big man above to help us get in to a better conference. Please Santa help us!!

The remaining Pac-2 have an opportunity to keep the conference alive and do it in a fashion that keeps it regional. I don't see why anybody would be surprised by this, nor why they would freak the f&^% out about it. Even if this happens, the East Coast dominoes aren't done falling. We'll be fine.

They're big. They're strong. They're fast.

Just don't die out there fellas.

2 hours ago, Rocky Style said:

TAMU doesn't seem like a great job in the modern era.

Also I read they are paying Jimbo like 70M to leave?  Is that even true?  If so, good to see the TV money gluttony going to good use.  The system is not broken at all.

My good man, that's not even TV money, that's your typical Texas oil booster money.

4 hours ago, Grateful Dad said:

Couldn't this start a ripple if they reconstruct the Pac?  Or is it too early for me to be thinking?

I imagine it means the end of the Mountain West in some form or fashion. Either they convince over half the MW to join them for larger payouts, or there's some kind of outright merger with the MW schools agreeing to take on the Pac-__ moniker. The biggest questions are does that result in AAC teams going out west and how many?

They're big. They're strong. They're fast.

Just don't die out there fellas.

11 hours ago, Bryson W said:

Behind the scenes drama. 

Goach talked last week about some immaturity on the defense and guys that weren't all in, all the time. That's probably the case here.

Don't know what the hell Hero Sports is, but it's clearly a poorly-researched piece written by someone in Mountain West territory.

Have a couple CBs and a couple safeties that are all mid-level (or slightly better) 3-star kids. Imagine still looking for another kid or two there before hitting the portal in the offseason.

22 hours ago, Cat941 said:

Dang, I knew in my head that the Memphis game was not going to go our way.  Away game and their proven record of success. Still, I wasn't going to give up on the possible upset.  And we could've done it.  Argh!  I want to run this conference as we're stuck here.  Win 'em all.

Anyway, I'm moving on to Temple game and it looks like a must-win.   

I had it as a loss going in to, but then got hopeful when we went up 42-38 and then had the ball again with a chance to stretch the lead. The D is obviously a cause for concern, but there are other reasons for optimism

They're big. They're strong. They're fast. Just don't die out there fellas.

50 minutes ago, E.T. said:

Shorts?

Hey man, it's still hot out

They're big. They're strong. They're fast.

Just don't die out there fellas.

18 hours ago, Bryson W said:

So we're sure this is happening? Just don't want to get my hopes up

Welcome to realignment where everything and nothing is real or makes sense

"I'm a guy who likes bangin' "

Me too, Nay'Quan. Me too.

On 10/27/2023 at 3:30 PM, Grateful Dad said:

If we go man against a dual threat qb, he'll run all over us.  It might work against a pocket passer.

Maybe so, but then you scheme to address that (disciplined rush lanes, keep a LB or S to spy, then have to tackle in space). But one thing we've seen is that scheming to stop them with zone has absolutely not worked. FAU's QB not only didn't feel the heat from the rush, but had wide open areas of the field to lob the ball into because DBs were slow to react to receivers in their quadrant.

On 10/26/2023 at 10:47 AM, hm101 said:

coach has a potty mouth 

Seems to be working better than the "aw shucks" "dadgum" "progrum" from the last guy. Give me all the f***s, Goach!

3 hours ago, Gatorbull325 said:

I was looking at our defensive ranking in different categories. While we are ranked 118th in total defense, there are a few positives. Even though we are 73rd in sacks, we are 7th in TFLs. That means we are making a crapload of stops before the line of scrimmage. That also means we should have a better defensive 3rd down conversion percentage. I blame it on calling the wrong plays for our 3rd down situations. Our current percentage is .374. The teams in the top 25 are at a .326 or better.  If we can lower the percentage, this will lead to a better 4th down conversion or maybe other teams wouldn't go for it on 4th down as much. Improving our 3rd down percentage would have a positive effect on the other stats as well. As for sacks, I feel losing Jason Vaughn is the reason the momentum has slowed down. I hope Jonathan Ross and Michael Williams take advantage of this opportunity. What's really hurting us is our passing defense. I have no solutions or reasons why our passing defense sucks so much. But I do feel we might as well go man b/c I'm seeing waaay too many missed assignments. We have 4 games left and a bye week. I hope our players rest up, heal up, study film, practice, and work on areas of need. We have 4 games and need to win 2 of them for a bowl game. Go bulls 

 

TOTAL DEFENSE	118th
PASSING YARDS ALLOWED	125th
RUSHING DEFENSE	82nd
KICKOFF RETURN DEFENSE	41st
TEAM SACKS	73rd
PASSES INTERCEPTED	56th
4TH DOWN CONVERSION PCT DEFENSE	76th
RED ZONE DEFENSE	69th
3RD DOWN CONVERSION PCT DEFENSE	61th
Tackles for Loss	7th

 

Sacks	Player	GP	TOT	TFL-YDS	Sacks-YDS
1	Evans, Daquan	8	39	10.0-35	3.0-17
2	Gordon IV, DJ	6	38	6.5-24	2.5-18
3	Shuler, Jhalyn	8	55	3.5-21	2.0-18
4	Ross, Jonathan	8	22	5.5-22	2.0-16
5	Vaughn, Jason	5	10	2.5-14	2.0-12
6	Stokes, Jaelen	8	45	3.5-10	1.0-7
7	Brown, Aamaris	7	22	2.0-13	1.0-12
8	Summerall, Lloyd	7	20	4.0-13	1.0-5
9	Williams, Jacquez	6	5	2.0-7	1.0-4
10	Cheney, Rashad	8	24	5.0-9	0.5-1
11	Logan, Tramel	8	23	3.0-10	0.5-3
12	Mata'afa, Andrew	6	21	0.5-2	0.5-2
	Player	GP	TOT	TFL-YDS	Sacks-YDS	INT	BU	QBH	FR	FF	KICK
1	Evans, Daquan	8	39	10.0-35	3.0-17	0	4	2	1	0	0
2	Gordon IV, DJ	6	38	6.5-24	2.5-18	0	1	2	0	0	0
3	Ross, Jonathan	8	22	5.5-22	2.0-16	0	0	1	0	0	0
4	Cheney, Rashad	8	24	5.0-9	0.5-1	0	0	0	0	0	0
5	Summerall, Lloyd	7	20	4.0-13	1.0-5	0	0	3	0	0	0
6	Shuler, Jhalyn	8	55	3.5-21	2.0-18	0	2	1	0	1	0
7	Stokes, Jaelen	8	45	3.5-10	1.0-7	2	0	1	1	0	0
8	Logan, Tramel	8	23	3.0-10	0.5-3	0	3	1	1	0	0
9	Vaughn, Jason	5	10	2.5-14	2.0-12	0	0	1	0	0	0
10	Harris, D.J.	7	13	2.5-5	0-0	0	0	0	2	0	0
11	Brown, Aamaris	7	22	2.0-13	1.0-12	0	0	0	0	0	0
12	Williams, Jacquez	6	5	2.0-7	1.0-4	0	0	0	0	0	0
13	Harris, Mac	8	13	2.0-6	0-0	0	0	0	2	1	0
14	Blue-Eli, Doug	8	10	1.5-3	0-0	0	0	2	0	1	0
15	Hickman, Immanuel	6	9	1.5-4	0-0	0	0	0	0	0	0
16	Williams II, Michael	7	9	1.5-6	0-0	0	1	1	0	0	0
17	Clark, Braxton	8	24	1.0-2	0-0	1	3	0	0	0	0
18	Townsel, Christopher	8	18	1.0-3	0-0	0	1	0	0	0	0
19	Ward, Tavin	8	18	1.0-1	0-0	1	2	0	0	0	0
20	Pettway, Jamie	7	11	1.0-3	0-0	0	0	0	0	1	0
21	Hill, Matthew	7	7	1.0-4	0-0	0	0	0	0	0	0
22	Bernard, Bryce	8	2	1.0-1	0-0	0	0	0	0	0	0
22	Sease, De'Juan	4	2	1.0-2	0-0	0	0	0	0	0	0
22	Mata'afa, Andrew	6	21	0.5-2	0.5-2	0	0	0	0	0	0
22	Berryhill, Logan	8	37	0.5-1	0-0	2	2	0	0	0	0
22	Curry, Jayden	7	12	0.5-1	0-0	0	1	1	0	0	0

 

NCAA College Football FBS current team Stats | NCAA.com

WWW.NCAA.COM

---

Discover the current NCAA FBS Football leaders in every stats category, as well as historic leaders.

 

I'm also of the opinion that we should go with man. I watched so many receivers running wide open against the zone against FAU because our guys didn't react until after the ball was well on its way. At least give man coverage a shot because it can't really be a whole heck of a lot worse than what we're seeing with zone.

6 hours ago, Peatearpan said:

Some people have it all!

Also, in terms of steepness, can someone explain the science about why that would create more noise? I am assuming that it is because it would be a wall of sound as opposed to a shorter wall of sound if it was a gentle slope?

Steeper means the stands are closer to the field, also the space holding the same numbers of seats would be taller. You'd have the taller bowl to trap noise in better.

21 minutes ago, olafberserker said:

As long as you are a Volunteer it's cool .... so does that mean the University of Tennessee is exempt from this rule?