MMW

1 hour ago, Cat941 said:

The Big10 would benefit from having a Florida team.  It wouldn't be us but it's a fun fantasy.  

22 hours ago, DontPushMe said:

No chance that miami is left in that conference. They'd sooner go independent like we should. 

 

If the best leftover acc schools go to the B12 we just need to accept the L and drop football. Any leftover conference at that point is barely an upgrade on the old aac

Or we could just enjoy the games

On 1/11/2024 at 9:59 AM, Jim Johnson said:

 

I watched it from the Hooters on BBD.  My wife was at the game.  She was an alumni, I was not at the time.

10 hours ago, Jim Johnson said:

Possibly ... but I wouldn't be so sure of that.  We could have played down at UT's stadium (before it was renovated)... or they would have delayed starting the team.

Maybe the first year or two?  If I recall we sold it the Sombrero in our debut.

1 hour ago, BULLSHTR said:

I think that it shows that winning is more important than who you play. Also, a lot of people going to college ultimately don't decide where they go based on football. A lot do, but most probably don't.

The article suggests otherwise.

1 hour ago, Cat941 said:

Wow look at South Florida!

Rutgers moves to the big ten and their applications only rise 5.8%.

Other schools they moved to bigger league also did not show a boon.  I'm not saying this isn't interesting, just not sure what it tells us.

52 minutes ago, GoBulls84 said:

Yep. They were too good to add Texas Tech and Oklahoma State along with Texas and OU. Their elitism also pushed away several other potential G5s that could have grown and thrived in the PAC as well. They thumbed their nose at everybody else right up until the moment they had no TV deal and ran to those other conferences they felt they were better than.

It was my understanding that it was disagreements around the Longhorn network.

Money

5 hours ago, Dave_Glaser said:

It’s funny what a 7-6 season and a rout of Syracuse will do. We were “USF Who?” or “USF brings no value” this time a year ago. When we were losing, these internet geniuses had a very short memory about how good we were just a few years before. Now we’re the sleeping giant arising again after a .500 regular season against some pretty awful teams. We’re making progress, our university is a good one academically, and our market ultimately makes us a viable candidate for anyone. Nothing has changed except a couple more wins, but in the minds of all these internet “experts” we’re somehow worthy again. It’s a laugh, and a very predictable one.

There are a couple of positive things we can string together that at least shows an upward trajectory.

- AAU, OCS, winning record, bowl win, best G5 recruiting class.

It is not happening but he is right, if we were in the SEC our attendance would explode, along with our recruiting.  

17 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Another top half b1g teamgettibg schooled by a top half sec team. Why are the networks paying the b1g so much for second tier football.

Ole miss

Mizzou

Tennessee 

LSU

later tonight  we see Bama finish the job.

The big has top half b1g Maryland beating  bottom half Auburn and can keep celebrating punts.

Easy question.  They have tons of fans.  What makes anyone think they are getting paid for strength?

Notre Dame was special for me.  The train ride, the lightning, the win!

The campus was cool and their chants were amazing.

7 minutes ago, Brad said:

I probably didn't ask that right.  Why do we think we're a top pick when there are plenty of P5 teams out there?  The GOR?  Ultimately the Big 12 and ACC should combine top teams and spit out the rest.

I would thinks so too but there is no mechanism for that, is there?  They would need to create a new league for that and only invite the best teams.  I would think that would be hard to do.

Unless they all applied to join the Pac 2 together.  I guess that might work.

10 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

They also haven't been relevant in football since Cmc (Stanford) and Aaron Rodgers(Cal) played.

True but football relevance is not what matters.  With all their success nobody really cares all that much about Stanford.

Michigan Bull is right

1 hour ago, michibull said:

You are absolutely right, BUT, Stanford, California does not offer the market/money that L.A. or Seattle does. The fan base in Oregon is exponentially larger than Stanfords, they just didn’t make business sense for the B10. 

It is all about viewership.

I don't know how you can make the case any clearer.  Stanford is the top of the foodchain in academics, decent in football and dominant in other sports but the B10 didn't want them.

52 minutes ago, Rocky Style said:

Are you implying they are stuck up?  

Stanfords acadmics rival the ivy's and they arguably have the best athletic program in the country:

"Stanford has won 134 NCAA team national championships, the most of any Division 1 school in the NCAA. Stanford has won these NCAA team championships in 20 different sports."

They really deserve better.  I am suprised the B10 did not scoop them up along with Cal.  

1 hour ago, Grateful Dad said:

Right now, we don't offer a whole lot attractive to any P conference.  They can afford to take their time being picky.  We seem to be falling for the Fundamental Attribution Error.  It essentially notes that "If my team gets promoted to P status, it is because they did it due to internal causes (they wanted it more, worked harder, are more talented, recruited better, etc.), but if my team does not get promoted, it is due to external causes (ESPN hates us, ____ University is blocking us, we don't have an OCS, prior President didn't prioritize it, etc.)

Those with an internal locus of control will most times perform better because they focus on what they have power over.  That means working hard enough, recruiting well,  coaching better, and finally, winning.  AAU status, OCS, our market, palm trees - are external variables and none of that is going to get us promoted.  Only one thing will - winning.  Yes, we started to possibly turn a corner.  But if we want to be courted and not just hope against hope that a P teams leaves their conference and we can be the best nerd picked in gym class to replace them, one season isn't going to do it.  It needs to be a trend.  I cringe when posters rest their hopes on someone leaving and we being the least undesirable team to fill that spot.  I believe we will earn it by winning to the extent that it would look ridiculous to be left out.  Backing in doesn't engender a whole lot of pride in me.

Right now, we offer potential.  That puts us in a large group.  I believe that Coach will make us desirable enough in time.  But I don't think a conference is going to offer us millions and millions solely because they would like another team to have a "travel partner" or whatever that means.

Interesting take but "Only one thing will - winning" is not accurate.  Yes, winning teams garner more attention so there is a strong correlation but what ESPN and Fox are looking for is the eyeballs that winning teams draw. 

Also, we don't actually control winning, "working hard enough" is not the problem, there are at a structural disadvantage when recruiting against the P4.  Even if we did start winning we lose our coach soon after, our good players will access the portal.  I think the past decade illustrates that finding a competent coach who can WIN is not something so easily done (or in our control most times).

AAU Status and OCS is something we can actually control.  Some leagues care about academics so it helps us with them.  An OCS will at least look full most times and present a college game atmosphere.  It will also be more fun for the students who simply need to walk across campus to a game - like the vast majority of college students.   

The fix is in guys.

12 hours ago, Bull Matrix said:

For USF’s sake we all better be hoping that the ACC comes out ahead. 

To what end, are we envisioning that the moment we join the ACC the shuffling will end?

I know I'm in the minority but if you play this to it's eventual conclusion there will be 2 leagues left standing that don't look an awful lot like the AAC and we won't be asked to join.  They will cherry pick from the weaker leagues and declare themselves the elite leagues or something and have their own championship.  

This is Fox and ESPNs toy now and all they want is eyeballs.  Tampa becoming the next Austin is the only thing I see changing that.

3 hours ago, Rocky Style said:

If the ACC gets pillaged by the BIG 12 then everything is wrong.

The ACC pillaged the Big East so turnabout is fair play.

1 hour ago, T-Man said:

FSU was close to AAU membership and should get it next go around.  Let's set our goals to more realistic conference.  Clemson and FSU to Big10.  USF and Tulane to ACC.  If two more leave ACC, then add Memphis and ....  The ACC surviving and thriving with us in it is the most realistic hope.  

Oh I agree. I thought we were just fantasizing here.

We are trending upwards and the timing is interesting.  If we can win the AAC next year and have a lively fan base that's all I ask.

7 minutes ago, macphisto said:

I wish. We need more than one blowout bowl win - but now the door is open for the American champion to get into the playoff - and consistently being in that conversation may get the Big Ten's attention. AAU membership is a big deal and we've also got a larger student body.

How crazy would they be. We are trending up at the right time. AAU, OCS, bowl win.  Now we need butts in the seats and let's win a conference.

1 minute ago, Outlaw said:

Yep the NIL craziness with fans paying players and 7/8/9 year transfer portal players has really hurt college football and ruined any illusion of an even playing field for any conference other than the SEC or B1G.

I was on a gator Facebook site where they were complaining about being left behind in this whole NIL process.

Here's a team that is in the SEC and arguably a top dog and even their fans are worried.

31 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

That would be dumb considering we are building a stadium and trying to win a conference and national championship as a goal set by our coach.

I'll take winning the conference.

I'm hoping that at 12 team playoff system will generate enough money that they'll want to expand it. I think it eventually will.

17 minutes ago, Triple B said:

That media bias was already exposed this year ...... and it shouldn't matter considering there's a Committee picking the playoff teams, but it did.

You are correct, but it's better than just two teams or four.  The more inclusive it is, the more we'll really see if some of these leagues are as good as they think they are. I know the SEC carefully curates who they play and where.  Same with the Big 10.  

An expanded playoff system would expose media bias towards some of the more tradition schools.

14 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

The latest for 2024 and 2025 is

The top 5 Conference Champions

7 at large. So basically if you aren’t in Top12 in ranking you aren’t getting an at large.

What this leads to is

SEC/BigTen and ND basically taking those 7 at large.

The chances of the ACC or Big12 having another school outside their champion in Top 12 is minimal.

Another reason that makes ACC schools paying a big exit fee for a similar media deal in B12 to also compete for one CFP spot there, not a real good decision.

Does anybody else feel a little schadenfreude watching other schools join the "have nots"?