Raetus

Down-voted for poor parody execution. Parody should be glaringly obvious or impossible to detect -- this is a mediocre middle ground.

28 minutes ago, Bourbon Bull said:

Couple of people at the game mentioned that he threw the best pass for USF all day - to that point of the game.

It really was a great throw.

10 hours ago, snarling Bull said:

This

One of the ref blunders that upset me the most was actually the extremely late whistle on the offsides during a point after attempt that allowed a defensive WKU player to mow down through a barely set line and crush a USF player (maybe Price?). That's uncalled for and how people get hurt. It's your job to identify and stop those plays quickly so things like that don't happen. I've seen far too much of this from stripes this year. It may not have been one of the calls that cost us points, but it was one of the more offensive to me personally. Between this call and the no call hit far away from the play, I wasn't happy with the lack of protection from the refs in that game. 

I can't make myself angry about this loss. I never expected a bowl at the beginning of the year, so to see the team actually try to win while down by multiple TDs in the fourth was a definite improvement.

Our secondary needs done tuning, run game was severely limited by their D, QB play was on and off and WRs still aren't at the level they should be at. It'll get there. This year has laid the foundation for a strong team next year.

WKU did what they needed to do and won. Blame it on the field, refs, whatever you want, we couldn't pull it off today. WKU deserves the win this time.

I'm looking forward to watching QF and AW compete.

It was a good game to watch. We're still reloading but we're WAY further along than we were at the beginning of the year.

Hats off to WKU on their win.

This definitely needed its own thread and definitely should not be in the in game discussion thread. Great post. 

Cancel the game!

You Ciabatti be kiddin' me.

1 minute ago, CPR said:

Our athletic department gets a good deal and saves money, "Why aren't we paying him more"? We overpay the man based on a good 3/4 of a season, "Why are we paying him so much"?

These were exactly my thoughts.

4 minutes ago, bullsmeanbusiness said:

CWT's incentives:

I like the academic bonuses.

[edit] And the season ticket sales bonuses. [/edit]

For those of you who want to turn off the beeping noise that happens when a thread updates, it looks like it is in Notification Settings under Account Settings.

Why is anyone upset that we didn't have to pay that much to keep our coach? Does nothing make you happy?

We should probably just cancel the game now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd5ZLJWQmss

Solid 6.5 with the potential for 7 on Monday.

Given the average user of this forum, it probably means it's less likely that he's a serial killer.

Is it Monday yet?

I think WKU will certainly move the ball, but I think the end zone defense will be tougher than they are expecting. When combined with our running game draining the clock, they'll have to make good use of offensive drives. If the punter sees the field more than a couple of times in the first half for WKU, then they're in trouble.

4 out of 5 is d*** impressive -- even in the Big East, I couldn't imagine pulling that off -- maybe the American will be okay after all.

Yeah, that season was pretty much one drive away from a perfect season.

UCF lost 3 games that year before Heisman voting (and 4 if you count the bowl) and played in Conference USA -- no one is going to look at a non traditional conference team and think "Oh, they lost three games, how impressive." 

As it's been said before, things are harder in what is currently called the G5... you've most likely got to win out to win the Heisman.

To be fair, it's not much different than any ESPN keys to the game -- ESPN just knows more words than Smazza.

Marshall also lost to Miami, Oh by like 20 points that year -- you're not winning a Heisman no matter who you are losing to Miami, Oh. When you add in that they also lost to West Virginia in the first game of the season, it just wasn't going to happen. The fact that he finished fourth is amazing given what the Heisman voters always herald as their criteria.

I agree. If you look at how the Heisman voting occurs, it's also very much skewed toward teams who are the most visible in large media markets. 

For those that aren't aware, the Heisman Trust appoints six representatives for the respective six geographical divisions it divides states with in. Those six representatives are each given 145 votes to divide amongst state representatives that they have chosen within their division. Those state representatives, then, divide their allocation amongst the media members they have chosen to participate in voting. So California, most likely, ends up with far more votes than Iowa and Florida ends up with far more votes than Georgia. Every former Heisman winner also gets a vote.

So if Florida gets, let's say, 30 votes, USF would have to be visible enough to overpower the history and exposure of traditional Florida powers in UF, FSU and Miami before many media members who don't even cover USF would pay attention -- it's worse when we aren't even on a regular annual schedule with any of these teams. Someone who covers FSU is aware of UF players by virtue of playing them every year and vice-versa; the same goes for Miami and FSU. So USF faces an uphill battle within their own state in terms of Heisman awareness, let alone the rest of the U.S.

For a USF Heisman winner, I think he would have to play a traditional Florida power early in the season, destroy them, and continue to roll through the rest of the schedule with games that have more media exposure than we're currently receiving. In a way, the American is well positioned geographically to do well with Heisman voting, but if the games are buried on ESPN the Ocho, that hurts the chances a lot.