bullsbucsfan426
-
Posts
3,114 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
News
Videos YouTube
SuperQuote
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by bullsbucsfan426
-
-
41 minutes ago, puc86 said:
Most top level hires are expected to make immediate results and if you don’t care for that pressure you can always stay entry level but even then you would have some expectations of ability and progress should you like to make it thru your 90 days. Maybe in academia you can survive on theoretical achievements but here in the real world you should be expected to be measured by your results. The only reason we are discussing KB in detail is because his first 6 games are far below average we are a bottom quartile offense and even if our talent is lacking it’s not in the bottom quartile. KB came out of training expecting our offense to be humming with the talent he has in place, that it isn’t certainly leaves him open to criticism. Please let me know what random game you find acceptable to start acknowledging his incompetence.
Key word: Most
For whatever reason, college football coaching results are judged not on the result of 1-3 games into the year, but rather the entire season as a whole (barring no progression at all throughout the first 2/3rd of the season). This isn't an accounting firm, most new hires during the tenure of head coach are made for one of two reasons-incompetence on the part of the previous staff, or success resulting in a bigger job for the previous staff. The only thing a coach can be judged on in his first six months on a job (given there are no games) is the cultural progress the team made. In Bell's case, he was hired because of Gilbert's incompetence, as was Darveau (for Mattox). By all accounts the culture was a lot better, until WIsconsin smacked the offense in the face. I'd still say the culture is better, because Strong and staff are still trying different methods to fix the culture that was previously so horrid. Now, it may be doubtful that Strong can do it, but we still have six games left (at least) to see if what the team is doing now is real or just the result of weak competition.
I'll note something else here-if we went by Strong's first six months or year here, then we would have been marveling over his results. I was very much in favor of his hire, I felt he must be more the coach we saw at UL, now I've seen that he isn't, and all we can do is wait for him to either reinvent himself as Taggart did and start winning something, or for Kelly to get rid of him.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, puc86 said:
If I said there was no other option but to run because the last qb willing to still go back into the game said “hey coach can we please start running the ball” why would I have to come up with more options?
Also let’s try a thought experiment let’s say you are facing a qb that can’t throw more than 50 yds but the OC keeps running go routs past that mark at which point the defensive backs stop dead allowing them to run free would it be the QBs fault that he can’t hit the wide open receivers ? And if he was actually hitting them do you think they would continue to be wide open?When it comes to actually converting passing plays KB and his turn the ball over faster offense is ranked 110th and at the end of the day what you actually accomplish with the team you actually have is all that maters, not what people wish you could do or pretend they see in some theoretical alternative universe.
KB is on track to have one of the worst passing offenses we have ever had and this is hardly the worst tools or toughest schedules we have ever faced, the OC has no clothes and everyone pretending they see something are only doing so because they are embarrassed of buying into the DIiiii hype train.
I don't buy the no clothes argument because both this year and last year the lines have been trash. Had the line been even 10% better last year we don't go on a six game losing streak to end the season, had the line been 20% better it's almost a guarantee we still compete for a conference championship, and a lot of that comes from Blake Barnett getting David Carr'd last year. We know what he's capable of, but he's been hit so many times that he hears footsteps coming even when they aren't. He has the talent, the GT game last year proved it-he's just been sacked so often he doesn't have any trust in his pocket being secure and so his throws end up being terrible. I will give you that Darveau shouldn't have shuffled the line, a lot of young guys got early playing time last year and they should have been able to stay and learn the position they were playing.
Now McCloud comes along, he hasn't been sacked into oblivion, and until his hand gets injured he actually looked relatively competent (for a freshmen at least). I will give you that he looked awful against SMU, but really-who didn't in starter vs starter action? BYU of course he was injured but I still saw the smart pocket awareness I expected. Had his hand been 100% I suspect we would have rolled BYU, because those deep shots to McDoom are on target.
As is, if he's 100% on Saturday then Navy can load the box all they want, I suspect we can dump it off to Wilcox and Mathis until they finally back off. I suspect we will be much more balanced on Saturday.
-
6 hours ago, jchem1995 said:
Went back and watched the game and the announcer was saying he needs to get better at blocking.
We've ran for 556 yards the past two games. I'm thinking his blocking may be fine. I have noticed they use Mathis more, and in many cases they're on the field together.
-
Hoping he is. Nothing else looked wrong about him, it was just that hand.
Wish they had started running heavy earlier, it would have likely prevented the shoulder stinger as well.
If he's able to throw well on Saturday then the heavy running game becomes very dangerous.
-
1 hour ago, JTrue said:
Bill Belichick hasn’t won **** without Tom Brady.
I think the 2008 season bears out that Belichick can win without Tom Brady. In fact, Belichick is 13-6 without Brady and given the massive popularity that Brady has in New England, there's zero way they Montana him. Belichick might just retire with him, which will always leave that question, but we must remember before Belichick ever won a Super Bowl with the Patriots, he managed to get the Browns to win a playoff game-the last coach to do so.
It would take a few rebuilding years, but if you give Belichick 3 years without Brady I still think he wins another Super Bowl. I just doubt it's ever going to happen. Even so, winning six Super Bowls is likely what cements Belichick as the greatest NFL coach ever. And don't give me the "he cheated" lines. He's won three super bowls since Spygate and appeared in three more.
-
23 minutes ago, Roaming Bull said:
Isn’t California working on that? Pay players, trade players, trade coaches, and so on. Soon things will be just like the big leagues
I bet Strong would be a great life coach for the University of California-Berkeley.
-
1 hour ago, NewEnglandBull said:
So right. Third downs have been killers. Most of the time the conversions seem to be in the middle of the field over our LBs head and in front of the DBs. LBs have to drop back more in my opinion.
Isn't that supposed to be the hardest part of the field to hit? I wonder if the defense is too worried about getting burnt over the top-or perhaps the LBs are too close in.
-
I'm assuming the hand injury was throwing things off for him as everything else he was doing looked normal. Hopefully he will be recovered next week.
Navy will be a tough game especially if he's not healed.
-
3 minutes ago, puc86 said:
The top P5 games every week draw 100k in attendance and 7 million people in viewers to the top P6 game of 35k in attendance and a million viewers. The AAC is much closer to the rest of the G5 than it is to the P5 and adding more teams from the bottom will only serve to strengthen that divide.
Don't make me laugh. Last years AAC championship between UCF and Memphis had 3.2 million viewers. The year before was 3.3 million and got the same rating as USC vs. Stanford. You're deliberately underestimating numbers for your narrative.
Besides, if we're so much closer to the G5 in ratings, why do we have a media deal that pays five times the next highest g5 deal?
-
7 minutes ago, puc86 said:
As long as it has nothing to do with us I would be perfectly happy for everyone involved. However if we are stuck in this conference for any more time I do not think there is any value that would be added by anyone that would be willing to join. Adding garbage teams because you simply want numbers is how we ended up with this conference that has captured the heart of the nation (and by that I mean people would rather have their hearts forcibly ripped from their chest than watch AAC football).
Give me a break. The raw numbers don't bear out that statement at all. The American regularly gets games in excess of 1 million viewers, something the other G5 conferences don't do outside of their conference championship. The top half of conference games are very much on par with mid-level P5 games.
-
4 hours ago, Jonesy Bull said:
This states his buyout is 2.5 mil before contract ends and drops to 1.7 mil next year. Thats more do -able than the 5 mil plus people have been saying...unless the Foundation piece is a part of this and not being reported.
That's if Strong leaves and had he won big again in 18 I suspect he would have been gone-which would have been good with me since it means we have more money to hire our next coach.
Even now, I still hope he goes on a big run and wins 9-10 games this year because that at least starts fixing the narrative set at the start of the year. I just don't think he will.
-
4 minutes ago, Jonesy Bull said:
Very good and interesting point.
The SMU game could have been a turning in his mind. It certainly was for me. Its going to take alot more than a win over lowly Uconn to turn me back to his corner.
I think at a minimum CCS would have to beat UCF and go to a bowl to have a shot at staying. That or have an 8-9 win season including a bowl win.
-
Had we won GT we likely would have had a good chance for 6 wins.
UCF is looking mortal right now, I can't write off anything given the game is in Orlando, but maybe, just maybe the team improves enough to actually beat them.
BYU is 2-3 as well although two of their losses are to top 25 teams (one of them by 26 points). If BYU shows up cold we have a chance-that is a major time change from Utah.
-
Welcome Julia!
-
1 minute ago, Azmodi said:
Hmmm, Tanned with a Mustache? That's you and 30 other men and women there.
I am not tanned, I am naturally brown skinned. Function of having Pakistani parents.
-
18 minutes ago, flsportsfan83 said:
That was Cory Sommers, if it was at the brewary. I ran the cycle before him. I actually was at that fundraiser.
Yes, it was Sommers and I was at that fundraiser at well. I wonder if we talked at all. You probably remember me. Brown skinned, classes, at the time I had a mustache.
-
31 minutes ago, flsportsfan83 said:
Maybe I sent the mosquitos , I did run for Pasco County Mosquito Control. lol
I may have met you or one of the candidates who ran in that race. I was following Pasco County elections pretty closely. Did you have a fundraiser in Zephyrhills?
-
14 hours ago, Triple B said:
Are there not any programs out there built from young, defensive coordinators? That's where we, ARGUABLY, have had the most sustained "success" ..... or is that just not done any more.
Temple has worked that model to perfection of late. The issue is that when they face any kind of high powered offense and defense at the same time, they end up getting beaten.
-
3 hours ago, Bull Nut said:
It looks like not all big programs are in favor of what California is proposing.
Of course not. How dare California break the power of the Universities taking control of the rights of these student athletes, like they're sharecroppers from the 1890s!
-
Throwing out the SMU start for a minute (which was a shame-imagine what 2018 would have looked like with Flowers), Flowers took some time to get going, particularly with the tough schedule and getting used to the offense. If they let McCloud keep playing, he could develop in the second half of the year, especially if Bell works on getting the ball out of his hands quickly...
-
Just now, BDYZR said:
Precisely the answer I expected. The guy that's born a step faster, maybe a little more agile, maybe a little better eyesight, etc. "earns" the right.
We're going to disagree, so I'm done with the discussion.
Fine. I don't see it your way, you don't have to see it my way.
-
14 minutes ago, NAS Gone to Paradise said:
CCS has Florida ties...what has that done for the Bulls?
What Florida ties did Scott Frost, or Josh Heupel have?
As far as Frost and Heupel go they both had the benefit of coming into a program that had already done the hard work of selling UCF to Orlando and to many parts of Florida in general. It was less relevant for them.
USF hasn't succeeded fully at that, so having a coach who can sell some sort of affiliation with the state of Florida is massively beneficial.
And since you're so willing to quote only part of my post, but not all of it, why don't you comment on my suggestions for head coach? Go on, I'm waiting. Until you do I'll call you Mr. Broken Pipe-because all you do is comment on problems, with zero ideas on how to fix them! Just like pointing at a broken pipe!
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, BDYZR said:
Who gets the money? Is it the 2 or 3 "stars" on the team? What about the 3rd and 4th string practice squad guy that works just as hard, puts in the same hours, and never even sniffs at real playing time?
The ones who earned it! I consider this a free-market solution. If you've earned your way onto the field, you will play, and if you play well, you will get rewarded with marketing contracts. Given that we have a walk-on playing significant snaps at WR right now that should tell you anything is possible.
-
29 minutes ago, John Lewis said:
Some great questions here and I will try to answer as best I can.
I'm not sure what the most effective way there is for our fans to express their displeasure besides voting with their dollars. However, I do know that we have an AD who will listen to our fans, who will speak to our fans and he has proven that in his time here. I also know that pulling dollars from a program that needs to raise more than we have is also not effective. We are right in the middle of a campaign to build a facility that will transform the program we are most passionate about and because we're in a tough situation people want to run from. This doesn't help us move forward at all. Obviously, I cannot tell those who post here, or who I talk to personally, how to spend their dollars, but I can say that we can't move in the direction we all want if support wanes.
You do bring up an interesting point about the dissolution of the Big East. I wouldn't agree that we have appeared to have squandered anything because we, and the other members, were left in the cold by Syracuse and Pitt. This surely is a cause of the program not being the same as it was 10 years ago.
I would also say the the consumer is part of the problem. I'm not talking about those who aren't going to the games now, or donating to the Bulls Club. I'm talking about those who found it convenient to leave once we lost the Big East affiliation and the automatic BCS berth. Yes, that happened during a downturn in the program, but we bounced back. I talk to many people every day and sometime I reach out to those who have not been involved with us for a period of time and it's a shame when I hear that there is not interest in the programs that we play right now. I could care less who we play because I attend game to watch USF. MY TEAM!!
I have generally taken the same view point, although I can't ignore economic reality.
The Skip Holtz downturn was extraordinarily bad timing that no one had control over. If anything, one could make the case that USF's doom was sealed with the hiring of Woolard. He just wasn't cognizant of what football does for a college athletic program and refused to learn. Had there been better leadership it wouldn't have guaranteed that we move to the ACC or a better conference, but it would have at least given USF a fighting chance to be ready for the alignment shuffle.
I would also agree with the point that yes, the conference downgrade has made an impact. I can't tell you how many people I've begged to go to (or watch) games with me over the years. Typically it turns out one of three ways:
1. They refuse and give me talk about how USF needs to be in a better conference.
2. They watch, but USF loses yet another key game for the future of the program (i.e. UCF 2017).
3. I bring a family member only to see USF get destroyed on the field.
I sympathize for you, because it has been so difficult for me to sell USF to my friends and family.
The last 9 games are especially bad because people were starting to believe in USF again after we'd started winning and showing something from 2015 to 2017. We had around 40k for last year's game vs. UConn. Now it will take another four years just to reach that point again-possibly more, because people's hope has been shattered.
Daily Stampede - Need Money Article
in USF South Florida Bulls Athletics
Posted
MK has been responsive to private messages, even as he doesn't comment much publicly (I've exchanged messages weekly via twitter PMs). He did speak up after the BYU win.
It is hard because all the momentum that was built up between 2015 and 2017 got fizzled by that six game losing streak. That was three years of hard work and rebuilding the fan base-only to see it get wasted. They managed to rebuild a ton of that with promises of improvement over the offseason (hence the fairly strong attendance for WIsconsin), but the team going 3-10 over its last 13 games and getting smacked when they had an opportunity is very damaging. They're going to have to win even more than they won in 16 and 17 to have a chance at rebuilding this base.