TallyBull

37 minutes ago, Triple B said:

His podcast was discussed earlier this season. Was pretty much AAC centric but he's been talking about branching out into more G5 conferences, which coincides with him getting a sponsor ....... "Best U Mental Health Clinic".

I've been getting less and less interested in this pod over time. Not sure if that's because of USF's lack of success recently, or his Texas-centric takes/interests. Possibly both. If he's also branching out into other G5 conferences... meh. I only care about the AAC because I have to. 

Hard to have confidence about anything right now. 

On 10/13/2023 at 4:01 PM, TallyBull said:

 

I guess I missed Saturday's announcement? Haven't seen anything on X. Starting to have my doubts.

What kind of world is this? Can't even trust Message Board Genuises.

4 minutes ago, 2000bull said:

that post got that guy -31 rep...ouch

 

but i'm here for it. 

He's either right or he's (most likely) wrong, but we'll find out soon!

FWIW

8 minutes ago, USF_Bullsharks said:

There are multiple P4 teams with stadium upgrades announced and/or under construction. I believe all of them are lowering total capacity, except for maybe Vanderbilt. 

SMU expanding their stadium: 32,000 -> ? unannounced  (not p5 yet, however may have been a prereq to joining either PAC/ACC?)

Northwestern 47,000 -> 35,000

Kansas 47,000 -> ? (press release says 2,300 more club seats, but also larger average seat size, leads me to believe less overall capacity)

Vanderbilt 41,000 -> ? (indications of more seats)

Oregon State 43,000 -> 35,000

FSU 79,000 -> "between 65,000 and 70,000"

UF 88,000 -> "reduced by thousands"

PSU a bajillion -> "less than 10,000 removed"

OkieSt 60,000 -> "additional leg room, more aisles added so less seats between aisle" = less seats

Nebraska 85,000 -> "adding more leg room"

Interesting, thanks for doing that research.

37 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Something to remember on this ACC thing. FSU, Clemson and UNC leaving will not necessarily trigger adding more teams. They’ve already got 3 coming to replace them and keep them at the same number if those do leave. 

It's a good point to keep in mind and certainly possible.

However, we do know ESPN TV deal renegotiations get triggered if the ACC dips below 15 teams. The B1G will already have 18 teams beginning in 2024, and if FSU and Clemson leave the ACC, they'll either go to the B1G - potentially increasing its membership to 20 - or to the SEC, potentially increasing its membership to 18. These increases could be higher if additional teams (e.g. UNC, UM, Virginia) leave the ACC. 

The Big 12 (presently at 16 in 2024) is also rumored to be eyeing Wazzu and OSU, in part to resolve the litigation with departing members, including some who are going to the Big 12 and stand to lose significant basketball and other revenue if the PAC continues to exist and those teams don't join. So the Big 12 could also go to 18 very soon.

Point being, it looks like the B1G, SEC, and Big 12 will soon be getting bigger one way or another (to 18+ members). And as noted the ACC can't risk falling below 15 teams. I think the speculation (expectation?) is that the ACC is actually going to lose more than just FSU, Clemson, and UNC, creating at the same both larger competitor conferences and possibly more spots to backfill within the ACC. But even if the ACC stays at 15, it would seem rather foolish to just stay at that number if your goal is to survive long-term (not that that would stop them from doing it).  

1 minute ago, BDYZR said:

In the context of my post, no. And I have no idea if this gut knows anything or not. But he said academics first, then sports. Memphis immediately reply's, "But but but we beat Tulane...yada, yada, yada."

Yeah, all of these posts go firmly in the "rumor" pile. But based on the ACC's decision to add Stanford and Cal, despite significant geographic challenges, ACC leadership clearly values academics. Jim's comments are consistent with that emphasis. USF's AAU designation couldn't have come at a better time. 

Hope there aren’t many FSU fans lurking here, doubt there are, but Jim’s pulling no punches here (notably he’s a USF grad):

15 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

MK’s ACC connections may pay dividends for USF

Boy howdy, this is going to go over about as well as a fart in church with some in this thread 

7 hours ago, Triple B said:

 

A little surprising if he actually turned them down. In these days and times, hard to imagine a program these days looking to someone who took 7 years to build something .......

It apparently took Fritz six years to have that magical run with Tulane in 2022. But he was still 41-45 overall, even at that point. And it's not totally clear that he was actually offered the Georgia Tech job, although media reports strongly suggest he was (GT went with an interim coach, Brent Key, instead). 

I think the concerns about Golesh leaving sooner rather than later are valid. Yes, he's only 3-2 at this point, but what he's been able to do in literally one season is pretty impressive. That fact, plus his amazing turnaround jobs at prior stops like Tennessee, will make him a hot commodity. Clearly the man knows what he's doing, which is more than what we can say for most new head football coaches.

All that said, I'm optimistic we can hold on to him for a while - at least long enough to build a true culture of success at USF, something similar to what Boise has. And who knows? Maybe he'll love it here (it is Florida after all) and settle in, especially if USF somehow gets into an auto-bid conference in the meantime. 

9 minutes ago, Brad said:

The tetrarchs (same vibe):

15 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

USF fan from Tallahassee -- any of these look like you?

Ha, nope, but I'm sure my wife would be delighted if I did! 

I look more like the bull in my avatar. 

15 hours ago, Cat941 said:

That's awesome!   

You should make one of those your avatar!

1 hour ago, belgianbull said:

I don't think they over expanded. They acted while the ACC and PAC sat back. Between the Big 12, ACC, and the Pac, the Big 12 was able to strike first by adding BYU, Cincy, and all the Pac teams. The ACC responded by adding teams like SMU and Cal, two teams the Big 12 didn't want. Stanford though was a great add. The Pac is now dead, and during the next expansion period I believe the Big 12 will have a leg up on the ACC; which works out for us since  the ACC will have to backfill programs they lose.

Wazzu and OSU:

2 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

pac 12 was offered $30m per school after usc and ucla were gone. the others going are getting partial shares. big 16 deal is comparable at $31.6.

my point was that the tv networks didn't break up pac 12. they did it to themselves by asking for $50m per school.

Yeah, some seriously bad negotiating went down. I get being aggressive, but the old PAC leadership was just being insane.

4 minutes ago, Cat941 said:

After witnessing the surgical destruction of the PAC, I'm thinking that if the networks or other forces with power want to do the same to the ACC, it will happen.  Of course the situation is vastly different but it seems that there has been an agreed upon agenda by those in powers and it will conclude with superconferences.  FSU will be included.  

And yet, they still exist.

Based on credible news reports, it looks like neither the B1G nor the Mid 12 are changing their minds about including them. 

If they win their court case against the (current) PAC, they'll get to keep some serious $$$ that formerly belonged to departing PAC members. Money that they could use to lure teams into helping them rebuild the conference.

Podcaster Trey Smith (FWIW) seems to think that if they do win their court case (as expected), they will not want to join or merge with the MWC because they don't want to associate with the bottom rung teams in that conference. 

All signs are pointing to a PAC rebuild at some point. Not sure whether they'd have any interest creating an eastern division that includes USF, but regardless I can't think of a better time for us to be making noise in football...

1. USF
2. 35-21
3. Wright
4. Atkins
5. 475

10 minutes ago, Bull Matrix said:

I don’t want to jinx USF’s recent success of winning on the field. Plus been busy with the quarter end close out at work. I do believe I ran across some USF to ACC or Big Ten rumors though lol 

But no USF to SEC rumors? 

18 minutes ago, MaltLiquorBull said:

This is why I think (and am hoping) that 35,000 is the number of SEATS, but not necessarily the capacity.  If we had 35,000 total seats not including standing or grass berm room that could allow 10,000 more people in (students), then we'd be ok for most games.

Standing room/grass berms would be cool. I have no idea if it'll happen, but it would be neat!

Bottom line, I'm just not worried about the stadium capacity. I trust folks in the know to make a wise decision considering all the factors, including expansion potential should the need arise. It's a huge investment, obviously, and I'm confident USF is looking at it from every angle.

From the beginning USF has said that it's going to focus on building a quality stadium. To me, that means fewer bleachers and more actual seats. Yes, some stadiums are larger (e.g. the Rust Bucket), but they rely on aluminum bleachers to get there.

So long as the place is dripping in green and gold (both structurally and in terms of attendance), I'll be fine with it. Shade structures would be an amazing bonus. 

And water fountains would be nice!

8 minutes ago, Gismo said:

P5s smallest stadiums.

35,000 Is small folks. We’d be one of the smallest in the p5 if we were in it.

 

NCAA college football: The Power 5’s smallest stadiums

THELISTWIRE.USATODAY.COM

---

It’s time to flip the typical NCAA stadium list

 

I don't doubt it. But I'd rather have a small stadium filled to capacity than a large stadium that is half full. If/when we get into a P5, there will be money and justification to expand. But I think the smaller stadium is the right size for now.