Ravishing Rueb

I don't see anything wrong with the article. I have taken a lot of out-of-towners to the Columbia over the years. Never again.

I liked Grothe on the field, but the guy is an embarrassment off of it. When he announced that he was foregoing the NFL draft to come back for his senior year - Funniest thing to ever came out of his mouth, by far.

Loved Grothe at QB, but come on. QB coach? That's almost as funny as when he held a press conference to announce he was coming back for his senior year. Give Willie more credit.

Whoa. Someone needs their dosage adjusted.

Yes, obviously I believe it was intentional. I thought I have been clear on this point. Why would he toss it forward? - Because he saw his teammate in a position to scoop and score.

I disagree. The forward propulsion call was legit. We would have been in an uproar if Rutgers did the same thing and got away with it. The last USF throw of the Rutgers game was a terrible call. Forward propulsion was legit? It was not at all. Illegal forward propulsion is when a player intentionally throws the ball to the ground in hopes someone else will pick it up. Replays clearly showed that the ball was knocked out of the USF player's hands by a Rutgers player from behind, thus pushing the ball forward. There wasn't anything remotely intentional about it. A regular fumble that is advanced is perfectly legal, which is exactly what happened in the Rutgers game. When I take my green and gold glasses off, it looks like there was an intentional throw forward. It was a smart play, and I bet Rutgers would have gotten away with it, but I can't objectively say that it was a bad call. I looked at that play a bunch of times. The ball was very, very clearly knocked forward by a Rutgers player that hit him from behind. It wasn't remotely close, and it would have been beyond stupid for the USF player to propel the ball forward in that situation anyway. It was far from the end of the game and it was a huge play to block the kick. No player would think about try to pass the ball forward. I have no idea what you think you saw, but it was clearly a Rutgers player that pushed it forward. I watched it multiple times too. It looks like forward propulsion to me. I have no idea how you can watch that play and write "it wasn't remotely close". Agree to disagree.

I disagree. The forward propulsion call was legit. We would have been in an uproar if Rutgers did the same thing and got away with it. The last USF throw of the Rutgers game was a terrible call. Forward propulsion was legit? It was not at all. Illegal forward propulsion is when a player intentionally throws the ball to the ground in hopes someone else will pick it up. Replays clearly showed that the ball was knocked out of the USF player's hands by a Rutgers player from behind, thus pushing the ball forward. There wasn't anything remotely intentional about it. A regular fumble that is advanced is perfectly legal, which is exactly what happened in the Rutgers game. When I take my green and gold glasses off, it looks like there was an intentional throw forward. It was a smart play, and I bet Rutgers would have gotten away with it, but I can't objectively say that it was a bad call.

I disagree. The forward propulsion call was legit. We would have been in an uproar if Rutgers did the same thing and got away with it. The last USF throw of the Rutgers game was a terrible call.

I feel better. White showed promise. I generally liked the offensive play calling. I hope the O-line can protect White against a team that blitzes. I'd rather see 15 holding calls than White getting pummeled. Whatever the line has to do - don't let White take a bunch of shots. But - I'm still pissed about the refs. The sting hasn't worn off. I get the "can't leave it in the refs hands" cliches. But we got SCREWED. That wasn't a questionable call, that was a BS call. I can't help but question the integrity of the officials. I'd feel 'good' minus that call.

I think Woolard should give himself a raise, extend Willie, take a nap, call the AAC, take another nap, and then call the Big 12. But all that will have to wait until Monday, when he is in the office. Because he's on the golf course right now.

The Good: QB White, and the confidence the rest of the offense has in him. The Bad: Our defense is atrocious. Can't tackle, can't recognize a screen pass, can't cover receivers. The Ugly: Penalties. The legit ones, and the BS calls.

It sure doesn't feel like a conspiracy theory. Feels more like solid reasoning. It took a UH player throwing the ball at a USF player to get a flag thrown. These guys need to be fired. It was the same ref. All the false starts etc were legit. Those are on Willie and to a lesser extent - White. Kid looked great otherwise. Rueben - Admitted conspiracy theorist

We are better informed.

I hope you are right, but is there anything you can point to that supports the statement - "We're a much better team than those stats show"?

When I read one of your posts, all I think about is how much shorter it should be. Cool story, bro.

Wendy's, McDonald's, Denny's. The ones near Mons.

You must be drunk too if you had to edit this brilliant and thought provoking post. USF alumni. Don't drink. And totally shocked by this fact. How about the next time I read something about USF athletics that seems totally outrageous I consult you for a title? That way you can write how you came up with and approved the title and don't have to write, and edit, an insult. Oh, and you misspelled rube. I'm totally shocked you graduated.

If the title is "wow"? You are drunk, or not a USF fan. Or both. I hope both.

1. Outside of a win, what would you like to most see in Saturday's game against Cincinnati? - Pass protection 2. What USF sport outside of football and basketball would you watch? - Soccer 3. What varsity sport would you love for USF to add? - Mens lacrosse 4. Who was your favorite professor at USF? - Dr Antia. Best in the COBA. 5. Pick the Rays/Red Sox series - Rays in 5

Is it impossible to hire a guy like Daryl Gross? Like him, as in - young(er) and hungry. http://suathletics.syr.edu/staff.aspx?staff=106

What do you accomplish by canning him now rather than the end of 2015 .... except more money going to somebody no longer working at USF? Great (rhetorical) question. Who knows? IMO, You send a message that going from a #2 ranking to a (whatever we are) is unacceptable, and heads will roll, beyond the HCs. My major beef with Doug is that he hasn't taken enough risk. We needed an AD that was willing to take risks that could (read could) send USF into the 'escape velocity' necessary to get out of the AAC gutter that we landed in. Skip and Taggart were not risky by any stretch of the imagination. Hiring a Sun Belt coach with a couple years HC experience and whose best record is 7 wins isn't risky enough? And the message sent would be a resounding one that USF has lost its collective mind as a program and must be taking directions from fan message boards whose response to losing is fire ________ even when the person directly responsible, the coach, already has been fired. No, it was obviously not risky, imo. I think it was rather safe. He was a hot commodity.

What do you accomplish by canning him now rather than the end of 2015 .... except more money going to somebody no longer working at USF? Great (rhetorical) question. Who knows? IMO, You send a message that going from a #2 ranking to a (whatever we are) is unacceptable, and heads will roll, beyond the HCs. My major beef with Doug is that he hasn't taken enough risk. We needed an AD that was willing to take risks that could (read could) send USF into the 'escape velocity' necessary to get out of the AAC gutter that we landed in. Skip and Taggart were not risky by any stretch of the imagination.

My question to GaUSFbull was rhetorical. My opinion obvious. I was hoping someone else would jump into the quicksand with him. Carried it on too long. Sorry. Nothing personal Ga.

It didn't have to be that way. The only thing I've learned is that your mind is a confused place full of (admitted) contradictions. I still don't know why Doug has to be here to have Willie succeed. Oh, wait, he doesn't.

do you want Taggart to succeed in turning around this football team? You do? Great, me too. However, that means that Doug keeps his job. How do you feel about that? Which one is it dipstick? Are you having trouble remembering what you wrote three posts above? I see this is getting personal for you. You might want to tone that down. While you're at it, try telling me how that DISPROVES everything I've been saying ... ? With regards to Doug keeping his job if Taggart succeeds? Didn't I JUST say that a moment ago, or are you still having problems comprehending? Usually when someone admits they are contradicting their own points, they don't question other people's comprehension. Again, you wrote that Willie succeeding means that Doug keeps his job. I asked why. That's all. Your Tool quote is fitting. Go Bulls. Fire Woolard.