Florida Bull

You can blame John Lott Brown for this one. He didn't just have to retire, he had to DIE before we could get football. What a misguided old man he was ('course, that's what most folks say about me, so who am I to talk...) ---------------------------------------------------------------- I am not sure where, but I read we would not have a football program without Lee Roy Selmon. He is the face of our athletic department.

If college players are suing for money on anti-trust grounds, could that mean they will be able to form a union like the NFLPA?

Conference news only keeps getting worse for us! Will it ever get better?

I saw the movie, too. It was very good and inspiring.

It does not make sense that the Big East, which includes borderline AQ-quality football, is worth less than the C7 pre-league and possibly the MWC. We have more fans, a larger footprint, and logically more national interest for tv.

Potentially less than $2 million per year? It looks like we will make less in television money than now, even during a time of heavy tv contract inflation.

Honestly I don't think so. Think about how much money a guy like Geno Smith and Matt Barkley have made for there Universities through jersey sales and ticket sales. You don't believe they deserve any of that compensation? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Then what about the students who already pay the universities providing the players with scholarships and many intangible benefits. With players getting paid big money, they would likely suffer more budget cuts and go deeper into debt. Especially with Title 9.

If college players get paid or sign contracts, I wonder how long before they form unions with collective bargaining agreements. Then college player strikes and/or lockouts? School Spirit!

I am not going to doubt the talent and potential of USF coaches and athletes. But, the past two seasons have taught me to not take any games for granted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree. They get scholarships, free healthcare, and soon to be stipends, while other students get into debt-funding the university that allows them to play, through tuition and athletics fees. And, making the average student pay even more and get deeper into debt for them, while suffering budget cuts and the firings of professors? Great training for the NFL, free exposure, great social networking opportunities, and social status for girlfriends and potential jobs if the NFL route does not work out. If this is such unfair exploitation, then why do they even bother playing?

Also, as a correction of one of my posts, DE Ryne Giddins.

I forgot. TE: Sean Price and Mike McFarland will probably be the main tight ends.

Defense: DT: Elkino Watson will likely start. I think Derrick Calloway will become good enough start, at least by mid-season. I can imagine good rotation opportunities for Deadrin Senat, Todd Chandler, and Luke Sager. DE: Probably Aaron Lynch and Ryne Giddens starting, with Tevin Mims getting some playing time. LB: DeDe Lattimore and Tashon Whitehurst will likely start. There might be some competition or sharing between Rahmon Swain and Mitchell Wright. I am not sure which position Nigel Harris would play, but he and Reshard Cliett are also among our best linebackers. Nigel might be a backup on the outside or compete with Rahmon and Mitchell for I guess the middle (?). CB: I think Lamar Robbins and Chris Bivins have a real chance to be starters, with the graduation of Kayvon Webster and George Baker. Perhaps Kenneth Durden and Fidel Montgomery also have very good potential for much playing time this year. I am interested in seeing how Torrel Saffold contributes. S: I think JaQuez Jenkins and Mark Joyce will likely be the starters. But, hopefully we can see some success from Nate Godwin, Jarvis McCall, and Jalen Spencer-in rotation or if any of them are good enough to start.

Very good question! Obvious, it is too early to know. But, I will take a general guess, just for fun. QB: Bobby Eveld will likely be the starter, with Mike White as a developing backup. Matt Floyd will probably be third. He really did not impress me in the last few games last year-all of which were blowouts. RB: Marcus Shaw will probably be the starter, with Michael Pierre, Stafon McCray, and Darius Tice as the backups. FB: Probably a lot of playing time for Justin Wilcox and Auggie Sanchez WR: Andre Davis and Terrence Mitchell are the obvious leading candidates to start. I think there is potential for Dvario Montgomery to get a lot of playing time. He is very talented. Sterling Griffin and Deonte Welch will likely be solid contributors. OL: Without asking the coaches and/or seeing the team evaluations, I really do not know what to guess before they play in front of the public. There are many non-obvious variables for evaluating offensive linemen-especially with so many on the team and freshmen prospects just coming in now.

Of course he hasn't. This is all fan generated. True, but with McMurphy you have to watch as he is a reporter but ESPN pays his bills and who loses the most with expansion now out of ACC, ESPN. ------------------------------------------------------- You can accuse him of having a conflict of interest. But, Brett McMurphy is virtually always right. He clearly knows what he is talking about.

------------------------------------------------------- I doubt FSU and Miami are afraid of USF. Of course, they probably like seeing USF lose its AQ status. But, they are not afraid of failing behind USF. It seems unlikely they would leave the ACC for a less compatible conference just to prevent USF from getting AQ status back. ----------- Well, if they were making $15-19 M and USF and UCF were making $25 M, I would say that is USF and UCF leap frogging FSU and UM with respect to athletic finances while still having a smaller viewer base. Look at a school like Baylor.... I mean they have a tiny fan base but are banking more than all of the ACC teams and they are a private school. ------------------------------------------------------- A tv contract payout is only a fraction of an athletic department's revenue. Even if we were in the Big 12 with full member revenue, we would still be financially behind the "Big 3." Of course, the "Big 3" probably like the idea of USF losing Its AQ status due to factors outside of its control. But, I doubt they would alter their strategies and potentially hurt their universities just to play petty games blocking USF from a conference they do not even want to be in.

------------------------------------------------------- I doubt FSU and Miami are afraid of USF. Of course, they probably like seeing USF lose its AQ status. But, they are not afraid of failing behind USF. It seems unlikely they would leave the ACC for a less compatible conference just to prevent USF from getting AQ status back.

------------------------------------------------------- Which university doesn't have a 5 year plan for AAU status? Just because FSU wants it, it does not mean it will actually get it. USF has more, in research expenditures.

If you are implying UC is clearly better and more valuable as a conference prospect than USF, I would disagree. Although UC has had more success in football and basketball-we have probably more balance in athletics, I believe more athletic revenue, a much more appealing location, and I think more fans. UC and USF are comparable, and make natural conference mates.

The problem is, I doubt Cincinnati wants to partner with us. Neither does UF or FSU, mentioned in earlier posts in this thread, for that matter. Both sided gotta wanna. Beggars can't be choosers, and right now, like it or not, we're beggars, so you take what you can get. Or we can be proud and stubborn, stomping our feet and demanding **** like a 2 year old, and get left standing out in the cold to freeze to death. I know Cincinnati looks down on us and wants to leave us in the cold. They apparently do see us as unworthy of sharing a conference with them. But, I said they probably make the most sense for us to associate with on our level. Not that UC wants to associate with us. Whether Cincinnati likes it or not, UC and USF are generally on the same level as conference prospects.

I think it makes sense the Texas schools would prefer exposure in Florida and major Northern cities instead of the inner West.

The most practical university at our level to try to associate with-particularly in conference realignment-might be Cincinnati.

I doubt Texas has to remain with the private schools; probably not even Texas Tech either. Why would the PAC-12 accept Oklahoma State, just so the SEC can get Oklahoma? If Texas is forcibly tied to Texas Tech and even the private Big 12 members, then Oklahoma would likely be tied to Oklahoma State in a move to the SEC.

I understand, they have accomplished a lot, and Cincinnati would offer a more 'new' market to somebody like the ACC or even SEC. UConn would certainly offer a very new market to the SEC or Big 10. But, regarding the rebuttal of market size being important, i don't think anybody said it was just market size. Being located in Florida-almost tied for being the third most populous state-with a big football culture and offering excellent recruits, USF would help a conference like the Big 12. Adding a school in Florida-particularly Tampa-would entail great exposure for the Big 12. The Big XII is doing just fine for quality recruits as it is now. I have no doubt the league, in an ideal scenario, wouldn't mind having a team in Florida, but unless you have a link from a conference official saying otherwise, I don't think it's important enough to justify taking in a league member that would add little if anything to the value of the conference's television contract and/or overall prestige. The league has managed just fine to produce quality football teams and players under the current alignment. It is not just if the conference is OK for now, but what is in its long-term interests. I know the Big 12 gets great recruits, but to some extent most FBS conferences do. With Texas A&M joining the SEC, and some of the western members on the rise, I would not be surprised if some SEC coaches put more emphasis on recruiting in Texas. And, it is about more than just getting satisfactory recruits for the time being. The Big 12 could claim to have a stronger conference overall and even be right (like the Big East vs. the ACC). but, people would not notice with the round-robin scheduling. Another issue is the footprint. It is largely contained in one region of the country isolated from eastern markets and fans. Lessening exposure and potentially losing recruits can have an effect. A part of exposure is also nominal comparisons. How embarrassing would the Champions Bowl be-already with potentially the Big 12 round-robin champion playing the SEC #2 or 3-with announcers pointing out the Big 12 only has 10 members compared to the SEC's 14, and can only rely on the state of Texas for recruiting and big media whereas the SEC a presence in Texas and the Southeast (particularly with Florida)? And, no conference championship game from the Big 12? The tv contract is obviously good, but includes 9 games per member while I think the other AQ conferences only include 8 each, so that might inflate how much money the conference can get in a tv contract without expanding. If the ACC had nine conferences games per member, even it would likely have more tv contract money per member. There may not be many great teams left, but I think at least the pre-2012 Big East teams would contribute to the inventory and even excitement. Complacency is not beneficial for the Big 12.

Procures 200th career win. http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/article/289646/8/USFs-Fernandez-gets-milestone-win