Jump to content
  • USF Bulls fans join us at The Bulls Pen

    It's simple, free and connects you to other South Florida Bulls fans!

  • Members do not see this ad, Register

  • Men's Basketball
    Great Season Bulls!
    nit3.jpg

    Sun 3/24, 7:30 pm ESPNU

     
      1 2 Final  
    VCU 32 38 70  
    Bulls 30 35 65  
    📻 Listen 📊 Live Stats 📺 ESPNU  
    Prediction Contest - In Game Thread 
    Last:  Romped over UCF 83-77
     
     

Bulls Release Post-Spring Depth Chart


Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  93
  • Content Count:  3,048
  • Reputation:   316
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  11/24/2005

3 minutes ago, TromBull12 said:

Stop living in the past bro!!! Second half of the season we were very good and got the whole country taking a look. Spring game shows we're still moving in the same direction. I say we're world class until we're not, not the reverse. I save the word abysmal for the Matt Floyd/Mike White offenses. 

Did you read the posts preceding mine? The discussion pertained to discounting Mack's achievements because he played with "the most prolific QB in USF history behind one of the best offensive lines we have had." If you can't recognize why that's an issue I don't know what to tell you (also I note that Mack's first year was predominately a "Mike White offense").

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  39
  • Content Count:  2,086
  • Reputation:   883
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  09/14/2007

29 minutes ago, WWMJD said:

Did you read the posts preceding mine? The discussion pertained to discounting Mack's achievements because he played with "the most prolific QB in USF history behind one of the best offensive lines we have had." If you can't recognize why that's an issue I don't know what to tell you (also I note that Mack's first year was predominately a "Mike White offense").

I am not sure what is wrong with that statement, especially given the context.  BULLZ said Mack was successful despite our offense.  I am just saying that Mack has also benefited from the success we had where Hall was all by himself.

Did you read the part about where I was discussing Andre Hall and the truly and consistently abysmal offenses he was forced to work with?

There was an ongoing discussion that you seemed to overlook.

Edited by mark_my_words
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  93
  • Content Count:  3,048
  • Reputation:   316
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  11/24/2005

5 minutes ago, mark_my_words said:

I am not sure what is wrong with that statement, especially given the context.  BULLZ said Mack was successful despite our offense.  I am just saying that Mack has also benefited from the success we had where Hall was all by himself.

Did you read the part about where I was discussing Andre Hall and the truly and consistently abysmal offenses he was forced to work with?

There was an ongoing discussion that you seemed to overlook.

Yes. Mack has been successful despite our offense for 75% of his career. The rest of the offense only started clicking halfway through last year. I was and am a huge Hall fan, he was amazing to watch. But you have to be realistic that except for an isolated couple games, Mack has had to deal with exactly the same stuff Hall did - 8 men in the box because there was no pass threat.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  39
  • Content Count:  2,086
  • Reputation:   883
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  09/14/2007

15 minutes ago, WWMJD said:

Yes. Mack has been successful despite our offense for 75% of his career. The rest of the offense only started clicking halfway through last year. I was and am a huge Hall fan, he was amazing to watch. But you have to be realistic that except for an isolated couple games, Mack has had to deal with exactly the same stuff Hall did - 8 men in the box because there was no pass threat.

Glad you are now all caught up - almost.  I also mentioned that CWT always geared his offense around his RB - that is his bread and butter.  (I would like to see who else he makes a start after Mack.)  I am not sure CJL had a offensive philosophy other than get the ball in the hands of his best players. Something you are forced to do when depth is limited.

Andre was a one man show given the scheme (or lack thereof) and the talent at QB (and probably OL).  We actually won a lot of games on Andre's heart and effort and truly DESPITE our offense in his case.  I would really love to see what CWT could have done with him in this offense.  

Really that is all I am trying to say and why I still have him above Mack. 

Edited by mark_my_words
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  93
  • Content Count:  3,048
  • Reputation:   316
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  11/24/2005

5 minutes ago, mark_my_words said:

Glad you are now all caught up - almost.  I also mentioned that CWT always geared his offense around his RB - that is his bread and butter.  (I would like to see who else he makes a start after Mack.)  I am not sure CJL had a offensive philosophy other than get the ball in the hands of his best players. Something you are forced to do when depth is limited.

Andre was a one man show given the scheme (or lack thereof) and the talent at QB (and probably OL).  We actually won a lot of games on Andre's heart and effort and truly DESPITE our offense in his case.  I would really love to see what CWT could have done with him in this offense.  

Really that is all I am trying to say and why I still have him above Mack. 

I think you are forgetting how run focused the offense was when Hall was here (as you note, in large part because we had zero passing game). Hall had 480 carries in 23 games, Mack has had 412 in 24. I actually tend to agree that Marlon needs another year to really firm up his spot as "the man", but he definitely has a body of work where the offense as a whole was as bad - if not worse - than they were in 04/05.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  39
  • Content Count:  2,086
  • Reputation:   883
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  09/14/2007

29 minutes ago, WWMJD said:

I think you are forgetting how run focused the offense was when Hall was here (as you note, in large part because we had zero passing game). Hall had 480 carries in 23 games, Mack has had 412 in 24. I actually tend to agree that Marlon needs another year to really firm up his spot as "the man", but he definitely has a body of work where the offense as a whole was as bad - if not worse - than they were in 04/05.

I recall. I guess the way I look at it is we were run focused because we had Hall (and very little else).  Now we are run focused regardless of who we have.  That was the first thing CWT got in place.  The last 8 games the rest of it started clicking.  

If we did not have Mack we would still be run focused.  Whether it would be with Tice or DJ or someone else.  Maybe we would not be as successful (also debatable) but we still would be running.  

I am not sure how else to make my point, which I guess is really more about head coaches.  When Grothe came along we saw the same thing with him.  CJL road Grothe to a good deal of success making CJL an opportunist when it came to offensive style.  In contrast, there was a lot of criticism around here that CWT was not fitting the scheme to the players.  **** it, he was going to run the ball until we got it right.  

Therefore the emergence of Mack was not much of a surprise - at least to me.  Maybe that is why I am withholding anointing him the best ever.

I think we agree on Mack's talent and that he still needs to develop but based on my reasoning I think he would really have to wow me (like Andre did) to take the top spot.  I actually think it he will, but don't be surprised if we run the ball well the year after he leaves and we revisit this debate with player X.  (Assuming we still have CWT.)

  

 

Edited by mark_my_words
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  93
  • Content Count:  3,048
  • Reputation:   316
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  11/24/2005

I'm just glad that is a conversation we can have. Last year things weren't looking so rosy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  86
  • Content Count:  17,061
  • Reputation:   1,429
  • Days Won:  19
  • Joined:  09/15/2005

I'm just confused as to why Flowers is STILL number one on the chart :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.  Registration is free and reduces ads.