UCF getting 'close' to CFP is good for AAC and USF

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Gatorbull325 said:

I hope UCF beats Memphis so we can go to the Gasparilla bowl and hopefully play Miami. If UCF loses we are going to get the worse of the worse AAC bowl game. 

USF will not play a bowl game in Tampa.

 

9 hours ago, El_Toro_86 said:

USF UCF is a zero sum game.  Good things that happen to UCF is ultimately detrimental to USF and vice versus.  Of course we haven’t lived the vice versus recently.  There is no guarantee that we are a package deal if and when expansion happens so I hope they lose every game they play in every sport.  It’s every man’s for himself when expansion happens and if it were tomorrow we’d be toast.  I just don’t understand the logic of rooting for UCF because it’s good for the P6 narrative or perception for both schools when expansion happens.  The only benefactor of UCF’s success is UCF, not USF, not the AAC, not the silly P6 narrative or USF.

No... it is absolutely not a zero sum game.  Look at the people who have criticized UCF despite two undefeated seasons in a row.  When USF does that in the future, people will criticize the strength of schedule.  No one questions the strength of WVU's schedule because they feel the Big 12 is better than the AAC.  Image. Is. Everything.  The Mountain West benefitted from Boise State to the point that Utah was invited to the Pac 12.  A rising tide lifts all boats.

 

 

9 hours ago, puc86 said:

 

I’m trying to find my center and be less angry. If anything it make me sad how far we have apparently fallen that we are hoping to grasp onto things we see as bigger than ourselves to be our salvation (that people now see that thing as UCF makes me physically ill). The AAC P6 fantasy is the biggest pipe dream and there is no making the AAC stronger because it’s not a meritocracy and it’s not in the best interest of those with any of the power or money to grow the power beyond the P5 they have annointed, it’s not happening ever at any time under any circumstances. The AAC’s power and money is perfectly aligned with all the other G5 also rans and some 10x removed from the least of the P5 no one game or group of games will ever close that gap. Every single AAC team recognizes this which is why every single team has one foot out the door at all times. Which brings us to our next point. We need market differentiation to make us be one of the ones selected on the last boat off of this Titanic and while markets, standing, prestige and size seems to have had more to do with expansion than on field success we certainly don’t want any factors going against us when we are likely situated against a team. To date there has not been any teams brought to expansion as a package, I don’t think any were even from the same state, and not one decision maker has expressed any interest in a package deal. UCF and us are not team, we are adversaries fighting over the exact same limited resources. There is no stronger together this is a zero sum game and we need to be better than everyone both by our own success and by their failure. The best thing for USF is for UCF to lose every game from now until eternity as we get out of the AAC and they get left behind again never to be heard from again. USF stands alone, we need to succeed on our own accord and our fans need to stop embarrassing themselves by perpetuating sad fairytales about other people’s successes actually being good for us when any and all evidence points to the fact that it’s destroying our program. 

If you want a Tweet from a Big 12 official about taking USF and UCF together, it doesn't exist.  The media - especially those from ESPN - have illustrated why it is a good idea.  That said, when the Pac 12 kicked this whole thing off, they wanted a "package deal" with four teams. 

The AAC is already ahead of the rest of the G5.... yes, a long ways behind the P5.  However, the changes in cable are going to reduce the P5 next time around.  There is even talk the Big Ten Network might fold.

If you stacked up UCF and USF today for "market differentiation" you would see that UCF is ahead of USF in nearly every meaningful measure.  USF has a bigger TV market (13) than UCF (19)... I don't know any other market measure that would give USF the edge... In short, USF needs UCF a lot more than UCF needs USF. 

Quite frankly UCF is not going to suddenly turn into U Conn or ECU.  Florida has too much high school talent for the Knights to be down for long.  Look at USF ... even Skip Holtz could not bury USF forever.

USF fans need to stop deluding themselves thinking this school can do anything on it's own.  Dan Mullen is right - first you sell out, then you win championships.  Nebraska had their worst season in modern history -- and sold out every game.

The lack of fan support is destroying the program.

[chapelbull]

Why didn't they just invite Boise State then?

[chapelbull]

https://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/how-hard-did-husker-fan-apathy-hit-attendance-at-nebraska/article_ce50fc4a-15a4-11e8-9961-97f4908ec6e4.html

[puc86]

59 minutes ago, JimUSFSig said:

USF will not play a bowl game in Tampa.

 

No... it is absolutely not a zero sum game.  Look at the people who have criticized UCF despite two undefeated seasons in a row.  When USF does that in the future, people will criticize the strength of schedule.  No one questions the strength of WVU's schedule because they feel the Big 12 is better than the AAC.  Image. Is. Everything.  The Mountain West benefitted from Boise State to the point that Utah was invited to the Pac 12.  A rising tide lifts all boats.

 

 

If you want a Tweet from a Big 12 official about taking USF and UCF together, it doesn't exist.  The media - especially those from ESPN - have illustrated why it is a good idea.  That said, when the Pac 12 kicked this whole thing off, they wanted a "package deal" with four teams. 

The AAC is already ahead of the rest of the G5.... yes, a long ways behind the P5.  However, the changes in cable are going to reduce the P5 next time around.  There is even talk the Big Ten Network might fold.

If you stacked up UCF and USF today for "market differentiation" you would see that UCF is ahead of USF in nearly every meaningful measure.  USF has a bigger TV market (13) than UCF (19)... I don't know any other market measure that would give USF the edge... In short, USF needs UCF a lot more than UCF needs USF. 

Quite frankly UCF is not going to suddenly turn into U Conn or ECU.  Florida has too much high school talent for the Knights to be down for long.  Look at USF ... even Skip Holtz could not bury USF forever.

USF fans need to stop deluding themselves thinking this school can do anything on it's own.  Dan Mullen is right - first you sell out, then you win championships.  Nebraska had their worst season in modern history -- and sold out every game.

The lack of fan support is destroying the program.

So in your mind we are behind UCF but you think what would be best for USF would be to cheer for UCF to have continued success so that we could possibly ride their coattails into the promised land based off some notion that is possible because you heard a person on ESPN say it’s not a horrible idea? Wouldn’t it make more sense to cheer for USF to pass them by from our success as well as their failure? We are the higher rated university, we are the bigger market, we have drawn the bigger crowds and we are the ones with actual relationships with universities in the P5. Boise was having more success than UCF yet they got passed by and it’s time for UCF’s flash in the pan to burn out and we shouldn’t be cheering for anything other than that.

[GaUSFBull]

2 hours ago, puc86 said:

 

No... it is absolutely not a zero sum game.  Look at the people who have criticized UCF despite two undefeated seasons in a row.  When USF does that in the future, people will criticize the strength of schedule.  No one questions the strength of WVU's schedule because they feel the Big 12 is better than the AAC.  Image. Is. Everything.  The Mountain West benefitted from Boise State to the point that Utah was invited to the Pac 12.  A rising tide lifts all boats.

Yeah and look at where Boise is now.  They clearly had an anchor away because they are right where they were, same as us.  

And if image is everything, we are really screwed as an AAC afterthought.  

Nothing you just said really supported your argument at all.

[GaUSFBull]

Sorry, not sure why the quoted post shows as if from puc.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, GaUSFBull said:

Yeah and look at where Boise is now.  They clearly had an anchor away because they are right where they were, same as us.  

And if image is everything, we are really screwed as an AAC afterthought.   

Nothing you just said really supported your argument at all.

Boise States's biggest anchor was their location. Boise.  Their second biggest anchor: a lack of other quality teams in a conference.

My point is that UCF's success is improving the AAC's image.  It cannot -- no ... it MUST NOT be about only USF and no one else.  Or USF will be just another Boise State.

All of the Power 5 conferences have teams that would never be invited today, but are in the Power 5 based on sheer history. Wake Forest. Oregon State. Vanderbilt. Northwestern. Baylor.  If these schools are evaluated along the same lines as USF, they would be G5 schools as well.  I mention this because one factor many in the media (especially those at the worldwide leader) talk about how the AAC hasn't yet proven to have levels with a few dominant programs year after year... a few fair-to-middlin programs that flame up every 2-3 years... and a few bottom dwellers that have one or two flashes every decade.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, puc86 said:

So in your mind we are behind UCF but you think what would be best for USF would be to cheer for UCF to have continued success so that we could possibly ride their coattails into the promised land based off some notion that is possible because you heard a person on ESPN say it’s not a horrible idea? Wouldn’t it make more sense to cheer for USF to pass them by from our success as well as their failure? We are the higher rated university, we are the bigger market, we have drawn the bigger crowds and we are the ones with actual relationships with universities in the P5. Boise was having more success than UCF yet they got passed by and it’s time for UCF’s flash in the pan to burn out and we shouldn’t be cheering for anything other than that.

The comparative ratings of the universities simply do not matter.  The difference in market size is minimal (13 vs 19).  We draw bigger crowds because we play in an NFL stadium -- something so many people here feel needs to change ASAP.

You said it yourself earlier... success on the field is not the sole determining factor.  Boise was passed by because they are in Boise -- (they aren't even a top 100 TV market) - and because the Mountain West doesn't really have the overall quality for the image of Boise to be better than it is.

Even if USF and UCF are not a package deal... we still need the AAC to have 2 or 3 other programs who are 10 win programs year after year.  We need the overall image of the AAC to improve ... because then more USF fans will buy season tickets and attend games ('quality of opponent' is clearly an issue based on who shows up)... more USF fans will watch AAC games... more people will donate to USF athletics. 

Let me clarify one thing in your post ... I did not hear "a person on ESPN" ... there were DOZENS OF MEDIA MEMBERS who said the Big 12 should add both USF and UCF when the conference was doing it's dog and pony show interviewing interested schools.  People who, unlike you and I, are paid to analyze and report on this kind of thing.

Finally, I will say this... it would "be best for USF" if USF schedules four p5 teams out of conference and doesn't lose another game ever ... and that UCF only loses to USF -- year in and year out... the Alabama-LSU or Michigan-Ohio State type battles.  As I said above, if USF goes undefeated every year, but all other AAC teams change who gets 8 or 9 wins, that would be bad. USF would be another Boise State.

Edited December 1, 2018 by JimUSFSig

[puc86]

1 hour ago, JimUSFSig said:

The comparative ratings of the universities simply do not matter.  The difference in market size is minimal (13 vs 19).  We draw bigger crowds because we play in an NFL stadium -- something so many people here feel needs to change ASAP.

You said it yourself earlier... success on the field is not the sole determining factor.  Boise was passed by because they are in Boise -- (they aren't even a top 100 TV market) - and because the Mountain West doesn't really have the overall quality for the image of Boise to be better than it is.

Even if USF and UCF are not a package deal... we still need the AAC to have 2 or 3 other programs who are 10 win programs year after year.  We need the overall image of the AAC to improve ... because then more USF fans will buy season tickets and attend games ('quality of opponent' is clearly an issue based on who shows up)... more USF fans will watch AAC games... more people will donate to USF athletics. 

Let me clarify one thing in your post ... I did not hear "a person on ESPN" ... there were DOZENS OF MEDIA MEMBERS who said the Big 12 should add both USF and UCF when the conference was doing it's dog and pony show interviewing interested schools.  People who, unlike you and I, are paid to analyze and report on this kind of thing.

Finally, I will say this... it would "be best for USF" if USF schedules four p5 teams out of conference and doesn't lose another game ever ... and that UCF only loses to USF -- year in and year out... the Alabama-LSU or Michigan-Ohio State type battles.  As I said above, if USF goes undefeated every year, but all other AAC teams change who gets 8 or 9 wins, that would be bad. USF would be another Boise State.

The quality of a university is most certainly a determining factor,  have you ever actually heard the discussions around expansion or seen the presentations by the universities? The things I laid out are what gets discussed and presented. In the back of people’s minds does some football success also play a factor? Probably enough that I don’t want to risk it and I want anyone likely competing with us to fail miserably because as a USF fan it certainly is all about USF and certainly should be only about USF. I am a USF nationalist every other university be damned.

[puc86]

1 hour ago, JimUSFSig said:

The comparative ratings of the universities simply do not matter.  The difference in market size is minimal (13 vs 19).  We draw bigger crowds because we play in an NFL stadium -- something so many people here feel needs to change ASAP.

You said it yourself earlier... success on the field is not the sole determining factor.  Boise was passed by because they are in Boise -- (they aren't even a top 100 TV market) - and because the Mountain West doesn't really have the overall quality for the image of Boise to be better than it is.

Even if USF and UCF are not a package deal... we still need the AAC to have 2 or 3 other programs who are 10 win programs year after year.  We need the overall image of the AAC to improve ... because then more USF fans will buy season tickets and attend games ('quality of opponent' is clearly an issue based on who shows up)... more USF fans will watch AAC games... more people will donate to USF athletics. 

Let me clarify one thing in your post ... I did not hear "a person on ESPN" ... there were DOZENS OF MEDIA MEMBERS who said the Big 12 should add both USF and UCF when the conference was doing it's dog and pony show interviewing interested schools.  People who, unlike you and I, are paid to analyze and report on this kind of thing.

Finally, I will say this... it would "be best for USF" if USF schedules four p5 teams out of conference and doesn't lose another game ever ... and that UCF only loses to USF -- year in and year out... the Alabama-LSU or Michigan-Ohio State type battles.  As I said above, if USF goes undefeated every year, but all other AAC teams change who gets 8 or 9 wins, that would be bad. USF would be another Boise State.

They are paid to get people watch their show or click on their article they are neither paid to analyze anything nor paid to be correct. Being interesting, being attractive, being provocative, being famous are all qualities that will get you paid to “report” for ESPN being “right” about what a conference ought to do? Not so much because even if the analysis by the pundits said we would be a great package addition the analysis by those that write the checks (the only ones that actually matter) said **** that.