Transferring players

[NewEnglandBull]

12 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

I'm saying if you ranked teams by intelligence it would look nothing like ranking them by on the field success

there is no correlation

If the correlation including the variables that make up intelligence I would say this would be completely untrue. For example, if a player has poor skills in logic they will not be able to make split second decisions. If they can't retain information they will unlikely get on the filed...etc. This is much more pronounced in the NFL as they give a battery of IQ tests and generally favor players who have completed their degree. Perhaps the issue of this discussion is the degree of intelligence. There are plenty who never play because they don't reach a certain threshold. At the same time, because they are intelligent does not guarantee success as their are other physical aspects.

Edited December 21, 2018 by NewEnglandBull

[chapelbull]

Just now, Bull94 said:

no actually it doesn't. sure he needs "football" intelligence(really more like instincts) 

no that isn't more like instincts.  It's intelligence.  I didn't say high SAT scores.  you are wrong

[NewEnglandBull]

9 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

his excessive drug tests (which is causing all of these issues)and wearing earrings in the football facilities

Is smoking weed a part of the law in Florida? I suspect this is the key point for CCS. Better to be suspended than caught by authorities on campus/driving and putting a negative view on the program. I am sure that he does not test for alcohol since it is legal. If your issue is about weed on the FB team then your focus should be on the laws of the community and not on a coach protecting the integrity of a program (and please note I am not a CCS supporter).

 

[chapelbull]

2 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

If the correlation including the variables that make up intelligence I would say this would be completely untrue. For example, if a player has poor skills in logic they will not be able to make split second decisions. If they can't retain information they will unlikely get on the filed...etc. This is much more pronounced in the NFL as they give a battery of IQ tests and generally favor players who have completed their degree. Perhaps the issue of this discussion is the degree of intelligence. There are plenty who never play because they don't reach a certain threshold. At the same time, because they are intelligent does not guarantee success as their are other physical aspects.

I think this is an exercise in futility.  He doesn't get it.  He thinks football and sports in general is nothing more than people just running around doing athletic things.  No intelligence involved at all.  There's a vendetta against CCS due to having rules and the rants will go back to that no matter what.

[NewEnglandBull]

12 minutes ago, chapelbull said:

I think this is an exercise in futility.  He doesn't get it.  He thinks football and sports in general is nothing more than people just running around doing athletic things.  No intelligence involved at all.  There's a vendetta against CCS due to having rules and the rants will go back to that no matter what.

Agreed...his issue is always about the legalization of weed. We get it he smokes and enjoys it. Good for him. I still prefer that college athletes not put any type of smoke in their lungs but I know its going to happen. These positions typically change as one becomes older and has kids...

Edited December 21, 2018 by NewEnglandBull

[chapelbull]

2 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Agreed...his issue is always about the legalization of weed. We get it he smokes and enjoys it. Good for him. I still prefer that college athletes not put any type of smoke in their lungs but I know its going to happen. These positions typically change as one becomes older and has kids...

I wouldn't be surprised if he is a former player who has felt the repercussions of these rules

[NewEnglandBull]

5 minutes ago, chapelbull said:

I wouldn't be surprised if he is a former player who has felt the repercussions of these rules

Good point...

[usfgrad84]

4 minutes ago, Gatorbull325 said:

We lost a krap load of our star players so of course there was a drop off. Those same star players we lost endured a few bad seasons as well. That's the same team that lost to McNeese State. But in the end they got better and finished of their careers with 2 10+ win seasons. Sometimes teams have to endure a rough patch in order to value success more. I'm sure the coaches/players are pissed off about this year and will go harder in the off season. In the end CCS has to seasons above 500. Let the man lose first b4 we declare the world is coming to an end. 

Hm, normally I would agree with some of this statement, but last night we accomplished something no team has done since 1936.  We started 7-0 and lost the remaining games on the schedule.  

I see a team that just go embarrassed on national TV, in their own stadium 2 games in a row.  A team that did not come out prepared to play, on any of the 3 units, in one game this year.  Anyone that has any understanding at all about football can tell you that despite the record this was a poorly coached and ill prepared football team.

I would really like to understand, after what you have seen this season, you would point to as something positive to look forward to next year in terms of the program improving.  On defense, all we have been hearing is youth is the problem.  First of all, Mcgee, Jackson, Thomas, Hoggins, Wilkins, Black, Brown, and Bronson were all seniors.  They were all either starters or saw significant time.  So that would indicate to me that the problem was more than youth.  Why anyone thinks that coach BJ is a good defensive coach is beyond me. Seems like a nice guy, funny and great personality in interviews, but I don't see where he is a good coordinator.  A young team, late in the season, if there is hope for improvement the following year, should at least show that they know what they are doing, what their assignments are and be in place to make plays.  If they are young and not physically developed yet they may get run over, but that should change in the weight room.  There is no indication of this.  

Special teams is terrible.  We can't kick off past the 15.  Ever!  Opponents typically start at better than the 30.  Maybe next year the return game improves a little with Horne's return, but all other aspects have been bad for 2 years running.  

Offense?  All we can do is hope for a good hire of OC.

It is not the losing that has me worried for the future.  It is how we are losing.  It is how we are prepared.  It is how we seem to be listless and clueless in all aspects of the game that gives cause for concern.  

During the Leavitt years and during the Taggart years (and quite honestly I was never a fan of Taggart's) I always ended the season looking forward to spring and the next season.  During Holtz and now Strong's tenure I feel the same way about the football program that I did during Mccullum's time at the helm of basketball.  They sucked the wind out of my excitement.  Even in down times with Leavitt and the latter part of Taggart's time, at least there was excitement surrounding the football program.  These last few games I have been kind of apathetic.  Still USF football, but unexciting, boring and horrible play.  I wouldn't have minded losing if we at least showed we were somewhat competitive.

In my book, Kelly owns the mess now.  Please fix it.

[Bull94]

17 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

If the correlation including the variables that make up intelligence I would say this would be completely untrue. For example, if a player has poor skills in logic they will not be able to make split second decisions. If they can't retain information they will unlikely get on the filed...etc. This is much more pronounced in the NFL as they give a battery of IQ tests and generally favor players who have completed their degree. Perhaps the issue of this discussion is the degree of intelligence. There are plenty who never play because they don't reach a certain threshold. At the same time, because they are intelligent does not guarantee success as their are other physical aspects.

are you insane?? they prefer players that got their degrees??

they couldn't care less if they have their degrees. they wouldn't even cared if they majored in basket weaving. they give the wonderlic exam and that's it. even that shows absolutely no correlation with football success.

they care about your 40 times and your high jump and how many bench presses you can do.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Bull94

[Bull94]

8 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Agreed...his issue is always about the legalization of weed. We get it he smokes and enjoys it. Good for him. I still prefer that college athletes not put any type of smoke in their lungs but I know its going to happen. These positions typically change as one becomes older and has kids...

I am older and I have kids.  I don't think of weed as some evil drug. I know plenty of mid 40's professionals who are habitual weed smokers and they do just fine in life. I believe that if you aren't harming anyone else in life then to each his own.