Football scorecard from USA today.

[CousinRicky]

Saw a tweet from JK and followed this link.  USF at a C-.  https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2019/01/09/college-football-season-grades-report-cards-every-team/2474303002/

[79 Bull]

wow it's going to be a long off season if this is all they can come up with to entertain us.

[NewEnglandBull]

24 minutes ago, CousinRicky said:

Saw a tweet from JK and followed this link.  USF at a C-.  https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2019/01/09/college-football-season-grades-report-cards-every-team/2474303002/

Grade inflation is running rampant throughout our nation.

[Bull Dozer]

Did this get graded on a curve? 

[TRUTH D. Antagonist]

I don't think it's an unfair rating in either direction.

the grades don't seem to be on a curve, but graded relative to expectation, level of competition, SOS, etc.

some USF fans apparently feel entitled to 10-win seasons (minimum) every year, but in no way was that a given for objective observers of this team, like USAToday CFB writers who probably gave us a grand total of 3 minutes of thought the entire season, 2 of which were in writing them into this article. 10 wins was a best-case scenario.

i think USF was expected to lose UCF, split (at best) GT & @UI & pick 'em @UH, @TEM, @UC... 8 or 9 wins was probably the rational expectation for this season. we won 7. we overachieved vs. P5 opponents & absolutely fardded & shidded ourselves in conference play. inexplicable home blowout loss vs. Tulane & inexplicable home blowout loss in the Bowl were the difference between 7 wins & 9. winning at least ONE of UH or TEM (UC was a good team, we weren't beating them @Nippert this year) was the 10th.

7 wins was definitely an underachieving season, but reasonably only by 2 wins. so a C- ish grade makes sense.

idk how good USF will be next year with the assistant coaching upgrades, but Wis, @GT, BYU is a gauntlet of OOC games. nobody's head should explode if we lose 4+ games next season.

 

 

[Gatorbull325]

19 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Grade inflation is running rampant throughout our nation.

I dont understand how Taggart won more games than Nebraska but had a lower grade? I saw another story gave Scott frost a B and Taggart an F. Take out that Bethune Cookman victory and Nebraska only has 3 wins for the season. 

[BulledOver]

Good thing it wasn't graded "Pass / Fail" we would feel even worse. At least at a C- we will get a 'talking to' but shouldn't get grounded or lose car privileges...           Reality- I was hoping we would come out and beat Marshall just to end on a head-up positive..but we really just pooped the bed on that one. The OC hire gives us hope once again for what might be in 2019.

[Bull Dozer]

2 hours ago, TRUTH D. Antagonist said:

I don't think it's an unfair rating in either direction.

the grades don't seem to be on a curve, but graded relative to expectation, level of competition, SOS, etc.

some USF fans apparently feel entitled to 10-win seasons (minimum) every year, but in no way was that a given for objective observers of this team, like USAToday CFB writers who probably gave us a grand total of 3 minutes of thought the entire season, 2 of which were in writing them into this article. 10 wins was a best-case scenario.

i think USF was expected to lose UCF, split (at best) GT & @UI & pick 'em @UH, @TEM, @UC... 8 or 9 wins was probably the rational expectation for this season. we won 7. we overachieved vs. P5 opponents & absolutely fardded & shidded ourselves in conference play. inexplicable home blowout loss vs. Tulane & inexplicable home blowout loss in the Bowl were the difference between 7 wins & 9. winning at least ONE of UH or TEM (UC was a good team, we weren't beating them @Nippert this year) was the 10th.

7 wins was definitely an underachieving season, but reasonably only by 2 wins. so a C- ish grade makes sense.

idk how good USF will be next year with the assistant coaching upgrades, but Wis, @GT, BYU is a gauntlet of OOC games. nobody's head should explode if we lose 4+ games next season.

 

 

If you look at the record in a vacuum it isn't as disappointing but once you dig into it and see we lost our last 6 it becomes very, very ugly.  Sometimes the journey of how you got somewhere tells you much more than the destination you end up at.   

[TRUTH D. Antagonist]

1 hour ago, BulledOver said:

we really just pooped the bed on that one. 

*fardded & shidded.

we fardded & shidded the bed.

FIFY

[TRUTH D. Antagonist]

45 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

If you look at the record in a vacuum it isn't as disappointing but once you dig into it and see we lost our last 6 it becomes very, very ugly.  Sometimes the journey of how you got somewhere tells you much more than the destination you end up at.   

I guess it depends on how the grader graded the grades.

if he was like your average sportswriter who watched little/none actual USF football, the 6-loss cascade into oblivion is probably more triviality than it was the brutally masochistic torture to watch & experience that it was for fans.

let's ASSUME the writer started with a (very optimistic) 9-win expectation that would have scored the Bulls a decent B (let's say 10+ wins would have given us a B+, an AAC Championship an A-, NY6 appearance an A, NY6 win an A+). of course u subtract for the extra 2 losses (B minus 2 grades = C+), probably subtract a little more for just how bad the Bowl & Tulane debacles were (C)... how much is the overall optics of the 6 games of futility worth? another point? there's the C-.

we could make an argument for D+ or even D, but IMO the writer probably didn't have high expectations to begin with & likely gave us credit for the two P5 wins (esp. GT) aaaand, as bad as the 6-game slide was, the 7-game win streak & midseason ranking has to be worth something, so even if we fall into the D's there is enough there to fairly argue for a C-. 6-7 would have been D worthy, anything less a D-. losing to UConn or even worse Elon would have been F's.

the season could have been a lot better... Also could have been A LOT worse.