Schools that have passed USF in conference realignment

[belgianbull]

3 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

First off SMU to PAC makes sense. The league needs to expand into new territory and SMU provides that to them. The Big12 with TCU doesn’t need another Texas team in the Dallas area.

For USF nothing has changed. It must build the OCS and it needs to win and dominate whatever league it is in. If we do that , we will be attractive to Big12 or ACC if they get raided in future. But it is really up to USF to build and win..

 

it changes the fact that with SMU gone the conference we are in is even worse. It makes it harder for us to make the playoffs.

I wonder if SMU leaves whether we add another team to the AAC. Appalachian State, Army, Marshall would make sense. Or go after Mountain West teams. ( Boise state, Fresno,)

[Cubanbull]

30 minutes ago, belgianbull said:

it changes the fact that with SMU gone the conference we are in is even worse. It makes it harder for us to make the playoffs.

I wonder if SMU leaves whether we add another team to the AAC. Appalachian State, Army, Marshall would make sense. Or go after Mountain West teams. ( Boise state, Fresno,)

It doesn’t matter if they go or not. It doesn’t matter who the AAC adds or not. It all depends on USF, we must build OCS and win. That’s the answer.

As who the AAC will add, well that depends. The AAC still has the best tv exposure and money of the non P leagues so if I was Aresco, working with ESPN, I would first go after.

1. Colorado State, Air Force and Boise again and see if a 16 team league with those three can happen since MWC will also lose SDSU.

2. Go back to Army as a replacement. Maybe Army/ VCU, similar to Navy/ Wichita St

3. Look at Georgia State, a big public university in Atlanta that fits AAC profile

Those would be my first moves as Commissioner but it also depends how much can he get ESPN behind him.

[belgianbull]

7 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

It doesn’t matter if they go or not. It doesn’t matter who the AAC adds or not. It all depends on USF, we must build OCS and win. That’s the answer.

As who the AAC will add, well that depends. The AAC still has the best tv exposure and money of the non P leagues so if I was Aresco, working with ESPN, I would first go after.

1. Colorado State, Air Force and Boise again and see if a 16 team league with those three can happen since MWC will also lose SDSU.

2. Go back to Army as a replacement. Maybe Army/ VCU, similar to Navy/ Wichita St

3. Look at Georgia State, a big public university in Atlanta that fits AAC profile

Those would be my first moves as Commissioner but it also depends how much can he get ESPN behind him.

I agree that it doesn't matter if we are able to make the move up to the Big 12 or the ACC at some point. But if we don't and we will be in the AAC for the foreseeable future who is in our conference matters a lot.

As to adding teams to the AAC I like options 1 and 2, but not so much option 3. The quality of the teams is more important then the market in which it is located. The idea that Charlotte or Rice were better adds the lets say Appalachian State in in my opinion was a a huge mistake for the AAC to make

 

[Cubanbull]

10 minutes ago, belgianbull said:

I agree that it doesn't matter if we are able to make the move up to the Big 12 or the ACC at some point. But if we don't and we will be in the AAC for the foreseeable future who is in our conference matters a lot.

As to adding teams to the AAC I like options 1 and 2, but not so much option 3. The quality of the teams is more important then the market in which it is located. The idea that Charlotte or Rice were better adds the lets say Appalachian State in in my opinion was a a huge mistake for the AAC to make

 

Too early to make that assumption. Reality is that both Rice and Charlotte have higher ceilings than App State if they can start winning. And media markets do matter, if those two start winning there is a higher viewership for them than an AppState.

[Jim Johnson]

8 hours ago, BullsFanInTX said:

Teams that have passed USF:

Louisville, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, UCF, Houston, Cincinnati, SMU

Add TCU, BYU, and SDSU to that list if you want to include all mid majors. May also include UConn (Big East). 
 

That tells you everything you need to know about USF. MK isn’t working any ACC magic and USF is utterly worthless to conferences. By my count that’s 12 or 13 schools that got chosen ahead of USF in the last 10-12 years. That tells you exactly where USF stands to everyone. A nobody. 12 TWELVE!!!! schools left USF in the dust. 6 of who were in conferences LOWER than USF. USF: failing at every turn for more than a decade. 

On your list only UCF and SDSU can be said to have come from behind USF and are now ahead of USF.  That alone should be frustrating and upsetting.

USF was not "ahead" of the others in reality.

TCU, Houston, and SMU were all members of a conference with Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Arkansas, and Texas A & M.  They got left behind and have now returned to the same level as their former peers.

WVU, Rutgers, Syracuse, and Pitt were ahead of USF when USF joined them.

BYU is like Army - a national brand where the conference doesn't really matter.  Remember, they have won a national championship!

Finally, Lousiville and Cincinnati were peers of USF.

People seem to think that because USF was lucky to be invited to the Big East after two years in I-A that somehow USF is entitled to remain at that same level.  The reality is USF only got that invite because Tom Jurich had a decade long relationship from our days in the Metro Conference and C-USA, and the Big East wanted a team from Florida.  We received the invite before playing a single football game in C-USA, after all.

 

[smazza]

4 hours ago, Gat-Rat Bull said:

I believe USF will go to a different conference, but that discussion is ongoing in a different thread I think...

Just for fun, though, saying USF has gotten "passed" by other schools implies that USF was ahead of those schools at some point. You can definitely say USF is currently getting left behind, but we are still in the race and haven't hit the wall yet. And, anyway, USF will always be #1 in our hearts, right?

we arent going any where

the train left the station and we arent on it

[smazza]

33 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

Too early to make that assumption. Reality is that both Rice and Charlotte have higher ceilings than App State if they can start winning. And media markets do matter, if those two start winning there is a higher viewership for them than an AppState.

if media markets mattered bulls would have advanced to a better conference

[Gat-Rat Bull]

27 minutes ago, smazza said:

we arent going any where

the train left the station and we arent on it

 

[WoolyBully]

4 hours ago, CycleBull said:

should be surveying and asking fans who left supporting this team that question.

Oh, there's no reason to go pokin' about in that drafty ole dark cave. Nothing good can come of it. Besides, we never got the time machine working, so going back and manipulating the spectrum is not an option.  But...

Let's just ponder how the past decade would have shaken out, had the new and improved playoff system been in place. Would U of SF had gotten in? I don't think so. But that's the past. Let's not dwell on that. Let's focus on the future. The future where we believe that past performance is not indicative of future returns. You know...that future where USF, in true Lloyd Christmas fashion, has a chance.

Which would we prefer, having Jesus miracle USF into the ACC and not getting into the playoff ('cause somebody has to stay home), or spend the next twenty-five years in the AAC and always hold out hope for that playoff spot (I didn't say MAKE the playoff bracket)? Just curious, which do we value more? The reason I ask is, I get the feeling that some people believe that now that there is a bone thrown to the G5, maybe taking up residence in a P5 conference is not quite as important as it once was. And I understand that. If we accept that The Invite is not forthcoming in the foreseeable future, why not embrace the idea that, although not at the table, per se, we're not already excluded on the first day of practice. 

As for why people stopped supporting football. We already know the answer. Like it or not, football is, in the words of the Fansville commercial (or is it a documentary?), "just a bunch of kids with a ball". It's entertainment funded by discretionary spending. And losing is not entertaining. And paying to not be entertained is short lived. It's been that way forever. Gotta have some sort of ROI. There are those, and I admire them, who have a relationship with the alma mater that is not as transactional in nature. But there are a lot of people who simply weigh the outlay in time and money against the satisfaction of the experience. That's the tough sell; what makes marketing USF football challenging. But we already knew that. 

[Cubanbull]

2 hours ago, smazza said:

if media markets mattered bulls would have advanced to a better conference

Unfortunately is not just about media markets but location.

SEC with Florida doesn’t need USF as a media market

ACC as long as FSU and Miami are there will be a tough move for USF.

Big12 is really the only one that makes sense. And that’s the one that we will most likely end up in. But USF needs to win and build OCS.