South Florida is the real deal

[USFBulls12]

39 minutes ago, goingbackbull said:

I wish I beleived it. I know the game has changed and Bigs are not as important but I feel the lack of a Big to defend a strong  Big is gonna hurt us as some point.   

If we shoot 50%+ from 3, put up 30+ 3-pointers a game and play strong aggressive and swarming defense, we can outwork a big man. 

[Bull94]

12 hours ago, flsportsfan83 said:

It does not make one a better fan just because they think USF can do no wrong. Its 100% fine to call it how you see it.

the problem is some of you see it only one way every time.

many of you wrote this off as a bad hire before we ever played a game. did the same with football.

maybe  let a single season play out before deciding what type of hire we made.

[Bull94]

11 hours ago, goingbackbull said:

I wish I beleived it. I know the game has changed and Bigs are not as important but I feel the lack of a Big to defend a strong  Big is gonna hurt us as some point.   

tell that to fairleigh dickinson, or st peter's or north texas. they all beat purdue and zach edy in the last 3 ncaa tourneys.

we have 3 guys shooting over 40% from 3. that's how you win in today's game

better floor spacing. better ball movement. keeps lanes open for drives to the basket.

statistically it's like having 3 big guys that shoot +60% from the field.

Edited February 19 by Bull94

[flsportsfan83]

1 hour ago, Bull94 said:

the problem is some of you see it only one way every time.

many of you wrote this off as a bad hire before we ever played a game. did the same with football.

maybe  let a single season play out before deciding what type of hire we made.

if that is true, would the opposite also be true? Should one declare anything a homerun hire or a good hire before a season plays out? I can admit I was 100% wrong on basketball. I hated this hire.  We hit a homerun, and as much as I hate early extensions we may need to do it here. Pay this man.

Football, I hated as well. We are 100% moving in the right direction, however I am still not as convinced as others that we are as good as many on this board think. Golesch gets an A for last year. Solid hire at this point, but I am not convinced we see the amount of success so many expect next year.

For the record I loved the Jeff Scott hire, the Strong hire, the Taggery hire, and the Holtz hire. I loved the Heath hire, hated Antigua, and liked Gregory. So I am not always anti hires.

Edited February 19 by flsportsfan83

[SilverBull]

1 hour ago, flsportsfan83 said:

2 hours ago, Bull94 said:

the problem is some of you see it only one way every time.

many of you wrote this off as a bad hire before we ever played a game. did the same with football.

maybe  let a single season play out before deciding what type of hire we made.

if that is true, would the opposite also be true? Should one declare anything a homerun hire or a good hire before a season plays out? I can admit I was 100% wrong on basketball. I hated this hire.  We hit a homerun, and as much as I hate early extensions we may need to do it here. Pay this man.

Football, I hated as well. We are 100% moving in the right direction, however I am still not as convinced as others that we are as good as many on this board think. Golesch gets an A for last year. Solid hire at this point, but I am not convinced we see the amount of success so many expect next year.

For the record I loved the Jeff Scott hire, the Strong hire, the Taggery hire, and the Holtz hire. I loved the Heath hire, hated Antigua, and liked Gregory. So I am not always anti hires.

Edited 23 minutes ago by flsportsfan83

USF coaches remind me of my past marriages.  I am always enthusiastic and in love until the prove me wrong.  And I have also learned to consider whether it will cost me more to keep them or let them go.

 

Edited February 19 by SilverBull

[dabull80]

13 hours ago, USFBulls12 said:

A 13 seed would be the automatic qualifier for winning the AAC tournament. We don’t get that seed unless we win that championship game. If we keep winning, you may see us move to a 12 seed or conservative analysts may keep us as a 13 seed to see whether we win or lose the championship game (assuming we make it there). If we lose but make an impressive showing the rest of the season and lose that game by less than 5 pts in a hard fought battle, you may see 12 seed picks show up the next day. A lot of factors and opinions from a lot of “Bracketology Experts” still in play here. 
 

Disclosure: I do not declare myself a “Bracketology Expert”. 

Nor am I a bracketology expert but I like your thinking.  We all know that a 12 seed is sooo much better than a 13 seed.  It is a high risk thought ..Lose the championship game close and get a 12 seed or win the conference tournament and get a 13 seed or miss the tournament completely by not winning the tournament.  I just hope we make it to the championship game.  Of course we still have more games to play before the tournament so there's that.

Edited February 19 by dabull80
just add to post

[Bull94]

1 hour ago, flsportsfan83 said:

if that is true, would the opposite also be true? Should one declare anything a homerun hire or a good hire before a season plays out? I can admit I was 100% wrong on basketball. I hated this hire.  We hit a homerun, and as much as I hate early extensions we may need to do it here. Pay this man.

Football, I hated as well. We are 100% moving in the right direction, however I am still not as convinced as others that we are as good as many on this board think. Golesch gets an A for last year. Solid hire at this point, but I am not convinced we see the amount of success so many expect next year.

For the record I loved the Jeff Scott hire, the Strong hire, the Taggery hire, and the Holtz hire. I loved the Heath hire, hated Antigua, and liked Gregory. So I am not always anti hires.

I have done it in the past. Hated strong hire. loved scott hire.

I think it's pointless now to think one way or the other before we see the evidence. I guess I'm hopeful now when we make a hire and will give the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong.