Bulls actively seek beefier foes

[BullsFanInTX]

Let's wait until the contracts are signed before we say for sure who is replacing who.  It could very well be some CUSA teams like USM, Tulsa, Rice, Houston, Army, Navy, Etc. ect. replacing UCF.  Could be Ball State too, but we don't know yet.  Anything could change at this point.

[lotsofbull99]

Playing UCF is not logical

[MikeG]

Playing UCF is not logical

agreed.

UCF WILL DESTROY US

[E.T.]

Why the complaining/worried fans about the buyouts ?

wHAT ARE THESE BUYOUT amounts you are soo worried about ?

When was the last buyout ?

Relax  

[Guest wildrover]

Im quickly being swayed into the Auman camp.  Why didn't the other paper mention these other potential foes?

We had a long talk in one of my classes the other day about world views and perspective and how journalists are not taught to report a story objectively (many beleive there really is no such thing as objectivity) and that when they report a story they should accept the influence of their perspective and use it to try and influence opinion.  Its interesting to me how a seemingly small story about potential future opponents could be reported so differently.  Different perspectives I guess

First things 1st great article Greg. Presented well.

Second thing. Brett was writing about not continuing the UCF game for 1 and 1's with opponents like Ball State, Western Ky, and Buffalo. Which are the games replacing UCF. In reality it makes no sense to me. Thus the reason he didn't bring them up. The second being none of these big opponents were on the public search he received from the state. The only games he brough up were those that were on the actually state records. Quit slamming the guy just because he brought up a valid point that you don't agree with.

Joe, first, this is a message board, and its not yours, until Brad tells me I have to stop slamming him then I really don't.  I don't care if you want me to or not.

Second.  I believe there are some things wrong with your defense of Mr. Brett.  First, How exactly do you know what teams were and were not on that proposed schedule he received from the state?  Second, how much time had passed between Brett's article and Greg's article, like a week?  Am I really supposed to believe that DW talked to all those teams and got them on new documentation that Brett received just a week later.  I guess its possible but I'm not too sure about that.  If thats not the case then how come Greg knows about these bigger named opponents and Brett doesn't?  That could call into questions his ability as a compotent reporter.  Does Greg have better sources than Brett?  If thats true than there is good reason to read the SPT instead of the Tampa Tribune.  If those weaker opponents were really the only teams on that list then odds are the information was dated.  Did Brett really use dated material, without checking to make sure the dated information on that document hadn't changed before going with the story?  If so then there is more reason to go with the SPT.  

So basically, it boils down to this.  In order for me to be wrong about any of the above, DW had to contact and enter into discussions with what 5 bigger named programs in the five or six days after Brett ran his story and Greg was able to find out about these talks and generate a more updated potential schedule story, such a short time later.

As I don't believe either reporter is really incompotent, and I don't believe that talks with all those schools really happened after Brett's original story I'm still going with my idea that the difference in the stories is an indicator of each reporter's difference in perspective.  Just my opinion though.  

[Ferdinand the Bull]

wasn't Southern Miss a good rivalry! Why not play them if you are going to talk about a C-USA TEAM that brought out the crowds and caused a lot of excitement. They would not effect our recruitment and I seem to remember they were really into it with us. Does anyone know the attendance in those games. Why necessarily UJCF?

[Joe]

Rover,

1) I have no problem with you complaining, it's your right as a human. But the article wasn't about ALL the potential games we have available to us. It was about dropping UCF for opponents that didn't make much sense to schedule.

2) Brett scanned it and gave us the link. It contained the games and the payouts.

http://www.tbo.com/sports/bulls/usfschedule.htm

Brett was mentioning the oppents listed on the THIS public search document, not the ones we're in talks with. There are probably over a dozen, it happens at every school. Doesn't mean a deal always gets done.

As far as the date it says August 23, 2006. So it was 3 weeks old, I don't think it's drastically changed. These things take awhiel to set up and plan.

DW didn't contact 5-6 schools in that time, schools that are in negotiations aren't listed on future schedules because they aren't future games yet.. The schools Brett listed were the only unannouced schools on the schedule. No where did Brett even suggest that other big schools weren't in the talks, in fact he has talked about games in the past.

Rover, I'm getting a good read on you here. You're a sophomore journalism major or someone in a journalism class that has been listening well in class. The way you're reinterating this "competence" and "source" stuff just reeks of it. Give the guy a break, despite what people think the coverage of the UCF game was good this weekend and he contributed well to it.

I like Greg and Brett a lot. I think both bring enormous amounts of information to the table and USF as a school is VERY lucky to have two beat writers willing to accomodate to the fans and even post/converse/respond to the fans.

[South_Florida_Flip]

As I don't believe either reporter is really incompotent, and I don't believe that talks with all those schools really happened after Brett's original story I'm still going with my idea that the difference in the stories is an indicator of each reporter's difference in perspective.  Just my opinion though.

I am in agreement with your opinion. It will be real interesting to see what happens if we land the 1 for 1 with one of the teams Greg mentioned, thus taking Ball State or Buffalo off of the board.

I think the thing the is upsetting is how much people take to heart what is written. Ball State, Buffalo and WKU have not signed any contract, but it was treated as such.

[windbane]

I like Greg and Brett a lot.

me too.

[Triple B]

DW didn't contact 5-6 schools in that time, schools that are in negotiations aren't listed on future schedules because they aren't future games yet.. The schools Brett listed were the only unannouced schools on the schedule.

They were unannounced because they aren't scheduled yet. You did see that, if I read Greg's column correctly, those "state records" are nothing more than glorified doodling on a napkin ... Names of schools go on there as placeholders or whatever.