USF Football's 5 year plan

[windbane]

The college football landscape is a lot different in the past ten years compared to what it was 30 and 40 years ago.  With the amount of coverage, attention, technology, etc.  it is MUCH easier for a program to establish a footprint. 

Funny, a guy I was talking to the other day was arguing just the opposite.  That with all the big money in football from TV and the BCS that if you are an upstart program your climb to the top will be even more difficult than 30 or 40 years ago. 

I guess there are two sides to that argument.

I think there is more to your the side you talk about Bulliever as opposed to Matt's perspective.

Consider... why aren't Vanderbilt, Duke, North Carolina, Mississippi State, Washington State, Northwestern, Indiana, Baylor, Rutgers, Syracuse, and many other schools at the "higher level" ?

Because there is only so much space on that level... and the "haves" are getting just as much "coverage, attention, technology, etc" or money from TV and the BCS ... that makes it easier to stay on top.

USF may never be USC => Southern Cal... but we could be USC => South Carolina

However, I think that may not make many people here very happy...

We have the potential to be much closer to southern cal than south carolina because we're in FL.  If we start winning the big east and beating other schools in this state our recruiting will improve greatly.  I think most people want USF to be what Miami used to be in the Big East considering we're the ony school in the Big East from FL.

But yeah, who the hell would be satisfied being South Carolina?  They have 1 conference title (ACC in 1969) and have been playing football over 100 years!  They are 4-9 in bowl games all-time! 

[dabull80]

Certainly Jim, I was trying to be brief.

I believe the landscape change has served to insulate the top tier programs, not pave the way for newcomers.

Well, you could talk about Bear Bryant and the 3,000 scholorship players he had just so other teams didn't get them.  This is one of these subjects you could take either side and have a valid arguement.  Sorta like the best college,pro team of all time or my favorite - best starting 5 players for the all-time NBA team -now that one is really fun to argue.

[Brad]

Surely it can be argued either way. 

[smazza]

So here is what I have set as a MINIMUM requirement for me to consider USF football as being successful in moving forward in the next 5 years.

USF plays the BigThree- 8 times in that time period with 4 at home.

I think USF must win at least THREE

In that time period we should

Win Big East at least TWICE

Make a Bowl every year. win at least three

Make a BCS Bowl twice and win at least once.

These are the realistic goals that I think USF should be able to accomplish. Can we do better? Yes but as I said these are what I consider a must to look at our program taking the next step.

Thoughts?

usf needs to win the big east

[CousinRicky]

The college football landscape is a lot different in the past ten years compared to what it was 30 and 40 years ago.  With the amount of coverage, attention, technology, etc.  it is MUCH easier for a program to establish a footprint. 

Funny, a guy I was talking to the other day was arguing just the opposite.  That with all the big money in football from TV and the BCS that if you are an upstart program your climb to the top will be even more difficult than 30 or 40 years ago. 

I guess there are two sides to that argument.

I would think the limit on the # of scholarships would make it easier now.  Getting into a BCS conference isn't easy, but once there you share the TV and Bowl money.  So USF getting into a BCS conference was pretty remarkable.  But now there, there aren't as many excuses.  If you use FAU as an example, they are in a similar situation that USF was in about 5 or 6 years ago.  But unless they can get into a BCS conference recruiting will be difficult, not impossible.

[Matt]

yes, i was considering the scholarship regulations, tv money, and ability to sell your program to more kids because they have seen you on espn before.  now that you can watch a college football game on tuesday night on ESPN it is much easier for a kid to believe you can offer him exposure no matter who you are.

15 years ago, probably even 10 years ago, before espn's full out on slaught on college football with shows like college football live, tuesday, wed, thur, fri, sat, and sun night games, and the birth of a whole channel dedicated to college (ESPNU) it was tough for a coach to walk into a living room and make a case that he can offer the exposure needed to get on national tv and go into the nfl..

i dont want to spend the time to dig up the research (it would be interesting but i just dont have the time)  but if you were to take a look at the first 7 rounds of the nfl draft (it use to be much longer but since it is cut back to 7 now that is what should be used)

but take the first 7 rounds of the draft over the last 20 years.  you will most certainly see a shift in the amount of schools getting multiple players drafted.  that is directly related the media attention and kids willing to go to other schools because they can still make it to the next level from there.

20 years ago if you had dreams of playing the nfl you better of gone to a UCLA, USC, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas AM, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, etc.

i think it is easier for a program to gain ground on the top tier teams because the playing field is leveled some what by the attention that ANY kid can receive at ANY program as long as they produce.

look at the qb from ball st.  he was all over espn last season.  he got a huge amount of hype behind him.  was projected as high as the 2nd round prior to the combines (now obviously he isnt going to go that high since his workouts have been bad) but you can come to USF and have the same chances to get to the NFL as any other program as long as you perform.

[Guest hm101]

im going to have to agree... winning the big east will be the difference maker for the program. everything else will follow.

at least make the top 3 each year consistently.

However, how is it going to look if we win the big east but lose to both FSU and Miami? Something to think about.

[Cow Pie]

There are too many variables present to plan out a 5 years plan... however this year I think that we have 2 chances to shine.

(1) Beat FSU, Miami, or both.

(2) Win the Big East.

If we fail to do both of these it will set us back, if we only do one of these it keeps us relevant, if we do both then we are in the Big 4 and Big East Champs.

All we need to do to get into the big 4 is to beat FSU or Miami... currently none of the big three has ever lost to another Florida team besides the Gayturds.

[slowdown]

yes, i was considering the scholarship regulations, tv money, and ability to sell your program to more kids because they have seen you on espn before.  now that you can watch a college football game on tuesday night on ESPN it is much easier for a kid to believe you can offer him exposure no matter who you are.

15 years ago, probably even 10 years ago, before espn's full out on slaught on college football with shows like college football live, tuesday, wed, thur, fri, sat, and sun night games, and the birth of a whole channel dedicated to college (ESPNU) it was tough for a coach to walk into a living room and make a case that he can offer the exposure needed to get on national tv and go into the nfl..

i dont want to spend the time to dig up the research (it would be interesting but i just dont have the time)  but if you were to take a look at the first 7 rounds of the nfl draft (it use to be much longer but since it is cut back to 7 now that is what should be used)

but take the first 7 rounds of the draft over the last 20 years.  you will most certainly see a shift in the amount of schools getting multiple players drafted.  that is directly related the media attention and kids willing to go to other schools because they can still make it to the next level from there.

20 years ago if you had dreams of playing the nfl you better of gone to a UCLA, USC, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas AM, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, etc.

i think it is easier for a program to gain ground on the top tier teams because the playing field is leveled some what by the attention that ANY kid can receive at ANY program as long as they produce.

look at the qb from ball st.  he was all over espn last season.  he got a huge amount of hype behind him.  was projected as high as the 2nd round prior to the combines (now obviously he isnt going to go that high since his workouts have been bad) but you can come to USF and have the same chances to get to the NFL as any other program as long as you perform.

it is all relative.  USF is on tv more but so is everyone else.  it is no advantage.  tv money is a wash. those programs you mention get 75% of all that tv coverage.

really what about all the kids from the state of Florida who now see all these programs on tv?  20 years ago would more have them stayed in state as they would have known more about USF and less about other schools because coverage was more local?

[MikeG]

USF has done very well-- perhaps as well as can be expected for a startup 1-AA to a BCS conference in such a short time.

but anyone who thinks the meteoric rise was going to continue at the same rate is fooling themselves. I think we can still make progress but be prepared to be more patient than ever because USF is entering an extremely difficult time of diminishing returns.

anyone familiar with economics will understand that concept. I feel the same applies to college sports-- football in particular where you have 100+ moving parts to any team, demands for capital that are astronomical, and walls of opinion that always give the old standby with the giant warchest the benefot of the doubt.

I would like for us to meet or exceed those goals cubanbull throws out there. But the realist in me understands that we have quite a long way to go before we start counting any chickens. It would be interesting to see what Coach Leavitt's goals for the team are over the next five years (and not the "I just take it one practice at a time" remarks either). I would be surprised if they were not even more ambitious than cubanbull's ideas. Not that we have to hold anyone to them-- and this is the part that irks me: people who start talking crap inevitably during the season (usually when we hit the slump portion the past two years) about questioning whether Leavitt is the right guy to take us over the hump. I hope that isn't what this benchmarking is attempting to do-- because a new coach right now is not going to help us out very much imo.

bottom line: We are on the right course and even if some think we are somehow underachieving-- if they can just step back and rationally view the situation, they might understand just how daunting the task before USF truly is going forward.