What is USF doing about this conference mess - poll

[FazaUSF]

Quit the whining. USF's overall leadership over the past two decades has been excellent. Every example in our history demonstrates that our leadership does things quietly and diligently until they choose to act publicly. There is no indication whatsoever that this is any different. Be glad our leadership seeks to act with class, and not the foolish disregard with which the impatient laypeople among us here seem to expect.

[FazaUSF]

The hypochondriasis is poorly reflective of our fanbase. Better that one be presumed ignorant than to open one's mouth and prove it so.

[Hem]

The hypochondriasis is poorly reflective of our fanbase. Better that one be presumed ignorant than to open one's mouth and prove it so.

+1

[Brad]

As this poll has no "Tequila shots" option, it is silly.

+1

[Triple B]

Trip? Is that Ted Baxter? One of the funniest lines I ever heard was from that show. "I've just been handed a bulletin, "you have something in your teeth".

The one and only ...

[Triple B]

The media has decided we are not worth thinking about because USF has not given them any reason to.

This is the only sentence in your post that is accurate and it has nothing to do with what the administration is doing, or did, during all this realignment ******** ...

I get your point. But I also get Jamie's point, which is similar to the one I made in another thread (but was uniformly trashed for), because I think there is a broader failure (broader than just realignment issues, although it has recently been brought into focus because of the realignment issues) to ensure the media includes USF in the discussion, or at least acknowledges USF exists. I know you think that it's really just a media problem - we haven't done well this year athletically and therefore the "lazy" media don't bother to think about USF - but I think it's both a media problem AND a USF marketing problem.

Almost every article I've read refers to UCONN and Cincy as the "next two up" for the ACC, without even a mention of USF, but that simply shouldn't be, regardless of what USF is doing behind the scenes. It shoudn't be a foregone conclusion that UCONN and CIndy are the next two up. You know no better what the ACC intends to do than I know what is going on behind the scenes at USF. Perception becomes reality nowadays, and I think more needs to be done shaping the perception of USF. We often hear that USF is a "sleeping giant"; if that's true, why does USF not even get mentioned in these articles? I agree wholeheartedly with the professional" behind the scenes" approach, but there should also be a "behind the scenes" effort to ensure USF remains a player in the public eye (even if not vocal like UCONN and Cincy).

No, I think it's just the opposite. What has USF done, other than a little blip in 2007, to warrant the media to decide we are worth thinking about .... and I'm not like smazza saying we SHOULD have done something ... we are a relatively young athletic program that is still in the growing process.

[crambone]

I am sure our athetics department is doing EVERYTHING they can, but there are 2 things you should realize:

1. They cannot publicly trash the Big East in case we are stuck here

2. They cannot publicly speak about leaving the Big East or looking for other options

[CousinRicky]

I am sure our athetics department is doing EVERYTHING they can, but there are 2 things you should realize:

1. They cannot publicly trash the Big East in case we are stuck here

2. They cannot publicly speak about leaving the Big East or looking for other options

This - EXACTLY

[TallyBull]

The media has decided we are not worth thinking about because USF has not given them any reason to.

This is the only sentence in your post that is accurate and it has nothing to do with what the administration is doing, or did, during all this realignment ******** ...

I get your point. But I also get Jamie's point, which is similar to the one I made in another thread (but was uniformly trashed for), because I think there is a broader failure (broader than just realignment issues, although it has recently been brought into focus because of the realignment issues) to ensure the media includes USF in the discussion, or at least acknowledges USF exists. I know you think that it's really just a media problem - we haven't done well this year athletically and therefore the "lazy" media don't bother to think about USF - but I think it's both a media problem AND a USF marketing problem.

Almost every article I've read refers to UCONN and Cincy as the "next two up" for the ACC, without even a mention of USF, but that simply shouldn't be, regardless of what USF is doing behind the scenes. It shoudn't be a foregone conclusion that UCONN and CIndy are the next two up. You know no better what the ACC intends to do than I know what is going on behind the scenes at USF. Perception becomes reality nowadays, and I think more needs to be done shaping the perception of USF. We often hear that USF is a "sleeping giant"; if that's true, why does USF not even get mentioned in these articles? I agree wholeheartedly with the professional" behind the scenes" approach, but there should also be a "behind the scenes" effort to ensure USF remains a player in the public eye (even if not vocal like UCONN and Cincy).

No, I think it's just the opposite. What has USF done, other than a little blip in 2007, to warrant the media to decide we are worth thinking about .... and I'm not like smazza saying we SHOULD have done something ... we are a relatively young athletic program that is still in the growing process.

What kind of media attention do YOU think we merit? Pretty much the ZERO we're getting right now?

Also, are you suggesting that all of the other schools that have either found or are seeking lifeboats in other conferences HAVE done something to merit the media attention they've gotten? If so, what? Are we the ONLY meritless school out there, and that's why we're the ONLY ONE of the existing three Big East schools that is routinely overlooked in these articles concerning realignment and the Big East?

I think we can both agree that realignment isn't based upon merit. So why does accomplishment factor into anything? We got lots of press when we joined the Big East, but it certainly wasn't because of anything we did other than EXIST in Florida, and talk to the right people. I hold out hope that we're talking to the right people now. As I've already noted SEVERAL times, I agree with the behind the scenes approach the university's taking.

But you're apparently content with how things are in terms of USF's publicity in general, because after all, we haven't done anything to merit any attention. I'm not content with our media coverage, because I think we can do better. I think the potential is there (as it was when we joined the Big East in 2005), but even though it's really all we've got to sell, in my opinion it's not being highlighted as it should be in the media as a reason why we're still relevant. That's at least one reason why we're getting ignored, and I think it's why we won't be positioned well for the next realignment.

My modest proposal is that the university should do a better job of marketing itself, but apparently that pisses people off on this board (like most things). But marketing is something the university can control, whereas much of the other crap we cannot.

[Triple B]

The amount we're being mentioned in the media, from what I've seen is pretty appropriate. The focus is mainly on Cincy and UConn because they have a ton more history, tradition and name recognition than we do.

And the criticism of USF marketing in all this is totally unwarranted and has no bearing on anything in this situation. How much marketing did Rutgers and Maryland do before their invites?