A New Direction

[Bull94]

The USFL and the XFL think it would work.

 

I agree with WoolyBully, winning cures everything. And, if we had been doing more of that the past few years, we could be in a much better position.

 

 

The USFL DID work...until Trump got involved, then when Bassett (owner of the bandits that fought to stay in the Spring) died, Trump took control and tried to complete with the NFL in the Fall. They were developing quite the following in the Spring. Had they stayed there, IMO they would still exist.

bandit games were awesome. he killed that league. what an ass.

[charsibb]

Not really worth it.   You don't see national televised minor-league baseball games on TV.  Nor do you see many FCS or division II college football on TV.  People want to see the best athletes and the highest level of competition--and that's what they pay for. 

 

I do agree we should try a new direction which is WINNING.  A winning tradition will cure all problems in the long run.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much it. The only time D-III/D-II/FCS gets television time is playoffs. Because Lenoir-Rhyne v Wingate is not gonna draw what an Ole Miss v Clemson game would draw. Winning cures dang near everything, but I think we're gonna be seeing the football world from the back seat for a long, long, very long time. 

why do people care so much about how much money their program is bringing in. I'd rather be d-1aa and play for championships then to be on the bottom of the totem pole at a higher level.

 

Because their own personal self-image has been linked to the success or failure of the team?

 

Speaking from personal experience here - having lived through 0-26

[BaltoBull]

Not really worth it.   You don't see national televised minor-league baseball games on TV.  Nor do you see many FCS or division II college football on TV.  People want to see the best athletes and the highest level of competition--and that's what they pay for. 

 

I do agree we should try a new direction which is WINNING.  A winning tradition will cure all problems in the long run.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much it. The only time D-III/D-II/FCS gets television time is playoffs. Because Lenoir-Rhyne v Wingate is not gonna draw what an Ole Miss v Clemson game would draw. Winning cures dang near everything, but I think we're gonna be seeing the football world from the back seat for a long, long, very long time. 

why do people care so much about how much money their program is bringing in. I'd rather be d-1aa and play for championships then to be on the bottom of the totem pole at a higher level.

This is EXACTLY what I am saying. 

 

At this point, I don't understand the desire to go running to another conference if all it means is we get to have shinier facilities.

 

Sure, say we get the invite to the ACC. It won't matter. The perception will always be we are new blood and not one of the 'elites'. 

"Oh, cool - USF is in the ACC." "Well, UF is in the SEC and FSU is in the B12 (or the B10)." "We're the 'elite' conferences, y'know?"

 

When all is said and done, how many contract bowls do you think the NACC/NBE hybrid will be playing in? 

 

"That's neat, you guys won the NACC/NBE Championship. Here's an access bowl spot against one of our #6 ranked teams on a Wednesday." "You guys couldn't win in OUR conferences."

 

I just think the notion that we are ever going to have a seat at the big boy table is fallacy and will lead USF to more disappointment.

 

What does winning mean when ESPN and the powers that be are against you? You can make an argument either way for Boise State and all the success they've had, but I think they are still on the outside looking in.

[CPABull]

The USFL and the XFL think it would work.

 

I agree with WoolyBully, winning cures everything. And, if we had been doing more of that the past few years, we could be in a much better position.

 

 

The USFL DID work...until Trump got involved, then when Bassett (owner of the bandits that fought to stay in the Spring) died, Trump took control and tried to complete with the NFL in the Fall. They were developing quite the following in the Spring. Had they stayed there, IMO they would still exist.

Yes, I know it did and I believe it would still be around if they had remained in the spring as well.  But, that is exactly my point, a new league could not compete head to head with the NCAA.  So, would a new college league be relegated to playing in the spring as well in order to survive?

[Skingraft]

Not really worth it. You don't see national televised minor-league baseball games on TV. Nor do you see many FCS or division II college football on TV. People want to see the best athletes and the highest level of competition--and that's what they pay for.

I do agree we should try a new direction which is WINNING. A winning tradition will cure all problems in the long run.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. The only time D-III/D-II/FCS gets television time is playoffs. Because Lenoir-Rhyne v Wingate is not gonna draw what an Ole Miss v Clemson game would draw. Winning cures dang near everything, but I think we're gonna be seeing the football world from the back seat for a long, long, very long time.

why do people care so much about how much money their program is bringing in. I'd rather be d-1aa and play for championships then to be on the bottom of the totem pole at a higher level.

Root of all evil my friend

[WoolyBully]

It's all about vision.

 

College football is big business, and alarmingly big bidness here on the peninsula. Why did the program spend only a minimum amount of time 

at the IAA level? Why not, having been an independent, aspire to just join a I-AA conference? We would have playoffs and championships! 

But we didn't...we wanted to go IA - because that's where the money is (as well as everything else associated with "big time" football). Here in

the land of the giants, it's go big or go home. The vision for the program was always upward and onward, on to bigger and better. Now, how

many seasons of Butler, The Citadel and Elon could this program stomach and maintain interest?  Instead of RayJ...it could be bleachers down

at the soccer stadium to house the three thousand that show up for homecoming against our arch rival...the Samford Bulldogs.

 

Would you really, honestly, want to play at the FCS level? Winning at the FCS level - assuming some success given the necessary parameters

of the type of recruits we'd be getting as well as facilities and coaching staff - would not garner enough interest to make the program anything

more than a novelty. We complain about attendance, now. I can assure you, if you cant fill the stadium for IA football against name opponents,

it won't happen for "where the hell is that?" opponents. If you think standing on this side of the football velvet rope is bad, just think about what

it's like to have to stand all the way across the street. 

 

Playing in IAA/FCS land is a recipe for disaster. Sure, there's some hardcore at-any-level fans who'd show up. But there's a whooooooole lot

of folks - even USF alumni - who would opt for the remote instead of a ticket. 

[Bull94]

Not really worth it.   You don't see national televised minor-league baseball games on TV.  Nor do you see many FCS or division II college football on TV.  People want to see the best athletes and the highest level of competition--and that's what they pay for. 

 

I do agree we should try a new direction which is WINNING.  A winning tradition will cure all problems in the long run.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much it. The only time D-III/D-II/FCS gets television time is playoffs. Because Lenoir-Rhyne v Wingate is not gonna draw what an Ole Miss v Clemson game would draw. Winning cures dang near everything, but I think we're gonna be seeing the football world from the back seat for a long, long, very long time. 

why do people care so much about how much money their program is bringing in. I'd rather be d-1aa and play for championships then to be on the bottom of the totem pole at a higher level.

 

Because their own personal self-image has been linked to the success or failure of the team?

 

Speaking from personal experience here - having lived through 0-26

I'm not talking winning and losing. I'm talking dollars and cents. I'd rather win a 1-aa championship and bring in $3m per year than go 0-12 and bring in $25M per year.

[Bull94]

It's all about vision.

 

College football is big business, and alarmingly big bidness here on the peninsula. Why did the program spend only a minimum amount of time 

at the IAA level? Why not, having been an independent, aspire to just join a I-AA conference? We would have playoffs and championships! 

But we didn't...we wanted to go IA - because that's where the money is (as well as everything else associated with "big time" football). Here in

the land of the giants, it's go big or go home. The vision for the program was always upward and onward, on to bigger and better. Now, how

many seasons of Butler, The Citadel and Elon could this program stomach and maintain interest?  Instead of RayJ...it could be bleachers down

at the soccer stadium to house the three thousand that show up for homecoming against our arch rival...the Samford Bulldogs.

 

Would you really, honestly, want to play at the FCS level? Winning at the FCS level - assuming some success given the necessary parameters

of the type of recruits we'd be getting as well as facilities and coaching staff - would not garner enough interest to make the program anything

more than a novelty. We complain about attendance, now. I can assure you, if you cant fill the stadium for IA football against name opponents,

it won't happen for "where the hell is that?" opponents. If you think standing on this side of the football velvet rope is bad, just think about what

it's like to have to stand all the way across the street. 

 

Playing in IAA/FCS land is a recipe for disaster. Sure, there's some hardcore at-any-level fans who'd show up. But there's a whooooooole lot

of folks - even USF alumni - who would opt for the remote instead of a ticket. 

sorry but playing "big boy' football costs the school close to $20m in subsidies. that's an awful lot more tickets to sell just to break even.

 

personally i enjoyed it more when it was about going out to the stadium to see us play football at 7p.m. on a saturday night instead of playing on a thursday night to accomadate espn regardless of how many were there. I'm tired of us bending over for the almighty dollar. that's not what college athletics should be about.

 

I bet if we were playing in playoffs at a lower level we would get more fans than we do playing Uconn at noon when we're 1-5 in conference.

[WoolyBully]

I'm not talking winning and losing. I'm talking dollars and cents. I'd rather win a 1-aa championship and bring in $3m per year than go 0-12 and bring in $25M per year.

 

 

I'm not getting it. If you're not talking about winning and losing, yet would rather WIN a 1-AA (and bring in $3M/yr) than lose at 0-12 (and bring in $25M/yr),

it sounds like you ARE talking about winning and losing.

 

It sounds to me like you'd prefer a cut in revenue in exchange for wins. Is that correct?

Remember, there's no guarantee that the program would win at the IAA/FCS level.

 

 

 

Now if you have an anti-ESPN bias, or are chagrined at the idea of money and college football, that's a whole different chapter in the book. 

 

 

[Bull94]

I'm not talking winning and losing. I'm talking dollars and cents. I'd rather win a 1-aa championship and bring in $3m per year than go 0-12 and bring in $25M per year.

 

 

I'm not getting it. If you're not talking about winning and losing, yet would rather WIN a 1-AA (and bring in $3M/yr) than lose at 0-12 (and bring in $25M/yr),

it sounds like you ARE talking about winning and losing.

 

It sounds to me like you'd prefer a cut in revenue in exchange for wins. Is that correct?

 

 

Now if you have an anti-ESPN bias, or are chagrined at the idea of money and college football, that's a whole different chapter in the book. 

 

 

you're correct. I'd rather be competitive at a lower level than bring in cash. I think competing at whatever level we're able to is more important than chasing a buck.

 

My point was that it seems some fans priority is how much money their program brings in. I'd rather be appalachin state winning lower level titles than iowa state bringing in big checks. and i don't think we need to be at this level if it costs our students and school close to $20m per year.

 

as far as attendance is concerned, we used to get some pretty good crowds out at ray jay even when we were at a lower level. 41k vs Elon in 98. 33k against citadel. heck even when we went 7-4 the next year we would draw close to 30k at the end of the year.  and we had some talent as well. Blackwell. Rubin. ant Henry. etc.that was entertaining for me. now that we drop back a level it's quite possible we will be playing on wednesday and tuesday nights like some other lower conferences just for an espn payday.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Bull94