USF's "AQ" football legacy

[WoolyBully]

 

.Not sure exactly who/what you're responding to but in slick and my conversation, Ole Miss's SEC records wouldn't come into play .... and actually, all the teams in slick's original question were charter members of their current Power 5 conferences so all were exempt from invite-itis.

 

Well, I'd say you did a pretty bang up job of figuring it out! Nice recap. 

[Triple B]

.Not sure exactly who/what you're responding to but in slick and my conversation, Ole Miss's SEC records wouldn't come into play .... and actually, all the teams in slick's original question were charter members of their current Power 5 conferences so all were exempt from invite-itis.

 

Well, I'd say you did a pretty bang up job of figuring it out! Nice recap. 

 

BUT .... wouldn't even the charter members need to be invited by someone to be a charter member?

[Quo Vadis]

 

.Not sure exactly who/what you're responding to but in slick and my conversation, Ole Miss's SEC records wouldn't come into play .... and actually, all the teams in slick's original question were charter members of their current Power 5 conferences so all were exempt from invite-itis.

 

Well, I'd say you did a pretty bang up job of figuring it out! Nice recap. 

 

BUT .... wouldn't even the charter members need to be invited by someone to be a charter member?

The charter SEC schools were originally part of the "Southern Conference", and broke away in 1932 to form the SEC, much as the C7 are breaking away from the Big East. But whose idea that was, i do not know. Could have been one guy, like say the president of vandy, who had the idea and then sent out feelers to bama, georgia, lsu, etc. or maybe they all had the same idea, etc.

Edited February 26, 2013 by BatonRougeBull87

[charsibb]

 

 

Maybe we are the NCAA D1 example of the Peter Principle.

 

We were promoted to our level of incompetence. Now, we're being demoted, and it will be twice as hard to EARN our way back up. Especially given the environmental changes taking place.

Could be a valid theory ..... if we had done anything in CUSA.

I started following USF athletics in 1983 when i  first enrolled. Since then I've seen us move from the Sun Belt to the Metro to C-USA and to the Big East. Each was a promotion, going from a lesser to a better conference.  IIRC, absolutely NONE of those promotions was because we had proven ourselves on the basketball court or later the football field to be a dominant force that was too good for the conference we were moving up from. We were always promoted because of "potential", meaning our large size, and large and favorably-located market. Unfortunately, those factors didn't help us this time around.

 

 

Agree ... which means charsibb's Peter Principle theory is pretty much invalid.

 

Actually, BRB supports my contention.

 

Without visible means of justification, we were promoted 3 times. SBC to Metro to CUSA to BE. That's the essence of the Peter Principle, getting promoted beyond your abilities (perhaps it happened in the SBC to Metro promotion, but that's a different conversation)

 

Eventually, we were unable to perform at the new, higher level, and had to take a step backwards. The next step forward will now be all that much more difficult as a result.

[Triple B]

 

 

 

Maybe we are the NCAA D1 example of the Peter Principle.

 

We were promoted to our level of incompetence. Now, we're being demoted, and it will be twice as hard to EARN our way back up. Especially given the environmental changes taking place.

Could be a valid theory ..... if we had done anything in CUSA.

I started following USF athletics in 1983 when i  first enrolled. Since then I've seen us move from the Sun Belt to the Metro to C-USA and to the Big East. Each was a promotion, going from a lesser to a better conference.  IIRC, absolutely NONE of those promotions was because we had proven ourselves on the basketball court or later the football field to be a dominant force that was too good for the conference we were moving up from. We were always promoted because of "potential", meaning our large size, and large and favorably-located market. Unfortunately, those factors didn't help us this time around.

 

 

Agree ... which means charsibb's Peter Principle theory is pretty much invalid.

 

Actually, BRB supports my contention.

 

Without visible means of justification, we were promoted 3 times. 

 

Unless you have a different definition of the Peter Principle than Wiki, that doesn't support your contention: The Peter Principle is a belief that, in an organization where promotion is based on achievement, success, and merit, that organization's members will eventually be promoted beyond their level of ability.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

[charsibb]

 

 

 

 

Maybe we are the NCAA D1 example of the Peter Principle.

 

We were promoted to our level of incompetence. Now, we're being demoted, and it will be twice as hard to EARN our way back up. Especially given the environmental changes taking place.

Could be a valid theory ..... if we had done anything in CUSA.

I started following USF athletics in 1983 when i  first enrolled. Since then I've seen us move from the Sun Belt to the Metro to C-USA and to the Big East. Each was a promotion, going from a lesser to a better conference.  IIRC, absolutely NONE of those promotions was because we had proven ourselves on the basketball court or later the football field to be a dominant force that was too good for the conference we were moving up from. We were always promoted because of "potential", meaning our large size, and large and favorably-located market. Unfortunately, those factors didn't help us this time around.

 

 

Agree ... which means charsibb's Peter Principle theory is pretty much invalid.

 

Actually, BRB supports my contention.

 

Without visible means of justification, we were promoted 3 times. 

 

Unless you have a different definition of the Peter Principle than Wiki, that doesn't support your contention: The Peter Principle is a belief that, in an organization where promotion is based on achievement, success, and merit, that organization's members will eventually be promoted beyond their level of ability.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

 

OK, let's call my version the Pedro Principle!

 

(that is bad on so many levels! )

[hightechbull]

legacy is terrible as usf has never won anything at any level

 

Well the women's BB team won the WNIT.

We have a national title in women's sailing, but I am not sure if that is an NCAA sport.

I think (I could be wrong) that we also have a national title in one of the swimming sports, back when we used to have a swimming team.

[DELdaBull]

Not good enough.

[JTrue]

legacy is terrible as usf has never won anything at any level

 

Well the women's BB team won the WNIT.

We have a national title in women's sailing, but I am not sure if that is an NCAA sport.

I think (I could be wrong) that we also have a national title in one of the swimming sports, back when we used to have a swimming team.

I hope you're right about swimming, because women's basketball winning the tournament for 65th best team in the country would be pretty sad as the pinnacle of our athletic department.

[Quo Vadis]

 

legacy is terrible as usf has never won anything at any level

 

Well the women's BB team won the WNIT.

We have a national title in women's sailing, but I am not sure if that is an NCAA sport.

I think (I could be wrong) that we also have a national title in one of the swimming sports, back when we used to have a swimming team.

I hope you're right about swimming, because women's basketball winning the tournament for 65th best team in the country would be pretty sad as the pinnacle of our athletic department.

Swimming team might be ancient history? IIRC, i had a roomate in the Andros dorms circa 1985. He originally came to USF on a swimming scholarship but by that time the team had been disbanded.