Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[amory]

Other than the year they got as high as #2 in the polls, and the 4-2 bowl record over 8 years in the Big East?

They've had a couple good starts over the years before imploding, I'll give them that. Clemson was a nice bowl win in 2010. The rest (Memphis, UNI, ECU), meh.

UCF already won a Fiesta Bowl over a highly ranked Baylor team, and their 2013-2014 seasons were more impressive than anything USF has done.

I'm just saying if I'm buying one of them long term, it's UCF.

 

[WestHartHusk]

They've had a couple good starts over the years before imploding, I'll give them that. Clemson was a nice bowl win in 2010. The rest (Memphis, UNI, ECU), meh.

UCF already won a Fiesta Bowl over a highly ranked Baylor team, and their 2013-2014 seasons were more impressive than anything USF has done.

I'm just saying if I'm buying one of them long term, it's UCF.

They also won 0 games last year. Zero. Zip.

 

[BlueMAB]

I'm just saying if I'm buying one of them long term, it's UCF.

That's fair, but head to head resumes, USF has accomplished as much, if not more. Yes UCF won the Fiesta Bowl. But they also went 0-12.

 

[IMind]

Other than the year they got as high as #2 in the polls, and the 4-2 bowl record over 8 years in the Big East?

I'm actually pretty surprised they fell off the way they did after Leavitt was canned... especially because ol' Skip actually has a pretty good track record as a head coach. That being said one of the problems with Florida is there's just far t0o many schools competing for the talent there.. Outside of FSU, Miami and Florida... you've got basically every program on the east coast and the Big 10... FIU, UCF, and Florida Atlantic... there's probably enough talent for 4 maybe even 5 successful FBS schools... but to do it consistently has got to be tough. UCF proved that in spades over the last few years. Hell Miami has proved it.

 

[MattMang23]

"If UConn was a P5 school they'd be in a P5 conference already". Right, no mention of the decade we did quite well in the Big East. Just tiring to listen to these guys and their perception of UConn.

Never understood that one either. Does it hold true for Cincy too? BYU? Houston? Cincy might get picked because they are apparently a P5 school just happening to play in a G5 league, but they shouldn't pick us because if we were a P5 school, we would already be in a P5 league...

Sparkling logic. With that thinking, their only candidates should be from P5 schools because only they are deserving of a spot. Maybe they should go after all those great P5 athletic programs at Washington State, Purdue, Wake Forest, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Rutgers and... Wait for it.... Boston College. Because, remember, since they're all in the P5 they must all be better than any single G5 school.

 

[Kolumbo]

There was a positive post a few months back by a member who is apparently very well respected here. I don't remember his ID, but everyone swore by him. Any idea who or what he said? Just curious since he was apparently in the know.
I know this is very vague...
Skiblets! Someone just posted his name literally 1 minute ago!
whatever happened to Skiblets' post about something this summer?

 

[Excalibur]

Never understood that one either. Does it hold true for Cincy too? BYU? Houston? Cincy might get picked because they are apparently a P5 school just happening to play in a G5 league, but they shouldn't pick us because if we were a P5 school, we would already be in a P5 league...

Sparkling logic. With that thinking, their only candidates should be from P5 schools because only they are deserving of a spot. Maybe they should go after all those great P5 athletic programs at Washington State, Purdue, Wake Forest, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Rutgers and... Wait for it.... Boston College. Because, remember, since they're all in the P5 they must all be better than any single G5 school.

These are all "football guys" talking. So that is the kind of line you use when the data doesn't support your position, but UConn doesn't "feel right" from a football perspective . . .

 

[Excalibur]

There was a positive post a few months back by a member who is apparently very well respected here. I don't remember his ID, but everyone swore by him. Any idea who or what he said? Just curious since he was apparently in the know.
I know this is very vague...

It was Skiblets. He made a cryptic post that indicated that UConn was working towards P5 status.

 

[MattMang23]

These are all "football guys" talking. So that is the kind of line you use when the data doesn't support your position, but UConn doesn't "feel right" from a football perspective . . .

But 26 winning seasons out of 56 total for Memphis, for example, would be better just because they've played longer? It's really just all very strange to me.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

But 26 winning seasons out of 56 total for Memphis, for example, would be better just because they've played longer? It's really just all very strange to me.

I think we've all come to realize that the logic behind realignment decisions has been shoddy at best.

 

[Husky25]

But 26 winning seasons out of 56 total for Memphis, for example, would be better just because they've played longer? It's really just all very strange to me.

It's a good old boy network. UConn "not feeling right" is like Billy Beane drafting Jeremy Brown and bringing in all those Moneyball players against his scouts' recommendations (Okay, Brown didn't work out, But the A's had a great little run in the early '00s and their underlying philosophies were used by the Red Sox to win the 2004 and 2007 World Series.). The scouts had 35 years of baseball experience...each. They knew what a ball player looked like. Billy Beane brought in a Yale educated econ major who was good with pivot tables and focused ontaking advantages inefficiencies. That's scares folks who need a payphone when it's time order take out for dinner.

 

[MattMang23]

I think we've all come to realize that the logic behind realignment decisions has been shoddy at best.

It's not really even the conferences' decisions that get me.

It's the writers that bother me. Constantly trashing us. The fact that the ACC had us as the runner up twice should tell us that the leagues don't feel the same as the writers.

That said, I do feel all the schools left are beneath us and losing out to any of them, Cincy included, would be a decision I would be bothered by.

 

[Excalibur]

But 26 winning seasons out of 56 total for Memphis, for example, would be better just because they've played longer? It's really just all very strange to me.

Recency bias. It's the kind of stuff that should resonate with the decision-makers, but not with Media blowhards that only look at how things stand at this point in time.

 

[HuskyHawk]

But 26 winning seasons out of 56 total for Memphis, for example, would be better just because they've played longer? It's really just all very strange to me.

I think it's regional bias. Memphis is in Tennessee. Everyone knows that it's SEC country and loves Football and God in that order. Not only does every major state U in the south play FBS, but most of the lesser schools do (like Memphis, Southern Miss, La Tech). There's HS talent everywhere. They live for Friday HS football as well.

Now UConn. Only went FBS a little over a decade ago. It's local peers are UMass, which just went FBS a few years ago, UNH, Maine, UVM, URI and the SUNY schools. Buffalo plays FBS football I guess, but has never done anything. Ergo, our region doesn't like college football, doesn't support it and UConn cannot possibly succeed at it or garner any meaningful support.

That's what I think is going on with both fans and writers. Switch to basketball and now we're in a recruiting hotbed, a place where basketball thrives and was invented. They have no doubts about us in that sport.

 

[MattMang23]

I think it's regional bias. Memphis is in Tennessee. Everyone knows that it's SEC country and loves Football and God in that order. Not only does every major state U in the south play FBS, but most of the lesser schools do (like Memphis, Southern Miss, La Tech). There's HS talent everywhere. They live for Friday HS football as well.

Now UConn. Only went FBS a little over a decade ago. It's local peers are UMass, which just went FBS a few years ago, UNH, Maine, UVM, URI and the SUNY schools. Buffalo plays FBS football I guess, but has never done anything. Ergo, our region doesn't like college football, doesn't support it and UConn cannot possibly succeed at it or garner any meaningful support.

That's what I think is going on with both fans and writers. Switch to basketball and now we're in a recruiting hotbed, a place where basketball thrives and was invented. They have no doubts about us in that sport.

You had me until you started naming our "peers." I prefer to think our peers in this region are BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Penn St., Maryland and Pitt.

 

[HuskyHawk]

You had me until you started naming our "peers." I prefer to think our peers in this region are BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Penn St., Maryland and Pitt.

You and me both in that respect. I'm simply saying "the flagship state universities in our region". How about that? Like it or not, we used to play them in football and they continue to form the perception of college football in the region. I think the mere fact that those schools are 1AA hurts the perception of college football in New England. I mean, it's unfathomable to folks in the south.

 

[CL82]

You had me until you started naming our "peers." I prefer to think our peers in this region are BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Penn St., Maryland and Pitt.

You had me until you named Rutgers as a peer. Rival, perhaps. Spazy little brother, most definitely.

 

[jostar1]

There was a positive post a few months back by a member who is apparently very well respected here. I don't remember his ID, but everyone swore by him. Any idea who or what he said? Just curious since he was apparently in the know.
I know this is very vague...
Skiblets! Someone just posted his name literally 1 minute ago!
whatever happened to Skiblets' post about something this summer?

It wasn't a few months ago. It was April 11, 2015. A long time ago. He didn't give a time frame.

 

[huskymedic]

Home of Boise State Football:

93.1 KTIK The Ticket ‏@ktik931fm 6m 6 minutes ago
.@BerryTramel tells us he thinks the video conferences with potential Big 12 Schools is a smokescreen to try an get more $ from TV networks

93.1 KTIK The Ticket ‏@ktik931fm 4m 4 minutes ago
.@BerryTramel say's It's jarring to the system to see a league thumb it's nose at a TV partner

 

[Husky92]

Home of Boise State Football:

93.1 KTIK The Ticket ‏@ktik931fm 6m 6 minutes ago
.@BerryTramel tells us he thinks the video conferences with potential Big 12 Schools is a smokescreen to try an get more $ from TV networks

93.1 KTIK The Ticket ‏@ktik931fm 4m 4 minutes ago
.@BerryTramel say's It's jarring to the system to see a league thumb it's nose at a TV partner

This just makes me ill.

Oh, and p!sses me off. I hate being used and jerked around.

 

[jostar1]

Mailbag: Why the Big 12 might not expand after all
By Stewart Mandel @slmandel Aug 17, 2016 at 9:47a ET

Stewart: I live in Houston and have a few contacts who are very close with UH athletics. They believe Big 12 expansion talk is in fact a cover-up designed to take media attention off the Baylor scandal. They are convinced as soon as the season gets here and either Texas beats Notre Dame, or TCU beats Arkansas, or Oklahoma beats Ohio State, they’ll announce they've found it best to stick with 10.
-- Mark in Houston

I don’t know about the conspiracy theory (though anything’s possible in realignment), but there does remain a very real possibility – about 40 percent, if not higher – that the conference will eventually make that very announcement.
There are several reasons why.

First of all, nearly a month after the initial announcement about entertaining expansion candidates, I’ve still yet to hear any real enthusiasm or tangible reasoning from within the conference as to why they would do this. The Big 12 presidents, in their July 19 meeting, clearly heard something from their consultants to convince them they could no longer sit put, but with distance they may start realizing the negatives outweigh the positives.

Speaking of which, it’s no secret the league’s television partners want nothing to do with expansion. They’re obligated to pay whomever the conference adds, but they’d rather not. I could see a scenario where this whole thing ends with the Big 12 squeezing a little more out of ESPN and FOX in exchange for staying at 10 teams.

And finally, whether they realized it or not, this public bakeoff the presidents touched off among the various contenders is not healthy for anyone. Schools lobbying politicians and engaging in social media campaigns – all the while still competing in their current conferences – is creating tremendous pressure on all involved. If, in fact, this ends with the Big 12 presidents picking, say, BYU and Cincinnati, there will be incredible anger and bitterness from Houston, Memphis and the like. People may lose their jobs over it.

Of course, there will be unified anger and bitterness if it turns out this whole thing was a charade and the league isn’t expanding at all. But of course hurt feelings are inevitable when it comes to conference realignment.

Mailbag: Why the Big 12 might not expand after all

 

[huskymedic]

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

View attachment 15018

#notafootballschool

 

[JMick]

View attachment 15018

FINALLY. Someone helps set the record straight

 

[sportsart]

View attachment 15018

Would that be considered an indirect way of groveling by Benedict?