cuseroc Wrote:I think Memhis would be a great addition to the BE. Football being the real moneymaker for college fb, I think that Memphis would be interested in fb only as long as they know that within several years, they could be apart of the best BB conference ever put together. Do you think it would be possible for their basketball and other sports to go independant until then. Afteralll, Memphis basketball has so much history and tradition that it is its own attraction and I dont think it would hurt them at all. The extra bcs money that they would be getting could help subsidize their indy status for their other sports until full membership would be available.

That's interesting because the idea has been kicked about in conversations on local sports radio and of course on the boards. I think the initial "majority response" to a football only membership would be negative to luke warm. IMHO I believe that would change quickly. I personally would favor it because I believe the BB could survive on it's own for awhile if not "parked" in a lesser conference for the short term.

Look guys, I have nothing against USF. What I do feel is that USF hasn't paid its dues so to speak. Someone pointed to UConn as a program that hadn't paid any dues either but that simply isn't the case. UConn has invested heavily in its athletics department and is an elite basketball program. USF has done nothing in the revenue producing sports. I watched the Pitt vs. USF game in Tampa last season on ESPN and was embarrassed for the Big East.

That said USF was probably the best choice out there after BC bailed but even that’s debatable. Believe me I hope USF proves me wrong and blows up.

L-yes Wrote:Look guys, I have nothing against USF. What I do feel is that USF hasn't paid its dues so to speak. Someone pointed to UConn as a program that hadn't paid any dues either but that simply isn't the case. UConn has invested heavily in its athletics department and is an elite basketball program. USF has done nothing in the revenue producing sports. I watched the Pitt vs. USF game in Tampa last season on ESPN and was embarrassed for the Big East.

That said USF was probably the best choice out there after BC bailed but even that’s debatable. Believe me I hope USF proves me wrong and blows up.

The Big East is gambling on USF. The decison was made mostly because of their football potential. I don't really blame the Big East for making the decision. The timing was very bad for Memphis. The decision to add USF was made right before the 2003 football season. As some of y'all may know, 2003 was the year that Memphis finally did something on the football field. At the time the decision was made, the Memphis program wasn't really any different than the USF program. We have distanced ourselves in the past two years, but USF still has the potential simply because of geography.

While I still think Memphis would be a better choice and will prove so over the long haul, I certainly understand why the decision was made when it was made. I'd like to think that if the decison were being made today that Memphis would be given more consideration. Only time will tell if USF can live up to any potential. I agree with L-yes and think that they have an uphill climb, but anything is possible.

Quote:If UCF and USF don't develop a rivalry, and you can quote me on this: neither will develop a solid statewide fan base. And the only alternative to spark interest will be for one of the schools to give one of the Big 3 a beatdown! And both schools do have multiple games scheduled w/ the Big 3. Perhaps USF is placing all bets on that.

Here is where I differ with some knights fans. Many Knights feel that USF-UCF is THE rivalry, while I consider it A rivalry. Simply because of proximity it is a rivalry. But there is no way that we can call UCF our primary rival when there hasn't been much competition besides baseball. Memphis-Southern Miss is the main rivalry for them because of the history the two have, but we don't have that right now.
I think many USF fans don't call it a rivalry because it pisses of UCF fans. They get so riled up when we do that :D

Quote:Jackson,

If that is the case then how are they going to repay their education that we as tax payers paid for? In Universities like mine and your boosters pay for athletic scholarships. A military academy is free to those who attend based on their obligation to serve as officers in the armed forces.

What is the deal there if what you say is true? How am I as a taxpayer going to reimbursed for the educaiton I supported?

-- Here is the article.... <a href='http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2005/04/29/glealosp.htm' target='_blank'>Army football</a>....although after rereading the text I do need to correct my earlier statement...Cadets with a pro contract will get a shorter military obligation...2 yrs instead of 5


Jackson

BullsFanatic Wrote:

Quote:If UCF and USF don't develop a rivalry, and you can quote me on this: neither will develop a solid statewide fan base. And the only alternative to spark interest will be for one of the schools to give one of the Big 3 a beatdown! And both schools do have multiple games scheduled w/ the Big 3. Perhaps USF is placing all bets on that.

Here is where I differ with some knights fans. Many Knights feel that USF-UCF is THE rivalry, while I consider it A rivalry. Simply because of proximity it is a rivalry. But there is no way that we can call UCF our primary rival when there hasn't been much competition besides baseball. Memphis-Southern Miss is the main rivalry for them because of the history the two have, but we don't have that right now.
I think many USF fans don't call it a rivalry because it pisses of UCF fans. They get so riled up when we do that :D

True, USF can't claim to have historic rivalries with anybody? the history of your sports programs is just in its infancy.

UCF would be your natural rival--it would usurp every other one. Your two schools hate each other--at least it seems that way to me. I see UCF becoming your hated I-4 rival whether inconference or not.

Quote:L-Yes and Omnicarrier, what do you guys got against USF? Would you like to name a better 8th member? USF will be a good add to the Big East. Better yet, just let it go, because we're already in the conference and probably will be for a while.

BullsFanatic,

While your are 'in the conference', I have to believe your implication that there wasn't a better 8th member out there was as naive as the Bulls' motto - "We don't follow tradition, We create it". Try actually making tradition first before boasting about creating it

Memphis was far and away 'better' than a johnny-come-lately program that hasn't earned anything in either of the two revenue producing sports.

Now, with BCS affiliation, you may very well prove to be an excellent addition, the truth of the matter is, you didn't 'earn' your spot in the BE, time and circumstances simply favored you.

But take heart, you aren't the first institution to have fortune smile upon you and I'm sure you won't be the last. Now that you're in, just do us all a favor, and don't become the next Rutgers.

Cheers,
Neil

I'm sorry, I don't buy into the theory that South Florida or anyone hasn't "paid their dues" or "earned" their way. Why programs like Louisville and Cincinnati toiled and grinded and worked hard to get where they are and deserve the hard work, South Florida didn't exactly lay on their ****** and do nothing. And what has Baylor, or Vanderbilt or others done athletically to earn their ways? Heck, what did Virginia Tech do to "earn" their way into the Big East, West Virginia petitioned for them to get in while their football program was crap and the basketball program wasn't much better. USF deserves to be where they're at, I'm not going to thumb my nose down at them.

Quote:Cat's_Claw Posted on May 2 2005, 05:25 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry, I don't buy into the theory that South Florida or anyone hasn't "paid their dues" or "earned" their way. Why programs like Louisville and Cincinnati toiled and grinded and worked hard to get where they are and deserve the hard work, South Florida didn't exactly lay on their ****** and do nothing. And what has Baylor, or Vanderbilt or others done athletically to earn their ways? Heck, what did Virginia Tech do to "earn" their way into the Big East, West Virginia petitioned for them to get in while their football program was crap and the basketball program wasn't much better. USF deserves to be where they're at, I'm not going to thumb my nose down at them.&nbsp;

Despite all of the 'Big East made VT' claims fans like to make (which is only partially valid), in terms of football, VT was indeed the best option available for the Big East with a 481-356-45 record entering the 1990s.

Only So. Miss had a better record East of the Mississippi as far as non-major conferences teams go, and it just wouldn't have made sense to add a school in Mississippi, over a school that was located in Virginia considering the comparability of their records.

Louisville and Cincinnati had losing records and simply didn't have enough football cache, despite busting their ***** (which I would question anyway, since neither, to my knowledge, had put an awful lot of $$$ into their facilities at that point in time).

The better analogy than VT, would have been Rutgers and Temple. And see how rewarding teams that haven't 'earned' it as panned out for the BE? After all, how could Rutgers and Temple fail to become good football programs considering they are the two best talent producing states in the Northeast? And look at the markets they can potentially bring?

See, as a BE football fan, I've heard the USF arguments before and guess what?!? The good program from the talent-challenged state and very small market proved to be the best option over the other two- by a very wide margin.

As for your mentioning Vandy and Baylor, etc., keep in mind that Baylor was forced upon the Big 12 by Texas politicians. And while it is fashionable to knock Vandy, they still have a winning record in football to this day and at the time the SEC became a conference they had already won 13 football conference championships in the two conferences that preceded the SEC.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

Quote:L-Yes and Omnicarrier, what do you guys got against USF? Would you like to name a better 8th member? USF will be a good add to the Big East. Better yet, just let it go, because we're already in the conference and probably will be for a while.

BullsFanatic,

While your are 'in the conference', I have to believe your implication that there wasn't a better 8th member out there was as naive as the Bulls' motto - "We don't follow tradition, We create it". Try actually making tradition first before boasting about creating it

Memphis was far and away 'better' than a johnny-come-lately program that hasn't earned anything in either of the two revenue producing sports.

Now, with BCS affiliation, you may very well prove to be an excellent addition, the truth of the matter is, you didn't 'earn' your spot in the BE, time and circumstances simply favored you.

But take heart, you aren't the first institution to have fortune smile upon you and I'm sure you won't be the last. Now that you're in, just do us all a favor, and don't become the next Rutgers.

Cheers,
Neil

Wait a minute.....what did Memphis do for the last 30 years in football prior to the last two seasons to be more deserving than USF? Does one bad year wipe out our all time 2-2 mark against Memphis? Does two good years make Memphis a jaugernaut?

Quote:CyberBull Posted on May 2 2005, 06:47 PM ---
Wait a minute.....what did Memphis do for the last 30 years in football prior to the last two seasons to be more deserving than USF? Does one bad year wipe out our all time 2-2 mark against Memphis? Does two good years make Memphis a jaugernaut?

While admittedly Memphis is not the greatest of football teams, their record is very similar to Louisville's and slightly better than Cincinnati's. Memphis went two decades in the 60s and 70s with only 2 losing seasons, including three Missouri Valley Conference championships. They do have some history behind them whereas the Bulls have none.

While an independent they started the slippery slope downward. It took them a while to get going in C-USA, but once they got Tommy West, they have started to turn the program around. So I really see no significant difference between USF's two good years and Memphis', except for the fact that they have proven they can sustain a program and the Bulls haven't.

Memphis' fan support is clearly superior to the Bulls and rivals the Cards. Plus they bring the Liberty Bowl with them - guaranteed.

And that isn't even bringing basketball into the discussion.

Again, as you said before, the Bulls are in the BE so all any of us can hope for is that you do succeed. But please, just like you haven't created any tradition yet to be boasting about in your motto, please don't delude yourself into thinking the Bulls were the BE 'best option' for #8 - unless you consider location the overriding criteria that determines best option.

Cheers,
Neil

exactly we're the johnny come lately and memphis despite being bowl elgible once in 30 or so years is the established program. also if you look at our very brief track record, besides last year, we've had success in every level that we've played at, something that i'm sure temple and rutgers couldn't claim. there was a reason why we were able to become div 1 as quickly as we did, we lead div 1a in attendance, we had the financial backing, etc. i think in your frustration you are overlooking some of the good things that usf has done in its brief time. even though you like to pump up va tech, do you honestly think they would have been able to rise out of the level of obscurity without the benefit of a bcs affiliation (remember they were kicked our of cusa before joining the big east).

usf isn't a finished project and no one is claiming as such, however like the be commissioner and louisville ad said we have the right pieces in place to become a productive conference member. our b-ball program showed signs of life last year ending with wins against u charlotte, houston, and cincinati. we lead the big east in fb recruitng last year and finished within the top 50 this year (depite coming off of a losing season), we're front runners for the brent schaeffer sweepstakes, our ad just earmarked 50 million for renovations to the sun dome and olympic sport facilities. things are going in the right direction at usf, just give us some time.

Quote:USFMike Posted on May 2 2005, 08:02 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
exactly we're the johnny come lately and memphis despite being bowl elgible once in 30 or so years is the established program. also if you look at our very brief track record, besides last year, we've had success in every level that we've played at, something that i'm sure temple and rutgers couldn't claim. there was a reason why we were able to become div 1 as quickly as we did, we lead div 1a in attendance, we had the financial backing, etc. i think in your frustration you are overlooking some of the good things that usf has done in its brief time. even though you like to pump up va tech, do you honestly think they would have been able to rise out of the level of obscurity without the benefit of a bcs affiliation (remember they were kicked our of cusa before joining the big east).

First why do you think I haven't bothered to look at your track record? I have, which you will see in a minute.

Second, let's get the Va Tech stuff out of the way. VT joined the BE for football in 1993, three full years before C-USA had even started, so your last sentence makes no sense whatsoever.

Now, back to USF. Your attendance in 1-AA was spectacular, especially that first year with 33K plus. However, there has been no increase when comparing your 4 years in 1-AA versus your four years in 1-A. I cut the Bulls some slack here because of the weeknight games and early Saturday games, but still - considering your track record for success and your attendance in 1-AA, even you would have to admit your attendance in 1-A has been a disappointment.

Now look at Memphis, basically a steady increase over the past 8 years until they have reached the upper 30K and lower 40K range while the Bulls are still basically between 25K - 30K depending upon the opponents and the times of the games.

And yes, you have the financial backing and I respect Lee Roy Selmon a great deal. Even though he had to step down as your AD, I am confident he has left the blue-print for success and will remain actively involved as his health permits. I also happen to believe you guys have a good president (although I know some Bulls' fans are not pleased with her) in Judy Genshaft.

I think she will lead USF to Tier 2 (which of course is now lower Tier 1 level since they have combined Tier 1 and 2) within the next ten years.

And in terms of potential growth, the Bulls may very well be the best choice. But you certainly weren't 'the better' choice at the time, which to me signifies accomplishment already achieved, not what you might someday in the future achieve.

Put yourself in the position of a Memphis fan reading the things Bulls' fans post on this board. If USF had accomplished what Memphis has over the years and Memphis had simply 'potential', how would you react not simply to Memphis being chosen over the Bulls but then have Bulls' fans imply they were the best choice all along.

Again, CyberBull's comments smacked to me of the same arrogance as the Bulls' motto - 'We don't follow tradition, We create it'.

You haven't done anything yet. I hope you do, since your being good will be good for SU as well.

Best of luck in the BE. I'll be rooting for you to win, but don't expect me to swallow the Bulls' kool aid until you actually accomplish something.

If you want respect, earn it.

Cheers,
Neil

great post, and i completely agree we need to prove it on the field and based on last year we have a lot of work to do, we've been underdogs since our football program began, so we're used to it. i for one am glad we're in the big east, the fans/programs so far has been a huge upgrade compared to what we had in cusa. but i'm grateful the conference put us in a position to get into the big east.

i'm not saying memphis isn't a good program and if i was a fan i would also be pretty ticked, unfortunately, i think what really hindered memphis was their AD, he had a lot of enemies in the big east and i don't think calipari was much liked as well. and let's just say usf isn't the biggest fan of their AD either. in 5 years if the league splits i would like to see either memphis (if its true their ad is retiring), villanova, or umass as the ninth member, with the new bcs changes i don't think we need more than 9, unless its a penn state, etc.

omnicarrier Wrote:

Quote:USFMike Posted on May 2 2005, 08:02 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
exactly we're the johnny come lately and memphis despite being bowl elgible once in 30 or so years is the established program. also if you look at our very brief track record, besides last year, we've had success in every level that we've played at, something that i'm sure temple and rutgers couldn't claim. there was a reason why we were able to become div 1 as quickly as we did, we lead div 1a in attendance, we had the financial backing, etc. i think in your frustration you are overlooking some of the good things that usf has done in its brief time. even though you like to pump up va tech, do you honestly think they would have been able to rise out of the level of obscurity without the benefit of a bcs affiliation (remember they were kicked our of cusa before joining the big east).

Second, let's get the Va Tech stuff out of the way. VT joined the BE for football in 1993, three full years before C-USA had even started, so your last sentence makes no sense whatsoever.

I had to take a second look at that too until I realized he is talking about Metro Conference politics back in the 90s.

Quote:I had to take a second look at that too until I realized he is talking about Metro Conference politics back in the 90s.

Ah, but the Metro wasn't an all-sports league. I remember FSU and WVU being part of that league as well as VT, but I believe each were still independent for football.

Cheers,
Neil

And you are correct.

Same Memphis that only had a home average of 26,000 from 1997 - 2002. Memphis is also a 4-tier University and really does not have anything to do with the Liberty Bowl. If the Liberty bowl wanted to matchup an SEC vs. ACC team, they would do it in a heartbeat. When was the last time Memphis played in "THE Liberty bowl?" The largest attended Liberty bowls were from Alabama, Notre Dame, Louisville, Boise State, East Carolina, and etc.... No Memphis....Plus the BE is already too strong in basketball, adding another "strong" [I don't believe that Memphis is a strong team, but more on the lines of a traditional middle of the pack team that has all the talent in the world, but can't win the big ones] team would do nothing for the conference.

The Big East knew the potential of the Bulls and knew that our media market was a good thing for the Big East. They knew that we were the new kids on the block, lacked a large fan base, and still building a program. They knew that we have averaged 23,000 at home since joining D-1A and averaged only 3,600 in basketball over the past few seasons. MT lobbied for USF inclusion during the late 90s and around 2000, but Miami said no and if we ever would join the BE, Miami would leave. I don't want to hear anything more about USF paying any dues since everyone knew what they were getting with us. Give us a chance to prove that we are worthy.

Quote:I don't want to hear anything more about USF paying any dues since everyone knew what they were getting with us. Give us a chance to prove that we are worthy.

This isn't about 'giving <the Bulls> a chance to prove that <you> are worthy."

It's about some (and I emphasize some) Bulls fans acting as though they have already 'earned' it simply on the basis of being chosen. The Bulls were chosen, therefore they were the best choice, therefore they must have earned it.

And the very fact you in this post attempt to equate yourself to Memphis, which is clearly a better choice in every athletic sense for the two revenue generating sports (except for location) only proves my point.

Time and circumstance got the Bulls into the BE. Just the same as it got VT into the ACC, Baylor into the B12, and RU and Temple (for football, at least) into the BE.

Again, I sincerely hope the Bulls step up to the plate and prove their worth. Believe me, the BE needs a touch of 'green' - too much blue and red for my tastes and not enough green and orange :D

Best of luck. I will be rooting for your team. But I just won't get too excited about having USF in the league until they actually do prove their worth.

Cheers,
Neil

Quote: I remember FSU and WVU being part of that league as well as VT

-- WVU was in the A10 for its other sports with Penn St, Rutgers and temple etc


Jackson