What the bulls dont' want to tell you is, USF is basically having a 2 for 1 with Miami, they just don't get it. They have a 1 for 1, that they have already played at Miami. The second game that is to be played in 2009, but there is a very minimal buyout. Now the second seriers is set for a 1 for 1 to be played in 2012 and 2013. With that, USF asked for a $500,000 buyout for Miami and got it. Now ask yourself this, if you look at UM's schedule this year, they have one non conference road game this year, at Louisville. In 2005, one non conference away game at Temple. 2004, one non confernce away game at Houston. Now comes 2009 and UCF is already on the books for October 3rd and there is a $250,000 buyout, not to mention that UCF is a 2 for 1 and UCF will travel to Miami twice in 2008 and 2010, thus giving more reason to keep the contract with UCF. They are suppose to play at USF that year also, but with a $50,000 buyout. Now what do you think is going to happen. Why is there a $500,000 buyout this time for USF. This deal will end up being a 2 for 1. That is, unless Miami suddenly changes their scheduling practices.

Quote:...once again CFU gobbles up are our sloppy seconds. Funny what happens when the truth comes out.

Poor cyberpud, he just does not understand college football. Who cares about a 2 for 1 when you are talking about the national champions. So when you are playing Kansas at Raymond James with your 27,000 fans, UCF will be playing Texas on national TV, in their new on campus stadium, with a blimp flying over the campus showing the country the new football stadium, new basketball arena, the new athletic village, the new retail and bars that will be between the two venues. They will show the beautiful campus.

Your right Cyber, if USF would have played Texas at home, its nothing the country has not seen already, all they have to is watch the Bucs on Sunday to see what USF has to offer. Nice Pirate ship, ECU would love to have it.

rocketfootball Wrote:Personally, I would rather see Toledo play a 2 for 1 with Texas (even if the home game has to be at Ford Field because our stadium is too small) and not play the I-AA games at all.

Hmmnn....is anyone going to reply to this?

Go Bulls...beat the Rattlers or the Mcneese's or whoever you are playing.

When your fellow fans or students complain - just tell them it's becuase you're with the "big boys."

By the way...I should have checked the USF board before my last reply...sometimes its better to watch your own fans answer this junk themselves.

You see, outside of NCAABBS or the UCF/USF smackboard...some of you guys are actually honest. It's almost humorous to see some of the same posters taking different spins depending on what board they are - call UCF fans delusional if you'd like, but at least we're freakin consistant.

Anyway, upon the announcement that USF turned down a 2-1 with Texas:

mutt Wrote:It's better to get the chance to beat (and possibly lose to) a nationaly ranked team on ESPN, rather that beat a nobody team with no TV coverage. Now more than ever we need to take the risks...

bullman3 Wrote:Who says we don't need 2 for 1's? We havent ever really taken 2 for 1's anyway, we always were stuck just doing a one game payday. I don't remember any 2 for 1 games. We are not at the level yet to be able to sign 1 for 1 games with the tops teams like texas. We are beyond the 1 game pay days but arent to the point of demanding 1for 1s either. DW continues to make bad decisions on what's best for usf. A game in Austin would have been awesome and having a team like texas playing in Tampa, would be even more awesome. Talk about publicity, that game would easily sellout. What a shame that UCF will benefit from this instead of us. We should not pass up an oppotunity like this.

Joe Wrote:I said it yesterday, as long as this is a staggered 2 for 1 it would be good. We need to play and BEAT a team like this to help our national poisitioning. Yes, we got one with Miami, but their home attendance speaks for their willingness to play on the road.

UNC and Kansas are two bottom feeders in their conferences.

Lets see some gonads on the schedule, it won't hurt out BCS chances. We can still win our conference and I seriously doubt we're getting an at large bid. It will only make our team tougher.

(For those that will come back with last year's schedule, it was made when we were still young D-IAA and D-I. We have said we won't do one shot deals again.)

smazza Wrote:agreed

what a stupid decision not to play national chumpians


i almost cant believe it!!!!!!!!!!!!

turkeysoup Wrote:If you don't play the top teams you don't prove what you are really made of......and you don't risk good old job security....no risk no gain.

smazza Wrote:what an opportunity to play a great program like texas


only a loser mentality says no



usf athletics needs much higher expectations

Joe Wrote:Agreed. I don't think we should go running around taking every 2 for 1 or 1 game series out there. However, if a top 10 program like Texas says they will come to your place if you play them twice (I'd ask for staggered dates, i.e. - 2007 @ TX; 2008 @ USF; 2010 @ Texas) why not! It's a guarenteed sellout. You get to match wits with a big boy and you have a GREAT chance of getting a prime TV spot.

Joe Wrote:Kansas also has signed a 1 and 1 with Fresno State and finished a 1 and 1 with Wyoming.

North Carolina just signed for a 2 and 2 with ECU and finished a 1 and 1 with Utah

Signing those teaams to a 1 and 1 isn't some challenged feat that no one else could do. Both teams are bottom feeders and give us no respect.

When a team refuses to play 2 for ones with the Biggest powers and then turns around and refuses a 1 and 1 with non-bcs teams it runs into schedule problems. That's why you see D-AA teams on BCS teams schedules while some non-bcs teams don't play any D-AA teams.

The real issue is money. Now that USF has the BCS money they don't need to earn it with a money game. non-bcs schools will drop games that are not profitable. Those buyouts are part of the contract for a reason. Both teams agreed to the buyout terms of the contract. How many non-bcs teams had to scramble their schedules when the ACC and BE made those moves. MAC lost Marshall and UCF which caused the MAC adust the future conference schedules for every member. MAC had to adjust to merging Temple into the MAC. I guess the ACC started the mess, but the raid of BE impacted schedules in football for years. Teams like USF,UC, Louisville are able to negotiate better schedules as BCS teams than they did 2 years ago. Also, adding the 12th game put the MAC in high demand among BCS schools. The MAC had more power to get better money deals.

Unless the NCAA mandates every team play 6 home and 6 away games and share tv and bowl money equal, there is gonna be buyouts and changes to schedules.

I'm sure UCF will get more out of playing Texas than USF playing Florida A&M and MCneese State. Just paying the big boys gets you noticed.

Michigan, Penn State, Florida State, Alabama, Texas, USC, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and others are well known. Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers and WV have been around long enough for the non-hard core fan to recognize as a major college programs. To a Michigan or Ohio State fan......Uconn,UCF, and USF are less known than Central Michigan, Miami-Oh, or Bowling Green. If all you play is in-state Florida schools, souther D-AA's, and the BE then most of the nation will never hear of USF unless they reach a New Years bowl and play a major power that day.

I'm amused by USF fans who point to UCFs past of playing the best of the best and calling it a "failed" method of building a program.

The reasons for the Kruczek regime failing are well documented and have NOTHING to do with scheduling. If anything, our schedules brought us attention and recruits that we didn't necessarily deserve at the time and accelerated our growth as a program.

The problems that we had (lack of discipline, strength training and recruiting for skill positions while the lines suffered) are the reasons why we didn't win more of those "moral victories" and are directly attributed to certain game. Syracuse fans can agree with that point (see 2002 game).

Let me be the first to BREAK THE NEWS....

The powerhouse to complement North Carolina and Kansas is.....................................................


ILLINOIS!

st932253 Wrote:I'm amused by USF fans who point to UCFs past of playing the best of the best and calling it a "failed" method of building a program.

The reasons for the Kruczek regime failing are well documented and have NOTHING to do with scheduling. If anything, our schedules brought us attention and recruits that we didn't necessarily deserve at the time and accelerated our growth as a program.

The problems that we had (lack of discipline, strength training and recruiting for skill positions while the lines suffered) are the reasons why we didn't win more of those "moral victories" and are directly attributed to certain game. Syracuse fans can agree with that point (see 2002 game).

What tangible benefit did UCF get out of playing those road warrior schedules? Outside of $$$ you got nothing, except embarrassed in the majority of those games. That is not the attention you want. All that does is reinforce that you are not at the same level as the teams you are striving to catch.

You never recruited the next Culpepper, nor did it get you invited to a BCS conference. All it did was kill your win:loss record during the the first month of the season and destroy your fan's moral.

Has UCF ever won a "big game"? Somehow beating a 3-8 Alabama team that was going through an internal meltdown is not a big win. Thus outside of that game, point to the big wins to put a notch on your headboard.

Sir Galahad Wrote:

Quote:...once again CFU gobbles up are our sloppy seconds. Funny what happens when the truth comes out.

Poor cyberpud, he just does not understand college football. Who cares about a 2 for 1 when you are talking about the national champions. So when you are playing Kansas at Raymond James with your 27,000 fans, UCF will be playing Texas on national TV, in their new on campus stadium, with a blimp flying over the campus showing the country the new football stadium, new basketball arena, the new athletic village, the new retail and bars that will be between the two venues. They will show the beautiful campus.

Your right Cyber, if USF would have played Texas at home, its nothing the country has not seen already, all they have to is watch the Bucs on Sunday to see what USF has to offer. Nice Pirate ship, ECU would love to have it.

Poor guru still doesn't get it: playing big teams if you can't compete with them does nothing for you. Your stadium may be brand new but it looks like the rest of those erector set MAC Country Stadiums you used to play in. I just laugh how you guys talk like you invented the "stadium concept." In case you haven't figured it out most teams have on campus stadiums and that hasn't help the majority of them escape mediocrity.

It's about what happens between the lines and not where or who you play.

As far as not understanding football, you understood football so much that for years you said Central Florida would kick the crap out of USF yet when the reverse happened you have yet to be found.

Yeah you know your football......

I applaud USF's decision to play no 2 for 1's.

I would question the decision not to play 2 state of Florida powers in the same year. If I could schedule both Miami and Florida in the same year, I would certainly jump at that opportunity.

Jim

JIM15068 Wrote:I applaud USF's decision to play no 2 for 1's.

I would question the decision not to play 2 state of Florida powers in the same year. If I could schedule both Miami and Florida in the same year, I would certainly jump at that opportunity.

Jim

USF is a work in progress. Nobody except those who have the most to lose by USF's 9-year old football experiment suceeding would suggest that we are. Thus with this in mind, USF is still not at the point where it has the depth and maturity to take on powerhouse schedule like this. Perhaps by the end of the decade but the main goal right now is to continue growing on and off the field and win as many games as possible. For all the crap flying around these boards, the only thing that matters is winning. If you take care of your conference schedule and mix in a respectable OOC schedule with a big win here or there that does tons more than playing sacrificial lamb on the road to an established power like Ohio state or Texas.

Just look at West Virginia, they took care of business in conference, should have won the VPI game and then won their bowl game against the SEC champ.

Do you think they would have the same buzz heading into 2006 if they had played a couple "powerhouses" in September but got blown out by Georgia? Of course not....

The Big East has to continue to be smart in scheduling.

As I said, don't try to convince us. Try and convince most of your fans who don't seem to agree. Incidentally, it's the ones that aren't trying to put on a song and dance for everyone else.

st932253 Wrote:As I said, don't try to convince us. Try and convince most of your fans who don't seem to agree. Incidentally, it's the ones that aren't trying to put on a song and dance for everyone else.

st932253, you reference the "other Bulls fans on other boards", but the fact is most of those other fans don't understand the big picture. I see the same thing with a ton of UofL fans who wear the Red Glasses, but never venture onto conference boards like this one.

Fact is USF fans like CyberBull have a better understanding of the big picture for the future of the BE and what's best for USF.

Quote:What tangible benefit did UCF get out of playing those road warrior schedules? Outside of $$$ you got nothing, except embarrassed in the majority of those games. That is not the attention you want. All that does is reinforce that you are not at the same level as the teams you are striving to catch.

Please cyber, list us those "embarrassments" for UCF.

Was it :
14-9 loss to Auburn
10-9 loss to Auburn
1 point loss at UGA
the 14 point loss to Nebraska
the 3 point loss to USC
The two losses to GT by less than 7
the 10 point loss to Penn State
The 1 point loss to Ole Miss


Or was it the 40 point loss USF had to Oklahoma
the 40 point loss USF had at Arkansas

Just because UCF actually played 20 times more difficult teams and acutally hung with them, USF is now the expert in big games. Tell us Cyber, give me a big game that USF actually played well in, and don't throw out any of that weak ass Big east stuff.

Who cares about big picture?

They are being honest and honestly they'd rather not see their team turn down a chance to play Texas at home to play a 1-1 with North Carolina or Illinois out of principle.

"Acting" like the big boys is one thing....but doesn't that statement in itself suggest that you are not IN the "big boys" yourself?

Trust me, UCF pulled the same junk by "acting" like it was too good for C-USA a ways back and the Sun Belt (1991) - holding out for those BCS conference bids that never materialized. USF is doing a disservice to their fans (so it appears from their words), by "holding out" and settling for 1-1s with lower tier BCS teams. Instead of playing Samford to warm up for North Carolina, why not play North Carolina to warm up for a Top 25 team?

But if you want to just label those Bulls fans who disagree as "small minded" as if your little club is privy to certain information, than that's your thing. Those small minded people do talk and perception becomes reality.

Look how well it worked for UCF through the MAC experience. Big talk gets you by for 15 minutes, after that you have to back it up.

Quote:Your stadium may be brand new but it looks like the rest of those erector set MAC Country Stadiums you used to play in. I just laugh how you guys talk like you invented the "stadium concept." In case you haven't figured it out most teams have on campus stadiums and that hasn't help the majority of them escape mediocrity.

How sad for you, you are so jealous of what UCF is building, it just kills you. I find it humourous that a USF fan can talk about attendance when everyone knows that USF's actual attendance is around 25,000 and they have 3,000 real season ticket holders who buy the 17,000 total season tickets sold. Add to that, the only reason USF had any real good attendance numbers in 2005 was because of a 1-AA FAMU and UCF, who brought 15,000 fans with them to the Buc's Stadium.

Enjoy your games at the Buc's Stadium with your 27,000 fans, we will be just fine in our On Campus stadium.

lmfao

st932253 Wrote:Who cares about big picture?

They are being honest and honestly they'd rather not see their team turn down a chance to play Texas at home to play a 1-1 with North Carolina or Illinois out of principle.

"Acting" like the big boys is one thing....but doesn't that statement in itself suggest that you are not IN the "big boys" yourself?

Trust me, UCF pulled the same junk by "acting" like it was too good for C-USA a ways back and the Sun Belt (1991) - holding out for those BCS conference bids that never materialized. USF is doing a disservice to their fans (so it appears from their words), by "holding out" and settling for 1-1s with lower tier BCS teams. Instead of playing Samford to warm up for North Carolina, why not play North Carolina to warm up for a Top 25 team?

But if you want to just label those Bulls fans who disagree as "small minded" as if your little club is privy to certain information, than that's your thing. Those small minded people do talk and perception becomes reality.

Look how well it worked for UCF through the MAC experience. Big talk gets you by for 15 minutes, after that you have to back it up.

USF is just acting like a BCS team from a BCS conference. The USF administration understands this, CyberBull understands this, but because many other USF fans don't understand this doesn't make them wrong.

From this point forward, no Big East football team should ever accept a 2-1 from any school in America, including Texas.

CyberBull Wrote:...once again CFU gobbles up are our sloppy seconds. Funny what happens when the truth comes out.

------------------------------------------------------------------


How serious is Woolard about his team not traveling without getting a return game? Central Florida recently announced a three-game series with national champion Texas, including a game in Orlando to open the Knights' new stadium in 2007. Woolard said USF was contacted by ESPN about a game with the Longhorns, but he wasn't interested in an uneven series.
.

lmfao You really have to read this thread to appreciate this one....

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/bigeast/ph...=texas+ucf

CyberBull...."Funny how ucfers like theKnightime Twins despise the BigEast yet are over here showing off their "wares"."

The Knight Time...."LOL.

But hey, when USF has a team of Texas' caliber visiting Tampa......let me know. "

lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao

StillJonesing Wrote:

CyberBull Wrote:...once again CFU gobbles up are our sloppy seconds. Funny what happens when the truth comes out.

------------------------------------------------------------------


How serious is Woolard about his team not traveling without getting a return game? Central Florida recently announced a three-game series with national champion Texas, including a game in Orlando to open the Knights' new stadium in 2007. Woolard said USF was contacted by ESPN about a game with the Longhorns, but he wasn't interested in an uneven series.
.

lmfao You really have to read this thread to appreciate this one....

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/bigeast/ph...=texas+ucf

CyberBull...."Funny how ucfers like theKnightime Twins despise the BigEast yet are over here showing off their "wares"."

The Knight Time...."LOL.

But hey, when USF has a team of Texas' caliber visiting Tampa......let me know. "

lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao

The next time you guys beat us at football or basketball then you can talk.....Until then we will enjoy the money from your top alumni.

I still haven't seen any evidence of sloppy seconds yet. All i've seen is that Texas offered USF "a game". 1-0 is a pretty uneven series. I can see why your AD would want to spin it like UCF is getting sloppy seconds since USF didn't even get firsts.