(05-24-2023 09:25 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 09:04 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  USF is moving toward positioning itself to be a member of a current (or some as-yet not formed) all-sports power league. The school and athletics program simply have too many resources and too much potential to remain a "group league" member. Strong academics, great location, very solid football, underrated baseball. The list is notable.

Obviously, and is with the case for San Diego State, SMU and Memphis (and perhaps a few other universities with athletics programs remaining in the G5), USF will need a bit of good timing and positive circumstances to "move up."

I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

When is the book reviewing campus architecture and local brew pairings coming?

Joyously played, my good man.

I shall raise my beer mug on high, in your honor, the next time I quaff a fine Italian pilsner.

(and thanks for reading the thread on the Big East site)

For Tampa I'm betting it will involve seafood and a cigar.

I'm not sure how accurate this is (from Wiki):

Since 2009, Cigar City Brewing has brewed more than 6,000 individual brands of beer.

That is an eye-popping stat.

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

(05-24-2023 12:14 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

(05-24-2023 12:22 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:14 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

It is pretty big - they located it well on the outskirts of Tampa ("Temple Terrace") so there was plenty of land when they first broke ground. Same with UCF. I preferred UCF's campus of the two in the past, but it's been 15-20 years since I've visited USF.

(05-24-2023 12:43 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:22 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:14 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

It is pretty big - they located it well on the outskirts of Tampa ("Temple Terrace") so there was plenty of land when they first broke ground. Same with UCF. I preferred UCF's campus of the two in the past, but it's been 15-20 years since I've visited USF.

My brother and I drove the UCF campus that summer, too, and it is also huge. I viewed the USF and UCF campuses with about equal interest/appeal — which was modest. Such campuses simply do not offer the pleasantness of smaller and/or historic campuses (for various and obvious reasons).

(05-24-2023 12:56 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:43 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:22 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:14 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

It is pretty big - they located it well on the outskirts of Tampa ("Temple Terrace") so there was plenty of land when they first broke ground. Same with UCF. I preferred UCF's campus of the two in the past, but it's been 15-20 years since I've visited USF.

My brother and I drove the UCF campus that summer, too. It's huge, goo. I viewed the USF and UCF campuses with about equal interest/appeal — which was modest. Such campuses simply do not offer the pleasantness of smaller and/or historic campuses (for various and obvious reasons).

And I had you down as a Fritz Lang Metropolis kind of guy. I love quaint and unique, but also prefer it be "Far From the Madding Crowd."

(05-24-2023 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:56 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:43 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:22 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:14 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

It is pretty big - they located it well on the outskirts of Tampa ("Temple Terrace") so there was plenty of land when they first broke ground. Same with UCF. I preferred UCF's campus of the two in the past, but it's been 15-20 years since I've visited USF.

My brother and I drove the UCF campus that summer, too. It's huge, goo. I viewed the USF and UCF campuses with about equal interest/appeal — which was modest. Such campuses simply do not offer the pleasantness of smaller and/or historic campuses (for various and obvious reasons).

And I had you down as a Fritz Lang Metropolis kind of guy. I love quaint and unique, but also prefer it be "Far From the Madding Crowd."

From Wiki:

A review by H.G. Wells from April 1927, accused [Metropolis and Fritz Lang] of "foolishness, cliché, platitude, and muddlement about mechanical progress and progress in general."

Roger Ebert: "Metropolis is one of the great achievements of the silent era, a work so audacious in its vision and so angry in its message that it is, if anything, more powerful today than when it was made."

(05-24-2023 03:27 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:56 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:43 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:22 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

It is pretty big - they located it well on the outskirts of Tampa ("Temple Terrace") so there was plenty of land when they first broke ground. Same with UCF. I preferred UCF's campus of the two in the past, but it's been 15-20 years since I've visited USF.

My brother and I drove the UCF campus that summer, too. It's huge, goo. I viewed the USF and UCF campuses with about equal interest/appeal — which was modest. Such campuses simply do not offer the pleasantness of smaller and/or historic campuses (for various and obvious reasons).

And I had you down as a Fritz Lang Metropolis kind of guy. I love quaint and unique, but also prefer it be "Far From the Madding Crowd."

From Wiki:

A review by H.G. Wells from April 1927, accused [Metropolis and Fritz Lang] of "foolishness, cliché, platitude, and muddlement about mechanical progress and progress in general."

Roger Ebert: "Metropolis is one of the great achievements of the silent era, a work so audacious in its vision and so angry in its message that it is, if anything, more powerful today than when it was made."

So do you go with Wells or the fat guy instead of the skinny one (Gene Siskel)?

Debt isn't the best option, hopefully they can repay it without taxpayers bailing them out.

(05-24-2023 12:22 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:14 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 08:12 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I've driven/walked 45 campuses of universities with FBS football programs, and USF's ranks among the more impressive based on scale.

I'm not sure. Looks like the University of North Texas with a lot more trees.

"Directional" schools tend to come up short on atmosphere because they are built up quickly and on the cheap by legislatures.

I agree fully on how "directional school" campuses often lack in interesting vibe/atmosphere, stately architecture, distinctiveness/quirkiness, etc. Most such campuses were created relatively recently on massive sites of then-raw land and, because of this, offer few traditional buildings, quaint nooks and crannies, building density, etc. — in short, the elements needed for campus charm.

But as to the USF campus, my brother and I drove a good bit of it (in about 2008) and were impressed by the sheer size.

The problem with USF's location is the seedy folks hanging around Fowler Ave. They need to clean that up.

(05-24-2023 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 03:27 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:56 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:43 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  It is pretty big - they located it well on the outskirts of Tampa ("Temple Terrace") so there was plenty of land when they first broke ground. Same with UCF. I preferred UCF's campus of the two in the past, but it's been 15-20 years since I've visited USF.

My brother and I drove the UCF campus that summer, too. It's huge, goo. I viewed the USF and UCF campuses with about equal interest/appeal — which was modest. Such campuses simply do not offer the pleasantness of smaller and/or historic campuses (for various and obvious reasons).

And I had you down as a Fritz Lang Metropolis kind of guy. I love quaint and unique, but also prefer it be "Far From the Madding Crowd."

From Wiki:

A review by H.G. Wells from April 1927, accused [Metropolis and Fritz Lang] of "foolishness, cliché, platitude, and muddlement about mechanical progress and progress in general."

Roger Ebert: "Metropolis is one of the great achievements of the silent era, a work so audacious in its vision and so angry in its message that it is, if anything, more powerful today than when it was made."

So do you go with Wells or the fat guy instead of the skinny one (Gene Siskel)?

For whatever it's worth ...

... I preferred Gene Siskel over Roger Ebert. Not sure why. May have been Siskel's speaking style. And I preferred most of his No. 1 movies each year to Ebert's. That was a strong TV program. I particularly enjoyed watching it when I lived in Chicago, along with The McLaughlin Group (would that I could be the "Jack Germond of the CSNBBS.com Board").

(05-24-2023 04:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 03:27 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 12:56 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  My brother and I drove the UCF campus that summer, too. It's huge, goo. I viewed the USF and UCF campuses with about equal interest/appeal — which was modest. Such campuses simply do not offer the pleasantness of smaller and/or historic campuses (for various and obvious reasons).

And I had you down as a Fritz Lang Metropolis kind of guy. I love quaint and unique, but also prefer it be "Far From the Madding Crowd."

From Wiki:

A review by H.G. Wells from April 1927, accused [Metropolis and Fritz Lang] of "foolishness, cliché, platitude, and muddlement about mechanical progress and progress in general."

Roger Ebert: "Metropolis is one of the great achievements of the silent era, a work so audacious in its vision and so angry in its message that it is, if anything, more powerful today than when it was made."

So do you go with Wells or the fat guy instead of the skinny one (Gene Siskel)?

For whatever it's worth ...

... I preferred Gene Siskel over Roger Ebert. Not sure why. May have been Siskel's speaking style. And I preferred most of his No. 1 movies each year to Ebert's. That was a strong TV program. I particularly enjoyed watching it when I lived in Chicago, along with The McLaughlin Group (would that I could be the "Jack Germond of the CSNBBS.com Board").

I preferred Siskel as well, though I didn't dislike Roger. They both gave decent reasons for their opinions. I was more a fan of Cavett than Mcglaughlin but watched both, but they really represented 2 different eras in spite of some 80's overlap. Two different genres but Cavett covered politics and current events as well. I preferred old time 60 minutes with Andy Rooney and Huntly and Brinkley to Cronkite, though Walter was okay too. It was news back then, not propaganda. Today the editorial is the show, and the news is the filler, if you can find it.

(05-24-2023 04:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 04:18 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 03:27 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And I had you down as a Fritz Lang Metropolis kind of guy. I love quaint and unique, but also prefer it be "Far From the Madding Crowd."

From Wiki:

A review by H.G. Wells from April 1927, accused [Metropolis and Fritz Lang] of "foolishness, cliché, platitude, and muddlement about mechanical progress and progress in general."

Roger Ebert: "Metropolis is one of the great achievements of the silent era, a work so audacious in its vision and so angry in its message that it is, if anything, more powerful today than when it was made."

So do you go with Wells or the fat guy instead of the skinny one (Gene Siskel)?

For whatever it's worth ...

... I preferred Gene Siskel over Roger Ebert. Not sure why. May have been Siskel's speaking style. And I preferred most of his No. 1 movies each year to Ebert's. That was a strong TV program. I particularly enjoyed watching it when I lived in Chicago, along with The McLaughlin Group (would that I could be the "Jack Germond of the CSNBBS.com Board").

I preferred Siskel as well, though I didn't dislike Roger. They both gave decent reasons for their opinions. I was more a fan of Cavett than Mcglaughlin but watched both, but they really represented 2 different eras in spite of some 80's overlap. Two different genres but Cavett covered politics and current events as well. I preferred old time 60 minutes with Andy Rooney and Huntly and Brinkley to Cronkite, though Walter was okay too. It was news back then, not propaganda. Today the editorial is the show, and the news is the filler, if you can find it.

David Brinkley was a giant in the industry.

I also highly respected Robert Breckenridge Ware "Robin" MacNeil (the name makes Uncle Dazzy smile), who partnered with Jim Lehrer to create The MacNeil/Lehrer Report in 1975 and broadcasted on PBS. MacNeil, from Canada, is 92. Lehrer died in 2020 at age 85. Politico reported in 2012 that in order to maintain objectivity, Lehrer chose not to vote. Beautiful.

Some of the "news reporting" I see from both left- and right-leaning media publications and broadcast outlets today ... troubling.

Congrats to USF.

(05-24-2023 03:47 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  Debt isn't the best option, hopefully they can repay it without taxpayers bailing them out.

Many of the P5s were established and built via taxpayers, why should USF not get the same benefit?

(05-24-2023 08:11 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-24-2023 03:47 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  Debt isn't the best option, hopefully they can repay it without taxpayers bailing them out.

Many of the P5s were established and built via taxpayers, why should USF not get the same benefit?

USF is trying to get this built fast. They know the train is leaving the station and they don't want to get caught without a ride, so they are building at lightning speed. No time to engage politicians and go that route. So they are paying for it themselves.