in all fairness to cwt and the program

[snarling Bull]

only difference in that game was they landed Brissett and we didn't . they weren't even listed in his original list of options while we were.

70% completion rate with a 168 rating would look good right about now.

Bull94

White sure increases his stock yesterday didn't he!!!

not sure what this means but neither white nor bench are quality d -1 starters. that much is clear.

Last week you said he was fairly accurate and WCU was just first game jitters.

Many said WCU was first game jitters What would you call yesterday's performance

[WoolyBully]

 

Many said WCU was first game jitters What would you call yesterday's performance?

 I would refer to it as the 25% of the season gone, with games against mediocre schools, get used to it jitters.

[CRBULL]

Going back to the original post, I agree some are not considering reality so let's take a look at the facts.

 

Here's an average of the Rivals class rankings over the last 3 years for us and our OOC competition:

                  2012      2013      2014      AVG

USF               49          49          39          46

NC St            53          47          30           43

Maryland       35          33          53           40

Wisconsin     57          57          33           49

 

We are recruiting at the same level as we did before the Big East broke up, and roughly better than 33% of the schools in the recently proclaimed mythical "P5" conferences.

 

Saying we can't compete with NC State is like saying we can no longer compete with Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, WV, and Rutgers because they are now in the "P5."

 

We haven't been competitive at any level for the last three years, but the facts show it isn't because of the potential talent we can pull in. Whether that talent is pulled in effectively to meet the chosen schemes is another matter.

 

The other interesting thing that came up when looking at the facts is that it's impressive what Wisconsin has been able to do with the talent level they have been pulling in for the last 5 or so years. I had pictured them having top 20 classes before I actually looked it up and noticed they have been recruiting lower than us.

[smazza]

averaging classes doesn't isn't accurate because one class can have a hand full of playmakers that can turn your team into a top 25 team

 

was there a doubt Maryland and nc state had more talent

 

in the coming years the 4 teams you mentioned will get better talent than usf

 

however, a good qb can make a big difference

 

just as a bad qb can----usf has not had a great qb EVER!!!

 

I watched usf over the last 3 years and they are not a talented team... you can post all the numbers you want.

Edited September 15, 2014 by smazza

[CRBULL]

No doubt certain individuals can make a big difference on a team and it takes a decent coach to put the right ones in the right situation.

 

There is no doubt that their talent was used much more efficiently (this is the case with any winning team with a good system despite their level of talent - look at Wisconsin's recruiting level), but more overall talent on an individual basis, no they do not, that's what the facts tell you.

 

Despite what you and some of the sky is falling crowd say, there is no current trend to indicate that our recruiting will change beyond the normal swing for our current statistically significant factors, of which Big East vs AAC apparently wasn't a large one.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the QB situation and it's baffling, but it's not a talent gap issue (beyond what we already had to work with when we were in the Big East).

 

The entire point and bottom line is that we are still a top 30-50 destination school, regardless of conference and lack of recent winning record, for upper level talent. It just needs to be gathered and implemented to its potential.

[thebouncer1898]

Really? Tell ECU that.

[BDYZR]

 

 

 

 

only difference in that game was they landed Brissett and we didn't . they weren't even listed in his original list of options while we were.

70% completion rate with a 168 rating would look good right about now.

Bull94

White sure increases his stock yesterday didn't he!!!

not sure what this means but neither white nor bench are quality d -1 starters. that much is clear.

Last week you said he was fairly accurate and WCU was just first game jitters.

Many said WCU was first game jitters What would you call yesterday's performance

 

Third game ********...

[Rizman]

AS Byrd said, they were not prepared.   Very sad

[smazza]

it takes all my time to worry about usf

 

I don't have time to analyze another non p5 team like ecu

 

usf will be more competitive against fellow aac stiffs

 

we should beat uconn

[smazza]

rizman--you really believe byrd?