Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Triple B]

30 minutes ago, Skingraft said:

Jesus.... We have devolved to middle school 

I think there are times that that the case could be made that "evolved" could be used ....

[Brad]

9 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Offensive only to the thin skinned. The program was 7 freaking years old and had been 1-A for 3. When I say "potential", I assumed it would be recognized that it meant potential at the highest level of college football, which we weren't at.

You clearly don't see the difference in performance, that is willful.  Potential isn't based on magic.  There is nothing we've seen in four years that screams potential, really just the opposite.  The team that got the move to BE had already impressed mightily on the field.

Piss on the legendary work of Selmon, Griffin, Castor, Leavitt, Blackwell, Rubin and the rest.  Thin-skinners.  It's much easier to say we were in a far better position at the time.  Easily.   Today's program would did not get the chance.

[puc86]

3 minutes ago, Brad said:

We are literally in the grasping for straws mode (USF Athletics), it makes sense to me.  Just like Jeff Scott visiting every **** school from Pre-K to high school in Florida, Kelly really needs to figure out how to engage the thousands of fans that have been turned away.  I don't disagree with him engaging, but obviously the twitter guy had lofty expectations that MK should have him on speed dial.  The last thing MK wants to be seen as is aloof and out of touch (see Harlan, Mark).

I think his skill set is very strong towards being able to fundraise and this is certainly an example of that and I do appreciate his man of the people approach, I just don’t think if we were seriously involved in conference talk that there would be time for this nonsense. Nothing more and nothing less.

[Triple B]

3 minutes ago, puc86 said:

If we don’t get in and other people do, again, certainly it’s got to cross peoples minds about what we could perhaps do differently

If we don't get in, I would be interested to hear what MK could have done differently in the relatively short time here that would have gotten us in.

[Brad]

12 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Are you funning me? You don't know who I'm referring to .....??

Now that you put it that way...  No I don't know.  Remember, you're the law around here.

[puc86]

1 minute ago, Triple B said:

If we don't get in, I would be interested to hear what MK could have done differently in the relatively short time here that would have gotten us in.

Occasionally winning would have probably been a good start, hiring people with proven track records of success perhaps another, offering anything and everything in terms of contract another. The man has been here for over 4 years if there is nothing he can do to help our chances in 4 years what’s the point of having an AD?  Danny White was at UCF for 6 years and I believe he made a difference in that time that paid off for UCF and for him. Just because MK hasn’t been able to do it doesn’t mean it’s impossible.

[Triple B]

2 minutes ago, Brad said:

You clearly don't see the difference in performance, that is willful.  Potential isn't based on magic.  There is nothing we've seen in four years that screams potential, really just the opposite.  The team that got the move to BE had already impressed mightily on the field.

Piss on the legendary work of Selmon, Griffin, Castor, Leavitt, Blackwell, Rubin and the rest.  Thin-skinners.  It's much easier to say we were in a far better position at the time.  Easily.   Today's program would did not get the chance.

My comment had absolutely nothing to do with recent times. Not sure why using the term "potential" in the context I used it has set you off so. In the grand scheme of things we hadn't done **** in the world of college football and yet we were invited to the highest level ..... That's anything but pissing on those people you mentioned.

[Triple B]

3 minutes ago, Brad said:

Now that you put it that way...  No I don't know.  Remember, you're the law around here.

How about this ..... "We don't have a Charlie Strong problem, we have a Michael Kelly problem".

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, Triple B said:

How about this ..... "We don't have a Charlie Strong problem, we have a Michael Kelly problem".

The sticky note guy is the same guy? That really helps solidify my point even you guys didn’t publicly humor him to this level and this is actually the only thing you have going on. That he is upset about only wanting to give to women’s athletics does seem on brand.

[Triple B]

11 minutes ago, puc86 said:

Occasionally winning would have probably been a good start, hiring people with proven track records of success perhaps another, offering anything and everything in terms of contract another. The man has been here for over 4 years if there is nothing he can do to help our chances in 4 years what’s the point of having an AD?  Danny White was at UCF for 6 years and I believe he made a difference in that time that paid off for UCF and for him. Just because MK hasn’t been able to do it doesn’t mean it’s impossible.

Like Skip? Nothing is guaranteed. A coach would have had to come in here and gone undefeated for two years, winning a minimum of 1 BCS bowl to have possibly had any impact on getting in....... and that wasn't happening with what Chuck left us. You don't have an argument here.