Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[BaltoBull]

 

 

 

If USF were to go to the Big XII it would be tectonically shocking (I agree we'd leapfrong FSU and UM, at least in terms of TV revenue) and, IMHO, good (compared to our current situation).

Which is why it'll never happen. Because the college football gods have decided that we can't have nice things.

I agree

+1

Which is why I am perfectly content in the AAC. It's only a matter of time before the big boys break away and we form an alliance with the MWC or something. I really do want our champion and their champion playing for 'something'.

Once everyone else realizes we are just fodder for the 'established' programs with 'brand name' recognition and we are not part of what really, is the "Elite 16" or so in college football, things will be a hell of a lot easier.

The B12 would be nice, a truncated ACC would have been better but, for all intents and purposes, we are where we need to be.

Completely wrong. Was TCU where they needed to be? If we get to a better conference and we will we will eventually get better.

 

That's the same thing we said when we went from CUSA to the Big East. I submit to you we never got better.

 

For all the hype, the supposed potential and the advantage of location, can you say we got better? If USF could not perform in the Big East when given the chance, what makes you think we are going to compete with Texas, Oklahoma and West Virginia (again)? I don't buy it.

 

I truly believe if we were in the B12, we would be a doormat. Texas and Oklahoma own that conference and I don't see USF making too much of a dent. Sure, it would be nice to get the checks, upgrade facilities and enjoy the other perks that come with being a member of a P5 conference, but I just can't see us competing in the B12. I think there is already too much of a gap within the conference and 'catching up' is not likely.

 

I could be wrong.

[DELdaBull]

Nobody is leaving the SEC....

QFT and dummies

[usfgrad84]

If USF were to go to the Big XII it would be tectonically shocking (I agree we'd leapfrong FSU and UM, at least in terms of TV revenue) and, IMHO, good (compared to our current situation).

Which is why it'll never happen. Because the college football gods have decided that we can't have nice things.

I agree

+1

Which is why I am perfectly content in the AAC. It's only a matter of time before the big boys break away and we form an alliance with the MWC or something. I really do want our champion and their champion playing for 'something'.

Once everyone else realizes we are just fodder for the 'established' programs with 'brand name' recognition and we are not part of what really, is the "Elite 16" or so in college football, things will be a hell of a lot easier.

The B12 would be nice, a truncated ACC would have been better but, for all intents and purposes, we are where we need to be.

Completely wrong. Was TCU where they needed to be? If we get to a better conference and we will we will eventually get better.

That's the same thing we said when we went from CUSA to the Big East. I submit to you we never got better.

For all the hype, the supposed potential and the advantage of location, can you say we got better? If USF could not perform in the Big East when given the chance, what makes you think we are going to compete with Texas, Oklahoma and West Virginia (again)? I don't buy it.

I truly believe if we were in the B12, we would be a doormat. Texas and Oklahoma own that conference and I don't see USF making too much of a dent. Sure, it would be nice to get the checks, upgrade facilities and enjoy the other perks that come with being a member of a P5 conference, but I just can't see us competing in the B12. I think there is already too much of a gap within the conference and 'catching up' is not likely.

I could be wrong.

We got better as a program. We never got better relative to the better competition. Big difference.

[dabull80]

 

 

I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12.

 

 

Not a chance.  I'd jump conferences right now.  The benefit would far, far, far, outweigh the negatives.

 

 

If you are following the disscussion it is about how much.  What are the big positives that you see of being non-competitive in the Big 12 ?  So far I have tried to stay away from perceived benifits/negatives of changing conferences but we could have that disscussion.  Actually Data this might be a good new thread to start because we are sorta off tangent on this thread - not that this thread has ever gotten off subject - VIRGINS - SACRIFICE  LOL.

Edited April 25, 2013 by dabull80

[GaUSFBull]

 

 

 

I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12.

 

 

Not a chance.  I'd jump conferences right now.  The benefit would far, far, far, outweigh the negatives.

 

 

If you are following the disscussion it is about how much.  What are the big positives that you see of being non-competitive in the Big 12 ?  So far I have tried to stay away from perceived benifits/negatives of changing conferences but we could have that disscussion.  Actually Data this might be a good new thread to start because we are sorta off tangent on this thread - not that this thread has ever gotten off subject - VIRGINS - SACRIFICE  LOL.

 

 

I just don't get how some are so sure that we would be "non-competitive."  

[Triple B]

 

 

 

 

I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12.

 

 

Not a chance.  I'd jump conferences right now.  The benefit would far, far, far, outweigh the negatives.

 

 

If you are following the disscussion it is about how much.  What are the big positives that you see of being non-competitive in the Big 12 ?  So far I have tried to stay away from perceived benifits/negatives of changing conferences but we could have that disscussion.  Actually Data this might be a good new thread to start because we are sorta off tangent on this thread - not that this thread has ever gotten off subject - VIRGINS - SACRIFICE  LOL.

 

 

I just don't get how some are so sure that we would be "non-competitive."  

 

 

I'm reading this stuff and thinking the same thing. Since the previous jump in conference, we've been able to hang with "Big Boys" for the most part. It's the little pissants within the BE we've stubbed our toe on. We'd be further along in the building process of the program and I've got to assume the quality of recruits would go up with the B12 tag... We may not challenge for the top spot every year but I don't think we'd be a doormat every year either.

[Bull94]

 

 

 

 

 

I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12.

 

 

Not a chance.  I'd jump conferences right now.  The benefit would far, far, far, outweigh the negatives.

 

 

If you are following the disscussion it is about how much.  What are the big positives that you see of being non-competitive in the Big 12 ?  So far I have tried to stay away from perceived benifits/negatives of changing conferences but we could have that disscussion.  Actually Data this might be a good new thread to start because we are sorta off tangent on this thread - not that this thread has ever gotten off subject - VIRGINS - SACRIFICE  LOL.

 

 

I just don't get how some are so sure that we would be "non-competitive."  

 

 

I'm reading this stuff and thinking the same thing. Since the previous jump in conference, we've been able to hang with "Big Boys" for the most part. It's the little pissants within the BE we've stubbed our toe on. We'd be further along in the building process of the program and I've got to assume the quality of recruits would go up with the B12 tag... We may not challenge for the top spot every year but I don't think we'd be a doormat every year either.

 

what big boys have we hung with? a game or two here and there with a power program in a rebuilding year doesn't mean  you hang with anyone for a season.

 

where do you see us fitting in the big 12? I see us behind Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas state, west virginia, oklahoma state, and tcu on a regular basis. probably texas tech and baylor too. 

 

does that mean we couldn't have a year where we finish in top half? no but on a regulas basis we would be bottom half of the conference. hell we barely cracked top half of big east once or twice. the team that won it 4 of 7 times finished 7-6 last year with a team thought to be in the top 10.

[WoolyBully]

Well, that's kind of a tough call,  part of me says we should sharpen our skills via the AAC with eyes on moving conferences later on. I do think, however, that if we were to jump ship - right now - we would be the doormat. In looking back on our CUSA/BE days, we were an average team. One day, we might be an average team in the Big XII, but it wouldn't be this day. 

[GaUSFBull]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12.

 

 

Not a chance.  I'd jump conferences right now.  The benefit would far, far, far, outweigh the negatives.

 

 

If you are following the disscussion it is about how much.  What are the big positives that you see of being non-competitive in the Big 12 ?  So far I have tried to stay away from perceived benifits/negatives of changing conferences but we could have that disscussion.  Actually Data this might be a good new thread to start because we are sorta off tangent on this thread - not that this thread has ever gotten off subject - VIRGINS - SACRIFICE  LOL.

 

 

I just don't get how some are so sure that we would be "non-competitive."  

 

 

I'm reading this stuff and thinking the same thing. Since the previous jump in conference, we've been able to hang with "Big Boys" for the most part. It's the little pissants within the BE we've stubbed our toe on. We'd be further along in the building process of the program and I've got to assume the quality of recruits would go up with the B12 tag... We may not challenge for the top spot every year but I don't think we'd be a doormat every year either.

 

what big boys have we hung with? a game or two here and there with a power program in a rebuilding year doesn't mean  you hang with anyone for a season.

 

where do you see us fitting in the big 12? I see us behind Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas state, west virginia, oklahoma state, and tcu on a regular basis. probably texas tech and baylor too. 

 

does that mean we couldn't have a year where we finish in top half? no but on a regulas basis we would be bottom half of the conference. hell we barely cracked top half of big east once or twice. the team that won it 4 of 7 times finished 7-6 last year with a team thought to be in the top 10.

 

 

When I think non-competitive, I think of teams that get blown out in every game.  That's never happened to us ... sure, it's happened to us a couple times, against Rutgers, Pitt, on occasion, but how many games have we lost in the closing moments?  I'd say more than we've gotten blown out.  

 

(done beating my head against the wall now, and waiting to be utterly chastised and proven wrong by Bull94 henceforth)   

[Bull94]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I for one would rather stay in the new AAC, collect some of the 90 mil exit fee money and play competitive football then be a joke in the Big 12.

 

 

Not a chance.  I'd jump conferences right now.  The benefit would far, far, far, outweigh the negatives.

 

 

If you are following the disscussion it is about how much.  What are the big positives that you see of being non-competitive in the Big 12 ?  So far I have tried to stay away from perceived benifits/negatives of changing conferences but we could have that disscussion.  Actually Data this might be a good new thread to start because we are sorta off tangent on this thread - not that this thread has ever gotten off subject - VIRGINS - SACRIFICE  LOL.

 

 

I just don't get how some are so sure that we would be "non-competitive."  

 

 

I'm reading this stuff and thinking the same thing. Since the previous jump in conference, we've been able to hang with "Big Boys" for the most part. It's the little pissants within the BE we've stubbed our toe on. We'd be further along in the building process of the program and I've got to assume the quality of recruits would go up with the B12 tag... We may not challenge for the top spot every year but I don't think we'd be a doormat every year either.

 

what big boys have we hung with? a game or two here and there with a power program in a rebuilding year doesn't mean  you hang with anyone for a season.

 

where do you see us fitting in the big 12? I see us behind Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas state, west virginia, oklahoma state, and tcu on a regular basis. probably texas tech and baylor too. 

 

does that mean we couldn't have a year where we finish in top half? no but on a regulas basis we would be bottom half of the conference. hell we barely cracked top half of big east once or twice. the team that won it 4 of 7 times finished 7-6 last year with a team thought to be in the top 10.

 

 

When I think non-competitive, I think of teams that get blown out in every game.  That's never happened to us ... sure, it's happened to us a couple times, against Rutgers, Pitt, on occasion, but how many games have we lost in the closing moments?  I'd say more than we've gotten blown out.  

 

(done beating my head against the wall now, and waiting to be utterly chastised and proven wrong by Bull94 henceforth)  

 

thought they meant compete for the conference title. not just keep games close. I guess we just have different ideas of being competitive.