South Florida is currently second in the BCS Rankings. Their resume is the best of any undefeated school and at the end of the season would be second only to LSU (if they win out). They boast two quality wins: @Auburn and West Virginia. They put up 64 points on UCF, a team Texas struggled to beat and handled the rest of their business. The next half of the schedule looks like this: @Rutgers, @Uconn, Cincy, @Syracuse, Louisville and @Pitt. All the remaining games are in conference and each team will be up for a chance to knock off one of the nation’s best teams. Simply put if they go 12-0 they deserve a chance to play for the National Championship.
The only thing that can tame the Bulls is the name on the front of their jerseys. If it was Michigan, USC or Alabama the story would end here with, win out and you’ll be playing in New Orleans. However, many analysts and writers (not the more liberal bloggers) think USF should be penalized because they have been playing football for just 10 years. An example scenario being argued is an undefeated Ohio State being bumped ahead an undefeated USF and behind a one loss LSU. At the heart of the argument is the question should the prestige and tradition of a program influence voters?
Obviously I am going to argue no. Tradition or prestige does not positively or negatively correlate to how talented and good a team is this year. Wins in an era without the BCS, spread option, equal scholarships and at present geriatric players shouldn’t count towards a team now in 2007. I think everyone including analysts and writers will concede this argument. However, the bias will still be there because writers need Texas versus USC to write about and networks need Florida St versus Oklahoma for people to watch.
Outside of Tampa residents, USF alumni and Jenn Sterger not many people care about USF. The relatively small USF fan base leads to the bigger problem: money and the bottom line. Traditional powers bring in more money, yield higher television ratings, create more buzz and sell more newspapers. Each part of the BCS, except the non-biased computers, all have something to gain from USF not making the BCS Championship Game. Too bad the computers are only 1/3 of the current BCS formula.
Again, if South Florida goes undefeated they deserve to play for the National Championship. They will have the quality convincing wins deserving of every pollster’s vote. In a team sport characterized by athletes playing for the love of the game let’s not deny a hard working program a chance to build their own tradition because of money.
47 responses so far ↓
1 Tom // Oct 16, 2007 at 6:43 pm
I don’t buy it. I’ve watched every USF game. Have the computers? Their D, especially their two top quality corners, shuts down any type of passing game. That allows them to clog the middle with bodies. Should that make them the top team in the country? Their spread O basically allows their very athletic qb to pull down the ball and run for 1st downs whenever he wants. Basically the only way to stop their O is to make them turn the ball over, which only seems to happen when they put their stud frosh rb in the game, something they don’t do very often.
This may be hard to wrap our brains around but they may be able to beat every team in the county, but should that really make them the #1 team? They may beat all of the teams on their schedule. Does that really mean they are the best team? Sounds crazy. I know. But they may be unbeatable but may not be a great team. Can that make sense?
2 www.soccersecrets.info » What if South Florida Runs the Table? // Oct 17, 2007 at 5:00 am
[…] cgb wrote a fantastic post today on “What if South Florida Runs the Table?”Here’s ONLY a quick extractHowever, many analysts and writers (not the more liberal bloggers) think USF should be penalized because they have been playing football for just 10 years. An example scenario being argued is an undefeated Ohio State being bumped ahead … […]
3 Tim // Oct 17, 2007 at 7:10 am
“they may be able to beat every team in the county, but should that really make them the #1 team?”
Uh, yeah. Not only should it, it does.
4 Matteo // Oct 17, 2007 at 8:58 am
If 1 or 2 teams go undefeated, regardless of conference or school they should play for the national championship. Because there is not a rule like this the entire Div IA is screwed up. Boise St should of played last year and Utah a few years before. If the NCAA elitist do not think a certain team or conference should not be allowed to play for a national championship then the team of conference should be moved to Div IAA. I do not have a problem with there being BCS conferences, but it should only be used for tie breakers. Say 3 schools go undefeated 2 BCS schools 1 nonBCS the 2 BCS play in the National Championship or 1 BCS and 2 nonBCS then the highest ranked nonBCS plays the BCS school for the National Championship.
It is really a simple solution if you win you win, why should you be rewarded for a lose. Lets use this year as an example
South Florida had 2 bad games, but they still managed to beat a Div IA Elon and FAU.
USC has 2 bad games 1 lost to a horrible Stanford and a win against Ari
Okla loses to a Colorado.
LSU loses a good game to Kentucky because of a bad play call at the end
Why should a team, South Florida in this case, go undefeated and not be play in the National Championship? They did win their worst games (at least so far), more then what can be said about the top 1 lose teams. After all South Florida is in a BCS conference like it or not.
Just win and your in.
I guess next year there should be fewer BCS conferences like the SEC, PAC-10, Big XII and I guess the Big Ten (if they can get the pianos of their backs and play football).
5 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 8:59 am
Couldn’t agree with CGB any more on this one. Well put.
6 Charlie // Oct 17, 2007 at 9:04 am
Is Herbstreit once again just shilling for the big money programs? Let’s dive into the numbers.
For comparison purposes, let’s take a look at four teams who are in contention for the BCS title game as of this week: Two undefeated teams (Boston College and South Florida), and two one-loss teams (Oklahoma and LSU).
First, let’s start with one-loss Oklahoma. Here’s their current profile, using the Sagarin calculation for strength of schedule:
BCS W/L Harris Coaches Computer SOS
4 6-1 4 4 .5500 67
Now, based upon the Sagarin ratings, here’s Oklahoma’s remaining schedule strength, including an average of their opponents’ ratings. I’ve also gone ahead and made adjustments to the ratings based upon home/away games.
@Iowa State 120
TEXAS A&M 51
BAYLOR 113
@Texas Tech 17
OK. STATE 40
Total Avg. 68.2
So in other words, the five remaining opponents for Oklahoma average out to be the 68th best team in college football.
Now let’s take a look at LSU’s current profile:
BCS W/L Harris Coaches Computer SOS
4 6-1 5 5 .9300 12
And LSU’s remaining opponents:
AUBURN 18
@Alabama 39
LA TECH 109
@Ole Miss 80
ARKANSAS 53
Total Avg. 59.8
LSU definitely has a better case than Oklahoma. Their future opponents are rated about 8 spots better than OU’s, and their current SOS is miles ahead of the Sooners.
Now, let’s move on to the undefeated teams. First, Boston College:
BCS W/L Harris Coaches Computer SOS
3 7-0 2 2 .8200 80
And Boston College’s remaining opponents:
@Virginia Tech 19
FLORIDA ST. 39
@Maryland 37
@Clemson 44
MIAMI 65
Total Avg. 40.8
The Eagles may be the most over-ranked team in the top 10. Despite quite a bit of computer love, their strength of schedule so far is highly questionable.
Finally, let’s check out South Florida:
BCS W/L Harris Coaches Computer SOS
2 6-0 3 3 1.000 31
And South Florida’s remaining opponents:
@Rutgers 35
@UConn 30
CINCINNATI 20
@Syracuse 112
LOUISVILLE 49
@Pittsburgh 95
Total Avg. 56.8
Hmm…now isn’t that interesting? South Florida’s remaining opponent average is actually above BOTH Oklahoma and LSU. Furthermore, USF’s schedule strength to date is better than Oklahoma’s, albeit not as good as LSU’s.
The biggest problem with the WWL’s stance on these issues isn’t so much that they’re anti-South Florida — and they are — but that the opinions they state on a regular basis have a great deal of resonance with the people doing the voting in both the Harris poll and the Coaches poll. Keep in mind, this is the same Kirk Herbstreit that voted Oregon 2nd in the AP poll this week (with South Florida 5th).
The mantra was set early by Herbstreit and his cronies regarding South Florida — they’re a nice story, Jim Leavitt has done a great job, but they just don’t deserve a chance, either because of what they supposedly haven’t done so far, or won’t do in the future. But our question is simple - what are you basing this perspective on? Their current resume is better than every other team in BCS contention, and their schedule for the remainder of the season is tougher than LSU and Oklahoma.
So is it really a case of South Florida not being good enough? Or is it just a case of Herbstreit and friends (including Chris Fowler, who voted South Florida 5th in his AP ballot) keeping down the little guy?
7 Thermocaster // Oct 17, 2007 at 9:11 am
That’s weird…”Charlie” just ripped off my blog post on this.
Anyway, CGB, loved the piece and I couldn’t agree more. Those commentators who claim that USF hasn’t done enough yet have obviously not looked at the resumes of the contending teams. Those who claim that USF has a weaker schedule down the stretch have not looked at the remaining schedules. If tradition is all that matters in football, then why don’t we just put Michigan and Notre Dame in the national title game every year?
8 The Meaningful Collateral » Blog Archive » It’s Wednesday, let’s sue Mike Vick // Oct 17, 2007 at 9:35 am
[…] in the life of SBA. — We at TMC are not alone in our South Florida love. College Game Balls gets all philosophical about the situation, and advocates for the Bulls in the national title […]
9 cgb // Oct 17, 2007 at 11:24 am
Tom - Nothing you said makes sense, I am almost thinking you are some content intelligent bot.
Matteo - I agree with your statement that good teams find a way to win bad games. However, while I think going undefeated is part of a great NC resume it shouldn’t be the only thing to let a team in or keep a team out. No offense to Utah and Boise St, but they didn’t prove to me that they where National Championship teams because they weren’t battle tested. USF is different because, they beat #5 WVU and went on the road and beat a great Auburn team. There needs to be a balance between excellent wins and good \ bad losses. That is the tricky part.
10 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Those numbers regarding the strength of schedule were some nice research. However, I have to disagree with the Boise St. and Utah comments. There is no way I wanted to see those two teams in the national title game because they aren’t battle tested as cgb pointed out. We can knock herbstreit and company all we want but when it gets down to it, you want to see the Texas-USC matchups. You want to see the Florida-Ohio States. I’m not going to lie, I think South Florida is a good team and if they win out, they would be deserving to play in the title game but I don’t want to see them there. It may be wrong for me to be biased against the small schools but i’m only being honest and thats the way the media and a lot of fans feel as well. We only get one title game a year and when we get it, we want to see a matchup between LSU and Oklahoma much more than Boston College vs South Florida. It’s not appealing, simply put. The die hard college football fans may want to see it but the vast majority don’t. I can name players on every single top ten team except south florida. It’s wrong but small schools don’t sell.
Plus, imagine if USF made it to the title game and some other team like, BC for example, made it. Now take the scenario of USF winning in an unexciting 21-13 game, a sloppy game. Suppose LSU absolutely thumps Ohio State or Oklahoma 55-6 in the Orange Bowl. You know everyone would say LSU was the best team in the country. So much unnecessary confusion rankings wise with BCS title and AP title etc, it’d be a mess.
Now if USF got a different bcs bowl this year and then again next year and started making a name for themselves annually, then its not as big of a shock. You get more familiar with them. So if Rutgers or Boise St. made it to the title game in 3 years, I wouldn’t be opposed or shocked by it. But people don’t want to see unknowns play. Look at the Colorado Rockies in baseball; put together one of the best winning streaks in HISTORY and they haven’t gotten any attention. Imagine if that streak was done by the Yankees, sox, Braves, phillies… those are big market, huge fan base teams. That’s why people care. South Florida is a very good football team, but they are irrelevant to fans nationally.
11 Rob // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:25 pm
I don’t understand why marketing is always an argument against cinderella teams playing in national championship games. I thought the idea was to have the best teams playing. Not the team with the biggest name.
12 cgb // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Unfortunately it is all about the Benjamins.
13 yoyodyne // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:37 pm
USF boasts 45,000+ students, is in the Big East and has been averaging something like 50000 fans/game.
UF has 50,000+.
Man, small schools are actually pretty large these days, eh Shaun.
14 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:39 pm
It’s not an argument. Its just how things work.. everything revolves around big names. I’m not saying it’s right but there is no way sponsors, advertisers, and networks want small schools in the national title game because ratings will be lower and the profits will be lower. My reason for not wanting to see them is because I don’t know if they’re a one year wonder or not. I don’t want a one year wonder to win a title. Its pretty apparent the voters feel the same way. Again, I’m not saying its right but I’m just saying what a lot of people try to BS around and not say, even though they really feel that way. Everyone wants to come up with a reason for why USF shouldn’t be in the title game from a football perspective while the real reason they don’t want them there is because they want to see a big SEC school make it.
What USF is doing is nothing short of great. I am just speaking the truth when I say i really don’t care for them and would rather see a well known powerhouse duke it out with another.
15 cgb // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Yoyodyne USF is 1/2 commuter correct? Just curious how many full time students live on campus \ do you go there?
16 Troy // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:43 pm
This may be way too paranoid, but Herbstriet does seem to be sort of loggying for the big-name schools. Last week, when he was at ABC’s late-night game, and so not at LSU for gameday final, put USF at #4 on his AP ballot. Then that week on SportsCenter (in front of a national audience and not in the relative anonymity of an AP ballot) he didn’t list USF in his top 5. This week he was asked his top 5 on gameday final, and put USF #5 (down 1 from his AP ballot after beatinig UCF 64-12) and gave the impression that USF was top 5 by default and not really deserving. I wonder why a national audience (and seeming chance to be an advocate for certain teams) made Kirk wuss out on his USF at #4 pick.
17 Matteo // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:47 pm
I agree that Boise St and Utah were unproven, but if only certain teams can play for a national championship why should they even be included in a BCS game. Correct me if I am wrong, but Boise St vs Okla was the best BCS bowl game last year (probably THE best bowl game)… also the least watched BCS game.
I agree with Shaun that people are not comfortable with drastic change. There is a perception that in football a team’s history is playing the game, not the current players. Therefore people see it was a fluke when new teams or teams with a losing or avg history get wins.
I do think that if the NCAA thinks that the BCS is the answer at least let the 4 nonBCS conference and independents have some form of a playoff. Now that could fun football to watch, could you imagine watching Boise St playing BYU last year to be the best nonBCS team.
As for USF if they do not make a big name for themselves now and the next few seasons they may go back to oblivion. Because they play in the Big East, they have to schedule more OOC games and nobody wants to schedule them now, there goes SOS and with that any chance to play for a NC, because the Big East is the Big Least as far as the other BCS conferences see it.
BTW- I do not know why people refer to USF as a small school, it is just small in history. My reaserch show USF as the 9th largest school in the country, establish in 1956, and as everyone knows now has only played football for 10 years and Div I for 6 yrs including this year
18 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Yoyodyne… I’m not knocking the size of USF, but when i say “small” school, I’m referring to it not being a big time football school like a Virginia Tech or a Miami. Not going literally by the number of students.
19 Chris // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Yoyodyne is exactly right, USF is far from a small school, they might have only been around 10 years, but they are NOT a small school.
Secondly, are we all forgetting that other “small” school in Florida? The University of Miami? Funny, when people think of national championships, one team they think of is the University of Miami. But when they won their first championship, they were a NOBODY. They weren’t some big ranked team with a lot of history, they didn’t have tons of bowl wins behind them. Yet they won the national championship, and then went on to win a whole bunch more. But I guess they never should have been able to play in the championship game, EVEN THOUGH THEY WON, because they had no history behind them.
So according to some people, the most dominant college football team of the last 20 years should never have been allowed to get in the door to begin with. Funny how it works out that way
And P.S., Herbstreit has ALWAYS been a shill for ESPN. If USC, Texas, Ohio State, Michigan, or LSU aren’t playing for the national championship he doesn’t want them in. If it can’t bring tons and tons of money to ESPN/ABC because it’s a big name program, he doesn’t want them in. I don’t give his opinion jack squat because he’s all about trying to promote ESPN. Not college football, ESPN. At least I used to be able to say he’s much better than Lee Corse, but Herbstreit has taken a turn for the worse the last couple years, and is now obviously biased to big name schools. If it was up to him, there would only be 10 teams playing in Division 1A, and they would all have to have humungous histories and championships behind them.
Hey Kirk, this is exactly why you’re NOT in charge of NCAA College Football.
20 Tony B // Oct 17, 2007 at 1:52 pm
It doesn’t matter whether a team is a one-year wonder or not. Seasons happen in a vacuum.
21 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Chris- Miami didn’t burst onto the scene the way USF has. Miami finished the 1980 season with an 9-3 record and their first bowl appearance since the 60’s. The next year they went 9-2 and finished 8th in the polls. Then they made their title run in 1983. So they didn’t come out of nowhere. AGAIN, i’m not knocking USF but they won the Meineke Car Care bowl and Papajohns.com bowl in 05 and 06, now a national title run? I said earlier that if they win for a few years, I wouldn’t mind seeing them in the title game..just as I wouldnt mind seeing Boise St or Rutgers make a run at the title next year or the year after.
22 cgb // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:02 pm
We have no idea what kind of title game we are going to get until they happen. Most people thought Florida had no chance against against Ohio St. I’de also like to point out big name schools with tradition can get blown out. Herbie may be hating on USF because he knows OSU would likely be the school getting bumped out of the game.
23 vtbaz // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:16 pm
I don’t quite know what to think of USF. They are playing on emotion and I believe that they just might hit E and have to try to coast in on fumes here in a little bit. As lights out as they are playing, I can see them taking the foot off the throttle and letting a winnable game slip through the grasp. Cincinnatti is the game I would watch out for if I were them.
That being said, Jim Leavitt is a tremendous coach (taking USF along the same path that his mentor, Bill Snyder, took K-State during that stretch in the late 90s) and if anybody can keep them focused on their task at hand, it is him.
24 vtbaz // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:17 pm
To reference the topic: they belong this year as much as Rutgers did last year. Take that how you may.
25 booberry // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:19 pm
I agree the media shouldn’t play a role in who goes to the Nat’l Championship, but going undefeated shouldn’t be a guaranteed ticket there either. When its all about who goes undefeated you wind up with 6 weeks of worthless football between powerhouses and cupcake out of conference teams (which ironically is probably what Auburn thought USF was when they scheduled them).
I’d rather see LSU play Va Tech during the year or OSU play Texas like they did last year than see all the big names just scrambling to ensure they don’t risk a loss in an out of conference game. Strength of schedule deserves much more credit than people give it. A one loss team like LSU is more deserving of a nat’l championship bid than USF, BC, or Ohio State (and I’m a big OSU fan). For Example, LSU beat themselves up playing UF, then had to travel up to UK the next week, losing in 3OT, and this week has an Auburn team that has been playing very well lately. Should that really end their shot a title so that we can watch two undefeated teams who have been on cruise control all year play for it?
That being said, two points on USF. First, USF’s win over the tigers this year was before auburn got it together and started actually playing competitively. Second, every year you hear about how great WVU is, and they never are. There go those two huge victories. Oh yeah, Texas is weak this year too, so thumping a team that almost beat Texas really doesn’t add to your resume. Hopefully USF will lose this Thursday and everyone can shut up about them.
26 ken sly // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Whats next — the Rockies shouldn’t be in the WS?
27 cgb // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:28 pm
I agree Auburn is a better team now than it was at the beginning of the year. They were a very young non cohesive team at that point. But, any out of conference team winning at Jordan-Hare is big. I cannot think of another more impressive OOC win… WVU may suck but they have a shit ton of talent and had a lot to play for that game especially after losing at home last year.
28 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:39 pm
ken sly- “Whats next — the Rockies shouldn’t be in the WS?”
—No, but you’re mistaken if you think that the MLB, media, and all baseball fans excluding those in Colorado wouldn’t have much rather had the Cubs and Red Sox/Yankees playing in the world series… or the Mets vs Yankees. Same thing with cfb… you’re mistaken if you think any of the corporate people or the media want to see USF as opposed to LSU in the title game.
booberry - “A one loss team like LSU is more deserving of a nat’l championship bid than USF, BC, or Ohio State (and I’m a big OSU fan). For Example, LSU beat themselves up playing UF, then had to travel up to UK the next week, losing in 3OT, and this week has an Auburn team that has been playing very well lately. Should that really end their shot a title so that we can watch two undefeated teams who have been on cruise control all year play for it?”
–Couldn’t agree with that more.
29 thermocaster // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:40 pm
booberry: I understand your point about USF versus Auburn, but a win is still a win. Plus, looking at Herbstreit’s own ballot, he’s got Oregon ranked 2nd…based mostly off of beating Michigan like a drum before they got their season together and started playing competitively.
I have no problem with teams being rewarded in the polls, but I’d expect at least some degree of consistency from the so-called experts in the way they partition out their votes.
30 Funky Eye Patch // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:47 pm
I don’t think USF will run the table. Their win against Auburn is a little less impressive not because Aub wasn’t “good” then, but because they won the turnover battle 5-0 and still needed OT to win. They beat WVU, who is perennially overranked. They are a good football team though and more deserving of that ranking than OSU is of the #1 ranking.
31 yoyodyne // Oct 17, 2007 at 2:58 pm
No, don’t go there.
Just don’t get the “small school” reference…at all. If by “small” you mean “no history of football excellence” then yeah, ok, have fun watching Michigan play ND or OSU lose to another SEC school in a blowout.
If by “small” you mean a school like Miami, with only 15,000 undergrad…wait, I thought Miami wasn’t a small school.
I think I heard Leavitt say after a game that USF had as many on-campus beds as FSU, but really, who cares if it’s a commuter school? I know I only spent 1 year out of 4 on campus. Tampa’s a thriving city, if you can afford it why stay in a dorm (where you can’t drink)? I have no idea what percentage of their undergrads are part-timers and which are full-time, which is maybe the more telling statistic…but really, football is a sport.
Sports are played on the field.
If they are good enough to play in the championship game (with rules dictated by these so called “big” schools), then so be it.
Just imagine how exciting it would be to have a 4 or 6 game playoff with USF, LSU, OSU, BC, Cal, etc. Why they still haven’t figured this out is beyond me.
Great original post, btw.
32 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 3:27 pm
yoyodyne…
Yeah because I was really talking about a 23rd rank big school like michigan and an unranked notre dame team play for the title. yeah.. you got me. I clarified what I meant by small school above… Yeah they are small in the sense that they dont have jack worth of history. Don’t turn into a Rutgers type of fan and start blowing your own horn before you accomplish anything of significance. The only reason USF is ranked 2 is because this has been an unusually mediocre college football season. There are usually many more undefeated teams through six or seven weeks in the season so you’re only benefiting due to the national mediocrity.
You know when you’re playing football and one of your boys brings his little brother who’s only 13 and he gets lucky and catches a touchdown, and everyone is like “oh good job man that was a nice play” even though no one was really guarding his small ass… and you know how they pat him on the head and give him high fives?? Yeah, thats you South Florida. So get your high fives because when you try to play a BIG school like Florida or LSU or even Ohio State, you’re SMALL ass will get stomped back into your place. You wouldn’t even beat Virginia Tech who has little to no offense. I’d be shocked if you could score in double digits on them and they are 9 spots below you.
33 Troy // Oct 17, 2007 at 3:33 pm
@Matteo
USF has a 5 or 6 game series scheduled against Miami starting in a couple years, and within the next 9 years plays UF twice. They also have games against Indiana and other middle-of-the-road BCS teams peppered throughout. But because they now demand home-and-homes, they no longer have an EASY time getting these matchups scheduled. Not that it will get any easier now…
34 Tickkid // Oct 17, 2007 at 3:36 pm
“booberry - “A one loss team like LSU is more deserving of a nat’l championship bid than USF, BC, or Ohio State (and I’m a big OSU fan). For Example, LSU beat themselves up playing UF, then had to travel up to UK the next week, losing in 3OT, and this week has an Auburn team that has been playing very well lately. Should that really end their shot a title so that we can watch two undefeated teams who have been on cruise control all year play for it?”
–Couldn’t agree with that more.
”
The problem with this argument is to ignore the fact that being in the SEC already has its own built in advantages. Advantages when it comes to television packages, ane recruiting, when it comes to middle/smaller bowl apperances, and name recognition. It isn’t like playing in the SEC just means you play a bunch of hard games and you automatically get kicked out of national championship contender status. In fact, the percieved strength of the SEC gives a built in advantage in the polls, even if the conference is weak, just because people will blindly believe it when someone tells them that the SEC is the best conference (not that it is or it isn’t, just that people will come to that belief without investigation). The lack of uniformity in scheduling not withstanding, it isn’t like USF defeated some D2 teams, no quality teams, and had a very weak strength of schedule. I think it has been accurately shown (even if we use a rating system that has North Dakota State as #18) that USF’s opponent quality has not been to the point where excluding them on that basis alone will defeat the integrity of the BCS. Many larger teams skate on much weaker “true” strength because they defeated teams with names, or more importantly teams that are ranked too high to start with at the time they play. Not including the change of value in a win and loss depending on when it occured in the season or not. I say that having USF play in the national championship game if they go undefeated doesn’t make them less worthy - until the system is different, until all conferences play a conference championship game, and until college football decides that maybe someone should either more tightly control the SOS component - these things are going to happen. I’m just happy to see a mixup with some teams that aren’t sitting in the nest because of their name.
35 07wsf // Oct 17, 2007 at 3:45 pm
vtbaz, you’re straight up wrong comparing USF to Rutgers. Rutgers was undefeated deep into last season due in large part to a weak non-conference schedule. USF beat Auburn. They scored on Auburn. That is a big deal, and speaks volumes about their offensive talent. Auburn has one of the nation’s top five defenses, and USF threw up 26 on them. Also, they did it in Auburn’s house. The fact that they have a marquee non-conference road win separates their resume from Rutgers’ last season. If USF runs the table, and given the fact that they have a number of solid teams left to play this seems like a tough task, but if they do it they have to get a run in the title game given the landscape of college football this season.
36 Shaun // Oct 17, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I gotta say… this was a hell of a post. As much as I am for a playoff system, and as much a playoff system would be good for college football, it would likely take away great debates like these. Props to CGB.
37 Jay Emm // Oct 17, 2007 at 6:39 pm
I go to USF. However, I promise by response here will be as unbiased as possible. I transferred here from another school, so I’m not a huge Bulls fan who’s going to fill you with pro-USF jargon. I’ll try to be objective about this from the “inside” of the belly of the beast that is the USF college footbal phenomenon (haha).
USF is pretty much a commuter school in North Tampa. They’re making attempts to get more people to live on campus, but the vast majority of the students live somewhere else in the Tampa Bay area and drive here (parking sucks ass at this place because of it!)
About the 50,000+ attendance, it’s actually 60,000 per game…. BUT that’s only if you’re talking about the last 2 games (WVU and UCF).
The week before the WVU game, against UNC, and pretty much every game before that, attendance was pretty sparse. The top deck of the stadium was never open, and the lower bowl (in the past 3 seasons at least) was usually 1/2 to 2/3 full on any given gameday. Before they moved into the Big East, attendance was even worse. I saw them play Pitt (I think) on TV once in 2004 and there were literally about 3,000 people there.
Also to note, students here get free football tickets, BUT the stadium (Raymond James) is a good 8 miles off-campus.
I will say that this season has helped USF shed that “big community college” feel, and people from back home don’t get confused and think I transferred to UCF anymore… so that’s cool!
But you still see just as many kids on campus wearing other college shirts (namely UF, FSU, and Miami) as I do USF shirts (I mean honestly, how many of us came here for the football anyways? Most of us already had favorite teams.)
So, despite any real history or fanbase outside of the typical inital “bandwagon”, do I feel the Bulls should be in the national title game?
Well, I see both sides of the story. Unlike Boise St. or Utah, the Bulls play in a BCS conference (albeit a weaker one). So I guess yes (only if they run the table of course).
But beyond that though, this recognition will help USF not only be viewed as a “real college”, but a “real football team” after this season as well.
That, I suppose, will be the REALY benefit of this to the school.
Also, a lot of the bandwagon types might just stay on board when fortunes aren’t as good (like when Matt Grothe, the real catalyst for all of this, graduates), thus creating somewhat of a “real” fanbase (though you’re delusional if you think that fanbase will compare to UF’s or FSU’s. City schools in pro cities, after all, usually struggle to keep the fans’ attention in down years).
….or this could be a one-year thing we’ll all laugh about in 20 years… who knows?
But as for the national title implications for this year, how about this… DEVELOP A FUCKING PLAYOFF and this won’t happen again!!
38 Adrian // Oct 18, 2007 at 8:56 am
If they don’t let USF play at the title game because of money.. Those people are greedy!! They are part of people who like to take your money out and screwed up the economy in america. That’s sad! Being bias is not a ethic moral! That’s sad! USF knows there’s lot games left to go.. USF knows what people are. The only thing USF care about is winning a game at a time.
39 Robert // Oct 18, 2007 at 9:35 am
The number breast implants at the USF games are crazy. After going to the UCF and West Virgina games I think half of of the USF female student population are either strippers, or work at hooters.
The common female attire is very short jean short cutoffs, a USF tank top that maximizes boobage, and maybe a cowgirl hat.
While most of the West Virginia women are never any taller than 5′2″, over weight, and really need a hair cut.
40 otis // Oct 18, 2007 at 10:13 am
Shaun, you couldnt be anymore offbase.
No one would have any problem with Louisville or WVU running the table and going to the National Championship Game, so why shouldnt USF go if they win out? They will have beat both those teams and also won over Auburn at Auburn. (For comparison, Louisville lost to Kentucky, and WVU beat Mississippi State, which isnt that big of a deal)
For you guys that think USF couldnt beat an average Va Tech team, you just simply havent been watching that much football this year and have no idea what the hell you are talking about. We are seeing a parody in college football that is getting to be on par with what we are seeing in the NFL. Its really a great time to be a fan as we do now have teams that are not well known knocking big names off their high horses.
You have never heard of Grothe? Are you not paying attention or just that dumb? Doesnt your mom’s basement have cable so that you can watch Sportscenter or Gameday?
And say what you want about the BCS, but it is 10 times better than the old system. For instance: If the old bowl system was in place, this is probably what we would have seen
USC vs. OSU in the Rose Bowl
Florida vs. Wake Forest/Louisville in the Sugar Bowl
Oklahoma vs. Michigan in the Cotton Bowl
no BSU knocking off Oklahoma, no USC pounding Michigan, no Florida winning (deservedly) the National Championship. Just 3 teams at the end of the season all claiming a share of the title (much like USC did the year LSU won the BCS title. This just in Trojan fan - If you want to bitch about not being National Champions every year, tell your team to take care of business. Just saying you should have a share of the title doesnt make it true)
One other thing the BCS accomplished last year was to prove once again that the Big Pretend 10 is the most over rated conference in the Nation. Although why we have to be reminded of this every year, I am not quite sure.
41 booberry // Oct 18, 2007 at 12:19 pm
A lot of these posts are aimed at a moot point because USF doesn’t have a chance in hell of winning the national championship. There isn’t one other team who may conceivably play in the title game that wouldn’t stomp the Bulls. Don’t get me wrong, I think it is very cute and adorable that USF hasn’t lost yet, but they would get throttled by any number of teams out there: LSU, OSU, UF, Oregon, Oklahoma, USC, the list goes on.
42 Matteo // Oct 18, 2007 at 4:06 pm
@booberry I completely agree, USF stands no chance playing powerhouses. It was a complete fluke when they beat WVU 21-13 in Tampa in 2007 and WVU in Morganton 24-19 in 2006. It was a fluke when they beat Auburn 26-23 in Auburn in 2007. A fluke beating Louisville 45-14 in Tampa, in their 1st Big East game in 2005.
Enough with their wins, I mean they have plenty of loses against powerhouse teams as well. Like losing to Louisville in 2006 31-8 (yes a blow out), or losing to Rutger 22-20 in Tampa in 2006 or their lose to Penn St at University Park 23-13, or their lose to Oklahoma in 2002 31-14 (Oklahoma btw when on to the Rose Bowl to beat #7 Washington St 34-14). Let’s not forget other loses like da U in Miami 2005 27-7 or worse of all Alabama beating them 40-17 at Tuscaloosa in 2003.
Sure they have their loses to respected programs, they also have their wins. I do believe powerhouses get blown out by other powerhouses too. After all ND has never been blown out or OSU ot USC or UF or FSU or Texas….
That is why they play the games and that is why there are only 6 undefeated teams left year, history does not win games, players do.
43 booberry // Oct 18, 2007 at 5:51 pm
the flaw w/ your argument is calling WVU, Louisville, and an early season Auburn powerhouses.
44 vtbaz // Oct 18, 2007 at 10:46 pm
“And that’s the end of that chapter.” - Homer Simpson
Side note to Rutgers fans: do not chant overrated when you are up by only 3 midway in the 3rd.
45 Matteo // Oct 19, 2007 at 7:44 am
Sorry did not realize that early season games are only scrimmages. I guess that makes USF 0-1 on the season and Rutger 1-0. I guess Rutgers is BCS bound because they are the only team right now to have a win against and then #2 ranked BCS team.
But I do agree Louisville is not a tradition powerhouse, however WVU has consistently been good since 1982. By saying WVU is not a powerhouse is like saying da U is was not a powerhouse team.
If you really want tradition powerhouses USF did beat Army 28-0 in 2003 at West Point.
46 cgb // Oct 19, 2007 at 12:14 pm
I think the term powerhouse is overused. I say there are only a few elite \ powerhouse teams in the country and WVU isnt one of them because they haven’t played for or won a national championship. I would consider Florida, LSU, USC, Ohio St and Oklahoma to be the most elite powerhouse programs right now.
47 CollegeGameBalls: College Football at its Finest » Blog Archive » The College Football Blog Awards 2007 // Jan 23, 2008 at 11:31 am
[…] What if South Florida Runs the Table? […]
Leave a Comment