Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 09/14  at  11:04 AM

Mike, my bad. I agree the school makes the ultimate decision. I just think if USF’s scheduling philosophy is to play 3 non-BCS schools a year (which it is currently), UCF should be one of the three. If USF only plays 2 non-BCS schools a year, then leave UCF out.

Posted by  Mike Berman, Detroit, Michigan on 09/14  at  10:18 AM

Brett, I don’t think you understood my comments.  I never made any comments on the level of our opponents.  My sole point in this is it shouldn’t matter who USF schedules, any DEMANDS that UCF be one of our OOC teams is ridiculous.  Our University shouldn’t have to deal with anyone dictating to them who we play for games.

Reality is that it is up to our Athletic Director to decide who we play, not the media, and certainly not a UCF that cried to the media, their commissioner, and their legislators.

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 09/14  at  09:34 AM

Brian, when looking at the proposed schedules, remember USF will have four Big East home games in even years and three Big East home games in odd years. Dale, the WKU series won’t be played if the school doesn’t move to I-A. WKU officials are supposed to vote on moving to I-A in November and, if they meet all the requirements, could be a full-fledged Sun Belt member by 2009 or 2010. And Randy, no such luck with UCF in the Big East. The league won’t be expanding/changing for several years.

Posted by  Matt Sufficool, Boone, NC on 09/14  at  09:11 AM

Playing Ball State, WKY, and UB, is a good way to aleinate what few fans we have.  I can guarantee that more of our fans want to see us play UCF then those who want to see us play the above mentioned three. College football is run by the fans, we pay for it. So please, don’t play these games over a series with UCF.

Posted by  Dale Gibson, S. Brunswick, NJ on 09/14  at  09:03 AM

I certainly understand the arguments about playing UCF. The game does generate a good amount of fanfare and money. I believe the only way to dissolve the ‘Rivalry Tag’ is to beat UCF every time they play. When there is parody and proximity ‘Rivalry’ is inventible. Eliminate parody and there is no ‘Rivalry’. What confuses me are the two D I-AA games in 2011 and 2012. Brett is this accurate? Should I assume WKU will be D I-AA by then? This looks like a scheduling mishap considering a team can only have so many D I-AA wins count for the bowl eligibility.

Posted by  Ryan Roark, Nashville on 09/14  at  08:48 AM

I can’t believe this is even up for debate!

Let’s see…Ball State, totally awesome football power.  Buffalo, always in ESPN’s “Bottom 10,” but still, totally awesome football power.  And WKU, totally, totally awesome 1-AA football power.

I’m with all these guys who have a chip on their shoulder about UCF (for some reason).  Let’s ditch a game that is fun for a lot of reasons and play these dregs of the football world instead!

Posted by  Simon Royer,  on 09/14  at  08:18 AM

Not all of us non-internet wienies feel UCF is a good thing.  By the same token though I also do feel that 3 non-BCS opponents a year is too much for a BCS school that is trying to build toward being considered a major football power, unless of course one of them is Notre Dane.  I believe playing UCF now is a good thing but hopefully in the time past the currently scheduled games we have progressed to a status where we need to be scheduling a little tougher opponents.  Please remember that strength of schedule is one of the factors in the National rankings.  Two September “warm up” games a year should be fine.  Other than that we should not see the likes of the schools Brett mentioned gracing our schedules.

Posted by  Phil Canto, Jacksonville, FL on 09/14  at  08:07 AM

Fenelly said it best in his column when he raised the FSU-Miami series.  You think Bowden and Coker wouldn’t rather have a Buffalo or SW Mo. State on their schedule? Both UCF and USF need this rivalry and the fans enjoy it. Hard to build a rivarly with the likes of WKYU and Ball St. Plus, most fans are not familiar with the bar-scene in Muncie IN…GO Bulls!

Posted by  Randy Anderson, Miami on 09/14  at  07:48 AM

Brett - I am waiting for you to finally break the news the UCF will be invited to the Big East by 2008.
They were on BE radar before and with a Big-Time AD, Big-Name coach, New Stadium and a potential bowl game tie-in in Orlando…it’s only a matter of when and not if.

GO BULLS! BEAT UCF…again and again!

Posted by  Hector Jimenez, Weston on 09/14  at  05:43 AM

Why can’t the University give back to the people who helped build and maintain interest in the football program to begin with (the Alumni, the fans and the students).  Everyone on both sides of I-4 wants this game to happen, everyone except the USF Athletic Dept.  They need to open the eyes and ears to the people who want this game to happen, stop being so closeminded!

Posted by  Hector Jimenez, Weston on 09/14  at  05:42 AM

This issue seems clear to me and many others….PLAY THE GAME!  My Alma Mater is being extremly illigocial and stubborn when discussing any future UCF games.  If the atheltic department worries about attendance and providing a “quality” home schedule for its fans, let alone good contests for its team, then why in the world would you want to schedule Buffalo, WKU and Ball St.?  How are they going to promote the 2011 season (I-AA, Buffalo, WKU and Indiana)?  Here is a slogan for you….“Front row seats still available.”

next post….

Posted by  Eric Sachse, Tampa, FL on 09/14  at  05:27 AM

I would rather see USF play UCF over such ilk like Buffalo, W. Kentucky, or Ball State. The likelihood either is that by the time USF plays UB, UWK, or BSU, Leavitt and/or Wollard will not be at USF because they found higher paying jobs or lost their job at USF.
As far as the few minorities of fans that do not want to play UCF, they are Internet busybodies who spend more time making excuses why USF should not play UCF instead of doing whatever they do for a living.  Most of these Internet busybodies do not live in the Tampa or Orlando area; so how do they attend every home games?
What really matters is butts in seats and tickets collected at the gate.  USF vs. UCF will produce those numbers. USF vs. UB/WKU/BSU will not

Posted by  Joe Fine, St. Petersburg on 09/13  at  10:56 PM

Ugh…USF is scheduling Buffalo, W. Kentucky and Ball State?? That must be a joke. USF wants to be a BIG TIME program then they must fill their schedule with big time programs! It’s great they are scheduling Auburn, Miami, etc. so keep up that momentum and not schedule these lesser programs. USF & the Big East will be seen as a lower players in college football when compared to the other 3 FL programs and their conferences. Also, how are they going to fill Ray Jay when lesser programs are coming here?? That’s just sad.

Posted by  Brian Rolph, Venice, Florida on 09/13  at  07:31 PM

Is that accurate.  Are they missing a game.  I really doubt Woolard would agree to a home and home with those schools.  We would get at least a 2 for 1.  We received 2 for 1 from FIU and FAU so I really doubt USF would accept a 1 for 1 with Ball State, Western Kentucky or Buffalo.  Ball State and Buffalo are absolute MAC bottom dwellers while WKU is a D-1AA school.  I would see USF scheduling a home and home with a Mountain West school or WAC school long before agreeing to that.  My guess is there is another home game in a future schedule that is not being shown.  It just doesn’t make any sense.

Posted by  Brett McMurphy,  on 09/13  at  06:36 PM

Mike and Gary, my point was if you’re going to play 3 non-BCS schools each year (which right now is USF’s plan), the UCF game would seem a logical choice based on it be a better draw than Buffalo, WKU, Ball St. Now if USF only plays 2 non-BCS teams a year (including Div. I-AA team), then you could argue it doesn’t need to be UCF. But if your argument is USF doesn’t need to play UCF because USF is above UCF, etc.; then why should UM play USF? Sure USF and UM are both BCS, but they’re at two different levels. Brad, not sure what your question was, but I put in a public records request for the schedule. That’s it. If it had revealed USF was discussing home-and-home series with USC and Arizona State, would it have made any difference?

Posted by  Joe Humphrey, Wesley Chapel on 09/13  at  05:28 PM

Buffalo? Ball State? Western Kentucky?
Give me a break. USF needs to build a rivalry with UCF. 40,000 last year, a similar but likely smaller crowd this year. We have a block of 22 tickets for people making the trek from all over the state for this game.

I think the best solution here is to skip the I-AA opponent and just play UCF in that slot…For practical purposes, Buffalo and Ball State are I-AA-quality.

Posted by  Doug Boccuti, Orlando, FL on 09/13  at  05:27 PM

Perhaps after 2008 UCF will be a Big East game and behind the scenes and above my pay grade they already know that and are planning accordingly. Just my hunch.

Posted by  Justin Aultman, Zephyrhills on 09/13  at  04:28 PM

As much as I hate to admit it the UCF vs. USF game has become a legitimate rivalry.  The sale of discounted student tickets spurned a crowd of USF students to descend upon the Marshall Center monday morning.  There is more excitement amongst the students for this game than there was for the Big East home opener last year.  the students seem to have spoken and they want this to be a rivalry.

Posted by  Joshua Barrett, Land O Lakes on 09/13  at  04:23 PM

I have always been against the UCF series, but I started to waver this week.  I’m looking forward Sat in O-town. Ball State, WKU, Buffalo.  Give me a break, these are all terrible options.  Don’t waste my season ticket and donation money! This is apparently about recruiting battles and/or Coach’s egos (Sorry Jim I love you but pleeease).  Is UCF really a recruiting problem for USF?  Who cares about a WKU game?  Give me another BCS home game, even if it’s Duke, Baylor, or Minnesota but if Doug/Jim are not trying for them lets settle for UCF not something worse. At least UCF is fun and entertaining

Posted by  Gary Plaisted, Georgia on 09/13  at  03:49 PM

I personally have no problem with games against the aformentioned teams rather than UCF but then I am biased because EVERY game is a road game for me and I for one make enough trips to Florida each year and would look forward to a trip to Indiana or up state New York (or even a trip to Kentucky).

Scheduling is not done solely based on proximity and it is not based on developing the hardest OOC schedule either.  And USF has one more issue and that is to provide more exposure around the country and these types of games provide that opportunity more so than UCF does.

UCF fans just need to get over it and move on.

That’s my 2¢.

Posted by  Gary Plaisted, Georgia on 09/13  at  03:48 PM

As for games like Ball State or Buffalo or WKU, USF - though a BE team, is really only a BE team by association.  We do not have the history like Pitt or WVU or even Cincy or UL.  So, the options are to either pepper the schedules with BCS teams, and thereby reduce our chances at post season play, or . . . do like most other schools and schedule a mix of BCS foes and non-BCS ones.  So, why not UCF then?  Well, maybe this has more to do with getting more national exposure as opposed to playing another florida based team?  Ball State, UB and WKU, on paper, would seem like likely wins (though one would probably have assumed the same for McNeese St and FIU too).

part II

Posted by  Gary Plaisted, Georgia on 09/13  at  03:46 PM

Ok, I may be off in this but this is how I see it . . .

There is more to scheduling games then saving on the travel budget.  If that were the case then we’d be signing multi year deals with UCF, FAU and FIU.  Throw in games with FAMU and BCC every other year (etc) and you’ve got a pretty full schedule!!!  Granted it is a pretty weak one (nationally perceived anyway, provided anyone takes notice).

I think the biggest thing going against UCF is the way they’ve conducted themselves in the past by using the media and goading USF into a game.  Just in poor taste if you ask me.

part I

Posted by  Brad Meyer, Higley, Arizona on 09/13  at  03:41 PM

Brett,

What puiblic records require a school to identify “proposed” future schedules?

By the way, Mike from Motor City is dead on.  These potential schedule additions need to be evaluated on their own merits - mixing UCF in is unnecessary.  If we are going to run our program based on the “UCF is only 98 miles away” rule we may as well turnover the direction of the program to UCF and journalists. I don’t care either way, but our administrators should be able to schedule a school, or make a decision, without having to pass the “UCF test”.

Posted by  Mike Berman, Detroit, Michigan on 09/13  at  02:56 PM

I don’t want to see USF do one for ones with schools such as Buffalo, and am aggravatingly shocked to hear that has even been given thought at this juncture in our program’s progress.  However, at the same time, I don’t care if we play UCF, and could really care less if we do or don’t.

I don’t see it as either we play Buffalo or we play UCF.  I see it as we can play any of the other 118 I-A teams, why do people demand it MUST be UCF?

Posted by  Steve O'Neal, Valrico,Fl on 09/13  at  02:23 PM

I agree and it seems the fans have already spoken, with the large attendance at the game last year. And if you’re going to play a D1-AA each year, might as well make it FAMU. They bring people(money),great tailgaiting and AWESOME band.