USF is already taking recruits.They are number 40 in recruiting.

Tigersharktwo, agreed and USF is in a better city that Florida State. The weather can really get funky in Tallahassee.

If the BE someday expands further into the Florida markets, Florida Atlantic would be a huge competitor with Miami.

Florida Atlantic has a great location in the middle of Palm Beach to the Florida Keys corridor.

Miami use to play some of its bb game in Palm Beach to try and lure fans from this locale.

If Florida Atlantic expands as planned with a 40 to 50 thousand seat dome stadium and the coach can get football on tract at this school as he did at Miami, there is no limit to what could happen with Florida Atlantic.

Lash, I think FAU doing anything are pretty unlikely. They will have a hard time meeting the I-A standards. That is their first hurdle. They have 2 big problems:

1) Miami-being in their shadow and equally important;
2) Being a commuter school-that kills attendance everywhere as the students on the average have much less attachment to the school. See Houston, UAB, Cincinnati, most of the MAC, etc.

Sure about that Bullet?

Two words: Playing Time. Four new 1A schools means 88 new starting positions (and 22 in a BCS conference next year). The Big 3 will still get the best players, but they won't nearly the amount of second-stringers they currently get. That makes practice squads weaker, and over time that will make the teams slightly weaker. 8-4 seasons will be much more common than before.


Now those guys don't have to leave Florida to play ball. Many will stay.


It's the Florida 4 next year. USF will succeed, and fast. It would behoove the BE to take UCF, too.

Don't get me wrong--UF/FSU/UM will be top-notch, but they won't dominate like they used to. The first victim has been UF. They're not dominant, but they can have a championship season here and there. Instead of every other year, they'll win the SEC every 6-8 years. It is also possible that UM/FSU will account for only half of the next 10 ACC titles. That would be a rapid change of pace.

Lash, yes I'm pretty sure. Of course, time will tell.

LSU-as they once said about Texas under David McWilliams, people are choosing Texas because they want playing time. Those are the people we DON'T want. Currently, Texas and Texas A&M almost never lose players to Texas schools except a few W. Texans to Texas Tech. They may lose a player to OU or ND or occassionally some other out of state school, but almost never to North Texas or even Houston or TCU.

FAU and FIU might get a lot of talent, but they won't be taking it from UF, FSU and Miami. They'll be taking it from CUSA, MAC and maybe a few from SEC, BE and ACC schools out of state. I imagine the same will be true for UCF and USF although, being alone in their metro area, they might do well in central FL as Tech does in W. Texas.

Simply referring to me as the name of my school makes my heart swell with pride. From the words of the wise Hank Hill: "It's so beautiful. So God-dang beautiful." :'(


My first instinct is to agree with you, but then again UT/A&M have only accounted for two of the eight Big XII titles. And Jim Morrison was still alive when one of them last won a national title.

But still, having said that, you may still be 100% right. LSU (the school, not me) rarely, if ever, loses a recruit to LT/ULM/ULL/TU. However, Louisiana has the best per capita football talent in the nation (hey, that's at least arguable) and only one major program. That formula yields one national title every 45 years apparently.


I don't think USF can avoid being in a BCS bowl for the next five years. They could hire Gerry Dinardo and play in the Orange Bowl vs. the FSU/UM winner next year.

Speaking of which, this is another blunder the ACC made with the divisions. If UM/FSU are in the same division, it is far more likely for both to make it to a BCS bowl, especially if they play in the season opener.

I've been thinking the same thing. The way it is now, either both will have at least a loss (one early, one late) or one will have at least 2 losses.

With the State of Florida gaining more schools in 1-A, and USF moving to a BCS conference and UCF being enhanced, that indeed will have an impact on the depth of recruiting among the big 3 three in the state.
Miami and FSU will be frequent challengers for the championship title in the expanded ACC. However, the situation will soon emerge that 2 or 3 of the other ACC schools outside of Florida will become frequent title challengers as well.
When FSU joined the ACC, they were already way out in front. It has taken time for some of the other ACC schools to develop as challengers, though FSU has continued to dominate in titles. At least now, it is not a "shock" for FSU to lose an ACC fb game. During the next few years, that may become even less so.

Yeah, but as evidence shows in the states of California and Texas, UCF will not get at a BCS-level, and USF will be above the cutoff of BCS teams in Florida. There is no state that has more than 4 BCS teams. California with a nation-like 35 million people has 4 BCS teams that all go up and down, with USC and UCLA with the most consitency and Cal being up at the moment. Fresno is the only consistent competitor outside this group, and could be considered BCS-like. But again this is 35 million people. All of these schools have pretty much the same length of competitive history (all have the same historic alliance and Stanford and Cal have had ups and downs). Fresno is the only competitive team outside of this. San Diego State has ups and downs. San Jose State is currently down.

Texas has 22 million people, and 10 teams. The 4 Big 12 teams are the BCS teams. TCU currently is the major competitor of late outside of these 4. Baylor is down. Texas has a strong football environment.

UFla, FSU, and Miami all grew up together in the late 70's, 1980's, 1990's and even today. UFla has the most history of these three, but probably the most success out of these three prior to the 1970's -- it was essentially Florida's only team. They have a 25 to 30 year head start on the 4 newcomers. As the state's population grows, the growth of interest in these Big 3 teams will proportionately grow with the 4 newcomers. That means that it will be difficult for these 4 newcomers to catch UFla, FSU, and Miami. USF and its location in the 2nd largest metro market of Tampa-St. Pete and being the only school and a new member of the BE has the most liklihood of being successful. But UCF in a smaller market is crowding in in nearby Orlando. Both of these markets already have established followings of the Big 3, in addition to their own school in their metro area. It's really difficult to see UCF, FAU, and FIU, and a certain degree, USF catching up with this 30 year head start and success of the Big 3. USF has the most likelihood of getting up close to the Big 3, because of its new position, but UCF is mid-major and the other two are huge shadows to U Miami.

<<My first instinct is to agree with you, but then again UT/A&M have only accounted for two of the eight Big XII titles. And Jim Morrison was still alive when one of them last won a national title.>>

Some people claim he's still alive.

UT and A&M have 5 of the 8 Big 12 South titles. OU has the other 3. Baylor and Texas Tech have 0. OU is the one school in the Big 12 south they compete with for recruits and it shows in the division championships. As for the other 6 schools, Houston has won 1 CUSA championship and that was in 96. SMU, Rice and UTEP have not won any in the WAC. I believe TCU has 2, in the WAC and CUSA. UNT has 3, but they are all in the Sun Belt, so that hardly counts.

<<Speaking of which, this is another blunder the ACC made with the divisions. If UM/FSU are in the same division, it is far more likely for both to make it to a BCS bowl, especially if they play in the season opener. >>

I agree with you. I also think it helps the schools in the other division since they will always get a champion out of those 6. It would be tough on the 4 with FSU and Miami, but its been tough on anyone to beat out FSU anyway. Maryland is the only one and they lost to FSU that year, but got help. I also think the ACC is overestimating the interest in a rematch.

As for USF and the BE, while I think USF has an excellent coach, they have only just moved into I-A in the last couple of years. They haven't proven that they can continue to do well. They could fall flat on their face. I suspect it is more likely they will do well and be a regular BE contender, but I also think it will be a few years before they win the BE. I expect WVU, UL and SU to pick up a title first. And maybe Pitt and Cincy also.

There was a time a few decades back, that the best football team in Florida certain years was fielded by the University of Tampa. Tampa later had dropped football.

In California, Long Beach State, Cal State-Fullerton, and Pacific have dropped football.

^Yes, and Earl Bruce, former Iowa State, Ohio State, and Colorado State football coach was a head coach there before going to Iowa State in the mid 1970's, after Johnny Majors left for Pitt (he was at Iowa State in the early 1970's).

Yes, Tampa played in the 1972 Tangerine Bowl (fornrunner to the Florida Citrus/Capital One Bowl). They played Kent State in that game and it looks like that bowl at that time was a very mid-major bowl as the University of Nebraska at Omaha (then called the Muncipal University of Omaha) played in that bowl in 1955. The first major team to play in that bowl was the following year as Florida lost to Miami (OH). Tampa sounded like it was a mid-major team though at the time before discontinuing.

Yes, those three California Teams have discontinued which is some evidence that a large number of teams may be hard to support, even in a rapidly growing state, although each state is different. But its still hard to see more than 4 BCS teams in Florida just by the experience of California and Texas.

The Tangerine Bowl has gradually increased in stature throughout its history, and the 1972 edition was a vast improvement over that of 1955. For a time in the late 1960s and early 70s the contest pitted the champions of the MAC and the SoCon against each other (although it appears as though the Southern Conference had trouble carrying its end of the bargain, hence the substitutions of Tampa and former members Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina). Miami of Ohio briefly became a perennial top ten team (Bill Mallory, thingy Crum) and then suddenly the MAC no longer had an automatic bowl berth for its champion (1976-1980). I'm not really sure what happened...did the MAC feel that it had "outgrown" the Tangerine (like when the WAC left the Holiday the year following BYU's undefeated season) or did the Tangerine simply want more prestigious matchups (not exactly evident from the first few post-MAC games)...

Also, CS-Los Angeles, UC-Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, CS-Northridge, and now Saint Mary's have terminated their football programs...

imho the acc should have taken wvu instead of bc. i know wvu's magical year probably will not become a permanent thing, but they really would have fit so much better. with the divisions being like this

Atlantic
wvu
maryland
uva
va tech
ga tech
miami

Coastal
wake forest
duke
unc
nc state
clemson
fsu

they could schedule football like the sec with one protected cross divisional rival

fsu-miami
clemson-ga tech
nc state- va tech
unc-uva
duke-maryland
wvu-wake forest

the same could have been done for basketball playing everyone in your division and your protected division rival twice and the other 5 teams once. that would make a 17 game conference schedule, which would have only added one conference game per year for each team.

also, every important rivalry would have been protected, the nc schools would have been kept together, and miami and fsu would not have to be in the same division. you could even subsitute bc in for wvu and it would still make a lot more since than the crazy divisions they have now and the confusing scheduling arrangement