This Whitley drivel is a joke, he's been that way since he wrote for the Tribune...his histrionic swipes at both USF and UCF are embarrassingly crass for a writer. As is his revisionist history. It is a hard read, but one that should resonate with folks. He is wrong that the start date was 15 years ago, it was actually more like 20, around the time of our acceptance into the BE at which time UCF and USF diverged. As I was very familiar and close with situations within the athletic department those days it was clear USF, and his leadership had no desire to make athletics and football a priority. I find this article particularly fun to read as it was written pre-UF game last week and he was presuming a demolition and not a near win for USF with makes it a bit more palatable to read after the fact.
Conversely, this article by the Times is better, and talks about Weatherford being the driving force behind the stadium. It even provides hints from Will that previous regimes were not committed to it, although he put it more diplomatically stating previous regimes 'lacked conviction'....lacking conviction is a nice way to say they had no interest or not prioritized it, lacked vision, plan, and focus-- we are catching up for lots of previous shortcomings. He also said what I had mentioned during the Rhea hire that this was a different era and stadium was part of her task...and to put more of an emphasis on athletics. Still concerning that this article finishes with some flopping by the suggestion USF must 'figure it out'....figuring it out means standing behind it, standing at the forefront and making it a priority. The entire University needs to do that, and it's boosters, and BOT.
www.tampabay.com
Two different articles, written in the last 10 days or so, and neither particularly great but kind of give a semblence of where USF stands today, and what we need to do to get ahead.
Unlike UCF, South Florida blew its chance at football's bigtime | David Whitley
UCF and USF were similar football programs 15 years ago, but the Bulls didn't have the vision or resolve to make their big dreams come true.
www.gatorsports.com
Conversely, this article by the Times is better, and talks about Weatherford being the driving force behind the stadium. It even provides hints from Will that previous regimes were not committed to it, although he put it more diplomatically stating previous regimes 'lacked conviction'....lacking conviction is a nice way to say they had no interest or not prioritized it, lacked vision, plan, and focus-- we are catching up for lots of previous shortcomings. He also said what I had mentioned during the Rhea hire that this was a different era and stadium was part of her task...and to put more of an emphasis on athletics. Still concerning that this article finishes with some flopping by the suggestion USF must 'figure it out'....figuring it out means standing behind it, standing at the forefront and making it a priority. The entire University needs to do that, and it's boosters, and BOT.
‘Failure’s not an option’ for USF's on-campus football stadium
Board of trustees chairperson Will Weatherford tried to speak the stadium into existence a year ago today.
Two different articles, written in the last 10 days or so, and neither particularly great but kind of give a semblence of where USF stands today, and what we need to do to get ahead.
