Now what?

[UCfan_kc]

But, in my opinion, joining the MAC would basically be saying UC gives up and concedes that it is not a big-time athletic program. I am not ready to make such a concession, despite what the financial aspect of UC athletics may dictate.

Who cares if we are not "big time". I think the biggest issue these days is we worry so much about what everyone else thinks about the football program. If you enjoy the sport, enjoy going to football games, and enjoy rooting for UC then who cares what anyone else thinks?

[UCfan_kc]

Your second paragraph says it all. Will we get good recruits? No. National exposure? No. big time bowl games? No. But you still think this is a great option. Brilliant.

My point is why do we need these things? We can still enjoy football without these things. I go to football games to watch the game, not worry about if somebody in Pacoima, California is watching the Bearcats on a major network.

[cincyjman]

Getting lost in all of this is the fact that having a seat at the table isn't going to sway that many recruits one way or another.

Recruits care about coaches, schemes, tradition, exposure, and getting to the NFL.

IU football has a "seat at the table", but do you honestly think any kids sign on there with the belief they are going to be holding up the NC trophy?

[London 'Cat]

UC's revenues are not far above those of MAC programs. Yet, its travel expenses for non-revenue sports are far greater than they would be in the MAC. But, recruiting in men's basketball and football would drop off considerably in the MAC. At least for the next couple of seasons, UC can offer recruits the "seat at the table." But once the BCS AQ bid vanishes, will UC still hold that advantage over MAC programs? Probably not. So, recruiting may suffer anyway. The MAC may be a good fit geographically for UC and would provide some natural regional rivalries with those schools. But, in my opinion, joining the MAC would basically be saying UC gives up and concedes that it is not a big-time athletic program. I am not ready to make such a concession, despite what the financial aspect of UC athletics may dictate.

[True Bearcat]

If I want to watch MAC football, I'll drive 30 minutes up US 27 and watch Miami. I can count on one hand the number of non-UC games I have watched at Miami over the years. Once against Marshall in the Big Ben era and 2 Ohio U. games. I have zero interest in watching MAC games on a regular basis.

While a new league of the following isn't the ACC, it is better than C-USA

East
Cincinnati
Connecticut
South Florida
Temple
Central Florida
Navy
ECU

West
Boise State
San Diego State
Memphis
Houston
Southern Methodist
Tulane

There's also talk of adding UNLV, New Mexico and Fresno State to form a true western division in all sports along with adding UMass to the eastern division.

This is what I'm talking about. Looks like a good conference to me for now.

[True Bearcat]

http://www.crainscleveland.com/artic...976/-1/blogs04

All but two teams average under 20k. That tells me they don't travel either. The University of Cincinnati wants nothing to do with that, and if you are a true fan of Bearcat football neither do you!

The teams invited for football want to play football in the BIG EAST. I believe that the conference should be made up of the remaining football members.

[JohnFrancis]

anbuc88's opinion actually raises valid points and makes you think in a larger sense - what's it all about, anyway?

(oops sorry - I meant UCfan_kc raised some good points about the MAC)

Sometimes I just shake my head and wonder what it's all about - looking at the numbers, math and economics - not looking at things as a fan:

6 home games a year - some against unattractive foes
regional rivalries going away or already gone
multimillion dollar coaching & staff salaries & travel expenses
slim odds of ever winning a BCS championship (to my knowledge, schools with more resources like Wisc, VaTech and OSU have never won)
for what - a seat at the table - a CHANCE to compete

Building a new stadium just doesn't make sense to me - first its the capital cost, and I am not including land - then there is the annual upkeep (O & M) - all of this would eat up money from TV revenues. Changing demographics in the US do not bode well for increasing attendance either - attendance nationally is down the past year or so. Only the SEC has the rabid fans in sufficent numbers to keep this ponzi scheme going - less than 20 athletic departments nationally actually make money. It's just crazy.

BTW, lawyers will get very rich on their billable hours fighting these conference exit payments - which may never be paid or at least not in full...

[anbuc88]

As a UC fan, I guess I just don't see why the MAC can't be an option. I know everyone thinks that being big-time, competing for mythical national championships and all is great, but to me the in-game experience at Nippert, strong regional rivalries, and playing to win your conference are much more valuable to me than trying to get television viewers. When you go to a high school football game, do you care where the high school is ranked nationally or how it's going to play outside the metro area? No, you go to see a football...pure and simple.

I think the MAC offers the potential for great regional rivalries and exciting football games. Will we get the best recruits? Probably not. Will we get national exposure? Maybe, maybe not. Will we get in big-time bowls or the new tournament? We would have an outside shot. But what we would get is exciting football games to go watch, and the regional and in-state rivalries would do better to fill Nippert. And we would challenge for the conference championship on an annual basis. In the end, what is wrong with that? You would have a fun and exciting football program, a great basketball program, and most importantly, a well-regarded institution that refuses to sully itself to make (or probably lose) big bucks by turning itself into a football factory.

Your second paragraph says it all. Will we get good recruits? No. National exposure? No. big time bowl games? No. But you still think this is a great option. Brilliant.

[Ran513]

As a UC fan, I guess I just don't see why the MAC can't be an option. I know everyone thinks that being big-time, competing for mythical national championships and all is great, but to me the in-game experience at Nippert, strong regional rivalries, and playing to win your conference are much more valuable to me than trying to get television viewers. When you go to a high school football game, do you care where the high school is ranked nationally or how it's going to play outside the metro area? No, you go to see a football...pure and simple.

I think the MAC offers the potential for great regional rivalries and exciting football games. Will we get the best recruits? Probably not. Will we get national exposure? Maybe, maybe not. Will we get in big-time bowls or the new tournament? We would have an outside shot. But what we would get is exciting football games to go watch, and the regional and in-state rivalries would do better to fill Nippert. And we would challenge for the conference championship on an annual basis. In the end, what is wrong with that? You would have a fun and exciting football program, a great basketball program, and most importantly, a well-regarded institution that refuses to sully itself to make (or probably lose) big bucks by turning itself into a football factory.

No, simply no .

[RedRocker]

If I want to watch MAC football, I'll drive 30 minutes up US 27 and watch Miami. I can count on one hand the number of non-UC games I have watched at Miami over the years. Once against Marshall in the Big Ben era and 2 Ohio U. games. I have zero interest in watching MAC games on a regular basis.

While a new league of the following isn't the ACC, it is better than C-USA

East
Cincinnati
Connecticut
South Florida
Temple
Central Florida
Navy
ECU

West
Boise State
San Diego State
Memphis
Houston
Southern Methodist
Tulane

There's also talk of adding UNLV, New Mexico and Fresno State to form a true western division in all sports along with adding UMass to the eastern division.

[Banter]

As a UC fan, I guess I just don't see why the MAC can't be an option. I know everyone thinks that being big-time, competing for mythical national championships and all is great, but to me the in-game experience at Nippert, strong regional rivalries, and playing to win your conference are much more valuable to me than trying to get television viewers. When you go to a high school football game, do you care where the high school is ranked nationally or how it's going to play outside the metro area? No, you go to see a football...pure and simple.

I think the MAC offers the potential for great regional rivalries and exciting football games. Will we get the best recruits? Probably not. Will we get national exposure? Maybe, maybe not. Will we get in big-time bowls or the new tournament? We would have an outside shot. But what we would get is exciting football games to go watch, and the regional and in-state rivalries would do better to fill Nippert. And we would challenge for the conference championship on an annual basis. In the end, what is wrong with that? You would have a fun and exciting football program, a great basketball program, and most importantly, a well-regarded institution that refuses to sully itself to make (or probably lose) big bucks by turning itself into a football factory.

If we ever join the MAC I will cancel all my season tickets and donations to the athletic department. This would seriously water down our talent, and I'm not sure if you attended a game before 2007 but Nippert with 15000 people is not a great experiance

[bearcatbret]

Have you called the Miami game exciting the past 5 years. Being in the BEast has increased UC football talent. Taking a step back in conferences would do the same with recruiting.
I think people go to high school football to support their high school. Something that most of us not from Cincinnati do not understand (adults with no children left in school still going to the games). UC does not have that same dedicated fans. If we were playing Miami, Akron, Toledo, Ohio, Eastern/Central/Western Michigan every year, no one would want to come. We can not sell out the Miami game there or here.

[applegbt]

As a UC fan, I guess I just don't see why the MAC can't be an option. I know everyone thinks that being big-time, competing for mythical national championships and all is great, but to me the in-game experience at Nippert, strong regional rivalries, and playing to win your conference are much more valuable to me than trying to get television viewers. When you go to a high school football game, do you care where the high school is ranked nationally or how it's going to play outside the metro area? No, you go to see a football...pure and simple.

I think the MAC offers the potential for great regional rivalries and exciting football games. Will we get the best recruits? Probably not. Will we get national exposure? Maybe, maybe not. Will we get in big-time bowls or the new tournament? We would have an outside shot. But what we would get is exciting football games to go watch, and the regional and in-state rivalries would do better to fill Nippert. And we would challenge for the conference championship on an annual basis. In the end, what is wrong with that? You would have a fun and exciting football program, a great basketball program, and most importantly, a well-regarded institution that refuses to sully itself to make (or probably lose) big bucks by turning itself into a football factory.

I think we would get apathy and 12k per game attendance.

[UCfan_kc]

As a UC fan, I guess I just don't see why the MAC can't be an option. I know everyone thinks that being big-time, competing for mythical national championships and all is great, but to me the in-game experience at Nippert, strong regional rivalries, and playing to win your conference are much more valuable to me than trying to get television viewers. When you go to a high school football game, do you care where the high school is ranked nationally or how it's going to play outside the metro area? No, you go to see a football...pure and simple.

I think the MAC offers the potential for great regional rivalries and exciting football games. Will we get the best recruits? Probably not. Will we get national exposure? Maybe, maybe not. Will we get in big-time bowls or the new tournament? We would have an outside shot. But what we would get is exciting football games to go watch, and the regional and in-state rivalries would do better to fill Nippert. And we would challenge for the conference championship on an annual basis. In the end, what is wrong with that? You would have a fun and exciting football program, a great basketball program, and most importantly, a well-regarded institution that refuses to sully itself to make (or probably lose) big bucks by turning itself into a football factory.