In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 220
Online now 206 Record: 3381 (2/3/2013)
The place for Bearcat fans to talk football and recruiting
The place for Bearcat fans to talk basketball and recruiting
The place to talk Cincinnat Bearcats Baseball
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I understand your argument, but my opinion is that UC should be serving the alumni interests more than the casual t-shirt city fan's interest at this point in time.
To this point in its history, UC alumni haven't exactly been endeared much with the school because it was a Wright St type commuter school that was simply where you took classes.
With the complete transformation UC has undergone into a special 4 year college experience, as students graduate and grow older, you will see a much higher level of loyalty. I already have. There are much more active UC alumni groups in major cities recently than ever before. Thats how these big schools got their fanbases. Looking at the future based on what the school has become, it would be smarter to serve the interests of the students and alumni more than the city's population if forced to choose between the two. I don't say ignore the city at large completely, but that won't be how you build a fanbase. You get the loyal ones first (alumni, the ones who will never waver) and then you can get the casual fans.
UC LCoB '12 - @RyanTJBauer
Something like what 70ish% of UC alumni is within 100 miles of campus? Alumni/students are the ones that have stuck with the program through the good times and bad. Alumni is where you build the base. The t-shirt kind can follow. I almost like that we don't have any wack job OSU style T-shirt fans. The majority of fans are people that are alumni/students or those that have grown up around the university. Give it time. graduating ~10K students a year will build the base faster than you think.
Swing, I'll agree with you probation was a killer and the coaching hires then were poor...
But to say the arena and the fact that it wasn't on or even near campus wasn't a factor is simply not the case.
Its the prime reason we were so desperate to build even a flawed 5/3rd Arena (The Shoe).
The thought we would even entertain moving back to a now nearly 40 year old hockey arena is a true head scratcher to me.
I wouldn't mind the occasional game downtown.... but not all of them.
For example I'd like to see the X game always down there.... split the tickets down the middle and go from there.
But against arguably our second biggest rival (who bought a lot of the tickets) it only drew 14-K this year.
That doesn't scream to me a great demand to move 'em all downtown.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Eric Waddell 13 months ago
How can you tell that the arena was the problem when we had such terrible teams for ten years? I recall the crowds being good when we were at the Coliseum for two years under Catlett, some sell-outs, or close to it, when big teams came in. I think the ideal situation probably IS to be able to play on campus if conditions favor that, taken as a whole. It's a matter of weighing all the factors at the time.
In the 80's bb was in such a funk and needed a lift, we had a place to build an arena, and we had a guy in Shoemaker who could get state money to build it, so it made perfect sense. I think it still makes sense under the right circumstances. But I also feel we could succeed downtown under the right circumstances.
This post was edited by swingtime 13 months ago
I brought the possibility of moving downtown up because I was told by someone closer to the program than I am that it was being considered because the funds aren't available to repair Nippert and the shoe. Not because downtown was absolutely the best venue. I was told it was being discussed because we wouldn't have to spend dollars that aren't available at whatever the cost was to make a better 5/3rd going forward.
I agree with swing that while Catlett was here the crowds weren't bad.
I was told that U.S. would have to make changes that UC would find acceptable. I assume it's because of the perception that an updated U.S. Bank might appear to be an upgrade with attendance being higher capacity than our current 13,176. Would this help sell our school to one of the conferences that we hope to be invited? I'm not sure but I would think so?
Downtown on the river these days isn't even close to what it was before. I am a season ticket holder and have been for many years and I can tell you that there are lots of folks that believe that getting to our venues isn't the easiest. It's not stopped me from attending and it's only a minor nuisance to be sure.
Is it ideal, no, but I don't believe it should be dismissed out of pocket especially if going downtown might be helpful until funds are eventually available to hopefully raze and build a basketball home that we can all be proud of. Just my two cents.
This post was edited by cincyfish 13 months ago
^This is it. In a perfect world it would be nice to get a brand new 5/3 or something that reminds us of the mid/late 90s and the Shoe when it was the SHOE. But that may not be possible. Its time we're practical about doing whatever is absolutely necessary to make us better from whatever stand point. Which means you can't rule something out because you just don't want too. Also, I certainly wouldn't undervalue the value of a vibrant downtown and what that can do to make UC sporting events actual events and how they may make us, if only cosmetically, appear to be improved to the casual cincinnati fan as well as national perception. Just a thought..
I see your point. It would also help to fill the venue if you're bringing in conference foes like UNC or Duke or rekindling the rivalry with Cuse or Louisville. I could see the UC basketball games becoming events. Plus, there wouldn't be a pro team playing at the same time as competition, something the football team as to contend.
All options should be discussed, but the flip side of the argument being made above is to remember what the state of our program was, in terms of fan support, at the time we moved into the Shoe.
Many people commented at the time on how the move back to a campus home made the experience of going to a UC game an entirely different experience for them. It reconnected the idea of the university and the sport where we had the greatest tradition. Going to a game took on more significance than simply going to a sporting event.
To me, it comes down to a pretty simple determining factor: If we truly expect we are going into the ACC for basketball, going back downtown is potentially viable. People from all over, including the casual fan, will come out to see the locals take on UNC, Duke, 'Cuse, Pitt, Louisville and Notre Dame. (Side note: One of the most anticipated games I can recall locally when I was a kid was at Riverfront Coliseum, when Xavier hosted Digger Phelps and Notre Dame when they had Kelly Tripucka and Orlando Woolridge. That was a big deal.) But we can't make that commitment without the ACC. Even having games with UConn, Memphis and Temple won't do much to raise anyone's pulse after what we've experienced the past seven years. The best consideration under that scenario is staying in the Shoe and hoping we can draw 7,500 or more per home game on average.
Agreed. An invite into a strong ACC would draw fans downtown. I think UC basketball would thrive. Without an ACC invite, stay at the Shoe.
ACC and ESPN butting heads, expect some news leaks within the next week on the issue.
I stated on this forum a while back twelves teams is a must. In the Big 12's case it's part of their agreement with the SEC for the champions bowl, that the big 12 must host a conference championship. Which is why the Big 12 is asking the NCAA to remove the 12 team requirement to host a championship.
One wants the ACC to get bigger and the other doesn't?
The interesting thing is if the Big 12 is forced to expand their likely target is ACC teams.
Most fully expect the Big 10 to go after some teams.
At that point I wouldn't expect the SEC stand pat.
That type of feeding frenzy could really make a mess of the ACC.
All that said we could end up with the old Big East in the ACC.... at this point I could live with that.
Could be. It's obvious where the ACC stands.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports