I am stoked. I am excited...can't wait for drawings. Want to give money. Just tell me how......

Folks, it is time to embrace the decision and support the university.

Football is what is driving this bus so this is the direction the university is going. if you want to end up in the a10 fix 5/3.

Basketball is secondary. We must live with that. The shoe is much better off than nippers in its current state. The acc or big 12 do not care that 5/3 has bad seats in the upper level. They care that nippers hold 35k. The shoe hold 13156. The athletic dept needs luxury boxes in nippert for the $$$. We do not get that by renting PBS.

Pay no attention to lance or mo or his survey. Most Bearcat fans do not listen to them anyways. The majority of morons that listen to them are Bengals fans because that is all they cover on a regular basis. When the host constantly bad mouths Nippert the sheep will typically follow his lead.

UC has studied this extensively. I was part of a survey for season ticket holder a couple years back. Nippert it is...Embrace one of best stadiums in college football and help to make it better.

The PBS experiment was a failure plain and simple. UL and WVU didn't travel, having 20K+ empty seats turned the place into a cave, totally uninspiring atmosphere. Loss of sponsorship money, and paying ole Mikey boy made it even worse.

My guess is some of you out there don't remember the days UC played down at Riverfront - it was horrible. Those two conference games last season reminded me of those days.

(12-11-2012 03:23 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:20 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:17 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Hopefully this doesn't turn out to be a huge waste of money. I don't think a renovated Nippert does much to elevate the conference realignment profile and you still have the issue that casual fans prefer PBS.

As many others have stated, if improving Nippert wouldn't help UC move to another conference, Whit and Ono wouldn't be focusing on it.

Quote:Lance's poll question that has been up for a few days...

I'd be more inclined to attend a UC football game at...
Renovated Nippert Stadium - 38.52%
PBS - 61.48%

Lance is a buffoon

Lance's poll is far from scientific. UC did plenty of studies on this from people who actually went to UC and plan to attend UC games and Nippert was the preferred destination. I am stoked to see what the plans entail.

Of course it is far from scientific, but I still think it hints at the problem. Aside from the hardcore fans it's not easy to get people excited about attending a game at Nippert and now we are adding seats.

The problem isn't "True Fans". Those are the people who will go no matter what. You need to be concerned with "Casual Fan". The person who has entertainment money to spend. I didn't go to UC. I never went down to campus to party really. My allegiance lies with UC because I'm from Cincinnati. I take pride in my city and I want to see them do well. The same reasons I root for the Reds/Bengals. We need the casual fan to want to come to games. If they are more inclined to do so if the game is played at PBS then that option needs to be considered. I have no connection to campus or to Nippert. It is a place I watch my favorite team play. I'm sure there are more of us out there. I'd also be more inclined to attend a game at PBS than Nippert.

(12-11-2012 03:27 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:22 PM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:17 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Hopefully this doesn't turn out to be a huge waste of money. I don't think a renovated Nippert does much to elevate the conference realignment profile and you still have the issue that casual fans prefer PBS.

Lance's poll question that has been up for a few days...

I'd be more inclined to attend a UC football game at...
Renovated Nippert Stadium - 38.52%
PBS - 61.48%

This is an unscientific poll that includes an audience of Bengals, Reds, Ohio State, Xavier, Michigan, Kentucky, including UC fans.

A better poll to find out if Nippert or PBS was the right option would be to ask:

1) Are you fan of UC football or would potentially be one in the future?

Then of those who answered "Yes":

2) Would you rather attend a game at Nippert Stadium or Paul Brown Stadium?

Playing Devil’s Advocate, one could argue Lance’s poll is a better indication. UC needs more butts in the seat- period. They can’t be picky about whether UC alums/students/alums are the ones filling those seats. In fact, there are more people in the area who are non-alums than people who are. There are a lot of people in the area who would identify themselves as a XU, Miami, UK, OSU fan who would go to a local FBS football game at PBS. Think about this: if you have no connection to the University of Cincinnati why would you go to campus?

I hear what you're saying and it makes a lot of sense. My answer to that is that you want to garner the opinions of people who are NOT fans of other college football teams because on Saturdays those are the ones you compete with. Those include Ohio State, Kentucky, Miami, Michigan, Notre Dame, etc. Maybe they aren't traveling to see the game but if they are Buckeyes, Wildcats, etc. fans they are more likely to sit at home and watch their team play than go see the Bearcats at home.

So with a poll you'd have to isolate those people who are either casual football fans and aren't loyal to a team OR people who aren't college football fans at all (maybe they only root for the Bengals or Reds). Then you would poll those if you want to see if Nippert or PBS was the better option.

The problem is that you also have to incorporate people into the poll who are also UC fans because you want to make sure you're doing what's best for your current fanbase then try to capture those who aren't rooting for the Bearcats yet.

Basically this would be your target groups for polling:
1) Cincinnati Bearcats fans
2) College football fans non-loyal to a specific team
3) Non-college football fans

(12-11-2012 03:34 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:29 PM)UCMBA12 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:24 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:20 PM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:03 PM)UCMBA12 Wrote:  There you have it...the PBS debate is over

$70million luxury press box...hope its not another $70million to get our seating to more than 40k

I guess what you should ask yourself is, would you pay $70million for a 40,000 seat stadium...certainly we have seen many other schools who have paid much less, and got much more. Hope we have some smart people making decisions THIS TIME around

I don't know if they gave specifics on what the $70 million would go towards did they?

The $70M is for much more than just the press box/luxury suite structure.

To this point, I hope so...if $70million gets us a luxury box, better concessions and amenities, and a new pavilion on the east side with another mezzanine level and amenties with increased seating capacity to 45-48k. I contribute significantly to this project as I would view it as long term move.

All I can say right now is to get your checkbook ready if this is the case.

Thats exciting...if all that is done to the stadium I would be impressed. If the Cincinnati fan base could get behind this as a whole that number is very attainable with a legitimate outcome.

If we do this though, I think we should NEVER play at PBS again unless we are paid $3million to do it, as in the case of FedEx field. Dont put all this money into the stadium with a plan to play downtown for big games anyway. If you are all in on Nippert, then play those cards and forget PBS forever.

(12-11-2012 03:17 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:06 PM)subflea Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:05 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  ...sigh

What were you expecting?

The Shoe is a dump and they elect to raise funds for a temporary fix to an outdated football stadium?

Because it doesn't matter if the Shoe is a high school gym -- football rules all for revenue. Appease the conferences with football facilities, ride the profit wave after.

(12-11-2012 03:38 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:23 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:20 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:17 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Hopefully this doesn't turn out to be a huge waste of money. I don't think a renovated Nippert does much to elevate the conference realignment profile and you still have the issue that casual fans prefer PBS.

As many others have stated, if improving Nippert wouldn't help UC move to another conference, Whit and Ono wouldn't be focusing on it.

Quote:Lance's poll question that has been up for a few days...

I'd be more inclined to attend a UC football game at...
Renovated Nippert Stadium - 38.52%
PBS - 61.48%

Lance is a buffoon

Lance's poll is far from scientific. UC did plenty of studies on this from people who actually went to UC and plan to attend UC games and Nippert was the preferred destination. I am stoked to see what the plans entail.

Of course it is far from scientific, but I still think it hints at the problem. Aside from the hardcore fans it's not easy to get people excited about attending a game at Nippert and now we are adding seats.

Putting any stock into a small unscientific survey when making a multi-million dollar investment is simply a fool's errand.

UC has many garage options which are so easy to get to Nippert from, I have never had a parking issue at UC! The passes and cash only options now in effect direct traffic well ....

(12-11-2012 03:43 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:38 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:23 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:20 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:17 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Hopefully this doesn't turn out to be a huge waste of money. I don't think a renovated Nippert does much to elevate the conference realignment profile and you still have the issue that casual fans prefer PBS.

As many others have stated, if improving Nippert wouldn't help UC move to another conference, Whit and Ono wouldn't be focusing on it.

Quote:Lance's poll question that has been up for a few days...

I'd be more inclined to attend a UC football game at...
Renovated Nippert Stadium - 38.52%
PBS - 61.48%

Lance is a buffoon

Lance's poll is far from scientific. UC did plenty of studies on this from people who actually went to UC and plan to attend UC games and Nippert was the preferred destination. I am stoked to see what the plans entail.

Of course it is far from scientific, but I still think it hints at the problem. Aside from the hardcore fans it's not easy to get people excited about attending a game at Nippert and now we are adding seats.

Putting any stock into a small unscientific survey when making a multi-million dollar investment is simply a fool's errand.

What about a low response, highly biased, highly controversial survey?

Crikey, is it hard for people to understand that a lot of issues people currently have with Nippert might, I might be reaching here, BE FIXED during these renovations? That's what upgrading is. They are going to make Nippert BETTER. Is PBS>Nippert right now? Sure. Is New Nippert>PBS? For the Bearcats, I say yes.

(12-11-2012 03:45 PM)UCMBA12 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:43 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:38 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:23 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:20 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  As many others have stated, if improving Nippert wouldn't help UC move to another conference, Whit and Ono wouldn't be focusing on it.


Lance is a buffoon

Lance's poll is far from scientific. UC did plenty of studies on this from people who actually went to UC and plan to attend UC games and Nippert was the preferred destination. I am stoked to see what the plans entail.

Of course it is far from scientific, but I still think it hints at the problem. Aside from the hardcore fans it's not easy to get people excited about attending a game at Nippert and now we are adding seats.

Putting any stock into a small unscientific survey when making a multi-million dollar investment is simply a fool's errand.

What about a low response, highly biased, highly controversial survey?

As you describe it that would be stupid also. Please show me how and why that description applies to the UC survey.

(12-11-2012 03:45 PM)UCMBA12 Wrote:  What about a low response, highly biased, highly controversial survey?

You mean the one that asked the paying customers what they preferred? Yeah, I would bet they considered those results.

This is great news, I can't wait to see the plans in the coming weeks.

(12-11-2012 03:47 PM)moosebean11 Wrote:  Crikey, is it hard for people to understand that a lot of issues people currently have with Nippert might, I might be reaching here, BE FIXED during these renovations? That's what upgrading is. They are going to make Nippert BETTER. Is PBS>Nippert right now? Sure. Is New Nippert>PBS? For the Bearcats, I say yes.

How can you say "New Nippert" is better than PBS when you have no idea how it will end up?

(12-11-2012 03:50 PM)apoe Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:45 PM)UCMBA12 Wrote:  What about a low response, highly biased, highly controversial survey?

You mean the one that asked the paying customers what they preferred? Yeah, I would bet they considered those results.

This is great news, I can't wait to see the plans in the coming weeks.

Exactly. There's no guarantee that even one person that clicked on Lance's little flash poll would purchase a UC football ticket at either venue. Half of them are probably Ohio State fans that might go to a UC game if someone gave them a ticket.

Casual fans are a nice addition to the program. They, unfortunately do not pay the bills. Season ticket holders ,UCAT members, and donors pay the bills. They have overwhelming spoken to redo Nippert. The casual fan will still come. They did for Brian Kelly. The problem was Nippert is unable to handle 35k fans comfortably and it drove them away. Would you want to sit in the first 7 rows? That all will be fixed. Parking will be addressed, but is very convenient IMHO. Tailgating will be addressed. Get excited Bearcat Christmas is almost here. Santa Ono will be bringing us all a gift. I hope you like it.....

(12-11-2012 03:52 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:50 PM)apoe Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:45 PM)UCMBA12 Wrote:  What about a low response, highly biased, highly controversial survey?

You mean the one that asked the paying customers what they preferred? Yeah, I would bet they considered those results.

This is great news, I can't wait to see the plans in the coming weeks.

Exactly. There's no guarantee that even one person that clicked on Lance's little flash poll would purchase a UC football ticket at either venue. Half of them are probably Ohio State fans that might go to a UC game if someone gave them a ticket.

That's the problem with Lance's poll that I mentioned above, it includes fans of programs who compete with UC every Saturday. No way an Ohio State or Kentucky or Notre Dame fan is going to buy a UC football ticket if their team was playing at the same time as the Bearcats, regardless of if the game was at Nippert or PBS.

(12-11-2012 03:50 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 03:47 PM)moosebean11 Wrote:  Crikey, is it hard for people to understand that a lot of issues people currently have with Nippert might, I might be reaching here, BE FIXED during these renovations? That's what upgrading is. They are going to make Nippert BETTER. Is PBS>Nippert right now? Sure. Is New Nippert>PBS? For the Bearcats, I say yes.

How can you say "New Nippert" is better than PBS when you have no idea how it will end up?

For $70,000,000, I think, apart from making more seats out of c-notes, that it will be hard to mess up. Have I seen the plans? No, you're correct in that regard, but a new pressbox/luxury suites/ renovated amenities/ expanded seating sounds like a home run to me.

I don't, people screw up all the time. For instance, look toward the great decisions made in terms of constructing around Nippert, greatly limiting what they can do in terms of expansion and making it far more costly in the process.

I would think that they would link TUC and Lidner to an expanded nippert to make them "one" . That way they could expand the concession area back towards both buildings thus increasing the walkway space.