Really- what a joke. first- Ohio St.wouldn't lower themselves to play the likes of cincy. If cincy wants to join the C7 so be it. They won't park their fball here. Let them join the MAC so Miami U (OH) can pound them like the old days. cincy hasn't been totally and consistently relevant in fball since the days of Alkie Richards.

At least our basketball wouldn't have to suffer.

(12-15-2012 08:20 PM)redpony Wrote:  Really- what a joke. first- Ohio St.wouldn't lower themselves to play the likes of cincy. If cincy wants to join the C7 so be it. They won't park their fball here. Let them join the MAC so Miami U (OH) can pound them like the old days. cincy hasn't been totally and consistently relevant in fball since the days of Alkie Richards.

Cincy is going for their 5th 10 win season in 6 years. They could still finish top 25 for the 5th time in 6 years. They have 4 Big East Championships in 5 years, 2 of them outright. Pretty consistently relevant I'd say.

BTW you have no idea where they will or won't play football.

(12-15-2012 08:20 PM)redpony Wrote:  cincy hasn't been totally and consistently relevant in fball since the days of Alkie Richards.

Um, could we not say the EXACT SAME THING regarding SMU? I mean literally?

(12-15-2012 08:24 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  At least our basketball wouldn't have to suffer.

I feel you, having to play UCONN, Temple, and Memphis would suck. Not getting to play DePaul and Providence would be a death sentence. Hell of UNLV, UNM, and State play ball, it would be a travesty.

But what you got straight is that this is about basketball. Good to know people have their eyes on the prize.

of course you could. No fball for a couple of years and then an admin that wanted us to be like the ivy league (totally trash sports) left us in the desert for about 25 yrs..BTW- cincy- whats your excuse. My comments spanned a period of much more than 5-6 years. However things on the hilltop are changing. 4 bowls in the last 4 years. next yr. I expect the bball program to be in the 'big dance'. Larry Brown isn't going to rest until he has a final 4 team ( and he expects that sooner than later).

(12-15-2012 08:34 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 08:24 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  At least our basketball wouldn't have to suffer.

I feel you, having to play UCONN, Temple, and Memphis would suck. Not getting to play DePaul and Providence would be a death sentence. Hell of UNLV, UNM, and State play ball, it would be a travesty.

But what you got straight is that this is about basketball. Good to know people have their eyes on the prize.

Let's see. First of all, assuming this scenario is true. UConn and UC join the C7 for a 9 team league, they then add 3 schools, let's say they are Butler, St. Louis and Dayton. I would take that every day of the week over some random conglomeration of western schools and Memphis and Temple.

(12-15-2012 08:37 PM)redpony Wrote:  of course you could. No fball for a couple of years and then an admin that wanted us to be like the ivy league (totally trash sports) left us in the desert for about 25 yrs..

So, you are saying the only relevant period in your football history (because obviously if Cincy isn't relevant now than neither is SMU) is when you literally had players on payroll?

Note I am not a Cincinnati fan. But they are like brothers to us.

(12-15-2012 08:37 PM)redpony Wrote:  of course you could. No fball for a couple of years and then an admin that wanted us to be like the ivy league (totally trash sports) left us in the desert for about 25 yrs..BTW- cincy- whats your excuse. My comments spanned a period of much more than 5-6 years. However things on the hilltop are changing. 4 bowls in the last 4 years. next yr. I expect the bball program to be in the 'big dance'. Larry Brown isn't going to rest until he has a final 4 team ( and he expects that sooner than later).

HAHAHA. SMU does nothing well. In order to be good athletic program you need to draw big crowds and/or win a lot of games. That is why I have no problem with the ECU and Memphis adds because they satisfy the former and schools like Boise State satisfy the latter. SMU doesn't neither of those.

As I said. UC and uconn have no leverage. ZERO. The only way they would have leverage is if they had an invite to another football conf. And they don't. If the be does not accept them as football only, and they have no reason to, then they currently have no where to go. If you can show otherwise I am all ears and willing to change my mind. But that is how it stands currently.

And by the way I fully admit USF is in the same boat.

(12-15-2012 08:39 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 08:34 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 08:24 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  At least our basketball wouldn't have to suffer.

I feel you, having to play UCONN, Temple, and Memphis would suck. Not getting to play DePaul and Providence would be a death sentence. Hell of UNLV, UNM, and State play ball, it would be a travesty.

But what you got straight is that this is about basketball. Good to know people have their eyes on the prize.

Let's see. First of all, assuming this scenario is true. UConn and UC join the C7 for a 9 team league, they then add 3 schools, let's say they are Butler, St. Louis and Dayton. I would take that every day of the week over some random conglomeration of western schools and Memphis and Temple.

Enjoy

(12-15-2012 08:53 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  As I said. UC and uconn have no leverage. ZERO. The only way they would have leverage is if they had an invite to another football conf. And they don't. If the be does not accept them as football only, and they have no reason to, then they currently have no where to go. If you can show otherwise I am all ears and willing to change my mind. But that is how it stands currently.

And by the way I fully admit USF is in the same boat.

They have leverage for the same reason Bosie St had leverage: they are on of the strongest programs period. Boise had no other offers per se, but they had leverage because the big east needed their on field product. Same for cincy, uconn, and usf.

This is of course BS but if UC and UConn were to do this and I were in charge. I'd say bye-bye. Love the BS being slung now a days. Makes for some inspired comic relief.

(12-15-2012 07:24 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:16 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:10 PM)MetroMemphis Wrote:  This isn't remotely possible. For one thing, where would UC and UConn put football? The MAC? Besides, UConn and UC would be in a better basketball league with Memphis and Temple, along with UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico, etc than they would would the C7 who only have 2 or 3 real power programs as it is.

Name recognition doesn't hold weight like it used to. St. Johns isn't the same as they were back in their heyday. Neither is Villanova, Providence, or Depaul.

Again they only do this if they work an agreement to play football only in the National, Best of the Rest Conference. There would obviously be push back from the potential full members, but that does not mean it is out of the question. Whatever you think, Boise has come in as football only, SD State came in at football only, if the league really wants UC/UConn it could be willing to accommodate them.

Seriously, then why not vote to dissolve the conference? There is a serious logic gap in doing this and not standing with the C7 to dissolve.

It's irrelevant now. The Catholics have publicly announced their intention to leave. They are no longer voting members.

(12-15-2012 09:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:24 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:16 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:10 PM)MetroMemphis Wrote:  This isn't remotely possible. For one thing, where would UC and UConn put football? The MAC? Besides, UConn and UC would be in a better basketball league with Memphis and Temple, along with UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico, etc than they would would the C7 who only have 2 or 3 real power programs as it is.

Name recognition doesn't hold weight like it used to. St. Johns isn't the same as they were back in their heyday. Neither is Villanova, Providence, or Depaul.

Again they only do this if they work an agreement to play football only in the National, Best of the Rest Conference. There would obviously be push back from the potential full members, but that does not mean it is out of the question. Whatever you think, Boise has come in as football only, SD State came in at football only, if the league really wants UC/UConn it could be willing to accommodate them.

Seriously, then why not vote to dissolve the conference? There is a serious logic gap in doing this and not standing with the C7 to dissolve.

It's irrelevant now. The Catholics have publicly announced their intention to leave. They are no longer voting members.

Doesn't it just take 66% vote to dissolve? 2 out of 3 would be enough.

I heard UConn and Cincinnati are so disgusted with American college sports that they're sending their BB teams to a European pro league.

(12-15-2012 09:04 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 08:53 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  As I said. UC and uconn have no leverage. ZERO. The only way they would have leverage is if they had an invite to another football conf. And they don't. If the be does not accept them as football only, and they have no reason to, then they currently have no where to go. If you can show otherwise I am all ears and willing to change my mind. But that is how it stands currently.

And by the way I fully admit USF is in the same boat.

They have leverage for the same reason Bosie St had leverage: they are on of the strongest programs period. Boise had no other offers per se, but they had leverage because the big east needed their on field product. Same for cincy, uconn, and usf.

I have to agree with you. Right now UConn, Cincy, and to some extent USF have all of the advantage right now. If they dissolved the league, they could pick and choose who would make up a new league. Why? Because they are the biggest fish out there not in a Big5 Conference. They are the big houses in the neighborhood right now. Any TV deal would start with these 3...otherwise you are looking at just CUSA money.

(12-15-2012 09:29 PM)UABGrad Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 09:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:24 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:16 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(12-15-2012 07:10 PM)MetroMemphis Wrote:  This isn't remotely possible. For one thing, where would UC and UConn put football? The MAC? Besides, UConn and UC would be in a better basketball league with Memphis and Temple, along with UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico, etc than they would would the C7 who only have 2 or 3 real power programs as it is.

Name recognition doesn't hold weight like it used to. St. Johns isn't the same as they were back in their heyday. Neither is Villanova, Providence, or Depaul.

Again they only do this if they work an agreement to play football only in the National, Best of the Rest Conference. There would obviously be push back from the potential full members, but that does not mean it is out of the question. Whatever you think, Boise has come in as football only, SD State came in at football only, if the league really wants UC/UConn it could be willing to accommodate them.

Seriously, then why not vote to dissolve the conference? There is a serious logic gap in doing this and not standing with the C7 to dissolve.

It's irrelevant now. The Catholics have publicly announced their intention to leave. They are no longer voting members.

Doesn't it just take 66% vote to dissolve? 2 out of 3 would be enough.

Just to throw another wrench into things, you should reread the statements released today. You'll notice that while the BE office says the C7 "withdrew" from the league, the C7 characterized it as an "orderly evolution". To me, that says the C7 have only informed Aresco that they will no longer be associated...they have not formally stated how that would work. More than likely, lawyers will be needed to determine what that means...officially.