Quote:Michael DeCourcy ‏@tsnmike
How Mick Cronin is right about Crosstown Rivalry: split crowd was great. How he's wrong: An event that appealing deserves much better venue.

Mike DeCourcy is a venue queen, at least when it comes to UC athletics. He doesn't care about logistics or logic. He would rather see the UC-xu game played at NKU's arena than downtown because it is a nice, new spiffy place to watch a game.

I mean he's right, US Bank isn't that nice. The thing is that they don't have a reason to really put money into the arena for the 3 - 5k they draw for a Cyclones game.

He's not being a venue queen.

US Bank is a $hithole, and I don't like any of UC games being played there.

I haven't lived in Cincy since '04 and even then it was well known as a dump. Move on, nothing to see here. He's absolutely correct.






mc

It isn't just this one comment though. He harps on Nippert and 5/3rd.

Just about everything he has said about UC in the past month is framed by his viewpoint that the Cats play in dumps.

I have to agree with the thought of the OP, if not the term venue queen. I actually thought the same thing when I read some of DeCourcy's comments from last night and compared them to his comments about Nippert.

No one would deny that US Bank is incredibly outdated. However, by all indications the crowd last night was great, those in attendance enjoyed themselves, and the crowd and city looked good on national TV. The whole notion that games not played in brand new, state of the art facilities aren't up to par is getting really old.

(12-20-2012 10:35 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I mean he's right, US Bank isn't that nice. The thing is that they don't have a reason to really put money into the arena for the 3 - 5k they draw for a Cyclones game.

I agree the arena isn't great, but it is the one that makes the most sense for this game.

(12-20-2012 10:46 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 10:35 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I mean he's right, US Bank isn't that nice. The thing is that they don't have a reason to really put money into the arena for the 3 - 5k they draw for a Cyclones game.

I agree the arena isn't great, but it is the one that makes the most sense for this game.

Yea I totally agree with you and for one game a year I'm fine with US Bank Arena. But it still doesn't necessarily make DeCourcy wrong in this case.

It looked better on tv than 5/3 Arena does. I know the seating is more comfortable than bench seats.

I've not been there in several years but my wife and daughter have been to concerts there recently and said the concourses looked like they had a facelift.

(12-20-2012 10:46 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 10:35 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I mean he's right, US Bank isn't that nice. The thing is that they don't have a reason to really put money into the arena for the 3 - 5k they draw for a Cyclones game.

I agree the arena isn't great, but it is the one that makes the most sense for this game.

Yup. I think it works for the Shootout. Otherwise, I'd be all for just pushing the thing into the river and moving on.

Didn't look bad on TV. If the media focuses on the game and not the venue, nobody will care. It's not like the ceiling was caving in.

I wish we had a brand new downtown arena to play the game in too but that isn't the reality of the city. I want to keep basketball on campus too but I wouldn't be against two new arena's one on campus and one downtown. Anybody have any money??????

(12-20-2012 10:44 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  It isn't just this one comment though. He harps on Nippert and 5/3rd.

Just about everything he has said about UC in the past month is framed by his viewpoint that the Cats play in dumps.

That's because he's looking at UC from the perspective that the ACC or Big 12 might see it, in the context of an expansion candidate. It's pretty obvious that facilities are holding UC back in that regard. Seems to me that DeCourcy is a UC advocate, and his remarks are meant to be constructive.

I don't see any problems with DeCourcy.
He is one of the few UC homers out there along with Rothstein

(12-20-2012 11:06 AM)soapy smith Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 10:44 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  It isn't just this one comment though. He harps on Nippert and 5/3rd.

Just about everything he has said about UC in the past month is framed by his viewpoint that the Cats play in dumps.

That's because he's looking at UC from the perspective that the ACC or Big 12 might see it, in the context of an expansion candidate. It's pretty obvious that facilities are holding UC back in that regard. Seems to me that DeCourcy is a UC advocate, and his remarks are meant to be constructive.

It is not obvious that facilities are holding UC back. What holds UC back is the low budget for the Athletic Department. Are facilities part of that problem, yes and Whit laid out a plan to change that.

DeCourcy isn't constructive because he fails to grasps the reality of the football situation. He refuses to believe that UC and PBS is any different than Pitt and Heinz Field.

(12-20-2012 11:12 AM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  I don't see any problems with DeCourcy.
He is one of the few UC homers out there along with Rothstein

Have you paid attention to his trashing of UC's plan for Nippert?

(12-20-2012 11:16 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 11:06 AM)soapy smith Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 10:44 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  It isn't just this one comment though. He harps on Nippert and 5/3rd.

Just about everything he has said about UC in the past month is framed by his viewpoint that the Cats play in dumps.

That's because he's looking at UC from the perspective that the ACC or Big 12 might see it, in the context of an expansion candidate. It's pretty obvious that facilities are holding UC back in that regard. Seems to me that DeCourcy is a UC advocate, and his remarks are meant to be constructive.

It is not obvious that facilities are holding UC back. What holds UC back is the low budget for the Athletic Department. Are facilities part of that problem, yes and Whit laid out a plan to change that.

DeCourcy isn't constructive because he fails to grasps the reality of the football situation. He refuses to believe that UC and PBS is any different than Pitt and Heinz Field.

I agree that UC's athletic budget is a huge hinderance in holding back the program. It's really a joke of a budget for a BCS school. Dont they have the lowest recruiting budget out of all the BCS schools? That plays right along though with the lack of facilities as well. The overall commitment from the University just isn't there compared to most other schools playing at this level.

(12-20-2012 10:44 AM)lazyeyep22 Wrote:  No one would deny that US Bank is incredibly outdated. However, by all indications the crowd last night was great, those in attendance enjoyed themselves, and the crowd and city looked good on national TV. The whole notion that games not played in brand new, state of the art facilities aren't up to par is getting really old.

I agree with this. I'm not a big basketball fan. I go to maybe a game a year. I love UC and every team we field but basketball just doesn't do a whole lot for me. That being said, I had a great time at the game last night as did my wife and our friends (who go to even less games than I do). The atmosphere was great, the seats were comfortable enough and the beer was cold. Someone commented that it was sort of like being at a bowl game with the split crowd and the energy from both sides which I agreed with. Just a really enjoyable evening all the way around.

(12-20-2012 11:06 AM)soapy smith Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 10:44 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  It isn't just this one comment though. He harps on Nippert and 5/3rd.

Just about everything he has said about UC in the past month is framed by his viewpoint that the Cats play in dumps.

That's because he's looking at UC from the perspective that the ACC or Big 12 might see it, in the context of an expansion candidate. It's pretty obvious that facilities are holding UC back in that regard. Seems to me that DeCourcy is a UC advocate, and his remarks are meant to be constructive.

But he's advocating the wrong move, which he believes is moving the entire football program to Paul Brown Stadium. If Santa, Whit, and the UC BOT thought that Paul Brown Stadium was a smart decision both financially and in terms of conference realignment they wouldn't have gone all-in on renovating Nippert Stadium.

Basically I trust the decisions of the dozens of people who are working behind the scenes at the University of Cincinnati and have scoured through scenario after scenario for months if not years than some reporter who gets off on his own pro-basketball tangents.

(12-20-2012 11:17 AM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-20-2012 11:12 AM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  I don't see any problems with DeCourcy.
He is one of the few UC homers out there along with Rothstein

Have you paid attention to his trashing of UC's plan for Nippert?

No one disagrees that US Bank needs help. But Mike continues to bury his head in the sand regarding playing at PBS vs Nippert, even after Whit's in depth explanation at the press conference. Whit explained how much money UC loses each game when played at PBS and Mike continues to state he wants UC to play games there. Mike also wants a renovation for 5/3 (as does all UC fans), but basic math says losing money by playing games at PBS isn't going to help a renovation at 5/3.
I like Mike because he usually backs UC, but just another example of a media type too stubborn to change his opinion, even after given glaring, stong facts against his point.