I want the ACC over other conferences for few reasons...

1. it's a big boy confernce with a long term deal with the Orange Bowl
2. it's east...where Mick recruits and this also means florida football recruiting.
3. we have chance to win it in football any given year and compete in hoops

I'd rather UC were in the ACC vs. the Big 12 just because I think UC would be more successful and travelling out west to places like Lubbock and the Little Apple would suck.

But I totally get the argument why the Big 12 would be better from a stability stand point.

Right now, anything is better than the Big CUSA v. 2.0. Beggars can't be choosers.

I think the Big 12 is a better football conference. If we joined the Big 12, we could add substantially to their basketball programs being a ranked team for most of the past 2 years. However, the ACC would make more sense geographically and from past rivals including UL, Pitt and Cuse. Not sure if UC has approached the Big 12 about anything.

(12-23-2012 05:54 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Its funny to think how different things were a decade ago. If my memory serves me correctly were we 8 affirmatives, 2 negatives, and 1 abstention when UC went to a vote in the Big 10 back in the early 2000's. I know OSU and Northwestern were against it, and Indiana abstained I believe.

I find that extremely difficult to believe.

The only reasons I hate the idea of the Big XII is the distance factor and that it would completely change how Cronin would have to recruit.

Otherwise, it would seem (at least right now) to be a much better option than the ACC because it's not going to be raided by everybody else during the next few years.

(12-24-2012 09:13 AM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  The only reasons I hate the idea of the Big XII is the distance factor and that it would completely change how Cronin would have to recruit.

Otherwise, it would seem (at least right now) to be a much better option than the ACC because it's not going to be raided by everybody else during the next few years.

I understand what you're saying, but I 'm still not sure the B12 is completely raid proof. When the next round of expansion starts, the PAC12 may decide to add as well to keep up with the other big conferences. Geographically speaking there aren't a whole lot of high profile candidiates out west. I don't think schools like Fresno St., SDSU, Nevada, or Boise St.(a communuity college with a big time football program) are that appealing. The only school unattached at the present is BYU, and they already have SLC covered with Utah. I could see them going after B12 teams again. We'll just have to see how much of an obstacle the GOR truly is.

Bounce, Rath and Ty, I completely agree with all of you. But, when I have my mod hat on, I really need to prevent these two-page pissing contests that pop up when threads like this show up on the BE board (where this post originated). You all remember how much the Louisville guys got beat up over the last year? Got to the point where people started ripping them no matter what they posted.

Just trying for a little bit of preventative medicine here. Although in the case of Bounce, that is probably way too late

(12-24-2012 09:10 AM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  

(12-23-2012 05:54 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Its funny to think how different things were a decade ago. If my memory serves me correctly were we 8 affirmatives, 2 negatives, and 1 abstention when UC went to a vote in the Big 10 back in the early 2000's. I know OSU and Northwestern were against it, and Indiana abstained I believe.

I find that extremely difficult to believe.

I do too. This is the FIRST I've ever heard of a conversation of inviting the Bearcats happening much less an actual vote.

(12-24-2012 09:34 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Bounce, Rath and Ty, I completely agree with all of you. But, when I have my mod hat on, I really need to prevent these two-page pissing contests that pop up when threads like this show up on the BE board (where this post originated). You all remember how much the Louisville guys got beat up over the last year? Got to the point where people started ripping them no matter what they posted.

Just trying for a little bit of preventative medicine here. Although in the case of Bounce, that is probably way too late

so you're saying that if we get to that point, we'll get into the acc?

Never saw it that way Lush. Great point. I guess Rath and Bounce need to get over there and until their arms wear out

Tried that a year ago when I saw where this conference was heading to no avail.

Also tried it since spring practice but they still started Munchie. Fought the good fight against legions of idiocy. Learned my lesson. Stoopid'is as stoopid'does.

(12-24-2012 09:57 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(12-24-2012 09:10 AM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  

(12-23-2012 05:54 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Its funny to think how different things were a decade ago. If my memory serves me correctly were we 8 affirmatives, 2 negatives, and 1 abstention when UC went to a vote in the Big 10 back in the early 2000's. I know OSU and Northwestern were against it, and Indiana abstained I believe.

I find that extremely difficult to believe.

I do too. This is the FIRST I've ever heard of a conversation of inviting the Bearcats happening much less an actual vote.

Iowa State and Cincinnati were brought into an executive session of the meeting of the presidents in mid 2003 and a provisional "vote of potential" was done. It wasn't a formal vote to add them per se, but it was a vote to include them in further discussion. It was done as a way to look proactively at candidates after the ACC expansion in order to keep the Big Ten on top and make sure no other conference gained a foothold in the Midwest. Due to the fact that 3 (and in ISU's case 5) schools did not even want to pursue the agenda further it was still a long shot but this was on the table. My father worked in the athletic department for 27 years up in Ann Arbor before moving down to Toledo in the mid 90's to take a better paying job. It was through those connections that he, and in the process I, heard this.

Just because it wasn't public knowledge in Cincinnati doesn't mean its not true

Cincinnati was never and will never get into the Big Ten. It's that simple.

(12-24-2012 11:00 AM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  Cincinnati was never and will never get into the Big Ten. It's that simple.

Case in point, that's exactly what I said one post above you.

In today's world of conference juggling how can you say never?

Rutgers and Maryland to the Big 10...yea that was all the talk last year!

UC's best fit would be the Big 10. Will it happen...probably not. But it could.

UC really isn't a great fit for the Big10 outside of geography.
Rutgers, Maryland and UC is that Rutgers and Maryland expand the Big Ten footprint. UC does not.
Rutgers and Maryland have a large statewide following. UC does not as the following is more regional.
Rutgers and Maryland are in the AAU. UC is not (currently).
Rutgers and Maryland are the flagship public universities for their respective states. UC is not.

There are no Big10 schools that would likely have a problem with adding Rutgers or Maryland based on recruiting (aside from maybe Penn State due to proximity).

There are a number of Big10 schools that actively recruit the Greater Cincinnati area that would not want another Big 10 school smack dab in the middle of fertile recruiting grounds that they would have to compete with — tOSU, Mich St, Mich, IN, PU, Iowa, Northwestern, Ill have all had Cincinnati kids on their rosters. (Historically Minn and Wisconsin have too.)

(12-24-2012 11:28 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  In today's world of conference juggling how can you say never?

Rutgers and Maryland to the Big 10...yea that was all the talk last year!

UC's best fit would be the Big 10. Will it happen...probably not. But it could.

You would be surprised how much Cincinnati is STILL brought up in B1G discussions...most of the conference is on board fwiw. Three of my family members are UM alums and 1 currently works in the AD department.

I applied to and got excepted to Cincinnati, Michigan, Toledo and Miami of OH...wanted to go somewhere different with siblings at UM and UT so I looked south because I wanted to have my parents pay in-state tuition...I made the right choice!

B1G would be my number one choice for Cincinnati, the ACC would be second...I don't see UC as a fit for the SEC or Big 12.

(12-24-2012 09:34 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Bounce, Rath and Ty, I completely agree with all of you. But, when I have my mod hat on, I really need to prevent these two-page pissing contests that pop up when threads like this show up on the BE board (where this post originated). You all remember how much the Louisville guys got beat up over the last year? Got to the point where people started ripping them no matter what they posted.

Just trying for a little bit of preventative medicine here. Although in the case of Bounce, that is probably way too late

Fair enough. I prefer to provide the BE Board with relevant news and facts, if others on the board do not agree with my opinions, so be it.

(12-24-2012 11:28 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  In today's world of conference juggling how can you say never?

Rutgers and Maryland to the Big 10...yea that was all the talk last year!

UC's best fit would be the Big 10. Will it happen...probably not. But it could.

Actually, it's been the talk for a long time. Those are two huge markets that the Big Ten has been wanting to add.

There's a better chance of me getting up and finding Candice Swanepoel and Miranda Kerr making out in my living room than UC gaining entry into the Big Ten.

(12-24-2012 11:48 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  UC really isn't a great fit for the Big10 outside of geography.

Which is the main reason why UC would never be realistically considered. There's no extra BTN money in it for the conference.