(08-30-2013 03:04 PM)Ragpicker Wrote: (08-30-2013 01:44 PM)marcuscan Wrote: This sort of reasoning I find to be intuitive, yet ultimately problematic. Why? Well we're talking about a population and pop density that is FAR below that of the Cincinnati Metro. Slightly above 220K in terms of pop, to be exact. A stadium capacity that is only ~2K larger than Nippert right now. I believe they are either looking at expansion or have already greenlit it. So their revenue possibilities are limited. It's a fairly safe assumption that the City of Boise's per capita income is less than Cincy so things like luxury boxes and other high end revenue streams are limited. Either way, what does it really matter if the entire state and/ or region is uniformly behind them if the state is lightly populated?!? UC's financial ceiling is, at least theoretically far superior. In terms of quantity of graduates is over 250K. Boise can't match this. So in theory we have a greater pool of resources to harvest. Bottomline, we exceed them in fiscal potential.
Good stuff if you work for the Chamber of Commerce and are trying to lure business to the Queen City from Idaho. Agreed, UC's financial ceiling is far superior - now just figure out how to squeeze part of that endowment money for athletics. I also agree, UC has always had far more graduates than Boise. But my point is not theoretical, its based on history. Recent history, just prior to UC's entry into the Big East.
For years Boise State opened up their athletic fields with questionable students taking Prop 48 kids that couldn't get into the PAC-12. Prop 48 changed in 2010, but they still bring in kids that can't get into USC or UCLA. In fact, California produces so many FBS recruits, that all the DI schools in the state can't take them due to scholarship limits. So many head to Boise, the only real FBS team in the State. Yes, I know the Vandals moved up but also announced they will be joining the Big Sky in 2014.
UC could compete in the AAC, but certainly won't dominate if left in this conference for years. It will be just like CUSA, where UC had only one goal each year to make it to the Liberty Bowl as conference champs. Sadly, they never made it. East Carolina will get their time, so will UCF, so will SMU or Houston. What gives you the impression that they will be able to dominate over these schools in a few years with coaches leaving and UC recruiting against MAC schools for talent? UC can certainly make it their goal each year, but they will in no way dominate like Boise does in the MWC. And to your point, UC put players in the NFL during their CUSA days, but they never dominated the league.
I just don't want to go back to the days of CUSA. Nippert was just not as interesting back then. And most of those thousands of graduates you mentioned agreed and didn't show up.
Wow. Just wow. So, let me get this right....somehow, UC will simply just lay down and ball up and ECU(?!?) and the like will just pass us on by? This is to be the case if we don't go on to another conference. Hmmmm, and additionally....somehow the Liberty Bowl will be our sole objective. Wow. Just wow. So us making ~2M less a year will cause us to regress this far. WOW. If this is the case I would venture to say we don't even deserve an invite to another conference. What a difference ~2M makes! (tongue firmly planted in cheek)
Let's just say we agree to disagree. It's really simple. There is
HARDLY ANYTHING similar now to then.
THEN: it was actively debated among faculty that the football team should be disbanded.
NOW: we have successfully funded an addition to Nippert.
THEN: we had a recent and distant history of futility.
NOW: we're coming up on a decade of success. we all know the score with respect to our 10 wins. THEN: hardly anyone gave a s#*t about football. NOW: we pack the stadium
THEN: even bum coaches like Minter tried and tried to escape. NOW: we have a well recognized and respected commodity coaching our school....by choice.
THEN: our facilities were trash. i used to be able to get in to the football weight room.
NOW: we have some top of the line equipment and training facilities.
I could go on. It's just flat out intellectually lazy to make the sort of comparisons that you're making. Far too many variables have changed to NOT account for them.....you're comparing apples to oranges. Fans will come to see a WINNER. Fans came, in droves, to see us beat up on S.Miss/ Tulane/ Houston when we were consistently winning in hoops. However, you don't think the same is possible now that we'll play SMU rather than.....say the 'Cuse (cuz somehow ppl cared OH so much about SU.) The proof is in the pudding.....ppl are throwing down THOUSANDS of dollars to buy luxury seats. They are doing so knowing full well we're going to the AAC. I say again, ppl like winners.
Don't let me get in the way of your nihilism tho.
mc
/
American - Week 1 Football
