(09-18-2013 10:06 AM)marcuscan Wrote:  It's always refreshing to see that the doomsdayers haven't lost a step. Around & around we go.

How are all those millions working for [insert very long litany of programs that are bottom feeders in P5 conferences]?!?

Zzzzzzzzzzz.......





mc

Ahh, yes, the old some people don't do well with all that money argument. In other words, don't hassle me with a winning lottery ticket. Don't you know some people go bankrupt after winning the lottery? Why would you want to go bankrupt?

(09-18-2013 10:47 AM)MickMack Wrote:  There most significant change of all: the P5 has become an 800 lb. gorilla that can restrict access to television dollars and bowl access. There's never been a clearer division between haves and have-nots in college football, and it's only getting worse.

(09-18-2013 10:35 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  I still think people are confusing two different things, revenue and the ability to compete. Revenue helps a program compete but I wouldn't want to be a bottom tier power conference program.

In the American, UC is going to be one of the stronger programs in the two main sports. Wins bring fans but there is a solid argument that UC football will not take the next step up.

In a power conference UC will be able fund all their sports and recruit higher profile players; however, they might be a middle of the road program which could hurt fan support.

Based on the only thorough AAC media coverage I've seen, NJ.com says we are already in the middle of the AAC.

POWER RANKINGS
(Records through games played on Sept. 15)
1. UCF (3-0, 0-0) ..................... 2
2. Louisville (3-0, 0-0) ............ 1
3. Rutgers (2-1, 0-0) ............... 3
4. Houston (2-0, 1-0) .............. 4
5. Cincinnati (2-1, 0-0) ........... 5
6. SMU (1-1, 0-0) .................... 6
7. Memphis (0-2, 0-0) ............ 7
8. UConn (0-2, 0-0) ................ 9
9. South Florida (0-3, 0-0) .... 10
10. Temple (0-3, 0-1) ............. 8

(09-18-2013 11:05 AM)Ragpicker Wrote:  

(09-18-2013 10:35 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  I still think people are confusing two different things, revenue and the ability to compete. Revenue helps a program compete but I wouldn't want to be a bottom tier power conference program.

In the American, UC is going to be one of the stronger programs in the two main sports. Wins bring fans but there is a solid argument that UC football will not take the next step up.

In a power conference UC will be able fund all their sports and recruit higher profile players; however, they might be a middle of the road program which could hurt fan support.

Based on the only thorough AAC media coverage I've seen, NJ.com says we are already in the middle of the AAC.

POWER RANKINGS
(Records through games played on Sept. 15)
1. UCF (3-0, 0-0) ..................... 2
2. Louisville (3-0, 0-0) ............ 1
3. Rutgers (2-1, 0-0) ............... 3
4. Houston (2-0, 1-0) .............. 4
5. Cincinnati (2-1, 0-0) ........... 5
6. SMU (1-1, 0-0) .................... 6
7. Memphis (0-2, 0-0) ............ 7
8. UConn (0-2, 0-0) ................ 9
9. South Florida (0-3, 0-0) .... 10
10. Temple (0-3, 0-1) ............. 8

Too early for that stuff, only 3 games in and have not played a conference game yet. Rag if you want to put this to bed do a poll here on should UC accept a p5 invite or stay in the AAC. All of this is moot anyway. Whit would gladly accept a p5 invite, and that is all that matters.

(09-18-2013 11:11 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  ...do a poll here on should UC accept a p5 invite or stay in the AAC.

It would scare me that some folks would vote for staying in the AAC.

You are correct, it is all just banter, and Whit will accept the first P5 invite to come his way.

At the time I remember that Bearcat Chris guy on BCN saying going to the BE was a bad decision.

(09-18-2013 11:15 AM)Ragpicker Wrote:  

(09-18-2013 11:11 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  ...do a poll here on should UC accept a p5 invite or stay in the AAC.

It would scare me that some folks would vote for staying in the AAC.

You are correct, it is all just banter, and Whit will accept the first P5 invite to come his way.

Just for the record those who would rather stay AAC scare me almost as much as those who think we would kill the program if we get stuck.

There is such obvious middle ground on this issue, but people insist on taking extreme positions. It's a major negative for this program if we get stuck in the AAC. The program will do it's best to rise above it if it comes to that.

Moving to a power five conference is the right call every time. The important thing is that Cincinnati has the coaches and systems in place to succeed whether they are playing the MAC, American, Big Ten, Super Duper Conference USA, the Big 20 or whatever the college landscape looks like. Right now I feel very good about our situation in the American because we have great leadership. If Nancy and Mike were still here I would be scared to death about this league because I doubt Nippert expansion would even be on the table. We moved to the Big East with some questionable leadership at top the killed our basketball program and lucked into Brian Kelly. If we had 7 or 8 Marky D and Minter type years where UC won 5 to 8 games a year in football we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Instead we would be complaining about our basketball coach and wondering why didn't stay back in the Big East. (which is what a lot UConn fans discuss on their forums.)

(09-18-2013 11:49 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  At the time I remember that Bearcat Chris guy on BCN saying going to the BE was a bad decision.

For those of you advocating staying in the AAC with a P5 invite in hand, were you also a big proponent of staying in Conference-USA when the Big East invited Cincinnati?