Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

      
Post Reply 
Grading realignment winners, losers
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
BearcatJerry Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,092
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 506
I Root For: UC Bearcats
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Grading realignment winners, losers
(12-24-2013 12:47 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  
(12-24-2013 12:17 PM)#41 Wrote:  Given the gross cash disparity between the Power 5 and the other D1A programs, there is really no such thing as a bad situation in a Power 5 conference. Combine that with better access to the post-season and every school that made the cut-off for the P5 should be an "A+" grade.

The alternative to the P5 is irrelevance.

I think everyone needs to take a step back and realize that UC has an operating budget over one billion dollars. Power five money makes the athletic department look good but as long as UC has an administration that wants to support athletics and hires good coaches that is the foundation for success. Conference affiliation is only part of the equation.

I would give WVU's move to the Big XII an "F" on just about every level outside of revenue. Football and basketball went from Big East power to Big XII bottom feeder. Geography is a mess in terms of travel and natural rivals. Once again exposure isn't all that because Fox owns part of the deal and also rans aren't selected for the best TV spots either. I would rather win than lose in power conference.

All the teams that made moves to the ACC are at least at "B" level because they secured an ESPN deal with good money that keeps them with their geographic rivals. I can't see their on field success changing too much either way but Syracuse could make a big leap on the football field.

The funny thing about UC in the American was that my biggest concerns months ago was the quality of the football league and our football schedule. Right now the basketball league is underperforming with Louisville still in the conference. Next year SMU and Temple will be better but UC, UConn, and Memphis will lose a boatload of players. I still like the direction our basketball program is headed but the non-conference schedule will need to improve. The good news about football is that UCF, ECU, and Houston are all solid. Plus UConn and USF should get better. Watching Fresno State and Boise State fall back to the pack helps our access bowl chances next season.

The only thing I would say is that WVU didn't go from being atop a conference to "bottom feeder" by moving to the B12. I live in Morgantown, I went to five WVU home games this season and saw the FB team perform with my own eyes. IF THE BE HAD STAYED TOGETHER, THIS WVU TEAM WOULD HAVE FINISHED IN THE SAME PLACE AS THEY DID IN THE BIG XII.

Even in the AAC, this WVU team would be only JUST bowl eligible. And I mean that. Even in the AAC, this particular WVU team would not be competitive with UL, UCF, and UC. They might compete with Houston, SMU, and Rutgers, but given ***how*** WVU lost the games they lost this season, I'd pick them to lose 2-out-of-3 against that group.

My point is that people say that WVU went down...BECAUSE of their conference move. I disagree! WVU went down because of their coaching staff and their lack of depth. They would have struggled in whatever conference they were in, and they will likely continue to struggle.

On the other hand, UC would finish...with this current team...somewhere NEAR the top of the B12. We might not have won it, but we'd be in the top 3-4...with THIS team and against THIS year's B12 performance. Baylor, OK State, and Oklahoma (though OU didn't look overly impressive) are at a different level than us...right now. But K-State, TCU, Texas Tech, and Iowa State are all teams we could not only compete but beat...EVERY ONE OF THEM. And we are clearly in a superior place to Kansas.

As for WVU basketball... Well, last year was a down year. This year's team is looking much, much tougher. Close losses to Gonzaga, Missou, and Purdue bode well for WVU in the B12, this year. I think if they continue to improve, WVU will finish in the middle of the pack for the B12. But again, UC could compete...though it's unclear exactly where we would fall in. But THIS UC team is roughly equivalent with this WVU team, IMO... Different weaknesses, but similar in overall quality.

But my point is again...UC would not instantly sink to "Bottom feeder" level in a different conference. I think it is a faulty logic that makes those jumps.
 
(This post was last modified: 12-24-2013 02:05 PM by BearcatJerry.)
12-24-2013 02:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ragpicker Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,962
Joined: May 2005
Reputation: 198
I Root For: Black & Gold
Location:

Donators
Post: #22
RE: Grading realignment winners, losers
(12-24-2013 12:47 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Right now the basketball league is underperforming with Louisville still in the conference.

3 teams in the Top 20, and UC just outside the Top 25 with a 2-0 record against the ACC. Not bad, but actually thought that was the most logical statement you made in your entire post.

When UC dips into that $1 Billion and peels off an extra $20 Million each year for athletics then the rest of your argument holds water. Until then.....Merry Christmas.
 
(This post was last modified: 12-24-2013 04:39 PM by Ragpicker.)
12-24-2013 04:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FenderStratCat Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 798
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 5
I Root For: UC, Hillsdale
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Grading realignment winners, losers
(12-24-2013 02:04 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  
(12-24-2013 12:47 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  
(12-24-2013 12:17 PM)#41 Wrote:  Given the gross cash disparity between the Power 5 and the other D1A programs, there is really no such thing as a bad situation in a Power 5 conference. Combine that with better access to the post-season and every school that made the cut-off for the P5 should be an "A+" grade.

The alternative to the P5 is irrelevance.

I think everyone needs to take a step back and realize that UC has an operating budget over one billion dollars. Power five money makes the athletic department look good but as long as UC has an administration that wants to support athletics and hires good coaches that is the foundation for success. Conference affiliation is only part of the equation.

I would give WVU's move to the Big XII an "F" on just about every level outside of revenue. Football and basketball went from Big East power to Big XII bottom feeder. Geography is a mess in terms of travel and natural rivals. Once again exposure isn't all that because Fox owns part of the deal and also rans aren't selected for the best TV spots either. I would rather win than lose in power conference.

All the teams that made moves to the ACC are at least at "B" level because they secured an ESPN deal with good money that keeps them with their geographic rivals. I can't see their on field success changing too much either way but Syracuse could make a big leap on the football field.

The funny thing about UC in the American was that my biggest concerns months ago was the quality of the football league and our football schedule. Right now the basketball league is underperforming with Louisville still in the conference. Next year SMU and Temple will be better but UC, UConn, and Memphis will lose a boatload of players. I still like the direction our basketball program is headed but the non-conference schedule will need to improve. The good news about football is that UCF, ECU, and Houston are all solid. Plus UConn and USF should get better. Watching Fresno State and Boise State fall back to the pack helps our access bowl chances next season.

The only thing I would say is that WVU didn't go from being atop a conference to "bottom feeder" by moving to the B12. I live in Morgantown, I went to five WVU home games this season and saw the FB team perform with my own eyes. IF THE BE HAD STAYED TOGETHER, THIS WVU TEAM WOULD HAVE FINISHED IN THE SAME PLACE AS THEY DID IN THE BIG XII.

Even in the AAC, this WVU team would be only JUST bowl eligible. And I mean that. Even in the AAC, this particular WVU team would not be competitive with UL, UCF, and UC. They might compete with Houston, SMU, and Rutgers, but given ***how*** WVU lost the games they lost this season, I'd pick them to lose 2-out-of-3 against that group.

My point is that people say that WVU went down...BECAUSE of their conference move. I disagree! WVU went down because of their coaching staff and their lack of depth. They would have struggled in whatever conference they were in, and they will likely continue to struggle.

On the other hand, UC would finish...with this current team...somewhere NEAR the top of the B12. We might not have won it, but we'd be in the top 3-4...with THIS team and against THIS year's B12 performance. Baylor, OK State, and Oklahoma (though OU didn't look overly impressive) are at a different level than us...right now. But K-State, TCU, Texas Tech, and Iowa State are all teams we could not only compete but beat...EVERY ONE OF THEM. And we are clearly in a superior place to Kansas.

As for WVU basketball... Well, last year was a down year. This year's team is looking much, much tougher. Close losses to Gonzaga, Missou, and Purdue bode well for WVU in the B12, this year. I think if they continue to improve, WVU will finish in the middle of the pack for the B12. But again, UC could compete...though it's unclear exactly where we would fall in. But THIS UC team is roughly equivalent with this WVU team, IMO... Different weaknesses, but similar in overall quality.

But my point is again...UC would not instantly sink to "Bottom feeder" level in a different conference. I think it is a faulty logic that makes those jumps.

I get your quote about coaching: been over to the scout board for WVU and they have ripped Dana H. a new arse over there and I can't blame them. As far as "instantly sink", there of course are adjustments and no one can exactly predict how UC would fare in another conference in the first two years. I know I would like to see how we would react to that challenge and the fanbase would be electric. 04-cheers
 
12-24-2013 05:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearcats#1 Offline
Ad nauseam King
*

Posts: 45,310
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 1224
I Root For: Pony94
Location: In your head.
Post: #24
RE: Grading realignment winners, losers
(12-24-2013 12:47 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  
(12-24-2013 12:17 PM)#41 Wrote:  Given the gross cash disparity between the Power 5 and the other D1A programs, there is really no such thing as a bad situation in a Power 5 conference. Combine that with better access to the post-season and every school that made the cut-off for the P5 should be an "A+" grade.

The alternative to the P5 is irrelevance.

I think everyone needs to take a step back and realize that UC has an operating budget over one billion dollars. Power five money makes the athletic department look good but as long as UC has an administration that wants to support athletics and hires good coaches that is the foundation for success. Conference affiliation is only part of the equation.

I would give WVU's move to the Big XII an "F" on just about every level outside of revenue. Football and basketball went from Big East power to Big XII bottom feeder. Geography is a mess in terms of travel and natural rivals. Once again exposure isn't all that because Fox owns part of the deal and also rans aren't selected for the best TV spots either. I would rather win than lose in power conference.

All the teams that made moves to the ACC are at least at "B" level because they secured an ESPN deal with good money that keeps them with their geographic rivals. I can't see their on field success changing too much either way but Syracuse could make a big leap on the football field.

The funny thing about UC in the American was that my biggest concerns months ago was the quality of the football league and our football schedule. Right now the basketball league is underperforming with Louisville still in the conference. Next year SMU and Temple will be better but UC, UConn, and Memphis will lose a boatload of players. I still like the direction our basketball program is headed but the non-conference schedule will need to improve. The good news about football is that UCF, ECU, and Houston are all solid. Plus UConn and USF should get better. Watching Fresno State and Boise State fall back to the pack helps our access bowl chances next season.

WVA fans would disagree with you.

Bet if you allowed WVA fans to vote and their options were:

a: stay in the AAC (but remain as flagship type program)
b: go to the B12 and be fodder

the "b" button would get clicked 100 to 1 every time.


First of all WVA escaped from the G5, aka conferences that the nation doesn't care about. Let's put it this way, after this year the ESPN blog page will only feature P5 conferences, after this year the ESPN college football preview will only feature P5 conferences etc etc etc. P5 schools get 20million apiece, we get 2 million a piece, do the math. Extrapolate that out over the next 15 years and let's see what P5 athletic departments look (and programs) vs G5 athletic departments/programs. It won't even be close.

Also, just because WVA is bad now doesn't mean they will be bad three or four years from now. UC sucked in the Big East our first few years too but we finally got it together. WVA will have a chance to do that, and probably will because they have a rabid fan base and they expect a winner.

Anybody who is happy to be in the AAC or doesn't see UC in a horrible situation is either blind or just "doesn't get it".

It would be better to be a middling P5 program, say 8-4 or 7-5 than to be 10-2/11-1 in the G5 every year. The P5 schools, even at 6-6, or 5-7 etc will make more money than the 10-2/11-1 G5 schools. You also have better bowl tie in's in the P5, i.e. a 7-5 P5 schools goes to better bowls by in large than ANY G5 team. ANY WAY you slice it being in the P5 DWARFS being in the G5 at any level.
 
(This post was last modified: 12-24-2013 07:24 PM by Bearcats#1.)
12-24-2013 07:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.