So I emalied him this,


Tom, I was surprised to read this in your UC article,

ANNAPOLIS, Md. – ANNAPOLIS, Maryland – If the University of Cincinnati wants to get into a Power Five conference, the Bearcats certainly have not enhanced their image with their recent bowl performances.

The Bowl game has no impact on getting invited to the Big 12 (or ACC longshot). It is about expanding a footprint,
drawing in more TV viewers, having 12 teams so the Big 12 can have a conference championship game, more content for
Fox Sports/ESPN in the Big 12. The Big 12 draws the least amount of TV viewers than the other P5 conferences.
UC football is a consistent winner in football and basketball, and is located in an area with a strong population (see
Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten, that was about population and TV not about strong programs).

Then it about university academic rankings, 1.2 Billion endowment, Facilities like Sheakley practice facility and a
renovated Nippert, etc. UC has a very strong resume. Winning or losing the Military bowl is not even on the totem pole.
The following is what University Presidents care about in conference realignment,

First - do they have the academic cache to get approved by Big 12 presidents...these numbers are taken from my other thread (showing UL just to give a sense of comparison):

ENDOWMENTS
3. Texas - $20,448,313
62. Oklahoma - $1,324,313
63. Kansas - $1,288,995
67. TCU - $1,256,030
75. Baylor - $1,061,157
80. Cincinnati - $1,045,606
86. Texas Tech - $963,585
99. Oklahoma State - $817,625
100. Louisville - $788,529
121. Iowa State - $673,515
165. West Virginia - $460,640
195. Kansas State - $364,675

UC is a well-funded school as this shows (and their endowment has been taking a healthy upward growth). They would sit about middle of the pack in the Big 12.

RESEARCH EXPENDITURE
2. Texas - $2,679,164
38. Baylor - $466,061
42. Cincinnati - $448,936
71. Kansas - $302,668
76. Iowa State - $267,641
98. Texas Tech - $208,173
103. Louisville - $197,438
105. Oklahoma - $189,506
114. Kansas State - $169,167
116. West Virginia - $166,420
119. Oklahoma State - $162,786

UC is a great research school and they spend loads of money on it. Their #42 national rank would be well into the upper echelon of the Big 12 rankings and also ranks very high amongst public institutions. This of course includes a highly competitive medical school.

US&WR RANKING
53. Texas
71. Baylor
76. TCU
106. Kansas
106. Oklahoma
106. Iowa State
129. Cincinnati
142. Kansas State
145. Oklahoma State
156. Texas Tech
161. Louisville
168. West Virginia

Again - grain of salt must be taken with these "rankings" because they are fairly meaningless but just for reputation's sake among potential undergrads...UC isn't great but its no better or worse really than the majority of Big 12 schools - where only UT, Baylor and TCU really stand out.

ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT REVENUE
1. Texas - $165,691,486
7. Oklahoma - $123,805,661
18. Louisville - $96,193,330
22. Oklahoma State - $93,664,337
23. Kansas - $93,114,168
33. West Virginia - $77,706,698
37. Texas Tech - $72,917,990
39. Kansas State - $70,457,283
50. Iowa State - $62,357,761
51. Cincinnati - $61,915,431

Superfly how dare you present things like, facts. Come on man.

Good Work! We need to strangle crap like this in the crib.

Game results have very little impact on conference realignment. As long as Bearcat football continues to have solid seasons until the next wave of expansion they will be fine. I wouldn't want UC to fall off the map like UConn or USF did in football because that would hurt the cause. Big XII is probably more interested in the final number of tickets sold or the TV rating for the game than the final result.

His head must be spinning, seeing more than one fact in an article, something Enquirer reporters are not used to seeing.

It's funny to look at the revenues list and realize that we're getting roughly $26M less than anyone on that one this year. We'd automatically jump to #6 in the Big 12. That's why I never understand the AD Revenue argument.

Your either missing a c or an h in the spelling of his name.

Obviously I'd have preferred winning but even a dominating win wouldn't have had more than a miniscule impact, if that, on expansion. In fact you could make the case that losing to a good P5 team actually might even work as a tiny positive to our chances with some B12 programs. The league is tough enough as is - the last thing some of these programs want is to add a program that they probably can't beat (although money trumps all of course). Better to add somebody they reasonably believe they can compete with yet not so weak that it might hurt league credibility.

In Tom's defense, all he said was that UC "have not ENHANCED their image with their recent bowl performances." I have no problem with that statement. It's always better to win than to get blown out twice. Then you can say "look we have all these great things going for us (research, endowments, TV footprint) PLUS we kick butt on the field."

I'd say winning enhances your image.

SuperFlyBCat, I'm in complete agreement. It was a real downer to open the paper this morning and read that story. I commend you for emailing Tom. I've done the same in the past with other writers when I took exception to the point of view or facts presented.

I would agree there is zero correlation between that bowl loss and any decision the B12 will make (or has already made) on inviting UC. So I think by leading with that he's shown his ignorance of the P5 expansion criteria/process or just wanted to pour gasoline on a fan base already inflamed by a disappointing loss. If he had evidence from sources within the University or the B12 that UC had jeopardized their chances to join a P5 he could and should have reported it that way. Disappointing as that news might have been at least it would be substantiated by someone who is in a position to know.

Of course why should we expect differently from a paper that on game day for the Military Bowl featured women in wrestling on the front page of the sports section? Sadly, they are just clueless and I've decided to vote with my dollars. I'm only one person, but I've dropped back to three days a week for the print edition and I'm about to go Sunday only. At least the coupons add value. Don't even get me started on the USA Today pablum they now use to fill space.

Would love to see UC get in the B12...then tell 700 WLW to shove it up their arse and sign on with another radio station; one in which we PRE ARRANGE things like UC sports talk, etc. That would be amazing.

(12-28-2014 07:11 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Would love to see UC get in the B12...then tell 700 WLW to shove it up their arse and sign on with another radio station; one in which we PRE ARRANGE things like UC sports talk, etc. That would be amazing.

First sentence in the enquirer would be "UC will struggle to compete blah blah blah"

Has something changed with the 700 broadcast characteristics recently? I listen to mostly satellite radio anymore, but I used to be able to switch over to 700 when I wanted to hear a game. Now if I do that in my car, I hear I hear a high pitch whistle that almost drones out whatever they are broadcasting.