The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(11-17-2018 03:04 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Bearcats need to win out, pass ucf in the playoff rankings this Tuesday and hope ucf beats usf

Which isn't unlikely. If we beat them we'll have a similar record while owning the head to head. The committee has shown no fear of moving teams around in contrast to the AP and Coaches poll. You'd have to think they would reward our road win with a higher ranking. Even if it's just 19 and they're 20.

So if I am understanding correctly, ABC got good ratings for our G5 game and paid very little for it.
Hmmm....

(11-19-2018 08:28 AM)ucbandguy Wrote:  So if I am understanding correctly, ABC got good ratings for our G5 game and paid very little for it.
Hmmm....

8th out of 11 primetime game ratings this season in that timeslot.

(11-19-2018 08:47 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:28 AM)ucbandguy Wrote:  So if I am understanding correctly, ABC got good ratings for our G5 game and paid very little for it.
Hmmm....

8th out of 11 primetime game ratings this season in that timeslot.

nice. Thanks for positioning it like that. The frame of reference gives me more than shares, and etc. So, yeah...we did well enough, but it's not like it was really THAT much of groundbreaking game. which is not to say it wasn't a job well done by us. It proves that there is interest.

I wonder which games scored less...?





mc

(11-19-2018 08:47 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:28 AM)ucbandguy Wrote:  So if I am understanding correctly, ABC got good ratings for our G5 game and paid very little for it.
Hmmm....

8th out of 11 primetime game ratings this season in that timeslot.

I think data showed it mostly a middle of the pack type of game. The conference deserves more money. I hope that NBC or Turner get involved as the American can get solid rating. At 6 million to 9 million per school it would still be a huge bargain.
n

(11-19-2018 09:39 AM)marcuscan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:47 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:28 AM)ucbandguy Wrote:  So if I am understanding correctly, ABC got good ratings for our G5 game and paid very little for it.
Hmmm....

8th out of 11 primetime game ratings this season in that timeslot.

nice. Thanks for positioning it like that. The frame of reference gives me more than shares, and etc. So, yeah...we did well enough, but it's not like it was really THAT much of groundbreaking game. which is not to say it wasn't a job well done by us. It proves that there is interest.

I wonder which games scored less...?

BC-Clemson
Oklahoma-Texas Tech
and I'm blanking on the third...

I will say this about "shares" though. We had a 10.1 share in Cincinnati, which is higher than any Ohio State game has gotten in the Cincinnati market in 4 years.

(11-19-2018 09:43 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 09:39 AM)marcuscan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:47 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:28 AM)ucbandguy Wrote:  So if I am understanding correctly, ABC got good ratings for our G5 game and paid very little for it.
Hmmm....

8th out of 11 primetime game ratings this season in that timeslot.

nice. Thanks for positioning it like that. The frame of reference gives me more than shares, and etc. So, yeah...we did well enough, but it's not like it was really THAT much of groundbreaking game. which is not to say it wasn't a job well done by us. It proves that there is interest.

I wonder which games scored less...?

BC-Clemson
Oklahoma-Texas Tech
and I'm blanking on the third...

I will say this about "shares" though. We had a 10.1 share in Cincinnati, which is higher than any Ohio State game has gotten in the Cincinnati market in 4 years.

And that's a sea change that's been a long time coming. Some of us were around to remember the student section nearly empty at Nippert because they were back in the dorms watching OSU or ND any given Saturday.

Fickell has brought us out of the recent slumber under Tubs; the tide is rising once again.

I'm drawing different, but equally positive, conclusions about our TV ratings. The fact that we had solid ratings for that primetime slot doesn't scream out to me that the AAC deserves more money... it screams out that UC (and UCF) can pull its weight in the P5 by drawing in the TV eyeballs nationally. That is a very good thing to demonstrate!

It also shows that UC, by outdrawing any OSU ratings in the Cincinnati market over a number of years, owns our own market. These results are very encouraging, and will make a great resource when the next inevitable round of realignment comes.

(11-19-2018 10:53 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  I'm drawing different, but equally positive, conclusions about our TV ratings. The fact that we had solid ratings for that primetime slot doesn't scream out to me that the AAC deserves more money... it screams out that UC (and UCF) can pull its weight in the P5 by drawing in the TV eyeballs nationally. That is a very good thing to demonstrate!

It also shows that UC, by outdrawing any OSU ratings in the Cincinnati market over a number of years, owns our own market. These results are very encouraging, and will make a great resource when the next inevitable round of realignment comes.

Your points are excellent. The top of the AAC is far more P6 ready than the bottom and it's good for UC to be back in that top tier in football; consistently there in basketball and playing both in shiny new facilities.

When the AAC gets cherry picked by a P5 (and I have no doubt that will happen, date tbd) it behooves UC to have high visibility in both major revenue sports to go along with an excellent institutional profile and major TV market.

(11-19-2018 10:53 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  I'm drawing different, but equally positive, conclusions about our TV ratings. The fact that we had solid ratings for that primetime slot doesn't scream out to me that the AAC deserves more money... it screams out that UC (and UCF) can pull its weight in the P5 by drawing in the TV eyeballs nationally. That is a very good thing to demonstrate!

It also shows that UC, by outdrawing any OSU ratings in the Cincinnati market over a number of years, owns our own market. These results are very encouraging, and will make a great resource when the next inevitable round of realignment comes.

While I do agree, it does need to be noted that this is the BEST performance for the local University. Most weekends this is not the case...so we still have a lot of work to do.

Really wish the American didn’t over expand.

Wouldn’t a ten team league without Tulsa or Tulane be worth more. That gives the conference annual games they don’t have every year in current structure. I tend to think more UCF, Uc games against Memphis and Houston are worth more than any Tulane or Tulsa game. Navy would get UConn, ECU, and Temple every year.

(11-19-2018 11:22 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  Really wish the American didn’t over expand.

Wouldn’t a ten team league without Tulsa or Tulane be worth more. That gives the conference annual games they don’t have every year in current structure. I tend to think more UCF, Uc games against Memphis and Houston are worth more than any Tulane or Tulsa game. Navy would get UConn, ECU, and Temple every year.

I agree, and think that if we really wanted to maximize our TV revenue, it would be best (theoretically) to trim the fat. 3-4 AAC programs will likely never draw decent ratings, due to tiny market size and/or athletic irrelevance.

(11-19-2018 11:11 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 10:53 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  I'm drawing different, but equally positive, conclusions about our TV ratings. The fact that we had solid ratings for that primetime slot doesn't scream out to me that the AAC deserves more money... it screams out that UC (and UCF) can pull its weight in the P5 by drawing in the TV eyeballs nationally. That is a very good thing to demonstrate!

It also shows that UC, by outdrawing any OSU ratings in the Cincinnati market over a number of years, owns our own market. These results are very encouraging, and will make a great resource when the next inevitable round of realignment comes.

Your points are excellent. The top of the AAC is far more P6 ready than the bottom and it's good for UC to be back in that top tier in football; consistently there in basketball and playing both in shiny new facilities.

When the AAC gets cherry picked by a P5 (and I have no doubt that will happen, date tbd) it behooves UC to have high visibility in both major revenue sports to go along with an excellent institutional profile and major TV market.

It doesn't help that prior to this weekend, they've basically done everything in their power to marginalize UC and UCF by under ranking UCF and UC. Imagine if UCF was ranked 5 and UC was ranked 16-18th instead of 25th. It would have likely drawn higher numbers. Hell in the ESPN preview for this weekend, Herbstreit goes "it is disappointing there aren't better games this weekend with it being late in the year. Oh well, Cincy and UCF are playing. I guess you can watch that if you don't have anything better to do this saturday night."

(11-19-2018 12:54 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 11:22 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  Really wish the American didn’t over expand.

Wouldn’t a ten team league without Tulsa or Tulane be worth more. That gives the conference annual games they don’t have every year in current structure. I tend to think more UCF, Uc games against Memphis and Houston are worth more than any Tulane or Tulsa game. Navy would get UConn, ECU, and Temple every year.

I agree, and think that if we really wanted to maximize our TV revenue, it would be best (theoretically) to trim the fat. 3-4 AAC programs will likely never draw decent ratings, due to tiny market size and/or athletic irrelevance.

A couple years ago the Sun Belt dropped New Mexico State and Idaho and reduced down to 10. It's going to depend on the language in the conference charter as to whether the schools could do this without having to pay the departing schools any sort of exit fee. The fees due to the schools could be tens of millions of dollars. Not sure if the AAC has that kind of money hanging around.

The other issue is whether there is agreement in who the deadweight is? IMHO the deadweight is either Tulsa, Tulane or ECU. Crazy as it sounds though there are people who still maintain Tulane is on the short-list for the Big 12 because of their academic clout, recruiting grounds and media market. Supposedly they were considered back in 2012 and again a couple years ago.

(11-19-2018 10:53 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  I'm drawing different, but equally positive, conclusions about our TV ratings. The fact that we had solid ratings for that primetime slot doesn't scream out to me that the AAC deserves more money... it screams out that UC (and UCF) can pull its weight in the P5 by drawing in the TV eyeballs nationally. That is a very good thing to demonstrate!

It also shows that UC, by outdrawing any OSU ratings in the Cincinnati market over a number of years, owns our own market. These results are very encouraging, and will make a great resource when the next inevitable round of realignment comes.

I agree with this sentiment.

I said it elsewhere already, but it's ironic that USF came from the Big East with us and had the gall to look down on UCF. Even going as far as cutting off their rivalry game. Now USF is listless - and likely will stay that way. There's seemingly no real interest in Tampa. Meanwhile, UCF is #thehottestcollegeinamerica. Lol. But for real, they've enhanced their hoops team, and of course the football team is humming along. They're now the standard bearer in the conference, and we're a name brand as well. It behooves us both to continue to stand apart from the rest of the AAC pack.

The truth is that even programs like Houston and Memphis seem to have a hard time consistently pulling in crowds for football. It looks like it's just us, and UCF right now...and likely for the foreseeable future (which is always hard to judge for programs like ours where coach turnover isn't an 'if' but 'when thing.) If we can continue to stand apart the choice becomes increasingly clear for any conference looking to cherry pick.

btw, i don't think we're leaving the AAC anytime soon.





mc

(11-19-2018 01:48 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:54 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 11:22 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  Really wish the American didn’t over expand.

Wouldn’t a ten team league without Tulsa or Tulane be worth more. That gives the conference annual games they don’t have every year in current structure. I tend to think more UCF, Uc games against Memphis and Houston are worth more than any Tulane or Tulsa game. Navy would get UConn, ECU, and Temple every year.

I agree, and think that if we really wanted to maximize our TV revenue, it would be best (theoretically) to trim the fat. 3-4 AAC programs will likely never draw decent ratings, due to tiny market size and/or athletic irrelevance.

A couple years ago the Sun Belt dropped New Mexico State and Idaho and reduced down to 10. It's going to depend on the language in the conference charter as to whether the schools could do this without having to pay the departing schools any sort of exit fee. The fees due to the schools could be tens of millions of dollars. Not sure if the AAC has that kind of money hanging around.

The other issue is whether there is agreement in who the deadweight is? IMHO the deadweight is either Tulsa, Tulane or ECU. Crazy as it sounds though there are people who still maintain Tulane is on the short-list for the Big 12 because of their academic clout, recruiting grounds and media market. Supposedly they were considered back in 2012 and again a couple years ago.

I guess it depends on what you want your conference to be. ECU was humming along under Holtz, and still doing well under Ruffin. I think ECU made a mistake firing him. When that program is decent they get an excellent atmosphere in their stadium, but their media market is not "sexy."

Tulsa is a weird outlier, but they are quite strong in Olympic sports, and has an okay basketball program

Tulane has a coveted market, and are the Academic jewel of the conference. Their sports teams have been pretty bad, though the Football team has made some big strides this season. I feel like if they could become a trendy school if they get the right string of coaches in, especially now with their own stadium. They would face a lot of the same challenges that UC does with New Orleans being a Saints town. I like Tulane in the conference due to their potential, but it will take a competent AD, which I am not sure the have.

I don't have an issue with the schools the American added. There weren't good options and I think a 12 team league makes sense. The league is what it is, better and more desirable than the other g5, but behind the P5.

(11-19-2018 02:30 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 10:53 AM)TubaCat Wrote:  I'm drawing different, but equally positive, conclusions about our TV ratings. The fact that we had solid ratings for that primetime slot doesn't scream out to me that the AAC deserves more money... it screams out that UC (and UCF) can pull its weight in the P5 by drawing in the TV eyeballs nationally. That is a very good thing to demonstrate!

It also shows that UC, by outdrawing any OSU ratings in the Cincinnati market over a number of years, owns our own market. These results are very encouraging, and will make a great resource when the next inevitable round of realignment comes.

I agree with this sentiment.

I said it elsewhere already, but it's ironic that USF came from the Big East with us and had the gall to look down on UCF. Even going as far as cutting off their rivalry game. Now USF is listless - and likely will stay that way. There's seemingly no real interest in Tampa. Meanwhile, UCF is #thehottestcollegeinamerica. Lol. But for real, they've enhanced their hoops team, and of course the football team is humming along. They're now the standard bearer in the conference, and we're a name brand as well. It behooves us both to continue to stand apart from the rest of the AAC pack.

The truth is that even programs like Houston and Memphis seem to have a hard time consistently pulling in crowds for football. It looks like it's just us, and UCF right now...and likely for the foreseeable future (which is always hard to judge for programs like ours where coach turnover isn't an 'if' but 'when thing.) If we can continue to stand apart the choice becomes increasingly clear for any conference looking to cherry pick.

btw, i don't think we're leaving the AAC anytime soon.





mc

I also add that UCF has the best volleyball team in the AAC with UC second. UCF is really committed to being the best they can be in every sport.