CSNbbs

Looks like we're still showing Alabama A&M. We have Miami on Oct. 3 - maybe we could flip the games.

If we can't get a big name, I'd just as soon schedule Navy.

Navy will most likely be on the schedule as a conference opponent.

I think mac was shooting for an attractive conference opener, which I agree Navy fits the bill. Though after this year I'm not as optimistic the league will be helpful in that regard.

Really raises another interesting question--does the AAC care to help Cincinnati in a situation such as this? Aresco needs the Cincinnati brand and TV market if he really wants to build a better conference but maybe a lack of effort on the part of the AAC to secure an attractive home opener next year speaks to an expectation that UC is as good as gone in the coming few months...or years.

(10-22-2014 07:28 AM)indycat Wrote: [ -> ]Really raises another interesting question--does the AAC care to help Cincinnati in a situation such as this? Aresco needs the Cincinnati brand and TV market if he really wants to build a better conference but maybe a lack of effort on the part of the AAC to secure an attractive home opener next year speaks to an expectation that UC is as good as gone in the coming few months...or years.

This is just my feeling/opinion...

I think the AAC has marked UC because UC's administration had the nerve to say what everyone else was thinking: It is our priority to move to a different conference. The rest of the conference has taken literal joy in UC's struggles this season and ECU's ascent.

So... no. I don't see the conference coming to UC's aid any time soon. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that the conference makes it as difficult as they can. It is not in the conference's self-interest to see UC do well. The irony is that any of the other schools in this conference would be gone in a heartbeat if the ACC, B12 or any other "power" conference came calling...but the AAC could survive losing an ECU or UCF. UC's departure on the other hand, would be a major blow.

I am not sure that moving the Alabama A&M game is a priority. A couple points to consider, the first game at Nippert is going to draw a big crowd anyway and the coaching staff might want a FCS opponent followed by a bye week. 2015 is already loaded with difficult games so there isn't a need to add one more. Cats have Miami Fl, BYU, ECU, and UCF on the schedule. An improving USF and Temple will share the eastern division of the American with UC as well. I expect UC to land at least one decent cross divisional opponent too. With a championship game added to mix next season, UC will have the opportunity to play a 13th regular season game if they win their division. Unless an amazing opportunity comes along, I don't see any reason to move the FCS game.

(10-22-2014 08:04 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote: [ -> ]I am not sure that moving the Alabama A&M game is a priority. A couple points to consider, the first game at Nippert is going to draw a big crowd anyway and the coaching staff might want a FCS opponent followed by a bye week. 2015 is already loaded with difficult games so there isn't a need to add one more. Cats have Miami Fl, BYU, ECU, and UCF on the schedule. An improving USF and Temple will share the eastern division of the American with UC as well. I expect UC to land at least one decent cross divisional opponent too. With a championship game added to mix next season, UC will have the opportunity to play a 13th regular season game if they win their division. Unless an amazing opportunity comes along, I don't see any reason to move the FCS game.

This! The game is already going to have a good draw so why not guarantee yourself a win to keep those in attendance happy and excited about UC football. The last thing you want is to fill the stadium, many of which will be casual UC football fans, then have UC get beat, thus driving the casual fans back to their couches on Saturday's.

(10-22-2014 08:12 AM)nachoman91 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-22-2014 08:04 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote: [ -> ]I am not sure that moving the Alabama A&M game is a priority. A couple points to consider, the first game at Nippert is going to draw a big crowd anyway and the coaching staff might want a FCS opponent followed by a bye week. 2015 is already loaded with difficult games so there isn't a need to add one more. Cats have Miami Fl, BYU, ECU, and UCF on the schedule. An improving USF and Temple will share the eastern division of the American with UC as well. I expect UC to land at least one decent cross divisional opponent too. With a championship game added to mix next season, UC will have the opportunity to play a 13th regular season game if they win their division. Unless an amazing opportunity comes along, I don't see any reason to move the FCS game.

This! The game is already going to have a good draw so why not guarantee yourself a win to keep those in attendance happy and excited about UC football. The last thing you want is to fill the stadium, many of which will be casual UC football fans, then have UC get beat, thus driving the casual fans back to their couches on Saturday's.

I agree with the above points. The only thing is a bigger name in here would get more national attention . UC vs Alabama A&M may get buried on CBSSN as opposed to a Thursday or Friday night ESPN game with a more formidable opponent...but in the end is that worth it?

Yeah, the stadium is the star of the game. That's all we need. A blowout win will make it even better.

(10-22-2014 08:12 AM)nachoman91 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-22-2014 08:04 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote: [ -> ]I am not sure that moving the Alabama A&M game is a priority. A couple points to consider, the first game at Nippert is going to draw a big crowd anyway and the coaching staff might want a FCS opponent followed by a bye week. 2015 is already loaded with difficult games so there isn't a need to add one more. Cats have Miami Fl, BYU, ECU, and UCF on the schedule. An improving USF and Temple will share the eastern division of the American with UC as well. I expect UC to land at least one decent cross divisional opponent too. With a championship game added to mix next season, UC will have the opportunity to play a 13th regular season game if they win their division. Unless an amazing opportunity comes along, I don't see any reason to move the FCS game.

This! The game is already going to have a good draw so why not guarantee yourself a win to keep those in attendance happy and excited about UC football. The last thing you want is to fill the stadium, many of which will be casual UC football fans, then have UC get beat, thus driving the casual fans back to their couches on Saturday's.

Why do you think the many of the fans in attendance will be "casual" fans. Are the season ticket holders not attending? Are the students not attending? We are not adding that many seats and my guess is that there will be a strong push to bring in new season ticket holders to fill the excellent seats left by the people that will be movin on up to the club seats.

Just because we are playing in a renovated stadium is not going to bring in fans that don't normally come. And AL ST. certainly won't bring in a new crop of fans.

Why not Miami(OH)?

Isn't that the oldest non-conference rivalry or something like that?

I'd like to see some sort of historically significant game. I'm reading that the first game on that site was against Ohio University in 1901.

What about scheduling them?

What about wearing throwback uniforms? Maybe not leather helmets, but you know... :)

(10-22-2014 11:29 AM)AeroCat Wrote: [ -> ]Why not Miami(OH)?

Ok, I want holyfield...err... Miami(OH) in throwback uniforms. More history there than Ohio Bobcats.

Quote:The Bearcats and RedHawks (formerly the Redskins) square off each fall for the famed Victory Bell. The first game in the series, played on December 8, 1888 in Oxford, Ohio, was the first college football game played in the state of Ohio. The original bell hung in Miami's Harrison Hall (Old Main) near the site of the first game and was used to ring in Miami victories. The traveling trophy tradition began in the 1890s when some Cincinnati fans "borrowed" the bell. The bell went to the winner of the annual game for the next forty years until it mysteriously disappeared in the 1930s. The original bell reappeared in 1946 and is on display in the lobby of Miami's Murstein Alumni Center. The current trophy is a replica of the original bell and is kept in the possession of the winning team each year. One side of the bell is painted red and black and shows Cincinnati's victories, while the other side is red and white and shows Miami's victories.

The Miami–Cincinnati series ranks fifth on the list of most-played rivalries in college football and is the oldest Division I rivalry west of the Allegheny Mountains. After the 2010–12 NCAA conference realignment led to the end of several historic rivalries, it is now the most-played currently active rivalry involving schools from the same state, and also holds the same distinction among inter-conference rivalries. Of the more than thirty college football rivalries that include at least 89 games, none is older than Miami vs. Cincinnati.

(10-22-2014 09:50 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-22-2014 08:12 AM)nachoman91 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-22-2014 08:04 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote: [ -> ]I am not sure that moving the Alabama A&M game is a priority. A couple points to consider, the first game at Nippert is going to draw a big crowd anyway and the coaching staff might want a FCS opponent followed by a bye week. 2015 is already loaded with difficult games so there isn't a need to add one more. Cats have Miami Fl, BYU, ECU, and UCF on the schedule. An improving USF and Temple will share the eastern division of the American with UC as well. I expect UC to land at least one decent cross divisional opponent too. With a championship game added to mix next season, UC will have the opportunity to play a 13th regular season game if they win their division. Unless an amazing opportunity comes along, I don't see any reason to move the FCS game.

This! The game is already going to have a good draw so why not guarantee yourself a win to keep those in attendance happy and excited about UC football. The last thing you want is to fill the stadium, many of which will be casual UC football fans, then have UC get beat, thus driving the casual fans back to their couches on Saturday's.

Why do you think the many of the fans in attendance will be "casual" fans. Are the season ticket holders not attending? Are the students not attending? We are not adding that many seats and my guess is that there will be a strong push to bring in new season ticket holders to fill the excellent seats left by the people that will be movin on up to the club seats.

Just because we are playing in a renovated stadium is not going to bring in fans that don't normally come. And AL ST. certainly won't bring in a new crop of fans.

Prob thinks more casual fans show b/c it's an event. Cincy fans tend to show if the game is considered an "event." I agree with your point on a push for more season ticket holders. I think they will try to sell more packages to fill seats, where those previously move to club seats.

(10-22-2014 11:29 AM)AeroCat Wrote: [ -> ]Why not Miami(OH)?

UC is playing there.

OU is booked 2015

Navy would be a good booking. First game at Nippert, first AAC game for Navy. I doubt it will happen because the AAC hates us because we hate the AAC.

Navy starts 2015 at home vs. Colgate. I'm sure the American is probably willing to adjust any game, but it's a bit harder than it can first seem.
a) You've only got 4 home conference games to start with. If they've already decided which teams happen to be playing home and away (just not the specific schedule) it's got to be with one of those 4 teams you play to start the year (since this is the first year of divisions, maybe they have a bit more schedule flexibility; going forward that will be gone as a continuous rotation will be in place)
b) You need to find one of those teams that doesn't have a game scheduled week 1 (or is willing to buy out a game and get open) and who wants to start with a conference game on the road. I think this is the tricky part this late in the game.

(10-22-2014 06:01 PM)dossbig Wrote: [ -> ]Navy would be a good booking. First game at Nippert, first AAC game for Navy. I doubt it will happen because the AAC hates us because we hate the AAC.

I think Tulane is the only AAC with an open date on 9/5 as of now. I'd stick with Alabama A&M at this point. The stadium will sell out regardless of who we open with.

(10-23-2014 10:04 AM)RedRocker Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-22-2014 06:01 PM)dossbig Wrote: [ -> ]Navy would be a good booking. First game at Nippert, first AAC game for Navy. I doubt it will happen because the AAC hates us because we hate the AAC.

I think Tulane is the only AAC with an open date on 9/5 as of now. I'd stick with Alabama A&M at this point. The stadium will sell out regardless of who we open with.

And we win big. Just bill it as UC vs. ALABAMA a&m

Going along with the historical uniform/rivalry suggestion... Have you seen the 1939 throwbacks by Adidas for Texas A&M?

Link