I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

People also see Cincinnati as a school with a old small football stadium and lack of fan sport. Sorry Bearcats but it is true and you do not own your own TV market, Ohio State and Notre Dame do.

UC is just as good a "cultural fit" for the ACC as Pittsburgh. And they're definitely more of one than Louisville!

I live in Kentucky and I appreciate what this state offers ...... but seriously, the "Atlantic Coast" Conference just added a school with a rather poor academic profile from Kentucky!

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

I would agree that I don't see UC added to the ACC anytime soon, but I strongly disagree with your reasoning for it.

UC does not really fit in culturally with the Big XII at all. They actually make a lot of sense in the ACC from a culture standpoint. Not tobacco road at all granted, but with many of the others. The schools I can think of that they are most like out of any league is Louisville and Pitt (and share some similarities to Memphis and Georgia Tech). Obviously those aren't perfect comparisons, and have some differences but I've looked up info on the schools and it is my opinion that they are pretty similar when you are talking about cultures of the school.

UC will unlikely end up in the ACC, but it will have nothing at all to do with cultural fit.

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Can you explain how Notre Dame and Louisville, no offense meant towards those schools, are better cultural fits than UC?

Louisville is in Kentucky, which is a tobacco growing state that shares more in common with the culture of North Carolina than folks realize. As for UofL academics, it's easy to see just how quickly that're moving forward...

(09-06-2013 01:28 PM)Flying Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Can you explain how Notre Dame and Louisville, no offense meant towards those schools, are better cultural fits than UC?

I would have to question the cultural reference also.

I honestly don't know the reasons one school gets picked over another.

I suppose there is some rhyme or reason... TV Networks, athletic budget, AAU, Research.

I guess the rather odd thing about the ACC latest choice, in my mind, would be the high regard the conference (ACC) seems to hold and tout in academics. Given UC more than doubles the latest ACC choice in Research, $411M to $190M (go ahead and add that athletic budget for UL onto that $190M), it seems a shift away from any kind of culture and more to a pure athletic driven decision.

In any event, there is no crying in realignment. I don't think the ACC has any incentive to expand unless the other conferences go to 16... we'll have to wait for the Jan P5 meetings to get some kind of direction. We may not be going anywhere...

If you're defining the culture of a school as research, fan base and how they compete.. then sure it has an influence. If you're playing on regional culture then it has little influence.

Regional culture has little to nothing to do with realignment IMO. Miami, BC, Tobacco road? In all honesty 95% of the kids at the tobacco road schools have probably never stepped foot on a farm other than a possible field trip in grade school.

(09-06-2013 01:22 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  UC is just as good a "cultural fit" for the ACC as Pittsburgh. And they're definitely more of one than Louisville!

I live in Kentucky and I appreciate what this state offers ...... but seriously, the "Atlantic Coast" Conference just added a school with a rather poor academic profile from Kentucky!

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Louisville and the state of Kentucky were settled by proud Virginians! They are much more of a cultural fit than anyone from Ohio! Or Pennsylvania!

You don't have any clue what you are talking about!

#1 rule for a potential applicant...do you fill a strong need for the conference you want to be a part of?

For UC, the answer is no for everyone but the Big 12 which desperately needs bigger markets and exposure outside Texas and the corn states

(09-06-2013 01:20 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  People also see Cincinnati as a school with a old small football stadium and lack of fan sport. Sorry Bearcats but it is true and you do not own your own TV market, Ohio State and Notre Dame do.

I would also strongly disagree with this. Neither Ohio State nor Notre Dame come close to controlling the Cincinnati TV Market. If you are talking about Ohio, that is a different story, but no study has ever been done that would suggest those two are remotely close to owning the Metro Cincy TV market.

(09-06-2013 01:51 PM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:22 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  UC is just as good a "cultural fit" for the ACC as Pittsburgh. And they're definitely more of one than Louisville!

I live in Kentucky and I appreciate what this state offers ...... but seriously, the "Atlantic Coast" Conference just added a school with a rather poor academic profile from Kentucky!

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Louisville and the state of Kentucky were settled by proud Virginians! They are much more of a cultural fit than anyone from Ohio! Or Pennsylvania!

You don't have any clue what you are talking about!

Culturally, Cincinnati has very little in common with most of Ohio...

UC would fit fine in the ACC, the issue as 10thMountain pointed out is that there is no need to fill. They aren't going to extend an invite out of charity.

UC would thrive in the ACC and fit very well, but the ACC doesn't need UC. Simple as that. The day that the ACC needs something, UC may very well be able to fill that. But until then, not gonna happen.

(09-06-2013 01:51 PM)Crimsonelf Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:22 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  UC is just as good a "cultural fit" for the ACC as Pittsburgh. And they're definitely more of one than Louisville!

I live in Kentucky and I appreciate what this state offers ...... but seriously, the "Atlantic Coast" Conference just added a school with a rather poor academic profile from Kentucky!

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Louisville and the state of Kentucky were settled by proud Virginians! They are much more of a cultural fit than anyone from Ohio! Or Pennsylvania!

You don't have any clue what you are talking about!

I know that, I know the history of my now home-state!

A true cultural fit would have been if the ACC invited the University of Kentucky. I'm sorry, but outside of Jefferson, Oldham and Bullitt Counties, Commonwealth residents simply don't pay attention to the Cardinals.

The next University of Louisville flag I see waving in my Northern Kentucky hometown will be the first. (insert comment here about how "Northern Kentucky isn't really part of Kentucky")

Since Tennessee was settled by North Carolinians --- I suppose that the ACC should invite the University of Memphis!

(09-06-2013 01:53 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  #1 rule for a potential applicant...do you fill a strong need for the conference you want to be a part of?

For UC, the answer is no for everyone but the Big 12 which desperately needs bigger markets and exposure outside Texas and the corn states

I would argue that "being good at sports" is a need for a few of them. :ducks:

Kidding around though, I think your take is correct and why the B12 is our best bet.

(09-06-2013 01:55 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:20 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  People also see Cincinnati as a school with a old small football stadium and lack of fan sport. Sorry Bearcats but it is true and you do not own your own TV market, Ohio State and Notre Dame do.

I would also strongly disagree with this. Neither Ohio State nor Notre Dame come close to controlling the Cincinnati TV Market. If you are talking about Ohio, that is a different story, but no study has ever been done that would suggest those two are remotely close to owning the Metro Cincy TV market.

From the latest poll taken by ESPN1530 (Cincinnati sports radio station):

Lance McAlister ‏@LanceMcAlister 3 Sep Blog update: Favorite college football team...48% #Bearcats, 24% OSU, 7% UK, 6% ND http://tinyurl.com/espnlance

As stxrunner points out OSU and ND do not control the market here. The biggest hurdle UC faces is from professional sports. The Reds and Bengals get covered ad nauseum. There are passionate baseball fans here. However, there is a nice sized niche for UC as well

just like in Pittsburgh, Miami, Atlanta (Georgia Tech) and many other cities with professional sports teams.

(09-05-2013 04:08 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 02:21 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  I think I see the issue with the whole Cinci ranking and recognition thing... Since 2010 they've only played one ranked team, and lost to that team. And since the turn of the century, they've played 22 ranked teams and only beat 4 of them. #15, #25, #23, and #12.

I didn't do a full lookup, but this doesn't seem right. I went back and checked the schedules for the BK era since that was obviously the highs of the program.

2009: Beat #24 Oregon St, #21 USF, #25 WVU, #15 Pitt
2008: Beat #23 USF, #19 WVU, #20 Pitt
2007: Beat #21 Oregon St
2006: Beat #3 Rutgers (This was Dantonio I believe)

I believe there were 1 or 2 in the years before that, but I don't know that for sure.

Not any heavyweights obviously, so I'm not going to sit here and tell you they are a Top 15 team. But they are always disrespected in the preseason poll which just makes the hill that much harder to climb from the start. We schedule Illinois for a home and home after they go to the Rose Bowl, and they tank. Schedule Va Tech at a neutral site, and they have a bad season. We have OSU 2 of the next 3 years.

You can't blame us for our conference schedule, we would have no problem changing that.

Sorry, I didn't mention that what I posted were final AP rankings after post season... I know it sucks all the way around bro, but like you said, the schedule hasn't helped you out one bit...

(09-06-2013 01:22 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  UC is just as good a "cultural fit" for the ACC as Pittsburgh. And they're definitely more of one than Louisville!

I live in Kentucky and I appreciate what this state offers ...... but seriously, the "Atlantic Coast" Conference just added a school with a rather poor academic profile from Kentucky!

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Very quickly off the top of my head,

1. First: Pitt has a long and storied relationship with ND, SU, and BC, and shared the BIG EAST with Miami, VT, and UL.

Admittedly UL is closer to UC than Pitt, but the others aren't.

And yes, I realize that FSU, VT, and GT were in the Metro Conference with UC, but they haven't shared a conference in about 40 years. The people who went to any of those schools while they were in the same conference are now over 60 years old and either retired or pushing retirement.

It's also worth noting that Pitt and GT are VERY similar and Pitt grads were instrumental in founding Miami.

2. Second: Pitt academics are in the middle of the ACC, whereas UC's would be an extreme outlier. Yes, I know UL is an outlier, but UL was added out of necessity and is a very clear exception to the rule. To pretend like UL is just an average ACC team is crazy. UL was added because they make a ton of money and field good teams and the ACC needed credibility and money. Those are the only two reasons why UL got the votes. Don't get me wrong, it was the right thing to do and I am happy UL was added, but the ACC is not in a desperate situation any more. That ship sailed and it may very well never come back.

3. Pitt has a rich football history, like much of the ACC. UC is good now, but lacks the history of almost every addition to the conference in the conference's entire history.

So no, UC does not fit in as well as Pitt.

(09-06-2013 01:28 PM)Flying Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Can you explain how Notre Dame and Louisville, no offense meant towards those schools, are better cultural fits than UC?

well ND is private (SU, Pitt [kind of], Duke, Miami, Wake Forest, Boston College), elite academically, a historical power in football, has rivalries with Miami, BC, and Pitt and all the makings of at least a nominal rivalry with SU, and has a very strong east coast focus (NYC, Pitt, and Boston [I would guess]).

I'll cede that UC and UL are very similar, but UL is an outlier. To pretend otherwise is crazy. UL is in for financial reasons.

(09-06-2013 01:44 PM)Topkat Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:28 PM)Flying Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:10 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  I think that UC deserves to be in a power conference, and I wish UC all the luck in the world joining the Big XII and prospering there. However, the idea of the ACC adding UC needs to be put to rest. Don't get me wrong, UC fields great teams and has great potential. It just isn't a good cultural fit for the ACC, and that's important. None the less, I think that it would be an excellent cultural fit for the Big XII, it would be a great traveling partner for WVU, and it would elevate the competitiveness of the conference. If Memphis can figure out how to consistently field a competitive football team, I can see the Big XII adding Memphis and Cincinnati and both schools doing very well there.

Can you explain how Notre Dame and Louisville, no offense meant towards those schools, are better cultural fits than UC?

I would have to question the cultural reference also.

I honestly don't know the reasons one school gets picked over another.

I suppose there is some rhyme or reason... TV Networks, athletic budget, AAU, Research.

I guess the rather odd thing about the ACC latest choice, in my mind, would be the high regard the conference (ACC) seems to hold and tout in academics. Given UC more than doubles the latest ACC choice in Research, $411M to $190M (go ahead and add that athletic budget for UL onto that $190M), it seems a shift away from any kind of culture and more to a pure athletic driven decision.

In any event, there is no crying in realignment. I don't think the ACC has any incentive to expand unless the other conferences go to 16... we'll have to wait for the Jan P5 meetings to get some kind of direction. We may not be going anywhere...

The ACC isn't jam-packed with big state-funded degree mills that can spread the costs associated with developing a strong research mechanism over a billion students (i.e. like many of the schools in the B1G) and thus doesn't market itself as a premier research conference. It markets itself as the premier academic conference. Look at the slogan of it's academic consortium. It doesn't even mention research. It talks about academic rankings. It says "[o]nly the Ivy League includes more top 40 universities (as ranked by US News)." That's how little research matters. Marketing aside, research funding of one school means almost nothing to the other schools in the conference. In fact, I saw somewhere that the CIC saves something like $19 million. I'm not sure if that's per year, or since the beginning of time, but $19 million split twelve-fourteen ways isn't impressive, especially assuming that every other major conference research consortium is at least half that (guess). Each B1G school gets a couple hundred thousand dollar advantage. In the grand scheme of PSU's $4+ billion operating budget, how much do you think that matters? I'm guessing that you will agree with me when I say that it's worth less than a year's worth of well placed advertisements. However, academic ratings mean a lot. The high caliber kids who are interested in going to BC, ND, Pitt, Miami, and Duke who watch SU play those schools sit through SU advertisements and are more likely to consider going to SU. The same goes for the high caliber undergrads at those schools in relation to SU grad schools.

I guess that's the long way of me saying that UC's research spending is only relevant in my mind to the extent that it influences the UC's academic ranking, which isn't bad, but is more in line with the Big XII than the ACC.

The idea that the ACC has some sort of cultural identity is laughable. It's a hodge podge mix of two conferences (ACC, Big East) that has schools of high academic prestige and low academic prestige. It has schools that have been there for 1 year and some for 50. It has schools in Indiana and the southwest corner of Kentucky and Florida and Massachusetts. It's privates and publics. For God's sake 3 of the schools are from states that don't touch the Atlantic Coast.