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

(08-06-2019 01:43 PM)converrl Wrote:  

(08-06-2019 01:33 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The Bearcat football program is not covered to the level of interest and Bearcat fans / alums are underserved as a result. However, the Bengals are rightfully covered more than the Bearcats. The bottom line is there is more interest in the Bengals. That said... UC could and should be covered more. Look at Pitt in Pittsburgh...the Steelers are number 1 there, but the Panthers always get nice coverage. There is plenty of room for more UC coverage. It's why Justin Williams has worked so well with The Athletic.

Which begs the question...WHY is there more interest in the Bengals than UC FB? I have my assertions. What are yours?

We live in a pro sports town. The NFL, by a large, has a larger audience as college football outside of maybe 10-15 programs is mostly followed by alums and family of a university.

The second issue with UC FB is that the 70s, 80s and early 90s were so bad that we what I have in the past referred to a "black hole" in our fan base. Most guys in their 50s and 60s around here root for another school because UC football was so bad during those years. Had UC even had the modest level of success it had in the 1960s we probably could have kept a lot more of those fans and our fan base would be larger. UC has done a pretty good job securing a bigger fan base in the 35 and under group and I suspect it will get a lot better in the future as this audience matures and their purchasing power is greater.