(12-18-2012 12:32 PM)Shafes Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 12:25 PM)Kco17 Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 12:05 PM)Crewdogz Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 11:55 AM)Shafes Wrote:  My take. Overall, nice addition that hits most of the right areas, but it looks like UC is embracing the need to use PBS in certain big game situations.

...

I think you shoot yourself in the foot revenue wise if you ask big donors to buy luxury boxes and then move premium games to PBS where they will not have a luxury box.

Why wouldn't they be given a box at PBS? They have far more boxes there than Nippert ever will.

I think Crewdogz is right. At first I thought about the PBS boxes too, but I know many stadiums have you buy the rights to the boxes, which means you have the rights to it for all events. So the PBS box owners would still have the rights for events outside of Bengals games.

You get the first option to purchase events outside of Bengals games: http://www.bengals.com/tickets/private-s...tures.html

Thanks MickMack; I guess then that if the Bengal Suite Owner doesn't take the 1st option to purchase the UC game event (and retain the box) Nippert Suite holders would still need to add a premium for use of PBS boxes?

(12-18-2012 03:01 PM)Crewdogz Wrote:  Thanks MickMack; I guess then that if the Bengal Suite Owner doesn't take the 1st option to purchase the UC game event (and retain the box) Nippert Suite holders would still need to add a premium for use of PBS boxes?

Honestly, I don't know how that works. I'm almost positive that some suite holders, like Jeff Ruby, have their suites personally decorated. That makes me think they have the right to exclude others from the suite when it's not used.

Well given today's presser Whit has made a stron case to keep all games at Nippert and that is what I would prefer as well.

(12-18-2012 03:11 PM)Crewdogz Wrote:  Well given today's presser Whit has made a stron case to keep all games at Nippert and that is what I would prefer as well.

Yes. Unless UC was able to use the stadium for free, I don't see how it could have worked.

Unless it's free for Mike, Katie, Troy and the "family"… free is not part of Mike Browns vernacular.

(12-18-2012 03:22 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Unless it's free for Mike, Katie, Troy and the "family"… free is not part of Mike Browns vernacular.

Hence the Nippert Renovation.

(12-18-2012 03:26 PM)bearcatdp Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 03:22 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Unless it's free for Mike, Katie, Troy and the "family"… free is not part of Mike Browns vernacular.

Hence the Nippert Renovation.

Exactly.

yup.
spruce her up and make a ticket to the Nip the hottest ticket in town.

If you follow Michael DeCourcy on twitter, you can read him pissing on UC's plans. Of course, this shouldn't be a surprise since he has been beating the drum for a couple of weeks that PBS is the only solution for UC football and that all money needs to go to building a new basketball home.

(12-18-2012 05:02 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  If you follow Michael DeCourcy on twitter, you can read him pissing on UC's plans. Of course, this shouldn't be a surprise since he has been beating the drum for a couple of weeks that PBS is the only solution for UC football and that all money needs to go to building a new basketball home.

Mike's a basketball guy, and I don't think he has a very good grasp on the overall revenue picture in college athletics. He's a fan of UC because of UC basketball. IMHO, he views anything other than a complete focus on basketball as a poor move.

(12-18-2012 05:05 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 05:02 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  If you follow Michael DeCourcy on twitter, you can read him pissing on UC's plans. Of course, this shouldn't be a surprise since he has been beating the drum for a couple of weeks that PBS is the only solution for UC football and that all money needs to go to building a new basketball home.

Mike's a basketball guy, and I don't think he has a very good grasp on the overall revenue picture in college athletics. He's a fan of UC because of UC basketball. IMHO, he views anything other than a complete focus on basketball as a poor move.

He also refuses to believe that UC's situation with PBS is different than Pitt's with Heinz Field.

(12-18-2012 05:12 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 05:05 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 05:02 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  If you follow Michael DeCourcy on twitter, you can read him pissing on UC's plans. Of course, this shouldn't be a surprise since he has been beating the drum for a couple of weeks that PBS is the only solution for UC football and that all money needs to go to building a new basketball home.

Mike's a basketball guy, and I don't think he has a very good grasp on the overall revenue picture in college athletics. He's a fan of UC because of UC basketball. IMHO, he views anything other than a complete focus on basketball as a poor move.

He also refuses to believe that UC's situation with PBS is different than Pitt's with Heinz Field.

I'm hesitant to knock a guy like DeCourcy. He's been a great advocate for the school when we can barely say the same about our own beat writers. That being said, he seems utterly clueless on the economics of college sports. In that regard, he comes across as more of a fervent basketball fan, and less as a national commentator.

(12-18-2012 05:02 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  If you follow Michael DeCourcy on twitter, you can read him pissing on UC's plans. Of course, this shouldn't be a surprise since he has been beating the drum for a couple of weeks that PBS is the only solution for UC football and that all money needs to go to building a new basketball home.

He's just yet another butthurt college hoops fan that still thinks anyone writing checks in the media gives a damn about anything other than football.

College basketball fans need to wake up to the reality -- it's OK to love the sport, but it doesn't move the needle enough to make anyone big money.

1. Football drives the bus in colleges sports outside of a few schools.
2. Adding seats for the sake of adding seats is dumb, smaller stadiums with premium seating, dining, and comfort is the way to go.
3. The basketball arena will be reborn.
4. It doesn't matter what conference UC is playing in or what league they want to be in because the school can't wait around for a phone call that might not happen.

(12-18-2012 05:12 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  He also refuses to believe that UC's situation with PBS is different than Pitt's with Heinz Field.

That's the most incredulous aspect of his comments of late. There are totally different economics in play and yet he is either oblivious or willfully ignorant of those facts which is why his perspective holds no merit. Unlike others in the media, he calls it like he sees it when it comes to college hoops, which i appreciate since the Bearcats are so underserved within their market and nation wide. In this specific regard, he is dead wrong.

(12-18-2012 05:12 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 05:05 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(12-18-2012 05:02 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  If you follow Michael DeCourcy on twitter, you can read him pissing on UC's plans. Of course, this shouldn't be a surprise since he has been beating the drum for a couple of weeks that PBS is the only solution for UC football and that all money needs to go to building a new basketball home.

Mike's a basketball guy, and I don't think he has a very good grasp on the overall revenue picture in college athletics. He's a fan of UC because of UC basketball. IMHO, he views anything other than a complete focus on basketball as a poor move.

He also refuses to believe that UC's situation with PBS is different than Pitt's with Heinz Field.

I think that Pitt's experiment with Heinz Field is a dismal failure. To be fair, I never was at the old stadium, but Heinz is an awful place to watch a college game. I think that if UC went the same route with PBS it would be an even bigger failure, because we don't have 9 national titles worth of goodwill with the fans to build on.

Check out DeCourcy being a jerk

Quote:Michael DeCourcy ‏@tsnmike
Judging from interaction with Cincinnati fans, they seem fine with Big East so long as they can keep their old football stadium.

Idiot. Sorry, but that is just silly.

(12-18-2012 10:57 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  Check out DeCourcy being a jerk

Quote:Michael DeCourcy ‏@tsnmike
Judging from interaction with Cincinnati fans, they seem fine with Big East so long as they can keep their old football stadium.

It's amazing how out of touch DeCourcy and other basketball first guys are. I've been pro PBS in the past, but the economics simply don't work out. Unless UC somehow warms the Grinch's heart, the money just isn't there to move games downtown. Not making any money from concessions or parking will kill this program in the long run.

The only fans that are remotely happy with being in the Big East are the basketball fans that want to keep playing in a New York/Northeastern league for recruiting. The Football fans want the next lifeboat off the sinking ship.

DeCourcy is simply wrong on this argument. Football drives the bus and makes the most revenue. UC obviously knows something if they are taking these actions several weeks after not making it into the ACC. My gut says they were told do something, and they're doing it. If football is a success, then it will pay for a new basketball arena.