Although somehow he failed to even mention the word 'Cincinnati'.


4. Belk. There's tragedy, there's Shakespearean tragedy, there's Sarah McLachlan's ASPCA commercials, and then there's Duke football. Setting up for a chip-shot field goal with under 90 seconds to play that would give the Blue Devils their first bowl victory since 1961 in the first bowl they'd even played since 1994, Duke somehow conspired to lose by not one but two full touchdowns, 48-34. It was a true can't-look-away train wreck, but the first 58:30 -- with both teams trading offensive haymakers and roaring back from double-digit deficits -- wasn't bad viewing, either.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...bowl-games

(01-09-2013 09:42 AM)bearcatfan Wrote:  Although somehow he failed to even mention the word 'Cincinnati'.


4. Belk. There's tragedy, there's Shakespearean tragedy, there's Sarah McLachlan's ASPCA commercials, and then there's Duke football. Setting up for a chip-shot field goal with under 90 seconds to play that would give the Blue Devils their first bowl victory since 1961 in the first bowl they'd even played since 1994, Duke somehow conspired to lose by not one but two full touchdowns, 48-34. It was a true can't-look-away train wreck, but the first 58:30 -- with both teams trading offensive haymakers and roaring back from double-digit deficits -- wasn't bad viewing, either.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...bowl-games

horribly written from top to bottom. Often only mentions one team sometimes neither . I had a hard time figuring out who was playing in many of those blurbs.

>>>
3. New Mexico. Well, hi there, bowl season! Great to see you! Come in, come in! You brought us a gift? Well, goodness, how thoughtful! It's ... uh ... wow, bowl season. This is a 97-point explosion with a two-touchdown comeback in the final 46 seconds. How much did this set you back? These things are really, really hard to come by. You shouldn't have. Actually, bowl season, scratch that: You've arrived bearing some real clunkers in the past, so it's about time you showed up with what would be one of the biggest bangs of the entire postseason.
<<<<<<

great analysis.

It looked like a forum post. A good forum post but a bad article.

How sad is that? It's all about Duke's failure and not Cincinnati's success. It was one of the most exciting games this postseason but their summary certainly fits the prevailing narrative. Most media totally ignore the considerable success BE teams Louisville, Syracuse and Cincy had defeating teams from the SEC, B12 and ACC respectively. And the newly heralded MAC with their ranked teams folded (again) in bowl season.

(01-09-2013 10:32 AM)indycat Wrote:  How sad is that? It's all about Duke's failure and not Cincinnati's success. It was one of the most exciting games this postseason but their summary certainly fits the prevailing narrative. Most media totally ignore the considerable success BE teams Louisville, Syracuse and Cincy had defeating teams from the SEC, B12 and ACC respectively. And the newly heralded MAC with their ranked teams folded (again) in bowl season.

I think Louisville and Syracuse got their pat on the back, but as usual Cincinnati was ignored.

The point about the MAC is one I have been making for years. The media likes to push for the underdog 99% of the time. They loved Boise, They loved TCU and Utah when they were in the MWC, they love MACtion.... but you never hear of them getting behind UC and telling their story as an underdog. Why is that?

Watching the game, I think Duke did lose it. Cincy made some plays and regrouped, but UC did not look like they won the game. It looked like the coaching change took its toll.

As for UC being the underdog, they are the tweener. They are in A BCS conference, so they should be able to hang with the big boys. Boise, in the WAC in a talent desolate place is a real underdog. MAC schools are small but always pull off a few upsets. Small schools, small budgets but pretty good football. Make for good underdog status.

Also, when you win the BE (or a share) that many times and are in the top #5 out of years, you should not be an underdog.

UC had an amazing narrative for that game They fell behind big time early. Did not have their OC, DC, or HC. Players and secretary husbands were on the sidelines calling in plays and motivating each other. This was an incredible win for UC. Of course that story is almost completely ignored by the national media.

The difference between UC and Boise State, Utah or TCU is a simple one. Those schools all had moments in the recent past and near present that captured the imagination of the football public. Utah stunned Texas A&M during their first BCS run before coming back five years later and beating Michigan in the big house and blitzing Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. TCU pulled off a massive upset of Oklahoma in Norman back in 2005 and they had back to back BCS appearances, culminating in their win over Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. Boise infamously upset Oklahoma in the Fiesta bowl, but they also delivered stunning knock outs to Oregon (in Eugene in 2008, at home in 2009), Virginia Tech (at FedEx) and Georgia (in Atlanta) in four consecutive seasons. By contrast the biggest win for UC from the last seven seasons is what Rutgers? It could be argued that the problem for UC is that there is no readily apparent narrative to be sold other than "Hey you guys, it turns out that Cincinnati actually has a pretty good Football program" That's a truthful statement, but it doesn't drive a news cycle, or generate pageviews, and that's why no one says it.

We beat Oregon State in Corvallis, and WVU in Morgantown too. Hardly chopped liver at all. That 2009 win at Pitt count?

Just a little devil's advocate here - We have been in a BCS league while doing this - Boise, Utah and TCU weren't. They were, in basketball speak, mid-majors at the time. We also happen to be in a league that many in the media thought didn't deserve to be a BCS league. They are focusing on beating down the Big East, rather than the fact that we were the underdog, were underestimated (like Boise, Utah and TCU), and pulled off a couple of good wins. Rutgers, Oregon State, Pitt and WVU also aren't Oregon, Michigan, Alabama or Oklahoma. 3 of them have also been conference foes. The out of conference upsets seem to resonate more with the media. If we had won one of the BCS games (I still think BK had a bad gameplan in the VaTech game...and we could have won it), our story could be similar to Boise, Utah and TCU. Louisville has had similar BCS Bowl wins and are thought of pretty highly. For now, we are thought of as just a solid program with a small budget.

(01-09-2013 12:50 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  We beat Oregon State in Corvallis, and WVU in Morgantown too. Hardly chopped liver at all. That 2009 win at Pitt count?

Our biggest problem was that we beat good solid brand along the way like Oregon State, NC State, Louisville, WVU, Pitt, Virginia Tech, Rutgers, Illinois, Sryacuse, UConn, and USF but not the big the dogs of college football.

UC didn't beat Oklahoma, Tennessee, Ohio State, or Florida. Bearcats didn't have a lot of chances against the blue bloods of college football either.

Louisville has wins over Florida and Florida State
WVU has wins over Georgia and Oklahoma
UConn won at Notre Dame
USF beat Miami, Auburn, and Florida State.

UC's best brand name win came this season against Virginia Tech.

(01-09-2013 12:50 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  We beat Oregon State in Corvallis, and WVU in Morgantown too. Hardly chopped liver at all. That 2009 win at Pitt count?

All of those were great wins, but none of them resonated beyond the city of Cincinnati and the smallish faction die hard college football fans in the way that beating, for example, Oklahoma at PBS would have. WVU and Oregon State have good programs, but they are not, to borrow a betting term, public teams, neither is Pitt. The problem is, barring a BCS birth next year, the next game against a public team won't be until 2014 against Ohio State

How about being grateful for what UC has done this last decade, sure the heck beats the early 90's. Any win is a good one regardless of who they played. Granted, a few more upsets or a BCS win would be icing on the cake - how would you really feel if none of it happened at all, as at one point, UC football was being called upon to disband? I for one don't care what some media blowhard or dilusional fan thinks about UC - all I want is results, and the team has delivered by winning 10+ games a season 5 of 6 years. There are 115 other football programs that would love that 6 year run, we as UC fans are lucky to have it.