(01-29-2013 07:12 PM)subflea Wrote:  

(01-29-2013 05:45 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(01-29-2013 04:29 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  I'll be disappointed if our OOC doesn't improve to offset the decline in conference.

Wasn't the issue budgeting before? How was Huggins able to maintain a good OOC? Was the budget crap then too?

His OOC schedule wasn't great. He did a good job of playing the RPI game by buying games with low level teams who were tops in their conferences and we played in some good exempt tournaments. CUSA also wasn't a bad basketball conference when it was us, UL, Memphis, Marquette, a solid Charlotte program, and a Depaul program that was not as horrible as they have been the last several years.

The budget was not as bad as it is now. There was no VV to pay for back then. There were no coaches making millions a year. There was a football program that no one cared about and required little money.

Don't forget UC used to be in demand for made for TV games like the CBS match-up with Arizona and for tournaments such as the Great Alaska Shoot out when the Bearcats upset #1 Duke.

I did an analysis once of UC's Strength of Schedule in CUSA vs. the BE and it showed using Sagarin Ratings over a course of a season that UC's CUSA SOS was actually stronger than our 1st year in the BE. This analysis is dated and I havent updated it but I think people forget how tough CUSA was at the top with UC, UL, Memphis, Marquette, DePaul, etc. and how weak the bottom of the BE is while being an overall stronger conference:

Quote:For those that perpetuate the myth that UC "Never Played anyone in the Old Days" Here are some strength of schedule numbers from Sagrin (keep in mind these numbers are from a relatively weak CUSA schedule). The Sagrins read overall rank, college, rating, won/loss record, and in parenthesis strength of schedule (SOS):

Present: 154 Cincinnati 73.53 3 2 65.65 (313) 313 SOS! Yikes! But BE play will help this out.

2006 - 2007 138 Cincinnati 73.86 11 19 77.50 (52) TY BE schedule

2005 - 2006: 33 Cincinnati 84.10 20 13 80.01 (12) Good SOS

2004 - 2005: 21 Cincinnati 86.49 25 8 77.04 (77)

2003 - 2004: 18 Cincinnati 87.63 25 7 77.80 (56) 56th without the benefit of BE schedule?

2002 - 2003: 47 Cincinnati 82.60 17 12 79.10 (36) 36th WTF?

2001 - 2002: 4 Cincinnati 93.67 31 4 78.12 (46) 46th? Playing in CUSA? 4th best Sagrin? WTF x 2..?!

2000 - 2001 22 Cincinnati 86.10 25 10 78.25 (46) 46th?

I'm not trying to tear down the present day program or conference; just want to make sure everyone knows CUSA was a good conference and the Bearcats DOMINATED it... the program was in DEMAND for made for TV games.

As for VV... that was a vision of excellence. Without it this program never sniffs the BE. FB is close to breaking even so it isnt a drag as much as it used to be... and for the 1st time since Goin we have an AD with vision and a voice.

I hate "UC can't"... fiscal woes (wah)... when UL (a program for years UC overshadowed) has left us behind with the exceptional job their AD Jurich has done.

The analysis btw was posted in this thread http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=265498&page=2 WARNING-> if you dont want to read old Billy Don smack dont open it.

One more thing on the "UC can't" for whatever reason...

Things I remember:

1. UC considering dropping football or going to D III when our "rivals" Xavier dropped FB and Dayton dropped down to D III (present NCAA rules wont allow you to be DI in BB and D III in FB so UD raised their program to a higher level)

2. Nippert Stadium CONDEMNED - again, calls to drop FB all together

3. UC playing as a FB independant and being one of the worst D I programs in the country

4. People laughing at the thought that UC would ever be considered for the BE

and that's quick and off the top of my head.

(01-30-2013 10:23 AM)Crewdogz Wrote:  

(01-29-2013 07:12 PM)subflea Wrote:  

(01-29-2013 05:45 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(01-29-2013 04:29 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  I'll be disappointed if our OOC doesn't improve to offset the decline in conference.

Wasn't the issue budgeting before? How was Huggins able to maintain a good OOC? Was the budget crap then too?

His OOC schedule wasn't great. He did a good job of playing the RPI game by buying games with low level teams who were tops in their conferences and we played in some good exempt tournaments. CUSA also wasn't a bad basketball conference when it was us, UL, Memphis, Marquette, a solid Charlotte program, and a Depaul program that was not as horrible as they have been the last several years.

The budget was not as bad as it is now. There was no VV to pay for back then. There were no coaches making millions a year. There was a football program that no one cared about and required little money.

Don't forget UC used to be in demand for made for TV games like the CBS match-up with Arizona and for tournaments such as the Great Alaska Shoot out when the Bearcats upset #1 Duke.

I did an analysis once of UC's Strength of Schedule in CUSA vs. the BE and it showed using Sagarin Ratings over a course of a season that UC's CUSA SOS was actually stronger than our 1st year in the BE. This analysis is dated and I havent updated it but I think people forget how tough CUSA was at the top with UC, UL, Memphis, Marquette, DePaul, etc. and how weak the bottom of the BE is while being an overall stronger conference:

Quote:For those that perpetuate the myth that UC "Never Played anyone in the Old Days" Here are some strength of schedule numbers from Sagrin (keep in mind these numbers are from a relatively weak CUSA schedule). The Sagrins read overall rank, college, rating, won/loss record, and in parenthesis strength of schedule (SOS):

Present: 154 Cincinnati 73.53 3 2 65.65 (313) 313 SOS! Yikes! But BE play will help this out.

2006 - 2007 138 Cincinnati 73.86 11 19 77.50 (52) TY BE schedule

2005 - 2006: 33 Cincinnati 84.10 20 13 80.01 (12) Good SOS

2004 - 2005: 21 Cincinnati 86.49 25 8 77.04 (77)

2003 - 2004: 18 Cincinnati 87.63 25 7 77.80 (56) 56th without the benefit of BE schedule?

2002 - 2003: 47 Cincinnati 82.60 17 12 79.10 (36) 36th WTF?

2001 - 2002: 4 Cincinnati 93.67 31 4 78.12 (46) 46th? Playing in CUSA? 4th best Sagrin? WTF x 2..?!

2000 - 2001 22 Cincinnati 86.10 25 10 78.25 (46) 46th?

I'm not trying to tear down the present day program or conference; just want to make sure everyone knows CUSA was a good conference and the Bearcats DOMINATED it... the program was in DEMAND for made for TV games.

As for VV... that was a vision of excellence. Without it this program never sniffs the BE. FB is close to breaking even so it isnt a drag as much as it used to be... and for the 1st time since Goin we have an AD with vision and a voice.

I hate "UC can't"... fiscal woes (wah)... when UL (a program for years UC overshadowed) has left us behind with the exceptional job their AD Jurich has done.

The analysis btw was posted in this thread http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=265498&page=2 WARNING-> if you dont want to read old Billy Don smack dont open it.

Great stuff, thanks Crew

(01-29-2013 03:16 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  When I watch a CBB game, about the last two things I really care about are conference and brand.

I just want to watch a UC game, and I want to watch them kick butt doing it

Football may be all about the "chosen few" but the playing field is much more level in hoops.

Great point. I'm probably in the minority, however I watch UC games for UC. I do not watch for the opposing team. I will support them no matter what conf or team they play. This is what I respect about fanbases such as an ECU or Boise. With that said, I still would like us to be in major conf and at times play the best of the best. However, in the end lack of the above does not dissuade me from attending or supporting UC.

Great response Crew And, you know me... I never say "can't" either. Just acknowledging these are very trying and challenging times.