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

(12-24-2017 06:05 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  FWIW, the American football winning percentage since its inception...

Navy 18-6 (.750) 3 Seasons
UCF 28-13 (.683)
Houston 27-13 (.675)
Memphis 25-16 (.610)
USF 24-16 (.600)
Temple 23-17 (.575)
Cincinnati 20-20 (.500)
Tulsa 12-20 (.375) 4 Seasons
ECU 11-21 (.344) 4 Seasons
SMU 13-27 (.325)
UConn 11-29 (.275)
Tulane 7-25 (.219) 4 Seasons

To be honest ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa are the weakest overall brands in the conference. If we had to pick three all sports team in the east to get to 12 I would have selected Marshall over Tulsa. ECU at the time of their addition was a solid football team. Tulane has always been the Vandy/Northwestern of the Metro/C-USA teams.

If we had to start over I would want this as my leftover/tweener/power six league.

Football
East: Cincinnati, UConn, UCF, USF, Temple, Memphis, (Navy), (Army)
West: Houston, SMU, Tulane, Colorado State, BYU, Boise State, SDSU, UNLV

Basketball additions: Gonzaga, Wichita State, Dayton, Rhode Island.

16 football, 18 basketball. Gives UC and UConn a regional rivalry game in basketball as well.

i think VCU is a nice non fb ad and would offset Army fb only

the conversation begins and ends up new mexico

Why would a 12 (actually 13) team conference even think about the need to expand?? So we can divide our cumulative - what, $15-20MM? - total yet two more ways???

(12-25-2017 10:54 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Why would a 12 (actually 13) team conference even think about the need to expand?? So we can divide our cumulative - what, $15-20MM? - total yet two more ways???

To maximize TV revenue, earn more NCAA tournament credits, and place a lock down on the New Years Six bowl game. The next TV contract for the American is likely to going to be between 4 to 8 million per school anyway so why notgive it a chance to get number from 7 to 10 million. All it takes is ESPN and NBC each at 30 million per year and CBS at 15 million to get to at least 6 million dollars per school. That isn't a big leap when you look at the TV ratings and the amount of content the American is offering during the next TV contract.

Tier 1 and Tier 2 split for ESPN/NBC
CBS picks up remainder plus few top level basketball games.

(12-24-2017 12:01 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If the American really wants to be something more than just a tweener league the next expansion probably has be national.

Army (football only)
SDSU
Colorado State
Boise State
BYU
UNLV
Gonzaga (All sports but football)

Football East: Army, Navy, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, ECU, USF, UCF, Memphis
Football West: Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, SDSU, Boise State, Colorado State, BYU, UNLV
Ten conference games: 7 division, 2 crossover

Basketball East: Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, ECU, UCF, USF
Basketball Central: Memphis, Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, Wichita State, SMU
Basketball West: BYU, Gonzaga, SDSU, UNLV, Colorada State, Boise State
20 conference games, 8 division games, 12 crossover.

Not bad. If our lot be here, then...Also, it would seem that more content would warrant more $, but that's not how the B12 saw it. Perhaps a tandem deal with media rights people at time of expansion deal?

(12-25-2017 11:55 AM)FenderCat Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 12:01 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If the American really wants to be something more than just a tweener league the next expansion probably has be national.

Army (football only)
SDSU
Colorado State
Boise State
BYU
UNLV
Gonzaga (All sports but football)

Football East: Army, Navy, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, ECU, USF, UCF, Memphis
Football West: Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, SDSU, Boise State, Colorado State, BYU, UNLV
Ten conference games: 7 division, 2 crossover

Basketball East: Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, ECU, UCF, USF
Basketball Central: Memphis, Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, Wichita State, SMU
Basketball West: BYU, Gonzaga, SDSU, UNLV, Colorada State, Boise State
20 conference games, 8 division games, 12 crossover.

Not bad. If our lot be here, then...Also, it would seem that more content would warrant more $, but that's not how the B12 saw it. Perhaps a tandem deal with media rights people at time of expansion deal?

The one failure of the non-power conferences and schools has been refusing to create a national conference with best brands that forces the other conferences to treat them a step above the rest.

(12-25-2017 10:54 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Why would a 12 (actually 13) team conference even think about the need to expand?? So we can divide our cumulative - what, $15-20MM? - total yet two more ways???

^ This

That is why in my "expansion" proposal, I cut 3 schools before adding 3 schools.

(12-25-2017 10:54 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Why would a 12 (actually 13) team conference even think about the need to expand?? So we can divide our cumulative - what, $15-20MM? - total yet two more ways???

Pretty much how I feel too. If Cincinnati, UCONN, USF, UCF or Houston didn't "move the needle" for the Big 12 and their TV partners, why would adding other G5 programs lift the G5 AAC's TV deal?

BYU may prove attractive for football only and TV viewership. But there's a reason conferences have traditionally had some geographic basis and Connecticut to Utah hardly a conference makes; for Olympic sports especially.

Expansion way outside the current footprint doesn't really create a conference; just a scheduling confederation. Slowly, the AAC is building a solid football reputation and some rivalries. We'll know in three months if basketball has improved but it looks encouraging. Stay the course with the current group until we see what TV brings in the coming negotiation or until there is movement in the P5. If the TV folks want expansion, I'm sure we'll hear about it and feel compelled to comply.

(12-25-2017 12:32 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 10:54 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Why would a 12 (actually 13) team conference even think about the need to expand?? So we can divide our cumulative - what, $15-20MM? - total yet two more ways???

^ This

That is why in my "expansion" proposal, I cut 3 schools before adding 3 schools.

X3

(12-25-2017 12:32 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(12-25-2017 10:54 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Why would a 12 (actually 13) team conference even think about the need to expand?? So we can divide our cumulative - what, $15-20MM? - total yet two more ways???

^ This

That is why in my "expansion" proposal, I cut 3 schools before adding 3 schools.

I like the spirit and agree in principal, but we just can't "cut" schools. We are in contract with these schools and would have to pay them tens of millions of dollars each to go away. Any shedding of members would result in a loss financially. Unfortunately we are married to these schools until/unless we get invited to a new conference.

As to additions, the media partners will tell us who they would be willing to pay us more dollars for. I imagine the list is extremely short.

(12-24-2017 06:05 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  FWIW, the American football winning percentage since its inception...

Navy 18-6 (.750) 3 Seasons
UCF 28-13 (.683)
Houston 27-13 (.675)
Memphis 25-16 (.610)
USF 24-16 (.600)
Temple 23-17 (.575)
Cincinnati 20-20 (.500)
Tulsa 12-20 (.375) 4 Seasons
ECU 11-21 (.344) 4 Seasons
SMU 13-27 (.325)
UConn 11-29 (.275)
Tulane 7-25 (.219) 4 Seasons

I want to focus more on how we can get our football program back toward the top of this league. I find it embarrassing quite frankly when you see where our wins and losses stack up against our other conference members. We better not worry too much about expansion, contraction or moving on to another conference before ignoring the "log in our collective eyes." The Bearcats of the Brian Kelly era is long gone. No one in the nation remembers that anymore. We are, right now in my estimation, a has-been with a lot to prove. Sobering but it's the truth.

(12-26-2017 11:02 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 06:05 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  FWIW, the American football winning percentage since its inception...

Navy 18-6 (.750) 3 Seasons
UCF 28-13 (.683)
Houston 27-13 (.675)
Memphis 25-16 (.610)
USF 24-16 (.600)
Temple 23-17 (.575)
Cincinnati 20-20 (.500)
Tulsa 12-20 (.375) 4 Seasons
ECU 11-21 (.344) 4 Seasons
SMU 13-27 (.325)
UConn 11-29 (.275)
Tulane 7-25 (.219) 4 Seasons

I want to focus more on how we can get our football program back toward the top of this league. I find it embarrassing quite frankly when you see where our wins and losses stack up against our other conference members. We better not worry too much about expansion, contraction or moving on to another conference before ignoring the "log in our collective eyes." The Bearcats of the Brian Kelly era is long gone. No one in the nation remembers that anymore. We are, right now in my estimation, a has-been with a lot to prove. Sobering but it's the truth.

I don't disagree. Many see the record we put up from 2007-2012 with all the conference titles/top 25 finishes as an aberration (frankly most of them only say we had 1-2 good years). When you look at the history of UC football as a whole, I understand why they think that way.

I think this staff is rebuilding this program with the type of guys to get us there-- it is just going to be a slow process. Quite frankly, I think realistically we might be at best a 6-7 win program next year if everything falls into place, its going to take another year or two after that until we have the pieces in place to get us back to competing for conference championships.

If we can drop Tulsa and ECU, and add New Mexico (green chile, art, hiking) and Colorado State (beer, skiing) as travel partners and destinations, I'm in. Otherwise, no expansion.

(12-26-2017 12:14 PM)geef Wrote:  If we can drop Tulsa and ECU, and add New Mexico (green chile, art, hiking) and Colorado State (beer, skiing) as travel partners and destinations, I'm in. Otherwise, no expansion.

I don’t think things like green chili, art and hiking or basis is for adding teams to any conference in sports in any universe.

(12-26-2017 01:15 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(12-26-2017 12:14 PM)geef Wrote:  If we can drop Tulsa and ECU, and add New Mexico (green chile, art, hiking) and Colorado State (beer, skiing) as travel partners and destinations, I'm in. Otherwise, no expansion.

I don’t think things like green chili, art and hiking or basis is for adding teams to any conference in sports in any universe.

You clearly don’t understand expansion, nor my need to have green chile and craft beer coursing through my bloodstream.

Utah dominates toothless WVU.

(12-26-2017 11:08 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(12-26-2017 11:02 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(12-24-2017 06:05 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  FWIW, the American football winning percentage since its inception...

Navy 18-6 (.750) 3 Seasons
UCF 28-13 (.683)
Houston 27-13 (.675)
Memphis 25-16 (.610)
USF 24-16 (.600)
Temple 23-17 (.575)
Cincinnati 20-20 (.500)
Tulsa 12-20 (.375) 4 Seasons
ECU 11-21 (.344) 4 Seasons
SMU 13-27 (.325)
UConn 11-29 (.275)
Tulane 7-25 (.219) 4 Seasons

I want to focus more on how we can get our football program back toward the top of this league. I find it embarrassing quite frankly when you see where our wins and losses stack up against our other conference members. We better not worry too much about expansion, contraction or moving on to another conference before ignoring the "log in our collective eyes." The Bearcats of the Brian Kelly era is long gone. No one in the nation remembers that anymore. We are, right now in my estimation, a has-been with a lot to prove. Sobering but it's the truth.

I don't disagree. Many see the record we put up from 2007-2012 with all the conference titles/top 25 finishes as an aberration (frankly most of them only say we had 1-2 good years). When you look at the history of UC football as a whole, I understand why they think that way.

I think this staff is rebuilding this program with the type of guys to get us there-- it is just going to be a slow process. Quite frankly, I think realistically we might be at best a 6-7 win program next year if everything falls into place, its going to take another year or two after that until we have the pieces in place to get us back to competing for conference championships.

There was a very small crack in the wall for a couple of years that would have led to our escape. But UC's leadership was no Andy Dufresne. And they certainly weren't prepared to buy the proverbial rock hammer and do, figuratively, 19 years of hard work.

Much more like the clowns of Bluto's Delta Tau Chi. "What the f@ck happened to the Delta I used to know? Where's the spirit? Where's the guts, huh? This could be the greatest night of our lives, but you're gonna let it be the worst. 'Oh, we're afraid to go with you Bluto, we might get in trouble.'"

Louisville, Pitt, TCU, Syracuse, WVU didn't care if they got in trouble. It was worth the risk. UofL will skate just like UNC. Unfortunately our Bluto had retired.

(12-26-2017 04:54 PM)doss2 Wrote:  Utah dominates toothless WVU.

Wrong thread?

If we are not going to get in a conference that makes any money, I'd rather we take the initiative and form a conference of non-P5 AAU and AAU-deserving schools. Stick that academic nose high in the air.