Conference Realignment

[UCalum08]

Originally Posted by LeftyRose

If that's the case, you shouldn't run around and make noise about OSU doing the exact same thing. Frankly, when it comes to scheduling, I think he should be more realistic and concerned about attendance. This investment in the arena, and for that matter, his salary, are not justified based on his record of generating interest in his program. I think it's sad that there is a proposed 20% decrease in capacity, basically an admission that there is no strategy for getting attendance back to the levels experienced when Huggs was here.

Also, by not going downtown, I think they are missing out on a huge opportunity to position the brand. I.e., Xavier plays on campus, but the University of Cincinnati plays on the river, next to the Cincinnati Reds and Bengals. Louisville (with the Yum Center) is the perfect example of what the program should strive to become.

Attendance has been down for a lot of reasons that don't have to do with Cronin or our team on the floor. A few reasons would be...

-our arena is outdated and not that fun to watch a game if sitting upper deck.
-its easier for people to watch in the comfort of their homes
-there is way more entertainment going on around cincy
-its all about the entertainment experience when going to sporting events. You get none currently except to watch a basketball game. People like me and you that is okay but for average fans they need more incentive.
-its not about the total number of seat capacity that is truly important. Its all about having amenities that will generate money. Who cares we lose 2k seats. Majority of our games never come close to selling out, only the marquee matchups do that. Majority of our games could be around 10k all the time though.
-there are more points but its not worth to get into. I could go on about how weak cincy sport fans are, even more specifically, UC fans. We live in a different era brother. Its not as simple as just win.

[BCM]

The bowl should help with stacking the student section vertically unless they plan Pitt style side seating. Makes it more intimate and impressive if fewer students show up as opposed to how they spread out now.

Maybe install some stun batons that randomly emit an electric pulse to get the red sweater section some energy through the game. It'll keep them on their toes.

Edit - appears we have invaded the football subforum. FB wasn't that bad...

[david aka the TYZ]

Originally Posted by BCM

The bowl should help with stacking the student section vertically unless they plan Pitt style side seating. Makes it more intimate and impressive if fewer students show up as opposed to how they spread out now.
Maybe install some stun batons that randomly emit an electric pulse to get the red sweater section some energy through the game. It'll keep them on their toes.

Edit - appears we have invaded the football subforum. FB wasn't that bad...

Both ideas are being discussed according to Bohn at the meeting. Cronin said he had SMU students right behind him and it was a distraction, I think he wants some students courtside.

[david aka the TYZ]

Originally Posted by LeftyRose

If that's the case, you shouldn't run around and make noise about OSU doing the exact same thing. Frankly, when it comes to scheduling, I think he should be more realistic and concerned about attendance. This investment in the arena, and for that matter, his salary, are not justified based on his record of generating interest in his program. I think it's sad that there is a proposed 20% decrease in capacity, basically an admission that there is no strategy for getting attendance back to the levels experienced when Huggs was here.

Also, by not going downtown, I think they are missing out on a huge opportunity to position the brand. I.e., Xavier plays on campus, but the University of Cincinnati plays on the river, next to the Cincinnati Reds and Bengals. Louisville (with the Yum Center) is the perfect example of what the program should strive to become.

I thought the same exact thing. To be realistic though it wouldn't benefit us to give Dayton or Miami home and home deals. Same as it doesn't benefit OSU and UK to give us home and home deals at this point. You have to know your place and can't give inferior teams a recruiting edge by letting them beat you. Look what we did for Xavier in the 90's by losing so much to them.

I disagree about moving downtown. First I think it assumes the city is just waiting around for a team to root for. Since the NFL has blown up and the Bengals have started winning this already Reds town has turned it's winter attention to the Bengals. The average joe in town won't become a Bearcats fan and support the program simply because we play downtown. When we become the trendy team then we will get fan support. And as trendy things go they'll come to campus as easy as as they'll go downtown. Second we would have to foot the bill to rebuild US Bank. They tried their best to sell the idea to us and the city and simply put they wanted the two sides to pay for it for them. Neither side is willing to do that. So if you're UC and your current paying supporters want to be on campus (which they do) and you can keep 100% of the profits from being on campus and you have the choice of paying at worst $50 million to half pay to renovate US Bank and lose a certain percentage of your paying supporters and split gameday profits, tickets sales and get no parking money or $70 million to have an arena on campus, keep your current fan base and 100% of the profits it is a no-brainer. UC wouldn't raise money to rebuild US Bank, they are raising money to rebuild 5/3rd. Lowering capacity isn't ideal and I, too, am not crazy about it but again you have to weigh reality. We haven't averaged 10,500 fans for awhile so you can't really argue you are losing money on unsold seats. With so many more premium seating options and much better average seating options I think averaging 10,000 will happen immediately. They'll be making more money and have as good of an arena as possible when relying on private fundraising to do it. Building a whole new arena on campus would cost three times as much and be a logistical nightmare and take probably three years to accomplish. UC is faced with remodeling the current structure and I think the plan is a very good one.

[LeftyRose]

Originally Posted by david aka the TYZ

I thought the same exact thing. To be realistic though it wouldn't benefit us to give Dayton or Miami home and home deals. Same as it doesn't benefit OSU and UK to give us home and home deals at this point. You have to know your place and can't give inferior teams a recruiting edge by letting them beat you. Look what we did for Xavier in the 90's by losing so much to them.

I disagree about moving downtown. First I think it assumes the city is just waiting around for a team to root for. Since the NFL has blown up and the Bengals have started winning this already Reds town has turned it's winter attention to the Bengals. The average joe in town won't become a Bearcats fan and support the program simply because we play downtown. When we become the trendy team then we will get fan support. And as trendy things go they'll come to campus as easy as as they'll go downtown. Second we would have to foot the bill to rebuild US Bank. They tried their best to sell the idea to us and the city and simply put they wanted the two sides to pay for it for them. Neither side is willing to do that. So if you're UC and your current paying supporters want to be on campus (which they do) and you can keep 100% of the profits from being on campus and you have the choice of paying at worst $50 million to half pay to renovate US Bank and lose a certain percentage of your paying supporters and split gameday profits, tickets sales and get no parking money or $70 million to have an arena on campus, keep your current fan base and 100% of the profits it is a no-brainer. UC wouldn't raise money to rebuild US Bank, they are raising money to rebuild 5/3rd. Lowering capacity isn't ideal and I, too, am not crazy about it but again you have to weigh reality. We haven't averaged 10,500 fans for awhile so you can't really argue you are losing money on unsold seats. With so many more premium seating options and much better average seating options I think averaging 10,000 will happen immediately. They'll be making more money and have as good of an arena as possible when relying on private fundraising to do it. Building a whole new arena on campus would cost three times as much and be a logistical nightmare and take probably three years to accomplish. UC is faced with remodeling the current structure and I think the plan is a very good one.

Thanks, I hear you. I think Archie & Co. would take exception to being labeled an inferior program: A-10 is a better conference, +3,749 advantage to UD in average attendance, and Archie holds one more elite eight than Mick. I was just thinking that for a program that struggles with attracting interest, it might make sense to play rival teams with a large contingent of alumni residing in the region.

I do not know the details concerning the private fundraising, except to say that this money should be going to the medical school for research, so we can figure out how to cure Lauren Hill. The basketball program should be self-sustaining. Field of Dreams is an interesting concept, but "If you build it, they will come..." rarely works in real life. Ask Dan Gilbert about his casinos.

I guess I disagree on a fundamental level with some of you. I think winning big cures all. By winning big, I mean final fours. If Rick Pitino coached the Bearcats, would we be talking about reducing capacity? But, the marquee, charismatic coaches are hard to find, and I would agree that 10,500 is optimistic based on the historical performance of the current regime.

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Originally Posted by LeftyRose

Thanks, I hear you. I think Archie & Co. would take exception to being labeled an inferior program: A-10 is a better conference, +3,749 advantage to UD in average attendance, and Archie holds one more elite eight than Mick. I was just thinking that for a program that struggles with attracting interest, it might make sense to play rival teams with a large contingent of alumni residing in the region.

I do not know the details concerning the private fundraising, except to say that this money should be going to the medical school for research, so we can figure out how to cure Lauren Hill. The basketball program should be self-sustaining. Field of Dreams is an interesting concept, but "If you build it, they will come..." rarely works in real life. Ask Dan Gilbert about his casinos.

I guess I disagree on a fundamental level with some of you. I think winning big cures all. By winning big, I mean final fours. If Rick Pitino coached the Bearcats, would we be talking about reducing capacity? But, the marquee, charismatic coaches are hard to find, and I would agree that 10,500 is optimistic based on the historical performance of the current regime.

lefty, the big difference for me is I'm not going and sitting on a bench seat when I can watch at good pubs or from my home. Much better view.

[BCM]

Originally Posted by david aka the TYZ

Both ideas are being discussed according to Bohn at the meeting. Cronin said he had SMU students right behind him and it was a distraction, I think he wants some students courtside.

As long as radio and media are not in front of students. Reread that sentence 3 times. SMU had that, I believe, and it was painful to listen to 700. If Bohn ever shows up here to get fan input (he doesn't) that should be a main takeaway on that idea.

Did he mention the plan on how they are going to temporarily raise the building into the air enough to dig out a 5 story parking garage?

A man can dream.

[david aka the TYZ]

Originally Posted by LeftyRose

Thanks, I hear you. I think Archie & Co. would take exception to being labeled an inferior program: A-10 is a better conference, +3,749 advantage to UD in average attendance, and Archie holds one more elite eight than Mick. I was just thinking that for a program that struggles with attracting interest, it might make sense to play rival teams with a large contingent of alumni residing in the region.

I do not know the details concerning the private fundraising, except to say that this money should be going to the medical school for research, so we can figure out how to cure Lauren Hill. The basketball program should be self-sustaining. Field of Dreams is an interesting concept, but "If you build it, they will come..." rarely works in real life. Ask Dan Gilbert about his casinos.

I guess I disagree on a fundamental level with some of you. I think winning big cures all. By winning big, I mean final fours. If Rick Pitino coached the Bearcats, would we be talking about reducing capacity? But, the marquee, charismatic coaches are hard to find, and I would agree that 10,500 is optimistic based on the historical performance of the current regime.

Honestly, I'm not really sure what you are saying here. Some of it seems to be contradicting though. I agree about winning big cures all.

[david aka the TYZ]

Originally Posted by BCM

As long as radio and media are not in front of students. Reread that sentence 3 times. SMU had that, I believe, and it was painful to listen to 700. If Bohn ever shows up here to get fan input (he doesn't) that should be a main takeaway on that idea.

Did he mention the plan on how they are going to temporarily raise the building into the air enough to dig out a 5 story parking garage?

A man can dream.

Actually, he was asked about parking concerning football. Parking 40,000 for a football game is tougher than parking 35,000. As far as basketball, I never got the argument about parking. There's 13,000 for a full house, the renovated arena would only need to park 10,500 people. I do get that there aren't alot of cash lots for basketball, but if you can find enough parking spots for Nippert then you can find enough parking for bball games. But his answer was they are working on it. He said they are trying to find more parking and Burnet Woods is in the discussion.

BCM, there were a couple students in there asking questions as well as new alums that voiced their concerns. I believe you are a student right now, right? My suggestion if you are really concerned and want your voice heard is to send a well written email to Bohn or to someone in the development office. They do want to hear what people want. He asked the forum's opinion on how many student tickets they should reserve for students for football with students doing such a great job of turning out. Also asked opinions of wanting students behind benches or not. My guess is if you can get a big enough contigent of students to voice an opinion one way or the other that he would definitely listen and take your wants into consideration. One of the main concerns of the athletic office is getting the new alums to continue to support the program once they graduate. I know they've cut UCAT fees for new alums in the past and are looking into more stuff like that. He even said they are thinking about making one of the corner bar areas for basketball a young alumni area. The student body president was in there and he kept picking on her as the voice of the students, but he knows her personally and listens to her so reaching out to her with your concerns might not be a bad way to go. I think Mick wants students wrapped around some for noise so I think its a real possibility.

[BCM]

All very good suggestions. The big one is IMO going to be fees and pricing model. New grads are carrying unprecedented student debt (something I am well acquainted with) so money to burn is going to be getting harder and harder to come by, and the decision what to use any disposable income is going to be made with much discretion. Foregoing season tickets for a one or two night great event is the route I'll probably go myself, and just carefully pick the games and hope a good chairback deal goes on sale for mom. It should be easier if all the benches are ripped out.