PDA

View Full Version : UC Football 2009 Season



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

Redlegs23
09-28-2009, 09:27 AM
Keep in mind the Bearcats were playing without Curtis Young. Young is the best linebacker/DE on the team, and he would have helped out big time against the run. He will be back in a few weeks for the meat of the schedule.

Cyclone792
09-28-2009, 09:43 AM
Here's where UC ranks amongst the BCS components currently available:

Coaches Poll: 11th (848 points out of 1,475)
Harris Poll: 10th (1,700 points out of 2,850)

Here's where we currently rank in the computer polls:

JS: 13th through week 4
AH: Available October 4th
JB: 12th through week 4
CM: 9th through week 4
KM: 10th through week 4
PW: Available October 18th

The BCS formula weighs the Coaches' poll one-third, the Harris poll one-third and the computer polls jointly one-third (note: the BCS drops the lowest and highest computer poll rankings, then averages out the remaining four).

One current "BCS Projection" poll has UC ranked 8th in the BCS, though it's important to note that the projection poll has to make some assumptions given that two of the six computer polls are not yet available.

Caveat Emperor
09-28-2009, 12:22 PM
One current "BCS Projection" poll has UC ranked 8th in the BCS, though it's important to note that the projection poll has to make some assumptions given that two of the six computer polls are not yet available.

Just for fun, here's the way I see the landscape is shaping up:

The biggest loss this wekeend, from UC's perspective, was Penn State getting dropped by Iowa. Penn State was the B11's best shot locking down one of the spots in the title game, and I think their title game dreams are pretty shot at this point.

Ohio State still has @Penn State and @Michigan on the schedule -- I don't see them winning both those games, personally. I think they split, losing to Penn State but beating Michigan. Two losses take them out of the conversation as well.

Out of the ACC, Virginia Tech is a problem for Cincinnati. They've got 2 quality wins on their schedule already, and their remaining schedule is a relative cakewalk (other than a stop @ #25 Georgia Tech -- who they should annihilate). Other than GT, they travel to Duke, East Carolina, Maryland and Virginia -- all easy Ws -- and host BC, North Carolina, and NC State. I don't see another loss on VT's schedule, which should place them at the top of the 1-loss class. UC would need the computers help to leapfrog them to a national title game, and I don't see that happening.

From the SEC, I figured Ole Miss to fall out of the conversation eventually, so South Carolina's win last Thursday didn't impact the picture any great deal.

Moving forward, October 10th is a mini D-Day in the SEC: Florida plays @LSU and Bama plays @Ole Miss. Florida / LSU will be a "show me" game for the Tigers and a possible gut-check for Florida if Tebow can't go. Either way, one of those two teams is picking up an "L." I think Florida can survive a loss and still make the SEC title game from the SEC-East, which keeps them in the national title picture, but I think LSU is cooked if they pick up a loss here. It turns their game @Alabama into a must-win, which I don't see happening. On the other hand, Ole Miss is Alabama's last difficult road trip of the year. If they don't lose there, I don't see Alabma losing until the SEC title game.

Suffice it to say, UC needs some major drama to unfold in the SEC to keep one of their teams out of the title game.

Which brings us to the Big 12. One week after the SEC has it's October Showdown the B12 has the annual Red River game. You have to consider this game a pick-'em based on the history and emotion surrounding it. Bradford's health will play a great deal into this. Intuitively, you'd think that the winner of this game would have the inside shot at representing the B12-South in the B12 Championship Game.

However, both teams have Oklahoma State lurking in the future. Texas has to travel TO Stillwater, while Oklahoma gets them on the last week of the season in a game that could have major national implications.

I consider the B12-North to be a non-factor in the national title picture other than to note the possibility that Kanasas could play spoiler to either Texas or Oklahoma both in the regular season (they play @Texas and host Oklahoma) and the B12 Championship. I don't think Kansas is good enough to win both those games AND the Championship game, but they're more than capable of picking off a victory and ending someone's title ambitions.

Like the SEC, the Bearcats need major drama to unfold in the B12 to keep one of their teams out of the title game.

And then there's Boise State -- who should have no difficulty winning out and is the owner of a quality win that's looking better every day after Oregon's route of Cal. Their remaining schedule is pitiful, though -- with the only remotely difficult games being @Tulsa and @Hawaii (which is always a tough game due to travel and the home-cooking they routinely enjoy from the officials). They should get hammered by the comptuers based on SOS. At #5 currently, it's entirely possible that Boise State could win-out, finish with a human poll rank of #1 or #2, and still be leapfrogged by any number of 1-loss teams or undefeated BCS teams (like Cincinnati) charging late.

It's exciting to even be having conversations like this in Cincinnati -- so enjoy it while you can!

Boston Red
09-28-2009, 06:33 PM
Out of the ACC, Virginia Tech is a problem for Cincinnati. They've got 2 quality wins on their schedule already, and their remaining schedule is a relative cakewalk (other than a stop @ #25 Georgia Tech -- who they should annihilate). Other than GT, they travel to Duke, East Carolina, Maryland and Virginia -- all easy Ws -- and host BC, North Carolina, and NC State. I don't see another loss on VT's schedule, which should place them at the top of the 1-loss class. UC would need the computers help to leapfrog them to a national title game, and I don't see that happening.



VaTech would also have to get through the ACC title game. They'd be favored, but it would be another tough game.

Cyclone792
09-28-2009, 07:01 PM
Good analysis, CE.

I'm hoping UC gets some help from their OOC schedule, but so far it's been rather disappointing. Oregon State lost a game they really should have won at home against Arizona, and Illinois isn't doing anything to help matters. Fresno State's probably the best 1-3 team in the country, but they're still 1-3. Hopefully they can roll through the rest of the WAC and at least finish solidly in second place behind Boise State. And Miami (OH), well ... that game is going to be a huge stain on the SOS but there's not much we can do about it now except hopefully blow them out this weekend.

Here are what Big East teams still have on their OOC schedules - still some time for more help, but not much time:

UC: @ Miami (OH), Illinois
Pitt: Notre Dame
South Florida: Miami (FL)
West Virginia: Colorado, Marshall
Connecticut: @ Notre Dame
Rutgers: Texas Southern, @ Army
Syracuse: Akron
Louisville: Southern Miss, Arkansas State

Outside of UC/Illinois - if Illinois can turn things around - the Big East essentially has Miami (FL) and a pair of Notre Dame games left to pick up more solid OOC wins. Marshall may be a solid CUSA opponent, but things start looking bleak when we're looking at Marshall to boost up the OOC.

Caveat Emperor
09-28-2009, 09:01 PM
Outside of UC/Illinois - if Illinois can turn things around - the Big East essentially has Miami (FL) and a pair of Notre Dame games left to pick up more solid OOC wins. Marshall may be a solid CUSA opponent, but things start looking bleak when we're looking at Marshall to boost up the OOC.

And really, I want Notre Dame winning as many games as possible this year to keep Weis off the hot seat -- so I don't know that I can root against them just to keep the SOS high for UC.

Caveat Emperor
09-29-2009, 11:13 PM
http://promo.espn.go.com/espn/contests/theheismanvote/2009/

He isn't going to win, but it's still pretty amazing to see Tony Pike's name on the list of finalists for the 1 "fan" vote. Never in a million years did I think there would ever be a University of Cincinnati football player on a list like this.

Vote early, vote often. ;)

Cyclone792
09-30-2009, 10:41 AM
UC getting some SI love:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1160760/index.htm

Redlegs23
09-30-2009, 01:50 PM
Mo Egger set up a Pike for Heisman website. Proceeds from the t-shirt sales will go to Mitch Stone, who is the young cancer patient that the team "adopted".

http://www.pikeforheisman.com/

Redlegs23
10-02-2009, 09:20 AM
Anybody making the trip to Miami this weekend? Unfortunately I will not be able to, so I will be tuned in to the radio.

camisadelgolf
10-02-2009, 10:37 AM
I'm wearing my UC hoody at work today, and all the Miami people are scowling at me.

Reds Freak
10-02-2009, 12:02 PM
UC getting some SI love:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1160760/index.htm

Typical Cincinnati sports fan in that last quote. Would rather have the team suck so he doesn't have to deal with lines at the john and at the concession stands than the stadium be crowded and he has to wait an extra five minutes for his hot dogs and nachos...

SeeinRed
10-02-2009, 12:21 PM
Typical Cincinnati sports fan in that last quote. Would rather have the team suck so he doesn't have to deal with lines at the john and at the concession stands than the stadium be crowded and he has to wait an extra five minutes for his hot dogs and nachos...

I'm pretty sure he isn't the typical Cincinnati sports fan. I'm definately not in agreement with his POV.

will5979
10-02-2009, 01:28 PM
I'm going to go and say my hats off to you guys. UC is definitely as of now the team to beat in the Big East. I went to Mo-Town last night to watch that mess against Colorado. Sure a win is nice, but man was it ugly. If we don't correct our mistakes you all are going to beat us by 3 touchdowns, mark it down 3 touchdowns. Just do us all a favor and be undefeated when we come down there. If we can correct our mistakes and win till this game it will be HUGE for the conference. :beerme: to the Big East.

*BaseClogger*
10-02-2009, 05:22 PM
Anybody making the trip to Miami this weekend? Unfortunately I will not be able to, so I will be tuned in to the radio.

I'll make the ten minute walk if the weather is nice... ;)

redsfandan
10-03-2009, 02:10 PM
Mo Egger set up a Pike for Heisman website. Proceeds from the t-shirt sales will go to Mitch Stone, who is the young cancer patient that the team "adopted".

http://www.pikeforheisman.com/
Later that night Mo pulled the plug on the pikeforheisman.com website. From his blog:


-It was fun while it lasted. Last night I had to pull the plug on pikeforheisman.com.

The school had concerns about how it might affect Tony's eligibility. Obviously, the last thing I'd want is to compromise Tony's senior year or derail UC's season. I understand where they're coming from.

The main reason I started the site was basically because someone had to. Maybe someone will take this and run with it. Outside of winning the national championship, nothing thrusts you into the college football spotlight like having a player in New York at the Heisman presentation. Having Tony there would complete the journey this program has been on. And it wouldn't hurt recruiting either.

Obviously, Tony has to do his part by playing well, and the trophy probably has already been engraved with Tim Tebow's name, but the idea of Pike being one of the finalists isn't preposterous. Maybe our little website made that point.

Plus, my guys at donkeyts.com raised over $700 for Mitch Stone. That's a drop in the bucket compared to what his family needs, but every little bit helps.
It looks like people might still be able to buy a Pike for Heisman tee shirt, huddie, or womens junior fit at http://donkeyts.com/design/564+Pike+for+Heisman

HeatherC1212
10-03-2009, 04:09 PM
UC wins 37-13 and remains undefeated! No idea how the game went today since it wasn't on TV but I'm glad the offense put some points on the board and that the defense didn't give away too much. Go Bearcats! :jump:

BearcatShane
10-03-2009, 06:46 PM
I was there. UC didn't play well. Miami tried to take away the pass and UC had to run for some yards. Credit Miami on playing UC very tough but a win is a win.

redhawkfish
10-03-2009, 07:03 PM
Our program has fallen to the bottom of college football, if getting slaughtered 37-13 at home is playing some one tough!

Tony Cloninger
10-03-2009, 09:32 PM
I wish the Bengals would play that badly the rest of the year. :D

BearcatShane
10-04-2009, 02:54 AM
Our program has fallen to the bottom of college football, if getting slaughtered 37-13 at home is playing some one tough!


Well Miami is young. They're playing a frosh qb named Dysert who I really like. They played with alot of heart out there and in 2-3 years Miami should be a 6-8 win MAC team. Not great but better than what they've ben over the last three years.

Boston Red
10-04-2009, 08:38 AM
Our program has fallen to the bottom of college football, if getting slaughtered 37-13 at home is playing some one tough!

Miami easily covered the spread.

BearcatShane
10-04-2009, 01:53 PM
UC ranked 8 in the new AP poll. 10 in the coaches.

Redlegs212
10-04-2009, 02:58 PM
Now in front of osu:jump:

redsmetz
10-04-2009, 06:13 PM
Now in front of osu:jump:

First time since 1951 when the Cats were #20 and OSU was unranked. My son, a student at OSU, is fairly honked off.

Cyclone792
10-04-2009, 08:41 PM
Obviously UC being ranked 8th in the AP poll is going to generate news, but they're now also 9th in the Harris poll (1/3 of the BCS) and 10th in the Coaches poll (1/3 of the BCS).

Two of the computer polls included in the BCS have been updated tonight: Sagarin currently has UC 5th (up from 13th last week) and Richard Billingsley has UC 10th (up from 12th last week).

Matt700wlw
10-05-2009, 09:56 AM
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091004/SPT01/310040004/1055/NEWS/Ohio%20State%20fanatics%20outraged%20at%20AP%20pol l

LoganBuck
10-05-2009, 12:51 PM
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091004/SPT01/310040004/1055/NEWS/Ohio%20State%20fanatics%20outraged%20at%20AP%20pol l

Some fans get too wrapped up in these rankings. On Ohio State, specifically, there were several writers refusing to vote for them at all a couple weeks ago, for fear that it would inflate their value and help them get back in the BCS National Championship.

UC and OSU will both be tested enough before the end of the season. Lets see where it goes.

Boston Red
10-05-2009, 01:04 PM
there were several writers refusing to vote for them at all a couple weeks ago, for fear that it would inflate their value and help them get back in the BCS National Championship.



Voters in the AP poll?!? If so, someone needs to explain the BCS to them a little better.

traderumor
10-05-2009, 03:01 PM
Some fans get too wrapped up in these rankings. On Ohio State, specifically, there were several writers refusing to vote for them at all a couple weeks ago, for fear that it would inflate their value and help them get back in the BCS National Championship.

UC and OSU will both be tested enough before the end of the season. Lets see where it goes.

If that is true, that is not their job. They are to rank the teams and let the chips fall where they may. Dang activist judges ;)

bucksfan2
10-05-2009, 03:40 PM
Good analysis, CE.

I'm hoping UC gets some help from their OOC schedule, but so far it's been rather disappointing. Oregon State lost a game they really should have won at home against Arizona, and Illinois isn't doing anything to help matters. Fresno State's probably the best 1-3 team in the country, but they're still 1-3. Hopefully they can roll through the rest of the WAC and at least finish solidly in second place behind Boise State. And Miami (OH), well ... that game is going to be a huge stain on the SOS but there's not much we can do about it now except hopefully blow them out this weekend.

Here are what Big East teams still have on their OOC schedules - still some time for more help, but not much time:

UC: @ Miami (OH), Illinois
Pitt: Notre Dame
South Florida: Miami (FL)
West Virginia: Colorado, Marshall
Connecticut: @ Notre Dame
Rutgers: Texas Southern, @ Army
Syracuse: Akron
Louisville: Southern Miss, Arkansas State

Outside of UC/Illinois - if Illinois can turn things around - the Big East essentially has Miami (FL) and a pair of Notre Dame games left to pick up more solid OOC wins. Marshall may be a solid CUSA opponent, but things start looking bleak when we're looking at Marshall to boost up the OOC.

Good analysis Cyclone.

UC's major problem is their level of competition. It is almost looking like their strength of schedule will be awful. They need to beat everyone, but also need Pitt, South Florida, and WVU to continue to have strong seasons. I don't expect Oregon St., Freson St., or Illinois to finish strong and enter the rankings so they won't be of much help to UC. Also Miami, Syracuse, and Louisville are three awful teams.

In reality all UC can do is go out and win football games. They have no control over anything other than their opponent on every given gameday.

GIDP
10-05-2009, 06:45 PM
Id love to see UC go undefeated just to see the debate

LoganBuck
10-05-2009, 09:14 PM
Voters in the AP poll?!? If so, someone needs to explain the BCS to them a little better.

Exactly. AP doesn't count, but they were doing it out of some weird attempt to knock down OSU's perceived value.

acredsfan
10-05-2009, 11:26 PM
Exactly. AP doesn't count, but they were doing it out of some weird attempt to knock down OSU's perceived value.Was there a story on that or is that just something you heard? That makes a mockery of the whole poll if that is true, not that there should be much value put into these polls anyway.

paintmered
10-05-2009, 11:31 PM
“Ohio State doesn’t play Cincinnati – though my son played in PlayStation the other day Ohio State and Cincinnati, and Cincinnati won 91 to nothing. So maybe we could use that. Other than that, it’s just hypotheticals.”


Well said, coach.

Caveat Emperor
10-05-2009, 11:38 PM
Well said, coach.

His son should up the difficulty to "All American" -- just sayin'. ;)

paintmered
10-05-2009, 11:45 PM
His son should up the difficulty to "All American" -- just sayin'. ;)

He did. ;)

LoganBuck
10-05-2009, 11:51 PM
Was there a story on that or is that just something you heard? That makes a mockery of the whole poll if that is true, not that there should be much value put into these polls anyway.

One guy for sure is that guy from Cleveland, but he votes very erratically every week. I tried to find the links but am not finding what I am looking for. Some of the AP writers have had a burr in their saddle since the USC split national championship, and have gone rogue. If you listen carefully they show up on ESPN radio, XM etc. It is happening.

If Cincinnati loses the pollsters will come down on them with a vengeance. They will drop to near 20, and for no other reason than they aren't a "traditional power".

BearcatShane
10-06-2009, 01:30 AM
One guy for sure is that guy from Cleveland, but he votes very erratically every week. I tried to find the links but am not finding what I am looking for. Some of the AP writers have had a burr in their saddle since the USC split national championship, and have gone rogue. If you listen carefully they show up on ESPN radio, XM etc. It is happening.

If Cincinnati loses the pollsters will come down on them with a vengeance. They will drop to near 20, and for no other reason than they aren't a "traditional power".


If UC loses just one game any ranking becomes absolutely irrelevant at that point. UC's ranking is only important now because if they go undefeated they need to be 1 or 2 to get a title shot. If they drop a game they just need to focus on winning the Big East and getting to the Sugar Bowl because the National Title hopes would obviosuly be lost.

joshnky
10-06-2009, 07:14 AM
If UC loses just one game any ranking becomes absolutely irrelevant at that point. UC's ranking is only important now because if they go undefeated they need to be 1 or 2 to get a title shot. If they drop a game they just need to focus on winning the Big East and getting to the Sugar Bowl because the National Title hopes would obviosuly be lost.

Good point. Win the Big East and you'll be in a BCS poll regardless of polls and pundits. And if they lose, it will likely be to a team outside the top 25 which would suggest to voters that their success is a product of their schedule. Might not be true but is the issue you face when it is a mediocre year in the Big East.

Redlegs23
10-06-2009, 09:52 AM
Exactly. AP doesn't count, but they were doing it out of some weird attempt to knock down OSU's perceived value.

I did a little reading on the Buckeye message boards to get their reaction. I was a little stumped by all the hatred towards UC, but it seems like nobody there understands how the AP poll works. They were all furious over how UC could have jumped OSU by beating Miami Ohio. I decided against posting there because of the amount of animosity that seems to be behind their posts, and I figured it was a no win situation.

Just to clear it up though, each team gets points based on how high each voter ranks them, and the cumulative points for each team determines where they are ranked. So if a voter picks you as the top team in the country, you get 25 points, 2nd place 24 points, and so on. I haven't looked much at the voter by voter rankings, but from what I saw there weren't any voters that suddenly ranked UC higher than OSU after the Miami game that didn't have it that way before the Miami game. The jump stems from some of the voters that had UC ranked in the 20's moving UC up to the teens, which gave UC more points and put UC ahead of OSU. There is no conspiracy among the AP voters to put UC ahead of OSU to knock OSU's perceived value. And UC didn't jump OSU because the voters think the win over Miami was better than OSU's win over Indiana.

gonelong
10-06-2009, 11:32 AM
Let me preface this by saying I am a long-time OSU fan. Let me also say that I have always followed a 2nd "local" Ohio team that looks to make some noise that year. In the past this has been Miami(OH), Toledo, BGSU, or Cincy for the most part, and Cincy for the last several years.

UC is at OSU in 2012 and 2014. OSU opted out of the 2012 game @ PBS, but Cincy offered to play in Columbus for $1M, so the game is on in Columbus. This happened in 2008 and OSU began payments at that time, which UC has been utilizing for football initiatives.

If UC can win one of those convincingly and either win the other or play it tough, then they can claim OSU is ducking them. Until then it's just little brother talk. UC can play anyone, anywhere, at any time, because they have little to lose by doing so, and generally will get paid handsomely to do so.

There is very little gain for OSU to play UC at this time, other than it can be a seudo home game at PBS. Otherwise the incentive just isn't there. There is just not a useful risk/reward. I wish UD would play Wright State in basketball, but it's the same thing. The risk/reward for UD is just not there, and it's not going to happen unless Wright State can make an extended run and force it. (The gap between UD and WSU is pretty large at this time, which is not recently true of OSU and UC, but has historically been the case.)

The schedules are made 4-5 years in advance, so UC needs to demonstrate some stability in performance and in the program (coach) over some period of time before they would find themselves on the OSU schedule on a regular basis.

I hope UC can do it, it would be great for UC, OSU, and the region if they could.

GL

Hoosier Red
10-06-2009, 11:33 AM
One guy for sure is that guy from Cleveland, but he votes very erratically every week. I tried to find the links but am not finding what I am looking for. Some of the AP writers have had a burr in their saddle since the USC split national championship, and have gone rogue. If you listen carefully they show up on ESPN radio, XM etc. It is happening.

If Cincinnati loses the pollsters will come down on them with a vengeance. They will drop to near 20, and for no other reason than they aren't a "traditional power".

I actually like the guy in Cleveland. His name's Doug Lesmerises. He tries to avoid any bias of previous rankings. So he doesn't feel the need to explain why someone is "losing" their position.

If he feels Florida's the best team going in, he votes Florida, but he doesn't need for Florida to lose before he would vote someone more deserving in.


Here's his Week 6 poll.

Week Team Rank
6
Alabama 1
Boise St. 2
Florida 3
Cincinnati 4
LSU 5
Texas 6
Auburn 7
Virginia Tech 8
Miami 9
Iowa 10
Southern Cal 11
Oregon 12
Ohio St. 13
TCU 14
Georgia Tech 15
South Florida 16
BYU 17
Wisconsin 18
Missouri 19
Kansas 20
Stanford 21
Penn St. 22
Boston College 23
Houston 24
Oklahoma St. 25

SeeinRed
10-06-2009, 01:01 PM
Let me preface this by saying I am a long-time OSU fan. Let me also say that I have always followed a 2nd "local" Ohio team that looks to make some noise that year. In the past this has been Miami(OH), Toledo, BGSU, or Cincy for the most part, and Cincy for the last several years.

UC is at OSU in 2012 and 2014. OSU opted out of the 2012 game @ PBS, but Cincy offered to play in Columbus for $1M, so the game is on in Columbus. This happened in 2008 and OSU began payments at that time, which UC has been utilizing for football initiatives.

If UC can win one of those convincingly and either win the other or play it tough, then they can claim OSU is ducking them. Until then it's just little brother talk. UC can play anyone, anywhere, at any time, because they have little to lose by doing so, and generally will get paid handsomely to do so.

There is very little gain for OSU to play UC at this time, other than it can be a seudo home game at PBS. Otherwise the incentive just isn't there. There is just not a useful risk/reward. I wish UD would play Wright State in basketball, but it's the same thing. The risk/reward for UD is just not there, and it's not going to happen unless Wright State can make an extended run and force it. (The gap between UD and WSU is pretty large at this time, which is not recently true of OSU and UC, but has historically been the case.)

The schedules are made 4-5 years in advance, so UC needs to demonstrate some stability in performance and in the program (coach) over some period of time before they would find themselves on the OSU schedule on a regular basis.

I hope UC can do it, it would be great for UC, OSU, and the region if they could.

GL


By your logic alone it shows OSU is absolutely "ducking" UC. OSU wanted to move the game because they knew UC would stand a really good chance of beating them. It would absolutey hurt them if they lost so they wanted to move the game to swing the advantage to their corner. My definition of "ducking" someone is that if you feel the need to change something or avoid something to prevent yourself from losing, you are ducking. They definately were afraid that they would lose to UC at PBS or they wouldn't have changed the venue.

Its not a slight on OSU, but in all honesty UC hasn't proven they will be a team OSU can afford to lose to in 2012 or 2014. OSU absolutely has to do whats best for their program. Sure, we can make fun of OSU for doing it, but it was a smart move to "duck" the game at PBS. They had nothing to gain from their perspective by playing UC. Thats what UC wants to change.

UC fans shouldn't pretend that the Buckeyes are cowards for backing out of the original plans though. They were just doing what was smart for their program. However, OSU fans shouldn't have a problem with being called out on it because it will help OSU win.

schmidty622
10-06-2009, 01:30 PM
By your logic alone it shows OSU is absolutely "ducking" UC. OSU wanted to move the game because they knew UC would stand a really good chance of beating them. It would absolutey hurt them if they lost so they wanted to move the game to swing the advantage to their corner. My definition of "ducking" someone is that if you feel the need to change something or avoid something to prevent yourself from losing, you are ducking. They definately were afraid that they would lose to UC at PBS or they wouldn't have changed the venue.

Its not a slight on OSU, but in all honesty UC hasn't proven they will be a team OSU can afford to lose to in 2012 or 2014. OSU absolutely has to do whats best for their program. Sure, we can make fun of OSU for doing it, but it was a smart move to "duck" the game at PBS. They had nothing to gain from their perspective by playing UC. Thats what UC wants to change.

UC fans shouldn't pretend that the Buckeyes are cowards for backing out of the original plans though. They were just doing what was smart for their program. However, OSU fans shouldn't have a problem with being called out on it because it will help OSU win.

OSU would have have a road win against an out of conference BCS opponent to gain. They haven't been able to make that claim since the Washington win. By the time 2012 comes along though I think Kelly will be long gone and UC will be back to middle of the pack in the big east, so it will just be another OSU v Toledo/Ohio/Akron matchup in the Shoe. Yawn.

IMO it's all about recruiting. OSU doesn't want to risk losing to the only other BCS program in the state because they could possibly be going after a lot of the same players.

Eric_the_Red
10-06-2009, 01:34 PM
Wouldn't OSU stand to gain a lot by winning a game against a top 10 team on the road?

If it walks like a team ducking another, and quacks like a team ducking another.... ;)

LoganBuck
10-06-2009, 01:35 PM
By your logic alone it shows OSU is absolutely "ducking" UC. OSU wanted to move the game because they knew UC would stand a really good chance of beating them. It would absolutey hurt them if they lost so they wanted to move the game to swing the advantage to their corner. My definition of "ducking" someone is that if you feel the need to change something or avoid something to prevent yourself from losing, you are ducking. They definately were afraid that they would lose to UC at PBS or they wouldn't have changed the venue.

Its not a slight on OSU, but in all honesty UC hasn't proven they will be a team OSU can afford to lose to in 2012 or 2014. OSU absolutely has to do whats best for their program. Sure, we can make fun of OSU for doing it, but it was a smart move to "duck" the game at PBS. They had nothing to gain from their perspective by playing UC. Thats what UC wants to change.

UC fans shouldn't pretend that the Buckeyes are cowards for backing out of the original plans though. They were just doing what was smart for their program. However, OSU fans shouldn't have a problem with being called out on it because it will help OSU win.

There are two sides to that story, supposedly UC was desperate for cash at the time and "selling" the home game made sense. Remember that athletic department was desperate for cash. Unless you were party to that conference call it is all speculation.

Ohio State gets a home game, UC gets to rile up its fanbase saying "OSU backed out", while taking home big $$$. I see a win-win.

SeeinRed
10-06-2009, 01:40 PM
There are two sides to that story, supposedly UC was desperate for cash at the time and "selling" the home game made sense. Remember that athletic department was desperate for cash. Unless you were party to that conference call it is all speculation.

Ohio State gets a home game, UC gets to rile up its fanbase saying "OSU backed out", while taking home big $$$. I see a win-win.


OSU approached UC about the game. BK made no bones about the fact that it wasn't UC's choice to move the game, OSU gave them the choices of move the game and take our money or lose the game altogether in which OSU would still have to pay a settlement I'm sure. I don't think UC wanting money ever came into the equation. UC would much rather play in Cincinnati.

Caveat Emperor
10-06-2009, 01:41 PM
Wouldn't OSU stand to gain a lot by winning a game against a top 10 team on the road?

Not really.

If OSU flattens UC, the story isn't "Ohio State gets quality win," the story is: "Well, this is what happens when Cincinnati get outside the Big East..." Plus, they stand the chance of losing to UC -- where the story is "Changing of the guard in Ohio Football" (rightly or wrongly), which can have a lasting impact in recruiting and image long beyond gameday.

They'd see an improvement to their SOS in the computers for BCS purposes if they won, but I think the human element is a no-win situation for them.

schmidty622
10-06-2009, 01:45 PM
Not really.

If OSU flattens UC, the story isn't "Ohio State gets quality win," the story is: "Well, this is what happens when Cincinnati get outside the Big East..." Plus, they stand the chance of losing to UC -- where the story is "Changing of the guard in Ohio Football" (rightly or wrongly), which can have a lasting impact in recruiting and image long beyond gameday.

They'd see an improvement to their SOS in the computers for BCS purposes if they won, but I think the human element is a no-win situation for them.

If you've read the writters lately you obviously know that the human element doesn't think to highly of OSU as is. Any win over a quality BCS, OOC opponant would probably be a welcome sight in Columbus, whether it be USC, Cincinnati, or any other program of note in the nation.

bucksfan2
10-06-2009, 01:54 PM
By your logic alone it shows OSU is absolutely "ducking" UC. OSU wanted to move the game because they knew UC would stand a really good chance of beating them. It would absolutey hurt them if they lost so they wanted to move the game to swing the advantage to their corner. My definition of "ducking" someone is that if you feel the need to change something or avoid something to prevent yourself from losing, you are ducking. They definately were afraid that they would lose to UC at PBS or they wouldn't have changed the venue.

Its not a slight on OSU, but in all honesty UC hasn't proven they will be a team OSU can afford to lose to in 2012 or 2014. OSU absolutely has to do whats best for their program. Sure, we can make fun of OSU for doing it, but it was a smart move to "duck" the game at PBS. They had nothing to gain from their perspective by playing UC. Thats what UC wants to change.

UC fans shouldn't pretend that the Buckeyes are cowards for backing out of the original plans though. They were just doing what was smart for their program. However, OSU fans shouldn't have a problem with being called out on it because it will help OSU win.

Your wrong. The reason why OSU wanted to move the game with OSU is strictly financial. Two years ago OSU had an athletic department budget of over $100M, with only two profitable sports, football and basketball. OSU needs 7-8 home football games in a given season in order to balance their AD budget. They also have a home and home series with a big name team every year. In the past few years and going forward it has been Texas, USC, Miami, Cal, Tennessee, and I believe OU. UC isn't there yet, and we will see if they ever get there.

LoganBuck
10-06-2009, 01:55 PM
OSU approached UC about the game. BK made no bones about the fact that it wasn't UC's choice to move the game, OSU gave them the choices of move the game and take our money or lose the game altogether in which OSU would still have to pay a settlement I'm sure. I don't think UC wanting money ever came into the equation. UC would much rather play in Cincinnati.

A college football coach saying things to help his cause? What kind of world do we live in?

Go back two years and look at the economic state of the UC athletic department. It is well documented. Basketball was the cash cow, and it wasn't pulling in the money. Remember the aftermath of Bob Huggins leaving.

Again I say if you weren't part of the conference call you don't really know.

Caveat Emperor
10-06-2009, 02:14 PM
If you've read the writters lately you obviously know that the human element doesn't think to highly of OSU as is. Any win over a quality BCS, OOC opponant would probably be a welcome sight in Columbus, whether it be USC, Cincinnati, or any other program of note in the nation.

Oh, I agree -- believe me, I think more than most other that Tressel needs to start winning some tough games outside of the Big 10.

But, I can see the other side of the coin -- that OSU has a lot to lose by playing Cincinnati and not nearly as much to gain as if they played even a tier-2 SEC squad, say Georgia or Ole' Miss.

joshnky
10-06-2009, 02:17 PM
Again I say if you weren't part of the conference call you don't really know.

So you can suggest it but others can't reject the notion?

As somewhat of an outsider (I don't really care about either program) I agree with the notion that OSU had everything to lose and little to gain in this series. Same thing happened to Louisville in recent years. After the BCS bowl, teams such as Georgia and OU started backing out of planned home and home series. That's what happens when you are in a borderline BCS conference.

LoganBuck
10-06-2009, 02:27 PM
So you can suggest it but others can't reject the notion?

No, that isn't what I said. Just step back and think about it a different way. It is easy to point a flaming arrow at Ohio State, not quite as easy to view UC as cash strapped looking for cash ASAP.

Cyclone792
10-06-2009, 02:49 PM
Back to UC-related news since this is a UC thread after all and not an OSU thread ...

Rumor has it that a significant announcement regarding the practice facility donation drive is going to be released soon. There's smoke from somewhere, and where there's smoke there's usually fire. If true, this should have good news written on it.

Caveat Emperor
10-06-2009, 03:04 PM
Back to UC-related news since this is a UC thread after all and not an OSU thread ...

Rumor has it that a significant announcement regarding the practice facility donation drive is going to be released soon. There's smoke from somewhere, and where there's smoke there's usually fire. If true, this should have good news written on it.

I, and others, were chastized by a posting member of the Athletic Dept. over on bearcatnews.com for participating in a thread speculating on who might be behind any big donations / what the announcement might be. ;)

Hopefully they've secured enough money for the Jefferson St. complex that they can break ground soon.

Cyclone792
10-06-2009, 03:11 PM
I, and others, were chastized by a posting member of the Athletic Dept. over on bearcatnews.com for participating in a thread speculating on who might be behind any big donations / what the announcement might be. ;)

Hopefully they've secured enough money for the Jefferson St. complex that they can break ground soon.

Yup, I saw that thread. ;) Mike Waddell does a great job posting information over there and listening to [reasonable] input.

Any news would have to be good news if it comes out anytime soon, especially with the 5-0 start and the massive South Florida game looming large. It's an exciting time to be a UC fan, because the magnitude of each game is incredible. Not only does each game this year have an impact on this specific season, but it has a pretty big impact on the program as a whole.

Caveat Emperor
10-06-2009, 03:53 PM
Yup, I saw that thread. ;) Mike Waddell does a great job posting information over there and listening to [reasonable] input.

Great news indeed:

http://www.gobearcats.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/100609aaa.html



University of Cincinnati Fans Match $1 Million Sheakley Challenge for Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex

Sheakley extends the matching challenge an additional $1.5 million due to recent success

CINCINNATI - Two weeks after Larry Sheakley, the CEO of the Sheakley Group and UC Patron, initiated a $1 million matching gift challenge to raise money for the Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex to the University of Cincinnati fan base, the UC Foundation, which oversees the school's current $1 billion Proudly Cincinnati campaign, and the UCATS Office, the fundraising wing of UC Athletics, announced today (Oct. 6) that they have received the donations needed to match the initial challenge.

The commitments, which came from a wide demographic of benefactors and community philanthropists, combined with the $7 million already raised, move the project closer to its overall goal of $13.5 million.

"First I want to thank everyone who took up my challenge over the last couple weeks and made this gift a reality," said Sheakley. "I am incredibly proud to be a part of this wonderful University, and the dedication and commitment of our community to join together for our student-athletes and the school. In response to your generosity and team spirit, I am personally extending the matching gift an additional $1.5 million. I am certain that the enthusiasm and pride we all feel for UC and the City of Cincinnati right now will continue, and I feel confident we will make our goal. Together, fans, business leaders, students, alumni, and the entire community, WE are creating UC Athletics history!"

Plans for the complex include two fields, one 100 yards in length and the other being 50 yards. The fields will serve all 18 of UC athletics programs with additional practice space, while the 100-yard field will be the competitive home for women's lacrosse. Long-range construction plans include seating areas, team meeting space, a press box, concessions, restrooms, and scoreboard.

The complex is also expected to play a vital role in UC recruiting the nation's finest prospective student-athletes. The 100-yard field will also become an indoor practice facility during winter months via an air-supported "bubble" that will be inflated over the field.

"The University and the City of Cincinnati are blessed to have such selfless benefactors like Larry Sheakley and the numerous others that stepped up the last two weeks," said UC Director of Athletics Mike Thomas. "It is the efforts of those people who will help us reach our goal and realize our CATAPULT ideals of Championships, Academics, and Together."

"I'm grateful for the confidence and support we've received over the past three years from the University and our fans," head coach Brian Kelly said. "The passion of the Bearcats Community, fans, and all those associated with our program are truly what makes UC football special. Every time we are issued a challenge, be it on or off the field, our supporters seem to find a way to get it done. That never give up attitude is what it takes to be a championship program, and by doing so, they demonstrate they are Proudly Cincinnati."

To contribute to the Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex, UC supporters are encouraged to log on to www.UCATS.net and click on the main page icon that features a comprehensive presentation of information regarding the Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex.

If you would like to speak to a member of the UCATS staff directly, please call 513-556-4884.

To learn more about the UC Foundation's Proudly Cincinnati campaign or make a gift, you can log on to www.proudlycincinnati.com

Redlegs23
10-06-2009, 04:02 PM
They also have a home and home series with a big name team every year. In the past few years and going forward it has been Texas, USC, Miami, Cal, Tennessee, and I believe OU. UC isn't there yet, and we will see if they ever get there.

What is this "there" that you speak of? Why isn't UC "there" yet? Are you referring to being a big name team? If so, big name based on what? The media's opinion? How many people buy tickets to their games? Continued success year after year?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything, I really would like to know what UC would have to do to be "there".

SeeinRed
10-06-2009, 04:04 PM
Your wrong. The reason why OSU wanted to move the game with OSU is strictly financial. Two years ago OSU had an athletic department budget of over $100M, with only two profitable sports, football and basketball. OSU needs 7-8 home football games in a given season in order to balance their AD budget. They also have a home and home series with a big name team every year. In the past few years and going forward it has been Texas, USC, Miami, Cal, Tennessee, and I believe OU. UC isn't there yet, and we will see if they ever get there.

No sir, I believe you are mistaken. I can maybe grant that it might be somewhat financially driven, but only because losing to UC could have a negative financial impact on their program. As it has been said many times before, OSU has nothing to gain and everything to lose in this market. Absolutely OSU if afraid of losing to UC. I maintain it was a smart move for OSU but it is what it is. An attempt to limit loss. If it was purely financial, OSU would've just pulled out of the agreement.

gonelong
10-06-2009, 04:20 PM
By your logic alone it shows OSU is absolutely "ducking" UC.

It's the money. OSU can make much, much, more on a home game. If they were ducking UC they wouldn't agree to play them at all.

Good news on UC getting some dough to build facilities. That is a step in the right direction.

GL

SeeinRed
10-06-2009, 04:26 PM
Again I say if you weren't part of the conference call you don't really know.

If that is the crux of your argument you better be in that call before you tell me why they really did it? Do you have some information I might not? Thats why you can just throw out anything I say. Dang, I guess none of should be saying anything, including people on OSU's side because I'm sure they weren't there either. This is going to come off worse than I mean it I know, but it seems especially risky since you don't know who is behind these screen names and who they might know or be. I'd watch where you throw that "you don't know" stuff around. Some of us actually do know some things that go on in those offices. I might just happen to know more than you think I do. I don't like throwing that around and never have, but it seems appropriate here. Just a fair warning.

That said, This is pretty common for big programs to get cold feet when the "cupcake" on their schedule start to get better. I will say again, OSU is smart for doing this. It makes sense for their program.

bucksfan2
10-06-2009, 04:27 PM
No sir, I believe you are mistaken. I can maybe grant that it might be somewhat financially driven, but only because losing to UC could have a negative financial impact on their program. As it has been said many times before, OSU has nothing to gain and everything to lose in this market. Absolutely OSU if afraid of losing to UC. I maintain it was a smart move for OSU but it is what it is. An attempt to limit loss. If it was purely financial, OSU would've just pulled out of the agreement.

Its about the money. Its pretty simple. The schedules are made by the AD with $ in mind. It isn't made about being scared to play another team. This is largely trumpeted up by fans. In reality losing at UC wouldn't have that big of negative financial impact. All home games are sold out, the bowl games are pooled amongst all the Big 10 teams. The only negative impact that it could have would be the Big 10 would only get 1 BCS bowl bid instead of 2.

SeeinRed
10-06-2009, 04:30 PM
It's the money. OSU can make much, much, more on a home game. If they were ducking UC they wouldn't agree to play them at all.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. It seems more like an excuse than a reason considering that the deal ever done in the first place. I see no way OSU backs out if UC doesn't improve its program.

SeeinRed
10-06-2009, 04:33 PM
Its about the money. Its pretty simple. The schedules are made by the AD with $ in mind. It isn't made about being scared to play another team. This is largely trumpeted up by fans. In reality losing at UC wouldn't have that big of negative financial impact. All home games are sold out, the bowl games are pooled amongst all the Big 10 teams. The only negative impact that it could have would be the Big 10 would only get 1 BCS bowl bid instead of 2.

As with GL, we'll have to agree to disagree. Everything I've heard leads toward the conclusion that OSU's intent wasn't to make money off the game, but to avoid a no-win situation for them as far as a loss to UC.

bucksfan2
10-06-2009, 04:37 PM
What is this "there" that you speak of? Why isn't UC "there" yet? Are you referring to being a big name team? If so, big name based on what? The media's opinion? How many people buy tickets to their games? Continued success year after year?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything, I really would like to know what UC would have to do to be "there".

Its a good question. They aren't a traditional power and they won't be able to change that. All the aforementioned teams with the exception of Cal, have won a BCS Championship. Winning a BCS Championship would go a long way to become a "there" team ;)

In reality I think UC needs a marquee win. They need that program changing win against a top team. I think with coaching stability, and hopefully new complexes, UC can transform its self from another Big East team, into a Virginia Tech type team. One of UC's biggest hurdles is it needs to be compared to the big boys instead of the lies of Boise St. IMO Boise State is a nice team, a highly ranked team, but won't find themselves in a national championship game.

Redlegs23
10-06-2009, 04:40 PM
In reality losing at UC wouldn't have that big of negative financial impact. All home games are sold out, the bowl games are pooled amongst all the Big 10 teams. The only negative impact that it could have would be the Big 10 would only get 1 BCS bowl bid instead of 2.

You're right in that it won't make a large financial impact, but I think recruiting plays into the decision some since that's something OSU could lose by playing in Cincy. Cincinnati puts out many D-1 recruits every year. In the past it made sense for OSU to come down here, beat up on Cincy, show the recruits who rules the state, and go home. But now, if OSU comes down here and loses, UC can be seen as a real player in this state, and some of these local recruits could decide to stay home.

If it was all about the money why did OSU travel to Cleveland to play Toledo? Wouldn't it have made more sense financially to play that game in Columbus since they can make much, much more money to play it there? I would guess that they didn't mind playing in Cleveland too badly since they knew the stadium would be full of Buckeye supporters, they would get a win, and they would impress all of the Cleveland area recruits who got to go to the game.

bucksfan2
10-06-2009, 04:41 PM
We'll have to agree to disagree on that. It seems more like an excuse than a reason considering that the deal ever done in the first place. I see no way OSU backs out if UC doesn't improve its program.

Until UC isn't lured by a big payday (see OSU and UT) they will little say so in where they play. Maybe that changes if Nippert can increase capacity to around 50000, but playing big time games at PBS is quite a bit different than playing a big time game in Clifton.

Cyclone792
10-06-2009, 04:46 PM
Great news indeed:

http://www.gobearcats.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/100609aaa.html

This is huge! One million raised by the public in two weeks that's already matched by Sheakley. If they can keep the same momentum going, they'd have the new $1.5 million raised by the public by the end of this month. After the new match, that'd leave only $1.5 million needing to be raised by the end of the year to break ground.

Caveat Emperor
10-06-2009, 04:50 PM
This is huge! One million raised by the public in two weeks that's already matched by Sheakley. If they can keep the same momentum going, they'd have the new $1.5 million raised by the public by the end of this month. After the new match, that'd leave only $1.5 million needing to be raised by the end of the year to break ground.

Call this more "idle speculation" -- but my guess is that Sheakley has agreed to finance a lot more than they've been letting on and they're using this "matching contributions" thing as a means of getting more donors on board and increasing the base of people they can call on at a later date for things like the (hopefully) eventual expansion of Nippert Stadium.

If so, bravo to UC for using this not only as an opportunity to improve facilities at the university but also as a way to leverage current enthusiasm for the program into building a larger network of contributing alums and business partners.

Cyclone792
10-06-2009, 05:01 PM
Call this more "idle speculation" -- but my guess is that Sheakley has agreed to finance a lot more than they've been letting on and they're using this "matching contributions" thing as a means of getting more donors on board and increasing the base of people they can call on at a later date for things like the (hopefully) eventual expansion of Nippert Stadium.

If so, bravo to UC for using this not only as an opportunity to improve facilities at the university but also as a way to leverage current enthusiasm for the program into building a larger network of contributing alums and business partners.

My guess is you're probably right, and that's one of the first things that came to mind when I read the Sheakley offer to match an additional $1.5 million.

This is also a great time to be releasing this information and new match offer. The South Florida game is still nine days away, and both teams have byes so there is a virtual guarantee that South Florida will remain ranked. The buildup for this game is going to be lengthy and huge, and that will only further increase excitement all around which should further help the donation drive.

Next Thursday's game keeps getting bigger and bigger for the program.

Cyclone792
10-06-2009, 05:05 PM
Projected BCS rankings through week five from the guru - these are extremely close to what the actual BCS rankings would look like if they were available:

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/303/week5projected.jpg

paintmered
10-06-2009, 05:21 PM
There are two sides to that story, supposedly UC was desperate for cash at the time and "selling" the home game made sense. Remember that athletic department was desperate for cash. Unless you were party to that conference call it is all speculation.

Ohio State gets a home game, UC gets to rile up its fanbase saying "OSU backed out", while taking home big $$$. I see a win-win.

OSU opted out of the game. They took the initiative, not UC.

paintmered
10-06-2009, 05:28 PM
Until UC isn't lured by a big payday (see OSU and UT) they will little say so in where they play. Maybe that changes if Nippert can increase capacity to around 50000, but playing big time games at PBS is quite a bit different than playing a big time game in Clifton.

The OSU series has been on the books since 2004-ish. There's no way UC signs that deal today or even three years ago. As for the Tennessee game, it happened because Va Tech pushed back their return trip to Clifton and opened a non-conference hole in UC's schedule. Both schools had an open slot, UC keeps their OOC game against a big BCS school and so the game happened. The money is icing on the cake.

Boston Red
10-06-2009, 06:56 PM
Top 3 from the SEC? That's just sick.

Matt700wlw
10-06-2009, 08:17 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/columns/story/12322152

Greg Doyel's take....which may be all you need to know without even reading it.

SunDeck
10-06-2009, 08:47 PM
That article just reflects the same biases of all the major sports outlets. If a team is not well known as a powerhouse, they couldn't possibly be any good. It's the height of journalistic excellence.
But in an obtuse way, it also makes a very good case why there needs to be a playoff to determine the national championship.

paintmered
10-06-2009, 08:56 PM
I'd like to hear all of your thoughts on this hypothetical situation:

If at the end of the season, there are two undefeated BCS teams. One of them is Cincinnati, and for the sake of this example, Alabama and Texas have one loss. Do you take Alabama or Texas in the championship game over Cincinnati? Why?

Boston Red
10-06-2009, 10:10 PM
If Alabama's one loss is to Florida in the SECCG, then I'd probably take them. I would not take Texas over UC in that scenario.

acredsfan
10-06-2009, 10:42 PM
All this talk about UC wanting the game at OSU because of financial reasons is laughable. They stood to make a good profit with the game being held at Paul Brown Stadium. The fact is OSU could make more at their own stadium. They are still playing the game so OSU can still lose to UC, but the chances are less in Columbus. If UC goes into Columbus and beats OSU, that makes it look worse to me than losing at a semi-neutral site like PBS. I don't think UC had much to gain by moving the game other than keeping OSU on the schedule if they were going to back out if they didn't move it. I just don't see much motivation for UC to initiate a move.

OSU has the upper hand in negotiating right now, but that may not last.

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 08:08 AM
All this talk about UC wanting the game at OSU because of financial reasons is laughable. They stood to make a good profit with the game being held at Paul Brown Stadium. The fact is OSU could make more at their own stadium. They are still playing the game so OSU can still lose to UC, but the chances are less in Columbus. If UC goes into Columbus and beats OSU, that makes it look worse to me than losing at a semi-neutral site like PBS. I don't think UC had much to gain by moving the game other than keeping OSU on the schedule if they were going to back out if they didn't move it. I just don't see much motivation for UC to initiate a move.

OSU has the upper hand in negotiating right now, but that may not last.

That will always last. Ohio State has a 105,000+ stadium that sells out every game, every year. Season tickets to OSU games for alumni run around $150/ticket when you include the donation required to get the ticket. The only way UC will have the upper hand in negotiations is if OSU hits a 3-4-5 year dry patch and loses its sell outs. Until that happens, OSU will always have the upper hand because the dollars and cents.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 08:10 AM
I'd like to hear all of your thoughts on this hypothetical situation:

If at the end of the season, there are two undefeated BCS teams. One of them is Cincinnati, and for the sake of this example, Alabama and Texas have one loss. Do you take Alabama or Texas in the championship game over Cincinnati? Why?

I'd take an undefeated UC team over a one loss anybody. Fortunately, I think the computer polls would align with that as well. The computer polls favor undefeated teams, and they'll give a nod to marquee road wins.

Despite everyone focusing on UC's schedule and the Big East, one thing that does play in their favor very well is the fact that four of their seven Big East games are on the road and half of their overall games are on the road. If UC is undefeated at the end of the season, they will have road victories over Oregon State, South Florida, Pitt and Rutgers. All of those teams should be ranked in the top 40-50 in the computer rankings, with one or two of them ranked substantially higher (top 20ish).

The home/road schedule for UC this year is what separates them from an example such as Utah last year. Utah had quality wins, however, their best three wins (Oregon State, TCU and BYU) were all at home. Air Force was their best road win, and after Air Force they played nobody on the road.

This makes things interesting with Big East scheduling from year to year with the 4-3 format. Years with four home games for UC - like last year - help them win the conference. But years with four road games for UC - like this year - will give them more power in the computer polls.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 08:34 AM
Week 6: Who to root for

There are two schools of thought here for Big East conference games, such as West Virginia @ Syracuse and Connecticut @ Pittsburgh this week. In terms of boosting up UC's schedule with potential marquee wins, you'd want to root for West Virginia and most likely Pittsburgh to win (though Connecticut is still a solid team as well). In terms of simply winning the Big East, you want teams such as West Virginia and Pittsburgh to lose.

That much being said, until UC drops a Big East game, I'll go with the school of thought of rooting for the other higher caliber Big East teams to win so that a potential (or past) UC victory for that team helps pad UC's resume. However, at the same time, I won't really be at all disappointed if West Virginia and/or Pittsburgh lose this week since that just helps UC in terms of Big East play.

Teams in bold are teams to root for this week.


High Ranked Teams (#6 Boise State and #7 USC have bye weeks)

Boston College @ #5 Virginia Tech
#3 Alabama @ #21 Ole Miss
Wisconsin @ #9 Ohio State
Colorado @ #2 Texas
#10 TCU @ Air Force
#1 Florida @ #4 LSU (a bit of a pick'em since LSU has a better chance to lose in the future than Florida but an LSU loss likely moves UC in front of the Tigers whereas a Florida loss may not push Florida behind UC)
Michigan @ #12 Iowa (Iowa is currently 9th in the projected BCS rankings, just slightly behind UC)


UC OOC Opponents

Miami (OH) @ Northwestern
Michigan State @ Illinois
Stanford @ Oregon State
Fresno State @ Hawaii


Big East Games (South Florida has a bye week)

West Virginia @ Syracuse
Texas Southern @ Rutgers
Connecticut @ Pittsburgh
Southern Miss @ Louisville


We can eventually add in OOC Big East opponents as well later in the season if things get really interesting, such as Florida State, but for now I won't bother to list those games.

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 08:56 AM
I'd take an undefeated UC team over a one loss anybody. Fortunately, I think the computer polls would align with that as well. The computer polls favor undefeated teams, and they'll give a nod to marquee road wins.

I wouldn't. In reality it would have to be a weak 1 loss team for UC to leap frog them into the title game. UC needs to distance themselves for the Boise State association if they want to be considered a contender. I don't know why but Big East teams like WVU and Pitt don't have that problem, UC does. UC needs to change public perception, how they do that is anyone's guess.

Redlegs23
10-07-2009, 09:13 AM
I wouldn't. In reality it would have to be a weak 1 loss team for UC to leap frog them into the title game. UC needs to distance themselves for the Boise State association if they want to be considered a contender. I don't know why but Big East teams like WVU and Pitt don't have that problem, UC does. UC needs to change public perception, how they do that is anyone's guess.

That's a good question. You would think that finishing in the top 20 for two straight seasons and then vaulting up to number 8 in the country the next year would help change that perception, but the crap that people like Doyel keep pumping out keeps throwing UC in the cinderella role.

Redlegs23
10-07-2009, 09:15 AM
Does anyone know the honest answer as to why OSU went to Cleveland to play Toledo but they refused to come to UC? The answer is obviously not about money, or they never would have went to Cleveland. And if moving the UC game was all about money they would have never scheduled that game in the first place.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 09:19 AM
I wouldn't. In reality it would have to be a weak 1 loss team for UC to leap frog them into the title game. UC needs to distance themselves for the Boise State association if they want to be considered a contender. I don't know why but Big East teams like WVU and Pitt don't have that problem, UC does. UC needs to change public perception, how they do that is anyone's guess.

UC is already 8th in the projected BCS standings after only five weeks of play and the meat of the Big East schedule remaining, and the only one loss teams ahead of them are USC and Virginia Tech. Let's not forget either that UC picked up a mountain of points in both human polls after their sloppy win at Miami (OH). Further piling up wins will just further pile up the points in the human polls. It will happen, because it's already happening.

None of the one loss teams behind UC have a prayer of catching the Bearcats if UC would run the table either, and yes that also includes your Buckeyes.

Should UC beat South Florida in eight days, I'm guessing a lot of people unfamiliar with the Bearcats will be in for a heck of a surprise when the official BCS comes out after week 7. It sounds like they won't be ready to see how high UC would be ranked at that point in the BCS.

acredsfan
10-07-2009, 09:29 AM
That will always last. Ohio State has a 105,000+ stadium that sells out every game, every year. Season tickets to OSU games for alumni run around $150/ticket when you include the donation required to get the ticket. The only way UC will have the upper hand in negotiations is if OSU hits a 3-4-5 year dry patch and loses its sell outs. Until that happens, OSU will always have the upper hand because the dollars and cents.Not quite, if UC is at the same level of OSU for a few years and retain coach Kelly along with rennovating Nippert, OSU will no longer have the upper hand. They may want to keep the game in Columbus, but the Bearcats would have no reason to give in to that demand when they can bring it back to Cincinnati and make more money for themselves. UC has a little way to go, but OSU won't keep the leverage if this keeps up. The size of the stadium isn't all that matters.

Let's be honest, the reason OSU had the upper hand lately is because of UC's history, which is a good reason. If what you are saying is true, why do they even play home and home series with any other school? UC has to earn respect, and I'm not crazy enough to think that two seasons will change everything, but if they are still playing at this level in 2012, changes will be made.

SeeinRed
10-07-2009, 09:37 AM
UC is already 8th in the projected BCS standings after only five weeks of play and the meat of the Big East schedule remaining, and the only one loss teams ahead of them are USC and Virginia Tech. Let's not forget either that UC picked up a mountain of points in both human polls after their sloppy win at Miami (OH). Further piling up wins will just further pile up the points in the human polls. It will happen, because it's already happening.

None of the one loss teams behind UC have a prayer of catching the Bearcats if UC would run the table either, and yes that also includes your Buckeyes.

Should UC beat South Florida in eight days, I'm guessing a lot of people unfamiliar with the Bearcats will be in for a heck of a surprise when the official BCS comes out after week 7. It sounds like they won't be ready to see how high UC would be ranked at that point in the BCS.


I wouldn't at all be suprised if UC is passed up by a one-loss team in the end. We can make this case all we want but the fact is that this system is broken. Until there is some sort of change to the bowl system, only the traditional powerhouse programs will get the real chance to be called champions. People will argue about SOS, key losses/victories and computer rankings, but there is no way to compare teams that don't play each other that don't have glaring holes. Letting computers and polls decide make an absolute mockery of what sports is all about, playing the games. Thats not where the money is, however.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 09:43 AM
I wouldn't at all be suprised if UC is passed up by a one-loss team in the end. We can make this case all we want but the fact is that this system is broken. Until there is some sort of change to the bowl system, only the traditional powerhouse programs will get the real chance to be called champions. People will argue about SOS, key losses/victories and computer rankings, but there is no way to compare teams that don't play each other that don't have glaring holes. Letting computers and polls decide make an absolute mockery of what sports is all about, playing the games. Thats not where the money is, however.

UC is making too much noise in all the polls too early. Obviously the computer polls factor in every single game so there will be scenarios where they'll prefer certain one loss teams over an undefeated UC if lots of specific things happen, but those scenarios are rare.

If you string out the season for an undefeated UC, we have two important factors that would really come into play:

1) The computers would love an undefeated team with the type and amount of road wins UC would have (Rutgers, Oregon State, South Florida and Pitt)

2) The schedule sets up nicely to impress human poll voters down the stretch. Let's say UC beats South Florida, then mauls Louisville and Syracuse. At that point they're 8-0, very high in the rankings, and their final four games in order are Connecticut, West Virginia, Illinois (who I expect to rebound a bit) and at Pittsburgh. There's no single big wow team there, but that is a very solid four game stretch against good competition. If an 8-0 UC team rolled through those four games to finish 12-0, the human voters would most definitely recognize that stretch of games.

joshnky
10-07-2009, 09:44 AM
None of the one loss teams behind UC have a prayer of catching the Bearcats if UC would run the table either, and yes that also includes your Buckeyes.

I'm not sure if you mean current one loss teams (in which case I agree) or future one loss teams. IMO, Florida and maybe Alabama are the wild cards that would jump Cincy even with one loss. UC really needs Florida to run the table in the SEC so that a one loss SEC champ is not in the championship discussion.

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 09:49 AM
Does anyone know the honest answer as to why OSU went to Cleveland to play Toledo but they refused to come to UC? The answer is obviously not about money, or they never would have went to Cleveland. And if moving the UC game was all about money they would have never scheduled that game in the first place.

I think it had to do more with the Cleveland market than anything. Outside of Columbus, Cleveland is the biggest pro-OSU city in Ohio. It was more a game to the Cleveland fans as well as to keep the fertile Cleveland recruiting area.

I don't know the financials behind the game nor do I know how many tickets each given school was allotted.

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 09:52 AM
I'm not sure if you mean current one loss teams (in which case I agree) or future one loss teams. IMO, Florida and maybe Alabama are the wild cards that would jump Cincy even with one loss. UC really needs Florida to run the table in the SEC so that a one loss SEC champ is not in the championship discussion.

Florida, Alabama, Texas, Va Tech, USC, LSU, and Georiga would all jump UC if they only had 1 loss.

joshnky
10-07-2009, 09:55 AM
Florida, Alabama, Texas, Va Tech, USC, LSU, and Georiga would all jump UC if they only had 1 loss.

Now you're just trying to start trouble.

I don't agree but I guess we'll find out.

SeeinRed
10-07-2009, 10:00 AM
I think it had to do more with the Cleveland market than anything. Outside of Columbus, Cleveland is the biggest pro-OSU city in Ohio. It was more a game to the Cleveland fans as well as to keep the fertile Cleveland recruiting area.

I don't know the financials behind the game nor do I know how many tickets each given school was allotted.


That was the reason for doing it in PBS, so Cincinnati OSU fans could see the game. It just doesn't jive with being a money issue. From what I've heard, OSU didn't want the game at all when they approached UC. UC was just able to work a deal where the game was still played. UC probably would've had a larger payday if they had just let OSU opt out of the game.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 10:02 AM
I'm not sure if you mean current one loss teams (in which case I agree) or future one loss teams. IMO, Florida and maybe Alabama are the wild cards that would jump Cincy even with one loss. UC really needs Florida to run the table in the SEC so that a one loss SEC champ is not in the championship discussion.

For UC, the SEC team that needs to run the table or suffer two losses is Alabama. They are by far the team that would have the most impressive one loss resume, partly because of their win over Virginia Tech already.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 10:05 AM
Florida, Alabama, Texas, Va Tech, USC, LSU, and Georiga would all jump UC if they only had 1 loss.


Now you're just trying to start trouble.

I don't agree but I guess we'll find out.


Actually it's mostly a lack of understanding on the BCS as a whole, especially the computer formulas. Not to mention missing the fact that one of the teams listed above already has two losses anyway.

Boston Red
10-07-2009, 10:11 AM
Va Tech

Not a chance. Have you been watching the ACC? Not good.

DTCromer
10-07-2009, 10:15 AM
I wouldn't. In reality it would have to be a weak 1 loss team for UC to leap frog them into the title game. UC needs to distance themselves for the Boise State association if they want to be considered a contender. I don't know why but Big East teams like WVU and Pitt don't have that problem, UC does. UC needs to change public perception, how they do that is anyone's guess.

Sooo say OSU goes undefeated in the Big 10. Would you put them ahead of an undefeated UC team?

SeeinRed
10-07-2009, 10:18 AM
UC is making too much noise in all the polls too early. Obviously the computer polls factor in every single game so there will be scenarios where they'll prefer certain one loss teams over an undefeated UC if lots of specific things happen, but those scenarios are rare.

If you string out the season for an undefeated UC, we have two important factors that would really come into play:

1) The computers would love an undefeated team with the type and amount of road wins UC would have (Rutgers, Oregon State, South Florida and Pitt)

2) The schedule sets up nicely to impress human poll voters down the stretch. Let's say UC beats South Florida, then mauls Louisville and Syracuse. At that point they're 8-0, very high in the rankings, and their final four games in order are Connecticut, West Virginia, Illinois (who I expect to rebound a bit) and at Pittsburgh. There's no single big wow team there, but that is a very solid four game stretch against good competition. If an 8-0 UC team rolled through those four games to finish 12-0, the human voters would most definitely recognize that stretch of games.

Oh, don't get me wrong, everything you say makes a lot of sense and you have done a very good job with analysis. I just wouldn't be suprised to see UC get snubbed in this system. Of course this all become moot if UC loses a game. All they can do is keep on winning and see how it all turns out. We'll see what happens.

DTCromer
10-07-2009, 10:19 AM
Florida, Alabama, Texas, Va Tech, USC, LSU, and Georiga would all jump UC if they only had 1 loss.

That's ridiculous to say considering it depends who they all lost to.

Even if Texas's 1 loss is to OU, I wouldn't put them in front of an undefeated UC. Who will Texas beat? Anyone more impressive than UC?

Same with USC and VT.

The only ones I could make an argument to jump UC are those 1 loss SEC teams.

Redlegs23
10-07-2009, 10:30 AM
It was more a game to the Cleveland fans as well as to keep the fertile Cleveland recruiting area.

Bingo, that's what I was getting at. That's what the game with UC at PBS used to be. It was a good chance for OSU to come into Cincy, which still holds a lot of OSU fans, impress the local recruits, and then drive back up to Columbus. Suddenly UC is looking pretty good and those two things are at risk. Some of those people that used to stay home and watch OSU games on tv are starting to take an interest in the local team, and a lot of the local recruits are starting to consider UC whereas the big time local recruits never did that in the past. OSU saw that risk, saw the potential damage that could be done by losing to UC, and decided it would be a better idea for them to play in Columbus. I'm not faulting OSU, it was a smart move on their part, but the people that say it was strictly financial are just flat out wrong.

The game would have never been scheduled in the first place if it was strictly financial, and OSU wouldn't have played in Cleveland if it was all about the money. But some OSU fans are too proud to admit that there were other factors in the decision. OSU fans often point out that "they're not scared of UC, why would they schedule USC, OU, etc. if they were scared of UC". The bottom line is losing to a traditional out of state powerhouse doesn't do near as much damage as losing to the in state UC team which doesn't have the great national reputation.

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 10:59 AM
That's ridiculous to say considering it depends who they all lost to.

Even if Texas's 1 loss is to OU, I wouldn't put them in front of an undefeated UC. Who will Texas beat? Anyone more impressive than UC?

Same with USC and VT.

The only ones I could make an argument to jump UC are those 1 loss SEC teams.

Sorry I forgot Georgia had two losses.

Lets look at it his way. All the teams that I mentioned, sans Georgia, would have benefit of a title game (except USC) in which they would play a top ranked foe. Look at the list of the teams that the undefeated, or one loss teams, have played or who they play. IMO they would all leap frog UC if they had one loss. USC and Texas would have the weakest arguments, but I think their name gives them the boost.

LSU - Florida X2, Old Miss, Auburn, Alabama.

Florida - LSU, Georgia, FSU, Alabama

Alabama - Old Miss, LSU, Auburn, Florida

Va Tech - Nebraska, Miami, Georgia Tech

Texas - OU, Missouri, Oklahoma St., Kansas, Big 12 title opponent.

USC - OSU, Cal, Oregon

Boston Red
10-07-2009, 11:37 AM
I agree with you on the SEC teams. I also agree that the other teams you mention have somewhat tougher schedules. However, I think that simply means they would have beaten out UC if both were undefeated. None of those teams (other than the SEC teams) play tough enough schedules to negate a loss if we're talking about an undefeated UC. Especially VaTech.

Sea Ray
10-07-2009, 12:09 PM
Sooo say OSU goes undefeated in the Big 10. Would you put them ahead of an undefeated UC team?

Definitely UC should go ahead of OSU in that scenario. UC's victory over the other OSU, Oregon St, is a better non conference win than any the Buckeyes will have.

The question to consider is should UC be ahead of Ohio St if they drop one to W Va or Pitt. That's a tough one

GIDP
10-07-2009, 12:14 PM
If you arent in the SEC you dont deserve to be called football!!!!!

:rolleyes:

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 01:24 PM
Definitely UC should go ahead of OSU in that scenario. UC's victory over the other OSU, Oregon St, is a better non conference win than any the Buckeyes will have.

The question to consider is should UC be ahead of Ohio St if they drop one to W Va or Pitt. That's a tough one

If OSU and UC win out it will be very interesting to see what the pollsters do. It will be interesting to see what happens if OSU looks good against Wisconsin to see if OSU leaps UC in the polls.

I think being in Cincinnati we have a much different perspective of the Bearcats than that of across the nation. IMO outside of this area UC is being talked about in the same category as Boise St. Its the primary reason I see a good 1 loss team leap frogging an undefeated UC team, if UC runs the table. I think a good comp for UC is Texas Tech. And it took a win over top ranked Texas to validate TT as a national title contender. Unfortunatly for UC the don't have the ability to play and beat highly thought of programs.

Sea Ray
10-07-2009, 02:16 PM
If OSU and UC win out it will be very interesting to see what the pollsters do. It will be interesting to see what happens if OSU looks good against Wisconsin to see if OSU leaps UC in the polls.

I think being in Cincinnati we have a much different perspective of the Bearcats than that of across the nation. IMO outside of this area UC is being talked about in the same category as Boise St. Its the primary reason I see a good 1 loss team leap frogging an undefeated UC team, if UC runs the table. I think a good comp for UC is Texas Tech. And it took a win over top ranked Texas to validate TT as a national title contender. Unfortunatly for UC the don't have the ability to play and beat highly thought of programs.


I think you make good points. UC is in a little better position than BSU because they are in a BCS conference but your point is well taken. The way I see it, both UC and OSU are in somewhat weak conferences so you then look to their non conference schedules

Redlegs23
10-07-2009, 02:45 PM
I still don't think UC will go undefeated and I don't think we will have to deal with this question regarding UC, but how awesome is it that you can ask these questions about UC possibly being in the national championship picture? A few years ago this wasn't even close to being a reality. It just speaks volumes of what has been going on with Coach Kelly in Clifton lately. There is so much momentum behind UC football right now and I'm enjoying every second of it.

bucksfan2
10-07-2009, 02:57 PM
I still don't think UC will go undefeated and I don't think we will have to deal with this question regarding UC, but how awesome is it that you can ask these questions about UC possibly being in the national championship picture? A few years ago this wasn't even close to being a reality. It just speaks volumes of what has been going on with Coach Kelly in Clifton lately. There is so much momentum behind UC football right now and I'm enjoying every second of it.

I second that. It sure is fun to talk about UC football.

Cyclone792
10-07-2009, 03:03 PM
I still don't think UC will go undefeated and I don't think we will have to deal with this question regarding UC, but how awesome is it that you can ask these questions about UC possibly being in the national championship picture? A few years ago this wasn't even close to being a reality. It just speaks volumes of what has been going on with Coach Kelly in Clifton lately. There is so much momentum behind UC football right now and I'm enjoying every second of it.

I'm not expecting them to go undefeated either. My goal heading into this season was for UC to win the Big East and grab another BCS bowl berth, and that's still my goal. Anything beyond that is a bonus.

The interesting twist to all this, which the national championship talk factors into, is the push for donations for the practice facility and raising the overall prestige of the program. On a smaller scale, the upcoming South Florida game is important for UC in simply winning the Big East. But on a bigger scale now, winning that game propels UC further in their donation drive. Similarly, if national championship talk also helps propel UC in their donation drive then I'm all for it.

paintmered
10-07-2009, 06:13 PM
Bingo, that's what I was getting at. That's what the game with UC at PBS used to be. It was a good chance for OSU to come into Cincy, which still holds a lot of OSU fans, impress the local recruits, and then drive back up to Columbus. Suddenly UC is looking pretty good and those two things are at risk. Some of those people that used to stay home and watch OSU games on tv are starting to take an interest in the local team, and a lot of the local recruits are starting to consider UC whereas the big time local recruits never did that in the past. OSU saw that risk, saw the potential damage that could be done by losing to UC, and decided it would be a better idea for them to play in Columbus. I'm not faulting OSU, it was a smart move on their part, but the people that say it was strictly financial are just flat out wrong.


I agree with all of that except for one little fact. OSU decided to not play the game at all. It is being played because UC proposed playing it in Columbus.

Caveat Emperor
10-08-2009, 10:53 PM
Brian Kelly is on an all-out media blitz tomorrow with ESPN -- per the Enquirer:


Here's the schedule of his appearances as sent to me by ESPN a few minutes ago:

11:20 a.m. - ESPN2 First Take
11:50 a.m. - ESPN Radio, Mike Tirico's Weekend Blitz
1 p.m. - ESPN Radio College Game Day (Tape)
1:20 p.m. - ESPN Radio/ESPN2, Scott Van Pelt Show
1:30 p.m. - ESPN Radio College Game Day Tailgate (tape)
1:40 p.m. - ESPN, Outside the Lines (tape)
2 p.m. - ESPN College Football Live

dabvu2498
10-08-2009, 11:32 PM
Brian Kelly is on an all-out media blitz tomorrow with ESPN -- per the Enquirer: He was on with Rome this afternoon. Hopefully nobody else in the conference was listening.

Cyclone792
10-09-2009, 12:11 AM
From the UC marketing department on redesigning their sports site, www.gobearcats.com, which will further have an impact on the football program (and basketball and other programs) ...


Our re-designed site and new lineup of writers and columnists will be announced in the next week and frankly it will blow away any other departmental site in the nation as we will have seven (7) feature writers who are some of the most knowledgeable sports minds in the Tri-State and many of which have NATIONAL reputations. Speculate on this for a while as to whom we may have hired... With media space shrinking for sports coverage in the area UC has made the proactive move to provide the best coverage from a staff of strong professionals that is truly over the top in terms of what we will deliver. October 14 is the launch date... stay tuned.

paintmered
10-09-2009, 07:33 AM
From the UC marketing department on redesigning their sports site, www.gobearcats.com, which will further have an impact on the football program (and basketball and other programs) ...

I absolutely love how UC has taken it upon themselves to fill the lack of proper local media coverage of UC athletics (Bill Koch, I'm looking at you).

SeeinRed
10-09-2009, 08:24 AM
I absolutely love how UC has taken it upon themselves to fill the lack of proper local media coverage of UC athletics (Bill Koch, I'm looking at you).


I really like the weekly Dan Hoard column. He may be a all sunshine and rainbows most of the time, but I really enjoy reading his work. I'd like to see more from Josh Katzowitz, but he is doing a lot of freelance work also. I know he does the rapid reports for the Bengals on CBSsports.com. That has to take up a lot of his time I would think.

Any guesses as to who will be the reporters/columnists? I hear Hal McCoy is looking for a gig....:)

Caveat Emperor
10-09-2009, 02:32 PM
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigeast/post/_/id/3572/video-kelly-on-cincinnatis-5-0-start

Coach Kelly on ESPN's "First Take" -- it's a short five minute interview, nothing really out of the ordinary. I do like his take on the OSU / UC situation, though.

travisgrimes
10-10-2009, 01:47 AM
Saw Marcus Barnett, Alex Daniels, Jeff Linkenbach, Kazeem Alli and Isaiah Pead at FearFeat at Kings Island tonight. Talked for a second to all of them and all seemed like nice guys although I was surprised to see Bones Barnett smoking a cigarette.

Cyclone792
10-11-2009, 12:07 AM
Even though UC had a bye this week, some good things happened for both UC and the Big East.

Oregon State picked up a very nice win against Stanford, and that will definitely aid UC's strength of schedule. Stanford was ranked 27th in the projected BCS standings, mostly because three of the five available computers had them ranked fairly high. Nevertheless, Oregon State will get a nice boost in the computers, which in turn will give UC a boost in the computers.

Fresno State currently leads 14-0 at Hawaii. Fresno State is a good enough team that they could realistically run the table the rest of the regular season. They've already played Boise State in conference play so the rest of their schedule plays out well. Fresno State running off a long string of wins would be a nice boost for UC.

Pitt beat UConn, and West Virginia beat Syracuse. In terms of opening up the Big East for UC, that's not really helpful. However, it does elevate both Pitt and West Virginia a bit overall.

Louisville picked up a nice win against Southern Miss. Louisville's not going anywhere, but any Big East OOC wins will help the Big East. Rutgers also beat lowly Texas Southern.

Florida State needs to beat Georgia Tech tonight, but this game could go either way.

NatiRedGals
10-11-2009, 09:35 AM
Florida State needs to beat Georgia Tech tonight, but this game could go either way.

Boy were you right.. man almost.. (22) Georgia Tech 49, Florida State 44

Cyclone792
10-13-2009, 08:29 AM
UC drops down to 9th in the updated projected BCS standings, although that's not unexpected considering the bye week. UC's SOS for most of the computers went up a bit over the weekend thanks to a nice win by Oregon State over Stanford and Fresno State picking up a win in Hawaii.

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/760/bcsweek6.jpg

Cyclone792
10-13-2009, 08:41 AM
Week 7: Who to root for

UC has a bit of a big game coming up this Thursday at #21 South Florida - we all know this. But we've got some other big games coming up this week too starting tomorrow night.

Teams in bold are teams to root for this week.


High Ranked Teams (#10 LSU is on a bye)

#5 Boise State @ Tulsa (this is likely Boise State's toughest remaining game)
#3 Texas vs. #20 Oklahoma (game played at neutral site)
#7 Ohio State @ Purdue
#11 Iowa @ Wisconsin
Arkansas @ #1 Florida
#6 USC @ #25 Notre Dame
Colorado State @ #12 TCU
#4 Virginia Tech @ #19 Georgia Tech (this is likely Virginia Tech's toughest game remaining this season, and that includes the ACC Championship. If the Hokies win this one, I think they win out)
#9 Miami (FL) @ UCF
#22 South Carolina @ #2 Alabama


UC OOC Opponents (Oregon State is on a bye)

Miami (OH) @ Ohio
Illinois @ Indiana
San Jose State @ Fresno State


Big East Games (Syracuse is on a bye)

Pittsburgh @ Rutgers (Pitt does not have many tough Big East road games, and I want to see them have two Big East losses by December 5th)
Louisville @ Connecticut
Marshall @ West Virginia (a chance for the Big East to pick up a decent OOC win here as Marshall isn't bad)

Roy Tucker
10-13-2009, 12:11 PM
Week 7: Who to root for

#7 Ohio State @ Purdue




What!!! Wait a minute there fella

:D

Cyclone792
10-13-2009, 01:19 PM
What!!! Wait a minute there fella

:D

No worries, if Ohio State drops a game they shouldn't drop then chances are I'll be rooting for them over Iowa if it's necessary for Iowa to lose later this season. ;)

Roy Tucker
10-13-2009, 03:49 PM
No worries, if Ohio State drops a game they shouldn't drop then chances are I'll be rooting for them over Iowa if it's necessary for Iowa to lose later this season. ;)


Thanks, I feel so much better. :rolleyes:

I'm a UC fan too. Its a nice story and I'm glad to see them doing well. I hope it never comes to a OSU or UC decision. I've got room in my rooting heart for both.

UC does need to continue this for a while and make it a habit and tradition like OSU. As quickly as its come up, it could just as quickly go away. The Cincinnati sport fan is quite fickle.

goreds2
10-13-2009, 04:27 PM
Here is the XM radio feed this week.

10/15/2009

Cincinnati @ South Florida (away feed) N/A 7:30PMET XM 102
Cincinnati @ South Florida (home feed) N/A 7:30PMET XM 103
Cincinnati @ South Florida (national feed) N/A 7:45PMET XM 203

http://www.xmradio.com/schedule/sport/get_schedule_servlet.jsp?sub_cat_id=

Redlegs23
10-14-2009, 10:15 AM
I'm starting to get a little worried about tomorrow night. USF will be completely jacked...night game, ESPN, 60,000 fans (which is well over their average), and a defense that lets up less than 10 points a game. Last time they had the atmosphere they're gearing up for tomorrow night they beat the #6 ranked WVU if I remember correctly. It will be very, very tough to get out of there with a win tomorrow night.

Boston Red
10-15-2009, 08:26 PM
UC clearly in for a war based on the first quarter. We're going to find out what the Bearcats are all about tonight.

HeatherC1212
10-15-2009, 08:26 PM
I'm not watching the game right now but the last time I checked the score it was 7-3 with USF leading and it was near the end of the first quarter. UC had the ball though so hopefully the offense starts figuring out ways to score TDs and not just FGs.

SunDeck
10-15-2009, 09:11 PM
17-7 with 4 and change left in the half.

Tony Cloninger
10-15-2009, 09:35 PM
17 to 7....but who is winning?

HeatherC1212
10-15-2009, 09:45 PM
17 to 7....but who is winning?

UC but the score is actually 17-10 at the half. Tony Pike fell on the arm he broke last year at the end of the half and they're concerned about him. Hopefully he's fine and plays the second half. :eek:

HeatherC1212
10-15-2009, 09:50 PM
X-rays were negative for Tony's arm. Apparently it's just a sprained wrist and he's got a brace of some sort on the arm. This is his NON throwing arm, the one he broke last year, and it remains to be seen if he comes back into the game or not. USF has the ball first in the third quarter.

Tony Cloninger
10-15-2009, 09:54 PM
Thanks. He played this way last year....which is hard to believe....so hopefully the dense can shut it down ...so they can run more and not have to pass as much.

cincrazy
10-15-2009, 10:10 PM
Backup QB just took off for like a 70 yard run for a TD, Bearcats up 24-10 and in control.

GIDP
10-15-2009, 10:38 PM
This game is kinda hard to watch

Boston Red
10-15-2009, 10:42 PM
Pike seems to be replaceable.

HeatherC1212
10-15-2009, 11:25 PM
UC ices this game with an endzone interception with only 1:25 left in the game. I'm impressed with Collarus and how well he's played on short notice and the offense was still able to move the ball. This was a crazy game though and I'm sure UC's practices this week are going to be busy if Pike is out for a while. :eek:

Congrats to UC on a big win though! :D

Cyclone792
10-16-2009, 12:04 AM
Big win for the Cats! The only downside is the status on Pike, but hopefully it's not serious enough that he's out too long. With the way the schedule shapes up, we really shouldn't need him next weekend against Louisville or the following week at Syracuse. Connecticut heads to Nippert on November 7th, and that game starts the key four game stretch. It'd be nice to have Pike back by Connecticut.

I think it's time to root for Rutgers tomorrow night. I want Pitt to have two Big East losses heading into UC's December 5th matchup.

paintmered
10-16-2009, 12:19 AM
I read 1-2 weeks for Pike on one of the message boards. So take that with a grain of salt. But it would mean that Pike would be back for the revenge game against the Donald Brown-less UCONN. In the meantime, Zach Collaros has shown himself to be plenty capable of handling the offense.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2009, 12:24 AM
I read 1-2 weeks for Pike on one of the message boards. So take that with a grain of salt. But it would mean that Pike would be back for the revenge game against the Donald Brown-less UCONN. In the meantime, Zach Collaros has shown himself to be plenty capable of handling the offense.

As long as the arm isn't broken, he can probably play next week against Louisville. But, given his overall importance to the team, I think they'll play it safe and give him next week off.

It's fortunate for all parties involved that Louisville isn't very good.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2009, 12:37 AM
Ugh --



Pike to see specialist Friday
Posted by BKoch at 10/16/2009 12:19 AM EDT on Cincinnati.com

Brian Kelly said after the game that Tony Pike will be examined by a specialist Friday to determine the extent of the damage to his left wrist/arm, the same one that Pike broke last year.

"The plate that's in there has shifted," Kelly said. "He may need surgery but we won't know until he sees the specialist."

Kelly said that Pike probably won't play next week against Louisville, but would not commit to Zach Collaros as the starter if Pike can't go. He said that Chazz Anderson is also under consideration. He did, however, praise the job that Collaros did against South Florida. The sophomore rushed for 132 yards and passed for 72.


It feels good that they got a tough road win, but Collaros and Anderson are legitimately terrible passers. Collaros is probably the better option of the two (I saw all I ever want to see of Anderson last season), but still not someone I want under center with a game on the line. I especially don't trust either one of them to win a BE game if the opposition has an entire week to prep.

Louisville and Syracuse should be games they can win with no passing attack, but they absolutely need Pike back to have a shot at beating UConn, WVU and Pitt. If he can't go for all three of those games, it could be bad.

BearcatShane
10-16-2009, 01:08 AM
Caveat, Callaros can throw that football. I'v seen it at practice. Trust me. He reminds me a little of former Louisville QB Stefon Lefors.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2009, 01:35 AM
Caveat, Callaros can throw that football. I'v seen it at practice. Trust me. He reminds me a little of former Louisville QB Stefon Lefors.

I hope you're right -- because other than the deep ball he threw to a wide open Guidugli, his passing looked bad tonight. I'll cut him some slack because he probably hadn't taken many snaps in practice, but he made a terrible decision to throw the ball with a defender leaping at him on the pick and he should've had another pass picked off as well.

BearcatShane
10-16-2009, 01:58 AM
I hope you're right -- because other than the deep ball he threw to a wide open Guidugli, his passing looked bad tonight. I'll cut him some slack because he probably hadn't taken many snaps in practice, but he made a terrible decision to throw the ball with a defender leaping at him on the pick and he should've had another pass picked off as well.

I know but he will practice with the first teamers this week and after the Louisville game I'm confident we'll all be saying how amazing it is that when someone gets hurt, no matter who, the replacement always seems to do a great job. Next man in.

BuckeyeRedleg
10-16-2009, 10:36 AM
Good win for UC. I hope they win out.

DTCromer
10-16-2009, 10:43 AM
If UC is playing for the BE championship, I plan on being in Pittsburgh 12/5. I've been to Heinz once and it was one of the coldest games I've ever been to. . .. with the wind blowing . . . I hate that stadium for multiple reasons. :)

joshnky
10-16-2009, 11:57 AM
Louisville and Syracuse should be games they can win with no passing attack, but they absolutely need Pike back to have a shot at beating UConn, WVU and Pitt. If he can't go for all three of those games, it could be bad.

While I don't think that UofL can beat Cincy, the trouble at QB does give me a glimmer of hope. Louisville is not a very good team but they have some talented players on the offensive side of the ball. Long, Guy, and Beaumont are a great group of receivers if Froman can get them the ball. Anderson and Powell are also capable of huge games running the ball. So, if Froman and the offensive line can figure it out, this offense will give anyone trouble including UC. Their problem is on defense, specifically the secondary. It has gotten so bad that they recently made a senior WR the #2 corner despite the fact that he hadn't played corner since high school. I expected Pike to pick apart the defensive backfield but, while this backup may be talented, he can't be expected to equal the success of Pike throwing the ball. While not elite, the linebackers and defensive line are capable of slowing the running game.

Really, I have no idea what to expect from this Louisville team. They seem to play one good half every game (see Pitt game) that makes you think they can be a good team but then they fall apart the rest of the game. The UConn game will hopefully answer some of these questions. If they can put it together against UConn, I think they may give a Pike-less UC a scare.

I'll add that if UofL loses to UConn, I'd be surprised if they win another game all year because that will seal the deal on Kragthorpe and deflate the team. However, if they can beat UConn, the players will likely approach Cincy as the game that may save their coach's job.

Caveat Emperor
10-16-2009, 12:19 PM
I know but he will practice with the first teamers this week and after the Louisville game I'm confident we'll all be saying how amazing it is that when someone gets hurt, no matter who, the replacement always seems to do a great job. Next man in.

True -- and it seems to force Kelly to step his game up even further, which I thnik is a great thing.

I don't think this team can succeed for more than a game or two playing the option-read and "Florida Dive" as their primary method of moving the football. Defenses will adjust once they take a look at footage -- UC caught USF off-guard with the abrupt switch in gameplan, but they won't catch any more teams flat-footed.

Practice should help, but Collaros looked like he'd never thrown a football in his life last night. I'll chalk it up to the environment and lack of preparation, but he's gotta show me somethnig next Saturday. Thankfully, they've got a kid named Brandon Kay behnid Collaros who (from all accounts) appears to be the real deal throwing the football and on the inside track to start in 2010 -- so they may have someone to turn to if Collaros can't get the job done.

acredsfan
10-16-2009, 12:29 PM
Pike going to see doc today. Probably won't be updates until Monday. Perhaps not as bad as originally thought. UL game up in air. #bearcatsThis came across Josh Katzowitz's twitter a little bit ago. That would definitely be good news for the Bearcats.

paintmered
10-16-2009, 07:31 PM
Practice should help, but Collaros looked like he'd never thrown a football in his life last night. I'll chalk it up to the environment and lack of preparation, but he's gotta show me somethnig next Saturday. Thankfully, they've got a kid named Brandon Kay behnid Collaros who (from all accounts) appears to be the real deal throwing the football and on the inside track to start in 2010 -- so they may have someone to turn to if Collaros can't get the job done.

I've heard Brandon Kay best described as Ben Mauk with a different name. :)

joshnky
10-17-2009, 03:16 PM
While I don't think that UofL can beat Cincy, the trouble at QB does give me a glimmer of hope. Louisville is not a very good team but they have some talented players on the offensive side of the ball. Long, Guy, and Beaumont are a great group of receivers if Froman can get them the ball. Anderson and Powell are also capable of huge games running the ball. So, if Froman and the offensive line can figure it out, this offense will give anyone trouble including UC. Their problem is on defense, specifically the secondary. It has gotten so bad that they recently made a senior WR the #2 corner despite the fact that he hadn't played corner since high school. I expected Pike to pick apart the defensive backfield but, while this backup may be talented, he can't be expected to equal the success of Pike throwing the ball. While not elite, the linebackers and defensive line are capable of slowing the running game.

Really, I have no idea what to expect from this Louisville team. They seem to play one good half every game (see Pitt game) that makes you think they can be a good team but then they fall apart the rest of the game. The UConn game will hopefully answer some of these questions. If they can put it together against UConn, I think they may give a Pike-less UC a scare.

I'll add that if UofL loses to UConn, I'd be surprised if they win another game all year because that will seal the deal on Kragthorpe and deflate the team. However, if they can beat UConn, the players will likely approach Cincy as the game that may save their coach's job.

I'll stand by this prediction. Louisville, will be lucky to win another game this year. I think this is the year Cincy avenges some of those Petrino coached blow outs.

AccordinglyReds
10-17-2009, 03:38 PM
I'll stand by this prediction. Louisville, will be lucky to win another game this year. I think this is the year Cincy avenges some of those Petrino coached blow outs.

It's going to be a disaster most likely, but I'll be rooting for them. :( Without Vic, the running game was absmyal when you take into account the 2 fumbles. If Powell is the starter next week, UofL will have little chance on the running side. Why not Darius Ashley? Perhaps some of the UofL fans won't come up and I'll find a seat in their section. lol

joshnky
10-17-2009, 03:48 PM
It's going to be a disaster most likely, but I'll be rooting for them. :( Without Vic, the running game was absmyal when you take into account the 2 fumbles. If Powell is the starter next week, UofL will have little chance on the running side. Why not Darius Ashley? Perhaps some of the UofL fans won't come up and I'll find a seat in their section. lol

Darius Ashley has a separated shoulder or he would have played. He didn't even make the trip to UConn.

AccordinglyReds
10-17-2009, 04:40 PM
Darius Ashley has a separated shoulder or he would have played. He didn't even make the trip to UConn.

Well that explains why....I remembered him getting injured, but didn't know how serious.

/threadjack

Sea Ray
10-17-2009, 05:52 PM
UC is running into the Achilles Heel of the Spread Offense: Keeping your QB healthy. To Brian Kelly's credit, he's done well keeping a decent #2 QB ready but this is a recurring problem with this sort of offense. Your QB takes a beating. Michigan is finding out the same thing with Tate Forcier. Even if you've got a huge man back there like Florida does, he will take a beating. I much prefer the Pro Styles run by USC, Tennessee, Arkansas and others

Redlegs23
10-17-2009, 06:08 PM
UC is running into the Achilles Heel of the Spread Offense: Keeping your QB healthy. To Brian Kelly's credit, he's done well keeping a decent #2 QB ready but this is a recurring problem with this sort of offense. Your QB takes a beating. Michigan is finding out the same thing with Tate Forcier. Even if you've got a huge man back there like Florida does, he will take a beating. I much prefer the Pro Styles run by USC, Tennessee, Arkansas and others

UC has allowed only 3 sacks on the season. Not sure I agree that Pike takes a beating compared to the qb's in pro style systems. The hit that he got hurt on was basically him falling backwards and trying to catch himself on an arm that has a metal plate and 6 screws in it, nothing to do with the system he's in. In reality Pike needs to pack on 50 pounds if he wants to make it in the NFL, he's way too skinny and that will be his biggest obstacle in going high in the draft IMO.

Sea Ray
10-17-2009, 06:15 PM
UC has allowed only 3 sacks on the season. Not sure I agree that Pike takes a beating compared to the qb's in pro style systems. The hit that he got hurt on was basically him falling backwards and trying to catch himself on an arm that has a metal plate and 6 screws in it, nothing to do with the system he's in. In reality Pike needs to pack on 50 pounds if he wants to make it in the NFL, he's way too skinny and that will be his biggest obstacle in going high in the draft IMO.


You're making my point. He takes hits after he passes the ball and that's when he's vulnerable to injury. A spread offense doesn't depend on a pocket and although the QB doesn't necessarily take sacks, he gets knocked down a lot. You're missing the boat completely if you just look at sacks.

He had a year to heal from that plate and screw job. If one fall to the ground is enough to disrupt it then it was bound to happen. It's football

paintmered
10-17-2009, 07:24 PM
You're making my point. He takes hits after he passes the ball and that's when he's vulnerable to injury. A spread offense doesn't depend on a pocket and although the QB doesn't necessarily take sacks, he gets knocked down a lot. You're missing the boat completely if you just look at sacks.

He had a year to heal from that plate and screw job. If one fall to the ground is enough to disrupt it then it was bound to happen. It's football

It's not that Pike gets hit a lot, it's that he doesn't know how to fall properly when he does. That's how he sprained his wrist.

Caveat Emperor
10-17-2009, 07:37 PM
UC is running into the Achilles Heel of the Spread Offense: Keeping your QB healthy. To Brian Kelly's credit, he's done well keeping a decent #2 QB ready but this is a recurring problem with this sort of offense. Your QB takes a beating. Michigan is finding out the same thing with Tate Forcier. Even if you've got a huge man back there like Florida does, he will take a beating. I much prefer the Pro Styles run by USC, Tennessee, Arkansas and others

If UC ran a pro style offense, they'd have difficulty recruiting enough talent to play effectively. There is a reason why only the big boys run the pro style and why most small to mid-sized universities run some variation of the spread offense.

An aside -- another loss by Notre Dame today. Put the "Weis Watch" up another notch.

DoogMinAmo
10-17-2009, 07:40 PM
If UC ran a pro style offense, they'd have difficulty recruiting enough talent to play effectively. There is a reason why only the big boys run the pro style and why most small to mid-sized universities run some variation of the spread offense.

An aside -- another loss by Notre Dame today. Put the "Weis Watch" up another notch.

UC tried to run a pro-style offense when Dantonio was here. He resorted to run first and let the defense win (BigTeleven style), when he found out that the talent drop-off prevented him from being successful at it.

Call me crazy, but if ND wins out Weis bought himself another year by barely losing at home to an overrated USC team.

Sea Ray
10-17-2009, 07:47 PM
If UC ran a pro style offense, they'd have difficulty recruiting enough talent to play effectively. There is a reason why only the big boys run the pro style and why most small to mid-sized universities run some variation of the spread offense.

An aside -- another loss by Notre Dame today. Put the "Weis Watch" up another notch.

You make an excellent point.:thumbup:

In UC's case Brian Kelly is handling the situation perfectly and this "Achilles Heel" I've mentioned is just something he has to deal with. Now Michigan running it is a different story altogether.

As to the ND Weiss Watch, I think Urban Meyer is the top candidate to go there if Weiss gets canned

paintmered
10-17-2009, 08:08 PM
UC tried to run a pro-style offense when Dantonio was here. He resorted to run first and let the defense win (BigTeleven style), when he found out that the talent drop-off prevented him from being successful at it.

Call me crazy, but if ND wins out Weis bought himself another year by barely losing at home to an overrated USC team.

The vaunted "run and punt offense", as we called it. It was nice to watch if you were suffering from insomnia.

Cyclone792
10-17-2009, 08:18 PM
Don't look now, but Virginia Tech is getting all they can handle at Georgia Tech. They're down 21-10 heading into the 4th quarter. This was the game to root for a realistic Virginia Tech loss, because they really should run the table with the remainder of their schedule.

Let's hope Georgia Tech keeps playing well so they can finish the job.

Also, West Virginia picked up a decent OOC win today against a solid Marshall team. Mountaineer QB Jarrett Brown was knocked out with an injury in the game, though.

paintmered
10-17-2009, 08:47 PM
Georgia Tech just finished the job. That triple option is impressive.

Cyclone792
10-17-2009, 09:18 PM
It's going to be an interesting look at the BCS tomorrow. The top four will be Florida, Alabama (assuming they win tonight), Texas and USC, but after that things will get interesting.

Does UC jump Boise State after the Broncos ugly win at Tulsa? That was a close game, and Tulsa's a pretty good squad but they're by no means a power.

Does UC remain ahead of Iowa? They had a narrow lead on the Hawkeyes in the projected BCS standings through last week.

Does UC jump an idle LSU squad? This doesn't matter in the long run since the SEC is only getting one team in the national championship, but it'd be nice for style points.

UC could be as high as 5th or as low as 8th. We'll see what shapes up tomorrow ...

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2009, 03:04 AM
If UC enters where I think they're going to, here are the crucial "scoreboard watching" dates for Bearcats fans (assuming UC takes care of their own business and they keep winning):



10/31: USC @ Oregon (The last game USC shouldn't be a heavy favorite in)
Texas @ Oklahoma State
11/7: LSU @ Alabama (Only difficult game remaining for Alabama)
11/14: Iowa @ Ohio State (The only difficult game remaining on Iowa's cake B11 schedule)
11/21: Kansas @ Texas
12/5: SEC Championship Game
Big 12 Championship Game


Just looking at things, I think that the BCS title game will be the winner of the SEC Championship Game (likely either FLA or ALA -- neither has a game left that screams "might lose") and either Texas or USC.

If you made me lay money on it right now, I'd say the BCS title game is Florida v. USC.

But, it's been such a crazy year in college sports that I don't think even I'd write any of this in pen.

Matt700wlw
10-18-2009, 04:07 AM
4 - USC
5- Boise St.
6- UC

A bunch later - OSU

I like the Buckeyes, but finally, some team, especially my home team can shut them annoying fans up!

While I'm at it, Alabama may jump Florida for the #1, but #3 is Texas.

GAC
10-18-2009, 07:00 AM
The two schools aren't even rivals, come on.

Because historically there never has been any reason for them to be so. Geographical location (proximity) does not justify rivalry.

While both schools are rich in history and tradition, been around for a long time, historically OSU has consistently possessed one of the nation's elite football programs in the nation. UC has not. It's only been in the last several years, with UC joining the Big East, and the advancements the school has made to improve their football program, that UC fans are screaming to create a rivalry with OSU.

I'm glad for UC football. I love seeing the great advancements they are making within their football program. I watch them, and hope they go undefeated and even get a shot at the NC game. I'm there! There certainly isn't any jealousy on this Buckeye fan's part.

But realistically, from a historical perspective, there has never been any justification for a rivalry between these two programs.

The two have played 15 times, the Buckeyes are 13-2 in the series with the last Bearcat win coming in 1897.

Prior to joining the Big East in 2005, look at UC's conference membership....MAC, MVC, and Conference USA. These are not consistently considered among the nation's elite football conferences, regardless of the recent successes of some of the MAC schools.

In 2007, the Bearcats posted their first 10-win season in more than 50 years.

Prior to 1997's Humanitarian Bowl, the Bearcats hadn't made a bowl appearance in 47 years. They have made numerous since then....

2008 Fedex Orange Bowl: 20-7 loss to Virginia Tech
2007 PapaJohns.com Bowl: 31-21 win over Southern Miss
2007 International Bowl: 27-24 win over Western Michigan
2004 Forth Worth Bowl: 32-14 win over Marshall
2002 New Orleans Bowl: 24- 19 loss to North Texas
2001 Motor City Bowl:23-16 loss to Toledo
2000 Motor City Bowl: 25-14 loss to Marshall

Other the 2009 vs Va. Tech, these aren't exactly considered prestigious bowls, nor were their opponents, other then possibly Marshall, considered solid or successful, football programs.

So there has never been a historical precedence to establish a rivalry between these two schools,

But I have no problem with trying to establish one in the future. ;)

And yes - if UC played OSU this year, the Bearcats, IMO, would win.

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 09:51 AM
Fresno State picked up another win last night by beating San Jose State. So long as the Bulldogs keep winning in the WAC, the better UC's win in late September becomes in the computers.

Sagarin has UC 4th in his BCS computer rankings. My best guess on Colley is 5th based on its hypothetical add games at will feature. Anderson & Hester had UC 7th last week just behind LSU, and my best guess is we'll jump LSU and land 6th in that poll. We were only 10th in Massey's rankings, and the only team in front of us to lose was Virginia Tech. We may have jumped LSU there too, but unfortunately 8th may be as high as we can get in that poll today. We're not faring too well in Billingsley's rankings either yet, though hopefully that turns around.

Who knows what Dr. Peter Wolfe has in store.

dougdirt
10-18-2009, 01:51 PM
#5 in the AP, #6 in the coaches poll.

Sea Ray
10-18-2009, 03:08 PM
If UC enters where I think they're going to, here are the crucial "scoreboard watching" dates for Bearcats fans (assuming UC takes care of their own business and they keep winning):



10/31: USC @ Oregon (The last game USC shouldn't be a heavy favorite in)
Texas @ Oklahoma State
11/7: LSU @ Alabama (Only difficult game remaining for Alabama)
11/14: Iowa @ Ohio State (The only difficult game remaining on Iowa's cake B11 schedule)
11/21: Kansas @ Texas
12/5: SEC Championship Game
Big 12 Championship Game


Just looking at things, I think that the BCS title game will be the winner of the SEC Championship Game (likely either FLA or ALA -- neither has a game left that screams "might lose") and either Texas or USC.

If you made me lay money on it right now, I'd say the BCS title game is Florida v. USC.

But, it's been such a crazy year in college sports that I don't think even I'd write any of this in pen.


Don't take my Tennessee Volunteers lightly. CBS gets to pick the top SEC game of the week and it's Tenn-Bama this Saturday. It's up to Monte Kiffin to come up with a way to stop Mark Ingram

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 03:29 PM
UC is 6th in the Harris poll and 4th in the Sagarin computer rankings.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/newsletters/bcsnews/BCS_Oct_18_2009.pdf

BCS standings due out shortly. My guess is UC will be 7th with Iowa passing us up. Iowa gained points on us in both human polls, and they've got excellent computer poll rankings. Fortunately, the remainder of the schedule favors UC - Iowa already has played seven games - so if both go undefeated we should have the edge.

EDIT: It should also be mentioned that both Pitt and West Virginia are in the top 25 in all polls so far and will likely be in the top 25 in the BCS standings. UC knocked South Florida out of the top 25, but the Bulls are just on the outside. Looks like the Big East is doing its job getting back into the fray in college football.

Reds4Life
10-18-2009, 05:03 PM
BCS standings just came out.

UC is #5. Boise State is #4. I have no idea how.

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Cincinnati

nmculbreth
10-18-2009, 05:15 PM
BCS standings just came out.

UC is #5. Boise State is #4. I have no idea how.

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Cincinnati

Boise State is getting a big boost from their win over Oregon, who is currently 11th in the BCS standing. If both teams win out I'd expect UC to eventually overtake them given that UC has games over quality opponents (WVU, Pitt), Boise State plays nobody and Oregon still has to play USC.

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 05:24 PM
Wow, 5th is much better than I expected. The computer polls are currently loving UC more than even I thought they would.

Honestly, other than the SEC and Texas, UC looks like they control their own destiny. UC's schedule favors them over Iowa throughout the rest of the season, and Iowa is about as high as they can go in the computer polls already.

That means October 31st is a marquee matchup - Texas at Oklahoma State. Stillwater better be shaking heavily that day!

joshnky
10-18-2009, 05:30 PM
Honestly, other than the SEC and Texas, UC looks like they control their own destiny.

I found this quote funny. So they control their own destiny, but the only team they can jump if all win out (obviously an SEC team will lose) is Boise St?

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2009, 05:32 PM
Luckily for UC, assuming nobody charging up the back-stretch can catch them, Texas has a schedule with more than a few lurkers:

10/24 -- @ Mizzou
10/31 -- @ Oklahoma State ("Happy Halloween for the Bearcats?")
11/7 -- UCF
11/14 -- @ Baylor
11/21-- Kansas
11/28 -- @A&M
12/6 -- Big 12 Championship

That's 4 road games, 1 neutral site game, and only 2 games at home in Austin. Oklahoma State and Kansas are both quality opponents, plus the championship game.

Texas has a tough road left ahead of them.

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2009, 05:33 PM
I found this quote funny. So they control their own destiny, but the only team they can jump if all win out (obviously an SEC team will lose) is Boise St?

I think he was also referring to the idea that it doesn't look likely that anyone is going to jump UC coming up from behind.

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 05:34 PM
I found this quote funny. So they control their own destiny, but the only team they can jump if all win out (obviously an SEC team will lose) is Boise St?

... and the loser of the SEC Championship game mixed with nobody coming up from UC's rearview mirror.

If UC wins out and Texas trips up, UC has the inside path. I'm not so sure what's supposedly funny about that.

texasdave
10-18-2009, 06:25 PM
Bowl Championship Series Rankings
- Harris Poll Coaches' Poll -
Rank Team Record Rank Votes Avg. Rank Votes Avg. Comp
Rank
Avg BCS
Avg Previous

1 Florida Gators 6-0 1 2,802 .9832 1 1,464 .9925 .9900 .989 NR
2 Alabama Crimson Tide 7-0 2 2,736 .9600 2 1,398 .9478 .9500 .959 NR
3 Texas Longhorns 6-0 3 2,661 .9337 3 1,386 .9397 .8000 .891 NR
4 Boise State Broncos 6-0 5 2,289 .8032 5 1,153 .7817 .8400 .808 NR
5 Cincinnati Bearcats 6-0 6 2,173 .7625 6 1,104 .7485 .8500 .787 NR
6 Iowa Hawkeyes 7-0 7 2,045 .7175 8 1,037 .7031 .9400 .787 NR
7 USC Trojans 5-1 4 2,394 .8400 4 1,237 .8386 .6300 .770 NR
8 TCU Horned Frogs 6-0 8 2,015 .7070 7 1,069 .7247 .7100 .714 NR
9 LSU Tigers 5-1 9 1,996 .7004 10 995 .6746 .7500 .708 NR
10 Miami (FL) Hurricanes 5-1 10 1,896 .6653 9 998 .6766 .5400 .627 NR
11 Oregon Ducks 5-1 12 1,577 .5533 14 769 .5214 .6800 .585 NR
12 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets 6-1 13 1,489 .5225 13 779 .5281 .6600 .570 NR
13 Penn State Nittany Lions 6-1 11 1,620 .5684 11 894 .6061 .3200 .498 NR
14 Virginia Tech Hokies 5-2 15 1,278 .4484 15 672 .4556 .5800 .495 NR
15 Oklahoma State Cowboys 5-1 14 1,436 .5039 12 795 .5390 .1700 .404 NR
16 Brigham Young Cougars 6-1 16 1,210 .4246 16 577 .3912 .0800 .299 NR
17 Houston Cougars 5-1 18 834 .2926 18 421 .2854 .2200 .266 NR
18 Utah Utes 5-1 19 627 .2200 20 300 .2034 .3300 .251 NR
19 Ohio State Buckeyes 5-2 17 937 .3288 17 481 .3261 .0100 .222 NR
20 Pittsburgh Panthers 6-1 20 545 .1912 19 328 .2224 .1900 .201 NR
21 Wisconsin Badgers 5-2 38 18 .0063 31 26 .0176 .3300 .118 NR
22 Arizona Wildcats 4-2 37 19 .0067 40 7 .0047 .3300 .114 NR
23 West Virginia Mountaineers 5-1 23 275 .0965 22 188 .1275 .1100 .111 NR
24 South Carolina Gamecocks 5-2 26 216 .0758 23 142 .0963 .1400 .104 NR
25 Kansas Jayhawks 5-1 21 403 .1414 21 222 .1505 .0000 .097 NR Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/polls/bcs/#ixzz0UKS3TKPv
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2009, 06:33 PM
Though, the point cannot be repeated enough, this is all academic if Tony Pike is gone for more than 2 weeks.

joshnky
10-18-2009, 06:40 PM
... and the loser of the SEC Championship game mixed with nobody coming up from UC's rearview mirror.

If UC wins out and Texas trips up, UC has the inside path. I'm not so sure what's supposedly funny about that.

UC does not control their own destiny. Florida, Alabama, and Texas control their own destiny. UC needs one of them to lose. Really, they need Texas to lose because a one loss Florida team would likely make the championship if they beat Alabama to win the SEC. They same could probably be said about Alabama as well.

I know its semantics but that is why I found the suggestion that UC controls their own destiny humorous.

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2009, 06:43 PM
UC does not control their own destiny. Florida, Alabama, and Texas control their own destiny. UC needs one of them to lose. Really, they need Texas to lose because a one loss Florida team would likely make the championship if they beat Alabama to win the SEC. They same could probably be said about Alabama as well.

I know its semantics but that is why I found the suggestion that UC controls their own destiny humorous.

...which is why he said "Other than the SEC and Texas..."

Redlegs23
10-18-2009, 06:49 PM
Though, the point cannot be repeated enough, this is all academic if Tony Pike is gone for more than 2 weeks.

Not so sure...I think he we can beat UCONN with one of our backups, which would give Pike another week of rest. We beat Rutgers last year with a freshman qb, and I like our chances against UCONN with our soph qb's. If we Pike is out for UCONN that would give him 4 full weeks of rest before the next game. Obviously I hope he is back for that game, but I wouldn't feel too bad about going into that game with Collaros/Anderson.

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 07:16 PM
UC does not control their own destiny. Florida, Alabama, and Texas control their own destiny. UC needs one of them to lose. Really, they need Texas to lose because a one loss Florida team would likely make the championship if they beat Alabama to win the SEC. They same could probably be said about Alabama as well.

I know its semantics but that is why I found the suggestion that UC controls their own destiny humorous.

My original statement stands correct. Other than the SEC and Texas, UC looks like it controls its own destiny. Only one team will advance to the national championship game out of the SEC so one of Florida/Alabama will be bounced out by default. If Texas loses, they will be bounced out. UC will simply pass Boise State by winning out. That's how they control their own destiny, other than the SEC and Texas. Win out, and they've got a great shot to be sitting at #2 on December 6th.

The computers will shift around a bit with Iowa and USC, but with Pittsburgh and West Virginia playing well and climbing into the rankings they've given UC two more excellent opponents to help boost up the computer rankings should UC pull out victories.

Two weeks ago I was defending UC's schedule in the computer rankings, and what do you know ... I actually knew what I was talking about. With all the outsiders whining that UC's schedule wasn't strong enough, here they are sitting 4th in the overall computer rankings, and they still have yet to play Connecticut, West Virginia or at Pittsburgh. And as I stated two weeks ago, that's what happens when teams beat other pretty solid teams on the road.

BearcatShane
10-18-2009, 07:19 PM
After the first BCS standings of the season were released this afternoon, Brian Kelly decided it was time to confront head-on those critics who say the Bearcats are not worthy to be considered as a legitimate contender to play for the national championship on Jan. 7 in Pasadena.


UC, which rose from No. 8 to No. 5 in the Associated Press media poll and to No. 6 in the USA Today coaches’ poll, checked in at No. 5 in the BCS standings, compilation of the USA Today poll, the Harris interactive poll and six computer rankings that determine who plays for the national championship.


That, he said, makes the 6-0 Bearcats just as worthy to be in the conversation as Florida, Alabama, Texas or Boise State, the four schools ranked ahead of them, even though UC does not possess the same pedigree based on its history.


“It’s pretty clear there are some people in the media that look at it as the elite teams are the ones that should get recognized and not those teams that haven’t been recognized in the past,” Kelly said. “That’s a shame.


“I think there’s a strong vocal contingent out there that even with the data that has been presented with Cincinnati being fifth in the county, there are some people that still don’t think that Boise State or Cincinnati or TCU or any of those schools that still don’t have that pedigree should be part of the conversation.”


Kelly contends that the teams that win on the field should be rewarded when it comes time to select the national championship game participants regardless of their history. And right now he believes that UC should be among those teams considered to have a real chance to do that.


“There’s a system that’s set up,” said Kelly, who voted UC No. 7 in the coaches’ poll this week. “But you have these people that say it doesn’t matter, Cincinnati is not playing for the national championship. That’s a bunch of baloney. If you keep winning, keep playing and doing the right things every team should have a fair opportunity at it. And don’t say they don’t have a fair chance. That’s unfair.


“Let the teams play. The rankings are what they are. Let it play itself out. We continue to go down the same road: Are they worthy or not worthy?”



Meanwhile, quarterback Tony Pike, whom Kelly all but ruled out of this week’s Louisville game last Thursday, is now is listed as day-to-day and might be able to play against the Cardinals.


“I’m more optimistic,” Kelly said. “They’re saying they have to find out whether they’ve got to do anything with the plate that’s in there. It they’ve got to open him up, he could get swelling in that left hand. That could be an issue relative to catching the snaps. He’s got to be able to catch the shotgun snaps. He goes back to University Hospital (Monday) and they’ll make a decision.”


Pike broke his left (non-throwing) arm last season and had a plate inserted. Kelly said the plate might have shifted when he took two hits last Thursday in UC’s win over South Florida.


The good news regarding Pike, Kelly said, is that he is not expected to be out for a long period, if at all.


Assuming doctors don’t have to go back into Pike’s arm, Kelly said, Pike will wear a brace during practice Tuesday and will be monitored to see how well he handles snaps and how much swelling there is in the arm.


If Pike can’t go, either Zach Collaros, who relieved Pike at South Florida, or sophomore Chazz Anderson, will start against Louisville.


http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog04&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ada6629a0-7bd0-4605-8869-25a20cb5adabPost%3a9b4699a7-cdec-4506-a78b-8667273eb6be&s

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 07:20 PM
Bill Koch actually getting some readable material - I'm shocked!

Anyhow, looks like there should hopefully be some good news on the Pike front tomorrow. Plus, it's interesting that Kelly voted UC only 7th in the Coaches poll (hey, at least that leaves him a bit more room to move UC up later on to grab a few extra points).

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog04&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ada6629a0-7bd0-4605-8869-25a20cb5adabPost%3a9b4699a7-cdec-4506-a78b-8667273eb6be&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com


After the first BCS standings of the season were released this afternoon, Brian Kelly decided it was time to confront head-on those critics who say the Bearcats are not worthy to be considered as a legitimate contender to play for the national championship on Jan. 7 in Pasadena.

UC, which rose from No. 8 to No. 5 in the Associated Press media poll and to No. 6 in the USA Today coaches’ poll, checked in at No. 5 in the BCS standings, compilation of the USA Today poll, the Harris interactive poll and six computer rankings that determine who plays for the national championship.

That, he said, makes the 6-0 Bearcats just as worthy to be in the conversation as Florida, Alabama, Texas or Boise State, the four schools ranked ahead of them, even though UC does not possess the same pedigree based on its history.

“It’s pretty clear there are some people in the media that look at it as the elite teams are the ones that should get recognized and not those teams that haven’t been recognized in the past,” Kelly said. “That’s a shame.

“I think there’s a strong vocal contingent out there that even with the data that has been presented with Cincinnati being fifth in the county, there are some people that still don’t think that Boise State or Cincinnati or TCU or any of those schools that still don’t have that pedigree should be part of the conversation.”

Kelly contends that the teams that win on the field should be rewarded when it comes time to select the national championship game participants regardless of their history. And right now he believes that UC should be among those teams considered to have a real chance to do that.

“There’s a system that’s set up,” said Kelly, who voted UC No. 7 in the coaches’ poll this week. “But you have these people that say it doesn’t matter, Cincinnati is not playing for the national championship. That’s a bunch of baloney. If you keep winning, keep playing and doing the right things every team should have a fair opportunity at it. And don’t say they don’t have a fair chance. That’s unfair.

“Let the teams play. The rankings are what they are. Let it play itself out. We continue to go down the same road: Are they worthy or not worthy?”

Meanwhile, quarterback Tony Pike, whom Kelly all but ruled out of this week’s Louisville game last Thursday, is now is listed as day-to-day and might be able to play against the Cardinals.

“I’m more optimistic,” Kelly said. “They’re saying they have to find out whether they’ve got to do anything with the plate that’s in there. It they’ve got to open him up, he could get swelling in that left hand. That could be an issue relative to catching the snaps. He’s got to be able to catch the shotgun snaps. He goes back to University Hospital (Monday) and they’ll make a decision.”

Pike broke his left (non-throwing) arm last season and had a plate inserted. Kelly said the plate might have shifted when he took two hits last Thursday in UC’s win over South Florida.

The good news regarding Pike, Kelly said, is that he is not expected to be out for a long period, if at all.

Assuming doctors don’t have to go back into Pike’s arm, Kelly said, Pike will wear a brace during practice Tuesday and will be monitored to see how well he handles snaps and how much swelling there is in the arm.

If Pike can’t go, either Zach Collaros, who relieved Pike at South Florida, or sophomore Chazz Anderson, will start against Louisville.

Cyclone792
10-18-2009, 07:23 PM
http://www.gobearcats.com/blog/dan-hoard/


After his brilliant second half performance against USF on Thursday, I'm guessing that Zach Collaros is extremely popular in Bearcat nation.

So popular in fact, that you'll probably cut him some slack for being a Steelers fan.

I learned of Zach's love for the "Black and Gold" when I saw him head to practice at Nippert Stadium a few weeks ago wearing a Steelers "terrible towel" on his waist. You'll be happy to know that the UC coaching staff told him to remove it immediately.

"I'm a Pittsburgh fan at heart," Zach told me with a grin. "My dad is a big Pittsburgh fan - Steubenville is about 45 minutes from Pittsburgh so I grew up liking the Steelers."

OK, so the kid is not perfect, but his record as a starting quarterback nearly is. In three years as the starter at Steubenville High School, Collaros led the team to a 41-1 record and didn't lose a game after his sophomore year.

With a medical update on Tony Pike expected on Monday, we'll soon know if Collaros will make his first college start this Saturday against Louisville.

"It's never a good thing to see your starting quarterback go down and Tony's one of my best friends on the team," Collaros said. "We have a great training staff here so he'll be back. I just have to do what I can to help the team win and get him back in the same situation that he left."

Collaros did most of his damage against USF on the ground, rushing for 132 yards on 10 carries including his game-changing 75 yard touchdown run in the third quarter. But he's a much more confident passer than he was last year as a freshman - thanks in part to watching Tony Pike.

"I think last year I relied on my athleticism a lot and if the play broke down I was quick to scramble," Zach said. "But his year, working with Tony, I've learned the check downs and how to get the ball out in certain situations where you have to get it out fast. His pocket presence is really good - he can tell when the pocket is going to collapse. He's not the fastest guy in the world, but he has a great feel in the pocket. He helps me out with my reads and knowing where to go on certain plays and I take in a lot by watching him."

Collaros has only thrown 22 passes in his college career, but from what I've seen at practice this year; Zach seems to have much more zip on his throws.

"I think I've picked up some arm strength, but what helps out a lot is just having more confidence," Collaros told me. "Knowing that you're going to get the reps every day, you know where to go with the ball and you can put more zip on it."

This year, Collaros is 10-for-18 for 201 yards with 2 TD passes and 1 INT. Admittedly, that's a small sample size, but it computes to an NFL quarterback rating of 108.8. Zach modestly credits the offensive system of head coach Brian Kelly.

"It's great," Zach told me. "You're going to get the opportunity to throw the ball 40 times a game and you can put up numbers to win the Heisman. He gives you so many options when you're on the field. He gives us full control and it's a great feeling to know that he trusts you like that."

We'll soon know if he's being trusted to lead the 5th-ranked Bearcats to their 7th straight win this weekend.

Highlifeman21
10-18-2009, 07:46 PM
UConn is not a team I would take seriously.

I've seen plenty of Randy Edsell's bunch over the last couple years, and while last season they were decent, this season they are awful. I honestly don't know how they beat Louisville.

UConn lacks a QB.

They are a run first team.'

Shut that down, and the Huskies suck something awful.

Caveat Emperor
10-18-2009, 08:46 PM
Some great news about Tony Pike in there -- sounds like he'll be OK for Syracuse. Ideally, you'd want to give him a week off against LOU, but I think you have to take the potential for a rivalry upset seriously and play Pike if he can go.

NatiRedGals
10-18-2009, 09:12 PM
Wanted to say thanks Cyclone! Between UC Basketball and Football i love reading what u write about them. Keep up the great work! Go UC

paintmered
10-18-2009, 09:18 PM
UConn is not a team I would take seriously.

I've seen plenty of Randy Edsell's bunch over the last couple years, and while last season they were decent, this season they are awful. I honestly don't know how they beat Louisville.

UConn lacks a QB.

They are a run first team.'

Shut that down, and the Huskies suck something awful.

And there's no more Donald Brown. The kid destroyed UC last year.

Sea Ray
10-18-2009, 09:31 PM
I wouldn't worry about the teams above UC. If UC wins out things will work out fine. Texas and any SEC team have to survive a conf championship game. If UC finishes the regular season #3 in the BCS then they can still finish with a great season. If they end up going to Pasadena it could be an ugly blowout.

Again, all I want is for UC to keep winning.

Matt700wlw
10-18-2009, 09:52 PM
#5 - this is pretty cool! :cool:

Highlifeman21
10-18-2009, 10:52 PM
And there's no more Donald Brown. The kid destroyed UC last year.

Andre Dixon is decent, but no Donald Brown.

For whatever reason, they've been splitting time between Dixon and Jordan Todman, and I don't remember Dixon being injured.

Marcus Easley is their only deep threat, he runs pretty good routes, but IMO his hands are suspect. I question if Cody Endres can withstand the UC pass rush and get enough time to actually get the ball to Easley, but IMO Endres is vastly overrated in general.

All UC needs to do is force UConn to kick FGs, since Teggart pretty much only has range from about 45ish. I think he hit a 47 as his longest on the year, but his misses have all come from 40+. Ironically, his best kicking game of his career came against UC last year, but he only averaged about 32 yards per his 4 FGs.

UConn won't be hard to keep out of the endzone.

NatiRedGals
10-19-2009, 04:50 PM
Pike is practicing
Posted by BKoch at 10/19/2009 3:57 PM EDT on Cincinnati.com
Just got the update on Tony Pike. He is practicing today with a brace on his left forearm. He will be evaluated as the week progresses to see if he can play Saturday vs. Louisville. Based on what Brian Kelly told me Sunday, it appears that if he can accept the shotgun snaps without too much pain and he can protect himself from getting hurt any worse, he might be able to play Saturday, but that's a long way off and it's really way too soon to know one way or the other. Meanwhile, Kelly said he will prepare both Zach Collaros and Chazz Anderson as possible starters in the event that Pike can't go.

In other news, Jake Rogers was named Big East special teams player of the week. Rogers scored 10 points in UC's win over USF, with field goals of 37 and 29 yards. He also had two kickoffs for touchbacks and averaged 45.1 yards on seven punts. He had a long punt of 53 yards.

UC's No. 5 ranking in the BCS standings is the highest for a Big East team since West Virginia was ranked No. 2 on Nov. 25, 2007. The Mountaineers then lost to Pitt, knocking them out of consideration for the BCS title game. UC was as high as No. 12 last year in the final BCS standings. That was the highesst rating for any Big East team in 2008.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog04&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ada6629a0-7bd0-4605-8869-25a20cb5adabPost%3a97e4b69d-964d-499a-9b53-39f14c0231e4&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Caveat Emperor
10-19-2009, 05:09 PM
Fantastic news, but I'll wait to see if he's in there tomorrow (meaning the pain and swelling post-practice isn't an issue the next day) before I get really excited.

And really, I won't be completely re-assured until Chazz Anderson's name disappears from stories.

GAC
10-19-2009, 07:33 PM
I realize Louisville is a traditional rivalry for UC, and conference opponent; but they're an unranked team, 2-4 overall, and 0-3 on the road. No, I'm not saying take them lightly, but UC's backup QB Collaros did a heckuva job vs a good South Florida team.

Why risk further aggravating the injury to Pike with so such at risk this year? See: Sam Bradford. ;)

Caveat Emperor
10-19-2009, 08:13 PM
I realize Louisville is a traditional rivalry for UC, and conference opponent; but they're an unranked team, 2-4 overall, and 0-3 on the road. No, I'm not saying take them lightly, but UC's backup QB Collaros did a heckuva job vs a good South Florida team.

He did a great job coming in off the bench and catching USF off-guard by running a completely different offense (option-read, Florida-dive) than the one they'd practiced to face for two weeks (spread pass).

Every team the Bearcats face from here on out will be prepared for the option-read attack. Collaros won't get lucky a second time, IMO.

GAC
10-19-2009, 08:52 PM
He did a great job coming in off the bench and catching USF off-guard by running a completely different offense (option-read, Florida-dive) than the one they'd practiced to face for two weeks (spread pass).

Every team the Bearcats face from here on out will be prepared for the option-read attack. Collaros won't get lucky a second time, IMO.

That may be true, but this is a very down year for the Cardinals, and I don't think the Bearcats will have much of a problem with them, and will win even with Collaros QBing. Do you risk putting Pike out for the rest of the season when he is already questionable and hurting?

redsfandan
10-20-2009, 05:17 AM
“It’s pretty clear there are some people in the media that look at it as the elite teams are the ones that should get recognized and not those teams that haven’t been recognized in the past,” Kelly said. “That’s a shame.


“I think there’s a strong vocal contingent out there that even with the data that has been presented with Cincinnati being fifth in the county, there are some people that still don’t think that Boise State or Cincinnati or TCU or any of those schools that still don’t have that pedigree should be part of the conversation.”

....

“Let the teams play. The rankings are what they are. Let it play itself out. We continue to go down the same road: Are they worthy or not worthy?”

I'm hoping that those teams (UC, Boise State, TCU) can keep this up. If they do it might start up talk about switching to a playoff format again, maybe for the top 8 teams. Or maybe I should just keep dreaming.

As far as Pike is concerned even if they say he's ok I'd rather start the game with him as a backup. Why push it if they don't need him.

reds1869
10-20-2009, 07:18 AM
I'm hoping that those teams (UC, Boise State, TCU) can keep this up. If they do it might start up talk about switching to a playoff format again, maybe for the top 8 teams. Or maybe I should just keep dreaming.

Playoff talk will occur, but the presidents will never agree to a switch. The BCS conferences are in control of way too much money to agree to a change, and the elite NAQs dream of the payday of being an at-large team. Playoffs would be best for the game itself, but the current system is a cash cow for those who are in BCS conferences. Sure, a playoff system could be as well, but the bowls are a known quantity.

All that said, as a graduate of a non-BCS school that would have benefited from a playoff system in the 90s, I'm all for a switch.

will5979
10-20-2009, 08:31 AM
they still have yet to play West Virginia

Congrats on the BCS #5, hopefully both our teams will continue their success and on November 13 there will be a de facto Big East Championship game in Cincy! Will be great for national recognition and the conference. This is what I want, WVU and Cincy to finish 1-2 in the conference. I truely believe that these are the best 2 teams in the Big East at the moment.

SeeinRed
10-20-2009, 09:10 AM
This from Dennis Janson at WCPO:


UC's football office went to great lengths Monday to inform the media, and hence Louisville, that quarterback Tony Pike's, " left, (non-throwing) arm has been placed in a cast. He was at practice today and participated. He will continue to practice this week and be evaluated by both the coaching and medical staffs. His status remains day-to-day."

No mention of why the cast was applied, but it was a prudent considering Tony's arm is – as we first reported Saturday night – broken. The fracture, sources tell me, is adjacent to the plate inserted when he broke it last year in the Miami game, causing him to miss the next two games.

The Reading High School grad will require surgery, possibly as soon as Tuesday to repair the damage. The fact that he participated Monday, was, one has to presume, a smoke screen to keep Louisville off balance as long as possible in their preparations for Saturdays' game at Nippert.

In the immediate aftermath of the injury which happened just before halftime, the hope was that the obviously highly pain-tolerant Pike, would be healed in time for the Bearcats game with Connecticut November 7. That, my sources tell me, may be wishful thinking and that Tony may not return until the West Virginia game, November 13.

The good news is that Zach Collaros is obviously a capable backup to Pike. So much so that he's been named to the Big East honor roll for his efforts in relief of Pike last Thursday. He directed three touchdown drives, accounted for 2 TDs himself, while rushing for 132 yards.


Don't know what to make of this. I don't know how accurate Janson's sources would be, but I find it hard to believe that BK and staff would let such a thing get out to anyone if it was indeed intended to keep Louisville off guard. Very interesting though. I haven't heard anything about this yet, but we'll see how it all plays out.

gonelong
10-20-2009, 09:39 AM
The non-BCS schools should form their own playoff. They should invite the top 4 schools in the BCS, then play without them when they refuse to show up and head to their bowl game$. They should then declare the winner of their playoff the only true national champion and stick with it. Put it in their media guides, refuse to be interviewed by anyone unless they follow along, etc. Hang banners in their stadiums, etc.

GL

/not sure if that is feasible under the NCAA or not

will5979
10-20-2009, 10:12 AM
The non-BCS schools should form their own playoff. They should invite the top 4 schools in the BCS, then play without them when they refuse to show up and head to their bowl game$. They should then declare the winner of their playoff the only true national champion and stick with it. Put it in their media guides, refuse to be interviewed by anyone unless they follow along, etc. Hang banners in their stadiums, etc.

GL

/not sure if that is feasible under the NCAA or not

A more fair playoff would be take top ranked 6 teams, and give the BCS ranked #1 and 2 and first round bye. That way you have a playoff and rankings still matter. Surely an undefeated Boise St. (as much as I'm sick of hearing about them) would be ranked in the top 6 to be included.

Then #3 plays #6-Orange Bowl
#4 plays #5-Sugar Bowl

winners go on to face 1 and 2 in a final four (Fiesta/Rose Bowls), then you have the National Championship.

You still have BCS bowl champions in this scenario with a true champion emerging.

Highlifeman21
10-20-2009, 10:26 AM
A more fair playoff would be take top ranked 6 teams, and give the BCS ranked #1 and 2 and first round bye. That way you have a playoff and rankings still matter. Surely an undefeated Boise St. (as much as I'm sick of hearing about them) would be ranked in the top 6 to be included.

Then #3 plays #6-Orange Bowl
#4 plays #5-Sugar Bowl

winners go on to face 1 and 2 in a final four (Fiesta/Rose Bowls), then you have the National Championship.

You still have BCS bowl champions in this scenario with a true champion emerging.

Why give #1 and #2 essentially a 1st round bye?

Just do 8 teams, and it's simple.



1 v 8 winner plays 3 v 6 winner

Winner of 2nd round game advances to NC

2 v 7 winner plays 4 v 5 winner

Winner of 2nd round game advances to NC

Hopefully the brackets make sense.

That way, you're looking @ 7 bowl games that matter.

*BaseClogger*
10-20-2009, 10:33 AM
Why not just go back to letting the AP vote on who they thought was the National Champion after bowl season?

dabvu2498
10-20-2009, 10:45 AM
Why not just go back to letting the AP vote on who they thought was the National Champion after bowl season?

You mean like they still do?

will5979
10-20-2009, 11:23 AM
Why give #1 and #2 essentially a 1st round bye?

Just do 8 teams, and it's simple.



1 v 8 winner plays 3 v 6 winner

Winner of 2nd round game advances to NC

2 v 7 winner plays 4 v 5 winner

Winner of 2nd round game advances to NC

Hopefully the brackets make sense.

That way, you're looking @ 7 bowl games that matter.

Because does anybody really want to see a MAC/WAC/CUSA team in the National Championship?

The ACC/Big East/Big 12/Big 10/Pac 10/SEC are BCS conferences for a reason...these are the BIG BOYS!

Boston Red
10-20-2009, 12:07 PM
Because does anybody really want to see a MAC/WAC/CUSA team in the National Championship?

The ACC/Big East/Big 12/Big 10/Pac 10/SEC are BCS conferences for a reason...these are the BIG BOYS!

Unfortunately (and I say this as a Louisville fan so you know my bias), most observers around the country are more likely to group the Big East with that first group of conferences and not the second when it comes to football. Or at least in a middle tier with the MWC (which you did not mention).

will5979
10-20-2009, 12:19 PM
Unfortunately (and I say this as a Louisville fan so you know my bias), most observers around the country are more likely to group the Big East with that first group of conferences and not the second when it comes to football. Or at least in a middle tier with the MWC (which you did not mention).

I understand your point and see where you are coming from...however, tell that to D--- Fraudriguez and the 2007 WVU football team that had a first class ticket to New Orleans for the national championship until we screwed the pooch against sPitt.

Also you being a Louisville will remember all the National exposure the Big East got in 2006 especially with UL and WVU being in the top10 ALL year long. Oh yeah forgot to mention, 5-0 in the bowls that year! Face it we have it made in the Big East. No conference championship game (other than a de facto) and with some talent and luck ANY of those teams can play for the National Championship, for that I'm greatful for the Big East.

joshnky
10-20-2009, 12:36 PM
with some talent and luck ANY of those teams can play for the National Championship, for that I'm greatful for the Big East.

But you have to win the BCS game when you get there. Cincy didn't follow through last year and it will further prove the point if they fail again this year.

The perception of the conference is primarily based on the performance of its BCS representative. From that standpoint Cincy has only themselves to blame for the lack of respect they're receiving this year.

redsfandan
10-20-2009, 12:59 PM
Because does anybody really want to see a MAC/WAC/CUSA team in the National Championship?

The ACC/Big East/Big 12/Big 10/Pac 10/SEC are BCS conferences for a reason...these are the BIG BOYS!
I sure do if they deserve it. If they're a top 8 team put them in a playoff. Most people LOVE to root for an underdog.

SeeinRed
10-20-2009, 01:01 PM
Just came across twitter that Pike did have surgery. Will not practice for the next two days and will be day to day.

gonelong
10-20-2009, 01:17 PM
A more fair playoff would be ...

The BCS doesn't care about fair, its about money.

The way to break that, IMO, is to have the "little guys" put on their own playoff. I am pretty sure it would do decently in ratings, add to the exposure and financial coffers of the non-BCS schools, and then they could easily claim the BCS schools are ducking them.

If the BCS schools are going to let them in, then the only way to get in is to kick the door down.

GL

will5979
10-20-2009, 01:33 PM
But you have to win the BCS game when you get there. Cincy didn't follow through last year and it will further prove the point if they fail again this year.

The perception of the conference is primarily based on the performance of its BCS representative. From that standpoint Cincy has only themselves to blame for the lack of respect they're receiving this year.

Sorry don't mean to brag but we have yet to fail. WVU is 2-0 in BCS bowl games. Its just too bad we screwed the pooch against Pitt in 07, our offense would have eaten Ohio State alive.

will5979
10-20-2009, 01:36 PM
I sure do if they deserve it. If they're a top 8 team put them in a playoff. Most people LOVE to root for an underdog.

But do they deserve it if they play a cupcake schedule? Boise St. has not yet earned the right to be in the National Championship based on their schedule. Beat more than just Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl in one year then we'll talk.

dsmith421
10-20-2009, 01:55 PM
Boise St. has not yet earned the right to be in the National Championship based on their schedule. Beat more than just Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl in one year then we'll talk.

I see, so basically a team can't be a legitimate national championship contender unless they've beaten big-name teams in previous years, with completely different rosters, coaches, etc. Good plan. By that logic WVU should be ranked higher this year because they were awesome when Rodriguez, Slaton, and White were there. How does that make one lick of sense?

And the strength of schedule trope is stupid as well. BSU (or Utah or whoever) can't just freely change conferences. They don't just get to say "Oh, we're in the Pac 10 this year, check it out." Furthermore, these schools only get 3-4 chances to get that big win, so if you schedule a big-name team that tanks in the 2-3 years between scheduling and the actual game, well, too bad.

College football's method of picking a champion is ridiculous, it's a cabal of rich schools protecting their own and sucking at the corporate money teat. Settle it on the field, it's the only fair way.

Reds4Life
10-20-2009, 01:57 PM
I think to many people are overlooking Louisville. They might suck this year, but they always play fairly well against UC. If Pike can't play, the game might be a lot closer than people are expecting it to be.

redsfandan
10-20-2009, 01:59 PM
But do they deserve it if they play a cupcake schedule? Boise St. has not yet earned the right to be in the National Championship based on their schedule. Beat more than just Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl in one year then we'll talk.
I don't think they'd be ranked in the top 8 of the BCS poll if all of their opponents were cupcakes. I bet all of the top teams have a couple cupcakes on their schedules. If those teams (UC, Boise St, TCU) are still in the top 8 in December I'd give them a chance to prove their worth on the field in a playoff. Otherwise how can it be fair.

will5979
10-20-2009, 02:00 PM
I think to many people are overlooking Louisville. They might suck this year, but they always play fairly well against UC. If Pike can't play, the game might be a lot closer than people are expecting it to be.

ANY team that plays in your conference cannot be overlooked. I have seen it many times before. I worry about the rest of the schedule for WVU. It is 6 straight Big East games from here on out and quite frankly I'm worried about every single one of them.

Chip R
10-20-2009, 02:05 PM
Sorry don't mean to brag but we have yet to fail. WVU is 2-0 in BCS bowl games. Its just too bad we screwed the pooch against Pitt in 07, our offense would have eaten Ohio State alive.


I think it's much worse to lose to an inferior team than to one at your level, but that's just me.

joshnky
10-20-2009, 02:07 PM
Sorry don't mean to brag but we have yet to fail. WVU is 2-0 in BCS bowl games. Its just too bad we screwed the pooch against Pitt in 07, our offense would have eaten Ohio State alive.

And Louisville was 1-0. As a result of that three year stretch the Big East gained some notoriety and respect. Maybe not Big 12 or SEC level respect but many thought they were a better conference than the ACC or even Big Ten. That was lost when Louisville and West Virginia dropped a level (or five in the case of UofL) and the other teams failed to adequately step into the void. Although, I think Cincy will make up for that this year.

will5979
10-20-2009, 02:22 PM
I think it's much worse to lose to an inferior team

Dude, you'll never know how much that lose hurt. I was born 79 so in sports for me only the 1995 NLCS sweep by Braves hurt as much as this.

I hate the feeling of being "that close" and having it taken away from you. I will take the hurt from those 2 letdowns with me to my grave, in other words, I'll never get over them.

What hurts even worse is that I know that a national championship opportunity for the Eers is something that doesn;t happen very often. In sports all I hope to see before I die is only one, JUST ONE national championship for WVU football, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, I want to see the Reds win another World Series in my lifetime.

Caveat Emperor
10-20-2009, 02:22 PM
Don't know what to make of this. I don't know how accurate Janson's sources would be...

Lots of mis-information being thrown around. The only thing people know with any certainty is that surgery of some sort was going to be inevitable to replace the plate in Pike's arm. That was going to require some time off (maybe days, maybe a week or two). This "fracture" thing seems to be something only Janson is running with.

He loses personal credibility when he says Collaros is a capable backup -- Collaros can't run Kelly's offense. I'll honestly be surprised if they beat Louisville and go into Syracuse and beat them with him at the helm. I fully expect, if Pike is gone for more than 3 weeks, that the team will go with Kay or Anderson. Kay is young, and Anderson stinks, but they're both better options long-term than Collaros.

will5979
10-20-2009, 02:23 PM
And Louisville was 1-0. As a result of that three year stretch the Big East gained some notoriety and respect. Maybe not Big 12 or SEC level respect but many thought they were a better conference than the ACC or even Big Ten. That was lost when Louisville and West Virginia dropped a level (or five in the case of UofL) and the other teams failed to adequately step into the void. Although, I think Cincy will make up for that this year.

Don't let the so called experts fool you, we are/have been better than the ACC.

jimbo
10-20-2009, 02:24 PM
Boise St. has not yet earned the right to be in the National Championship based on their schedule.

Yet, UC has? I hope UC wins out, but who have they really beaten? S. Florida? Oregon St.? If they win out and beat the likes of WVU and Pitt, then I can confidently say they are the real deal and deserve a NC title chance. For me though, they still have a lot to do before they've earned it.

Current SOS:

Boise St. T-59th
UC T-67th

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1003632

Redlegs23
10-20-2009, 02:47 PM
Yet, UC has? I hope UC wins out, but who have they really beaten? S. Florida? Oregon St.? If they win out and beat the likes of WVU and Pitt, then I can confidently say they are the real deal and deserve a NC title chance. For me though, they still have a lot to do before they've earned it.

Current SOS:

Boise St. T-59th
UC T-67th

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1003632

The difference is UC's schedule gets significantly tougher, and Boise only plays one team the rest of the season with a winning record.

jimbo
10-20-2009, 03:35 PM
The difference is UC's schedule gets significantly tougher, and Boise only plays one team the rest of the season with a winning record.

I understand that, I'm just responding to will's claim that Boise St. hasn't earned an opportunity to be in the NC game based on their schedule, by countering that neither has UC at this point.

IslandRed
10-20-2009, 03:59 PM
But do they deserve it if they play a cupcake schedule? Boise St. has not yet earned the right to be in the National Championship based on their schedule. Beat more than just Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl in one year then we'll talk.


BSU (or Utah or whoever) can't just freely change conferences. They don't just get to say "Oh, we're in the Pac 10 this year, check it out." Furthermore, these schools only get 3-4 chances to get that big win, so if you schedule a big-name team that tanks in the 2-3 years between scheduling and the actual game, well, too bad.

That's the eternal problem with the notion of schedule strength. As soon as a school like Boise becomes a known threat, nobody wants to play them. Then we jam them for not having proven themselves against the teams that wouldn't return their phone calls.

I love college football, but that's one respect where college basketball is better. If fate somehow puts the best team in a no-name conference, hoops gives them a fair chance to prove it. In football, not necessarily. If names like Alabama and Texas are undefeated, Boise State's not going to get a chance to play for the title, even if they could spot either team 14 points on a neutral field.

*BaseClogger*
10-20-2009, 04:22 PM
You mean like they still do?

;)

dsmith421
10-20-2009, 04:23 PM
Sorry don't mean to brag but we have yet to fail. WVU is 2-0 in BCS bowl games.

Seriously, you're going to rip Ohio State and your program has reached TWO BCS games? Really? TWO? Hasn't OSU played in like seven?

I do think it's hilarious that Will thinks WVU is part of the elevated pantheon of college football by virtue of its membership in the Big East....from where I'm sitting, the Big East is closer to the Mountain West than the SEC in terms of prestige and results.

(Sorry to take this afield from UC.)

Boston Red
10-20-2009, 04:47 PM
If Oregon wins out (including a win over USC obviously), Boise wins out and someone knocks off Texas, how do you keep Boise out of the title game? They'd be undefeated with a dominating win over an Oregon team that would be in the top 5. I think they'd have a stronger claim than an undefeated UC in that scenario (and only in that scenario).

Chip R
10-20-2009, 04:49 PM
If Oregon wins out (including a win over USC obviously), Boise wins out and someone knocks off Texas, how do you keep Boise out of the title game?

Because they aren't in the BCS.

Boston Red
10-20-2009, 04:51 PM
I really think Boise would play in the title game in the unlikely event it plays out that way.

If not, I guess Boise vs. Cincinnati would be a great Sugar Bowl.

NorrisHopper30
10-20-2009, 04:58 PM
Interesting stats for you guys right here:

Bearcat's defense:
3rd in the nation in interceptions
3rd in the nation in sacks
1st in the nation in tackles for loss (10 per game)
Have not given up over 20 points in a game this year

Yes, this is the defense that replaced 10 starters.

Redlegs23
10-20-2009, 05:30 PM
If Oregon wins out (including a win over USC obviously), Boise wins out and someone knocks off Texas, how do you keep Boise out of the title game? They'd be undefeated with a dominating win over an Oregon team that would be in the top 5. I think they'd have a stronger claim than an undefeated UC in that scenario (and only in that scenario).

Because that would give them one good win on their season, and UC would be 4-0 against ranked teams and in a BCS conference. Anybody can pull off a good game and upset someone, look at Washington and USC. I'm not saying that's what would happen, but that would be my argument as a UC fan.

jimbo
10-20-2009, 05:41 PM
Because that would give them one good win on their season, and UC would be 4-0 against ranked teams and in a BCS conference.

I only see 3 ranked teams in UC's schedule, and nobody ranked higher than #20. We also don't know if WVU and Pitt will still be ranked by the time UC plays them. That Boise St. win against Oregon looks pretty big right now.

paintmered
10-20-2009, 05:57 PM
I only see 3 ranked teams in UC's schedule, and nobody ranked higher than #20. We also don't know if WVU and Pitt will still be ranked by the time UC plays them. That Boise St. win against Oregon looks pretty big right now.

FWIW, Oregon State was 24th in the Coaches Poll when UC played them in Corvallis.

Caveat Emperor
10-20-2009, 06:18 PM
If Oregon wins out (including a win over USC obviously), Boise wins out and someone knocks off Texas, how do you keep Boise out of the title game? They'd be undefeated with a dominating win over an Oregon team that would be in the top 5. I think they'd have a stronger claim than an undefeated UC in that scenario (and only in that scenario).

Boise will be jumped by virtually any 1-loss team (even potentially, in your imagined scenario, Oregon themselves) sitting at #3 due to the SOS issues they'll have once their WAC schedule is completed.

In fact, I'd say Alabama has a better shot of losing the SEC championship and getting a rematch for the National Title than Boise State has of playing for it.

Caveat Emperor
10-20-2009, 06:35 PM
Anyway, to bring this back to UC -- reports indicate that Collaros took the majority of the first team snaps today in practice.

Be very afraid.

GAC
10-20-2009, 07:04 PM
I would love to see a team like UC make it into the NC game. Unfortunately, I don't think the BCS "heirarchy" (and networks) would. And for the very same reasons (viewership/ratings) they don't want to see certain teams in the World Series and Super Bowl.

If it came down to that "hard decision" (choice) between an established nationally recognized program, and a team like a Boise State and/or UC, I think those two teams would lose out. No, it wouldn't be right; but that's how those making the decisions work IMO. Politics.

Alabama's remaining schedule....

Tennessee 3-3
#9 LSU 5-1
Mississippi State 3-4
Chattanooga 4-2
Auburn 5-2

Florida's remaining schedule....

Mississippi State 3-4
Georgia 4-3
Vanderbilt 2-5
#24 S. Carolina 5-2
Fla. International 1-5
Fla. State 2-4

Texas' remaining schedule.....

Missouri 4-2
Oklahoma State 5-1
UCF 3-3
Baylor 3-3
#25 Kansas 5-1
Texas A&M 3-3

And lets not ignore USC, even with their one loss either, who in the AP poll is #4. They have remaining - Oregon State, #11 Oregon, Arizona State, Stanford, UCLA, #22 Arizona

It could prove interesting because any of those three teams above could suffer a loss before it's over. Florida or Alabama are going to end up with a loss IF they oppose each other in the SEC Championship game.

But, looking at their remaining schedule, and if they both win out, that, IMO, would be the NC game. :lol:

But I know that's not how it works.

It's gonna be interesting.

GAC
10-20-2009, 07:05 PM
Anyway, to bring this back to UC -- reports indicate that Collaros took the majority of the first team snaps today in practice.

Be very afraid.

Highly doubtful that Pike plays. I still say they beat Louisville, even with Collaros at QB. There is an awful lot of talent on the Bearcat team.

Redlegs23
10-20-2009, 07:10 PM
I only see 3 ranked teams in UC's schedule, and nobody ranked higher than #20. We also don't know if WVU and Pitt will still be ranked by the time UC plays them. That Boise St. win against Oregon looks pretty big right now.

Oregon State was 24 in the coaches poll when they played, I was counting that. I think Oregon State will be back in the polls by the end of the season too. You're right, we don't know if WVU and Pitt will still be ranked when they play, but they also may be ranked higher. We also don't know if Oregon will still be ranked at the end of the year, they might completely choke. In fact, we don't know what anyone will be ranked later in the year.

FWIW Pitt is 19th in one of the polls right now I believe, it they run the table until the UC game Pitt will be a top 10 team.

Redlegs23
10-20-2009, 07:14 PM
I too really doubt Pike plays this weekend, but I have more confidence in Collaros than Caveat does. UC wins this game regardless of who is starting at QB.

Reds4Life
10-20-2009, 07:44 PM
Highly doubtful that Pike plays. I still say they beat Louisville, even with Collaros at QB. There is an awful lot of talent on the Bearcat team.

Collaros doesn't have much of a passing game, IMO. He tries to float all of his passes, and they begging to be picked off. I know a lot of UC fans think he'll be perfectly fine out there, but I don't share the same confidence.

I'm a UC fan, but I wouldn't be suprised in the least if Louisvlle beats UC and Collaros throws a couple INT's.