UC's 5/3 Update

[xudash]

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/08/16/uc-unveils-first-stage-of-fifth-third-arena.html?ana=e_ae_set1&s=article_du&ed=2016-08-16&u=nBaExrqRSIS0%2B8tOrwQRvSDJvwN&t=1471378111&j=75454852

UC will begin the massive renovation in earnest after the upcoming basketball season. It will play at an off-campus site for a season before returning to a renovated Fifth Third Arena for the 2018-19 season. University officials haven’t said yet where UC will play in 2017-18 while construction takes place.

“That’s not determined yet, but we hope to have some finality soon,” Koslen said.

U.S. Bank Arena appears to be the most likely candidate, but UC officials have also mentioned Xavier University’s Cintas Center and Northern Kentucky University’s BB&T Arena. Cincinnati Gardens had been discussed as an option, too, but that building was recently sold to the Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Authority, which will tear it down and redevelop the space for industrial use.

We should be a good neighbor and let them in. Something to the tune of 1.75 times the normal rental rate. :biggrin:

[drudy23]

How can you, in good conscience, play home games on the floor of your biggest rival and feel good about it?

How many tantrums has Mick thrown because of this possibility?

This is gold.

[xeus]

No way would I want those people using our facility. US Bank is a perfect fit for them. Actually, based on their attendance, they could use most high school gyms too.

[xudash]

No way would I want those people using our facility. US Bank is a perfect fit for them. Actually, based on their attendance, they could use most high school gyms too.

Okay, my apologies. What's your price? How about 3x our going rate?

Plus full reimbursement for damage and vandalism.

Plus payments to Xavier for conducting reflection sessions for their students who do vandalize - - at 5x the going rate.

Plus $250,000 for psychiatric care for all affected Xavier people who witness any and all said vandalism.

Plus a comprehensive wash and scrub for D'Artagnan - - performed by Mick and Tubberville - - and with tickets sold to that event, with all tickets paid for by UC.

[bobbiemcgee]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZUpfqTUgyQ

[94GRAD]

I wouldn't mind 16/18 extra busy days!!!

[GIMMFD]

I wouldn't mind 16/18 extra busy days!!!

Yeah, but do you really want those Bearkittens tainting the place??

[GoMuskies]

I wouldn't mind 16/18 extra busy days!!!

Have you seen the size of the typical UC crowd?!?

[Strange Brew]

X should give away unsold tickets to X students to ahem, show UC how much they love 'em every game.

[Juice]

I wouldn't put it past some of their fans to treat the place like shit in spite of Xavier

[XUMIOH12]

X should give away unsold tickets to X students to ahem, show UC how much they love 'em every game.

that would be awesome haha

[JTG]

No to Cintas..let em play at the dogshit center or whatever that place on the riverfront is called these days.

[xudash]

UC's Athletic Department is losing money at the pace of $20 million per year.

Opinion piece from the Cin Enquirer:

UC spending on 'athletic arms race' irresponsible
Ron Jones and John McNay | Updated 8d ago

Ron Jones is a librarian in the University of Cincinnati College of Law and president of the UC chapter of the American Association of University Professors. John McNay is a history professor at UC Blue Ash College and president of the Ohio Conference, AAUP.

Athletics can be a fun part of the college experience for students. The faculty enjoy watching sporting events and supporting student athletes as much as anyone, but at some point you have to ask at what cost?

After factoring in ticket sales, sponsorships, advertising and all other sources of revenue, UC’s athletic program loses more than $20 million per year. This $20 million deficit is covered by taking $20 million from the academic side of UC. This money – generated from tuition, student fees and other sources – is diverted from every college and program that make up the University of Cincinnati.

According to the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics' report “Restoring the Balance,” UC’s expenditure per student declined by 32 percent from 2005 to 2012. Over the same period, its spending on athletics increased by 76 percent. Those trends have continued. Today, the university subsidizes nearly half of the athletic program’s budget....

The sea of athletic department red ink costs each UC student over $500 a year and about $2,000 over the four years it takes to complete an undergraduate degree. Further, UC athletic department’s total debt is $139 million.

.........

The argument now is that joining the Big 12 will bring in enough money to close the expanding shortfall in revenue in UC athletics. But joining the Big 12 will certainly mean even more spending on coaches, buildings, players, travel and equipment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That last sentence is scary. It's probably the reason that a number of P5 schools lacking 100k+ capacity stadiums loose money.

[coasterville95]

I still think the only role Cintas Center plays in all of this is as a bargaining chip to try to get lower rent at US Bank Arena.

Perhaps they should tour UD Arena as well...

[coasterville95]

Oh and add to all the costs XU dash proposes - a cleaning and sterilizing fee for Dans Gardens after each UC game.

[throwbackmuskie]

UC's Athletic Department is losing money at the pace of $20 million per year.

Opinion piece from the Cin Enquirer:

UC spending on 'athletic arms race' irresponsible
Ron Jones and John McNay | Updated 8d ago

Ron Jones is a librarian in the University of Cincinnati College of Law and president of the UC chapter of the American Association of University Professors. John McNay is a history professor at UC Blue Ash College and president of the Ohio Conference, AAUP.

Athletics can be a fun part of the college experience for students. The faculty enjoy watching sporting events and supporting student athletes as much as anyone, but at some point you have to ask at what cost?

After factoring in ticket sales, sponsorships, advertising and all other sources of revenue, UC’s athletic program loses more than $20 million per year. This $20 million deficit is covered by taking $20 million from the academic side of UC. This money – generated from tuition, student fees and other sources – is diverted from every college and program that make up the University of Cincinnati.

According to the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics' report “Restoring the Balance,” UC’s expenditure per student declined by 32 percent from 2005 to 2012. Over the same period, its spending on athletics increased by 76 percent. Those trends have continued. Today, the university subsidizes nearly half of the athletic program’s budget....

The sea of athletic department red ink costs each UC student over $500 a year and about $2,000 over the four years it takes to complete an undergraduate degree. Further, UC athletic department’s total debt is $139 million.

.........

The argument now is that joining the Big 12 will bring in enough money to close the expanding shortfall in revenue in UC athletics. But joining the Big 12 will certainly mean even more spending on coaches, buildings, players, travel and equipment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That last sentence is scary. It's probably the reason that a number of P5 schools lacking 100k+ capacity stadiums loose money.


The funny thing is, the Big12 will not be a golden parachute for them, the Big 12 is not going to give the newbies a big chuck of the money for a while.

[Muskie]

Is Cintas really on the table to host UC while they do renovations? Surely that would be a bad idea for all involved?

[paulxu]

Maybe it's Mick's idea so the gnome can host the Shootout at a neutral site for one year.

[GoMuskies]

Is Cintas really on the table to host UC while they do renovations? Surely that would be a bad idea for all involved?

I'm not really sure what the downside would be from UC's perspective. Other than perhaps disappointment when they go back to playing home games on their own campus.

[GIMMFD]

The funny thing is, the Big12 will not be a golden parachute for them, the Big 12 is not going to give the newbies a big chuck of the money for a while.

Agreed, because part of the acceptance into the Big 12 is knowing that you'll be taking less money than what the already established members have, will it be more than the AAC??? Probably, but that won't help $20mil in debt annually..

[Muskie]

I'm not really sure what the downside would be from UC's perspective. Other than perhaps disappointment when they go back to playing home games on their own campus.

I just have a hard time believing the UC administration would allow their basketball team to play an entire season the floor of their rival? Maybe I'm overvaluing that aspect? I can't imagine that Cintas would be much cheaper to rent from X, than say the U.S. Bank Arena?

[Muskie]

Agreed, because part of the acceptance into the Big 12 is knowing that you'll be taking less money than what the already established members have, will it be more than the AAC??? Probably, but that won't help $20mil in debt annually..

Maybe the hope is to eek by until they full payments start?

[xubrew]

Agreed, because part of the acceptance into the Big 12 is knowing that you'll be taking less money than what the already established members have, will it be more than the AAC??? Probably, but that won't help $20mil in debt annually..

The first and second tier media rights would be shared equally with the new schools. What wouldn't be shared equally is the bowl money, playoff money, NCAA Tournament money, and third tier media rights. So, the new teams would get around $23 million a year starting out as opposed to the $30.4 million that the rest of them are getting.

[throwbackmuskie]

The first and second tier media rights would be shared equally with the new schools. What wouldn't be shared equally is the bowl money, playoff money, NCAA Tournament money, and third tier media rights. So, the new teams would get around $23 million a year starting out as opposed to the $30.4 million that the rest of them are getting.

You sure about that? I think I read where the TV money would not be an equal share right out the gate.

[xubrew]

You sure about that? I think I read where the TV money would not be an equal share right out the gate.

It is my understanding that the third tier money will not be equally shared, but that the big first and second tier money will. Full disclosure, no one from the conference is telling me that. It's someone from a network, and I'm assuming they know...but maybe not. After all, they don't actually work for the conference.

[throwbackmuskie]

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209513755

Tcu and wva splits from when they joined


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xubrew]

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209513755

Tcu and wva splits from when they joined


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From the article...


TCU and West Virginia, which are about to start their third season as Big 12 members, received a 67 percent share in revenue distribution for the 2013-14

I don't know exactly how they divvy it up as far as what they get full shares of and what they get partial shares of, but based on the Big Twelve's total revenue will be if it goes through with expansion and adds a championship football game, a 67 percent share is about $23 million dollars a year.

[LA Muskie]

The funny thing is, the Big12 will not be a golden parachute for them, the Big 12 is not going to give the newbies a big chuck of the money for a while.

Again this is just not true. The Big XII may hold back non-TV money, but that pretty much pales in comparison to the TV money. And the TV contract stipulates that new members get full value from Day 1 on the TV side of things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Muskie]

The first and second tier media rights would be shared equally with the new schools. What wouldn't be shared equally is the bowl money, playoff money, NCAA Tournament money, and third tier media rights. So, the new teams would get around $23 million a year starting out as opposed to the $30.4 million that the rest of them are getting.

Thank you!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[throwbackmuskie]

Again this is just not true. The Big XII may hold back non-TV money, but that pretty much pales in comparison to the TV money. And the TV contract stipulates that new members get full value from Day 1 on the TV side of things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Read the article posted. The 1st and 2nd tier TV money are part of the overall payout, the third tier is not included.
"The revenue distribution that each school receives doesn't include the money each institution gains from third-tier media rights. That revenue varies from $3 million to $15 million."
Basically the top tv money, bowl rev, ect was not split evenly.

[xubrew]

Read the article posted. The 1st and 2nd tier TV money are part of the overall payout, the third tier is not included.
"The revenue distribution that each school receives doesn't include the money each institution gains from third-tier media rights. That revenue varies from $3 million to $15 million."
Basically the top tv money, bowl rev, ect was not split evenly.

Third tier money is bottom tier money. The article estimates that they'd get about 67 percent, or 2/3rds of what the other ten schools get once all the total revenue is divided up. Right now the schools get $30.4 million a piece. 2/3rds of that is $20.3 million right now. When you factor in the increased revenues from the championship football game, and the increased revenue that the networks will be required to pay, the 2/3rds figure will be about $23 million.

However you want to factor it out, the new schools will be getting about $23 million starting out, and that figure will increase to $30+ million within the next few years.

And, in 2025 when the contract is up, the networks who are against the league expanding now probably won't want to resign the league for nearly as much money, and who knows what happens then. But for now and for the next nine years, it's a huge chunk of cash.

In my opinion they're making a mistake. In the opinion of nearly all of the athletic directors they're making a mistake. But, the presidents have decided to do it. Yes, there will be more money for the next eight or nine years, but the networks who are the source of that money don't want the league to expand and are seemingly aggravated that the league has decided to do so. So, is it worth more money for nine years if it means aggravating the networks?? In my opinion it is not. In 2025 the money won't be nearly what it is now. They're fine with the ten teams they got now. Just my opinion, but then again no one who matters cares what my opinion is.

[throwbackmuskie]

I am pointing out they will not get a full share right off the bat, wvu and tcu had to wait 4 years before getting a full share. They won't get 67% right out the gate. My guess would be a max of a 50% pay out the first year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xubrew]

I am. It disagrees I am pointing out they will not get a full share right off the bat, wvu and tcu had to wait 4 years before getting a full share. They won't get 67% right out the gate. My guess would be a max of a 50% pay out the first year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What are you basing that guess on?? I'm sure the bylaws for expansion, and the percentages that new programs get, are the same now as they were when TCU and West Virginia joined. No one has reported that they have changed that I have seen. The TV contracts stipulate that new schools get full value for the first and second tier. That alone is more than fifty percent.

The only school that gets $15 million from third tier revenue is Texas. The rest get between about $3-5 million. It isn't shared equally because the schools are allowed to sign their own independent deals and keep the vast majority of it for themselves, so the fact that the schools don't get a cut of the third tier TV revenue isn't surprising since...well...no one gets a cut of it unless they've signed their own independent deal. More specifically, Texas doesn't have to share their revenue from the Longhorn Network.

The league made $312 million in total revenue last year. Roughly $230 million of that was from the first and second tier TV deals for football and men's basketball. That number will increase by more $25 million a year per school that is added. That's why league wants to expand. The current schools would actually result in each school getting more money per school than they do now. The schools who are added will get an equal share of first and second tier TV revenue right away. That's written into the contract. That in and of itself is about $23 million. Even if they get zero bowl money, zero NCAA Tournament shares, and zero third tier money, they're still getting about $23 million.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-could-earn-an-additional-1-billion-by-expanding/

From the article....


If the league expands by four teams, provisions in its contracts with ESPN and Fox provide money for that benchmark. If the expansion is by two teams, the increase would be $500 million.
Those rightsholders are contractually bound to provide "pro rata" for any new Big 12 members. That is, any new members would be paid an equal share of the current Big 12 members -- approximately $23 million per year.

Whoever it is that is invited to join this league will start off getting $23 million a year, and that figure will increase in the coming years. That's a fact. It might actually be a couple million more than that.

[throwbackmuskie]

I have seen a few articles, can't find them at the moment to link, they have suggested the new members will get a very reduced share off the bat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoMuskies]

50% of Big 12 money>>>>>>>>>>>> 100% of AAC money.

[LA Muskie]

I am pointing out they will not get a full share right off the bat, wvu and tcu had to wait 4 years before getting a full share. They won't get 67% right out the gate. My guess would be a max of a 50% pay out the first year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's fine. But your guess is wrong and is premised on a refusal to understand the terms of the TV contract. The Big XII can jerk around with all the other money but they can't touch the Tier 1 and Tier 2 dollars. They are required to bring in new schools at full parity for those rights. And those rights are worth at least $20mm. Probably closer to $25mm. There is literally no way UC can lose money by joining the Big XII. Much to the contrary it would be a HUGE windfall. HUGE!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Muskie]

I have seen a few articles, can't find them at the moment to link, they have suggested the new members will get a very reduced share off the bat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Those articles are out there. And they are wrong or misleading. Even ESPN -- a party to the contract -- recently posted an article on this topic and acknowledged the parity requirement. (Notably they had an earlier article that was wrong/misleading, and didn't bother to mention that this was a correction...)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[throwbackmuskie]

That's fine. But your guess is wrong and is premised on a refusal to understand the terms of the TV contract. The Big XII can jerk around with all the other money but they can't touch the Tier 1 and Tier 2 dollars. They are required to bring in new schools at full parity for those rights. And those rights are worth at least $20mm. Probably closer to $25mm. There is literally no way UC can lose money by joining the Big XII. Much to the contrary it would be a HUGE windfall. HUGE!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get what it currently states, but the Big 12 can and will also renegotiate the contract if expansion happens.

This is the true problem, the TV networks and I think a lot of the Big 12 people have issues with, outside of BYU and ND, there are no other nonP5 schools who are worthy of being in the P5 right now. ND is set with their ACC deal and BYU wants in. The problem is there really isn't a good partner for them.

If they expand with UC and Houston, I think Texas will bolt as soon at the current Big12 TV deal is done, in I think 6 years.

[xubrew]

I get what it currently states, but the Big 12 can and will also renegotiate the contract if expansion happens.

This is the true problem, the TV networks and I think a lot of the Big 12 people have issues with, outside of BYU and ND, there are no other nonP5 schools who are worthy of being in the P5 right now. ND is set with their ACC deal and BYU wants in. The problem is there really isn't a good partner for them.

If they expand with UC and Houston, I think Texas will bolt as soon at the current Big12 TV deal is done, in I think 6 years.

Nine years, not six.

And no, the Big Twelve cannot renegotiate it. And no, they won't want to. In fact, the specifics of the current contract are the biggest reason they're wanting to expand. Essentially, the more teams there are, the more each team gets. If anything, it's the networks who would want to renegotiate it, and they can't either. But, what they can do is in 2025 not resign with the league, or at least not resign with anywhere near the chunk of change that the current contract pays it. But, as of now, they're kind of stuck. They can't really do anything other than come out and say they're against expansion, which they've done, but until 2025 that's really all they can do.

[throwbackmuskie]

Thought it was 2022, doesn't matter.

AS for renegotiating, "While on its face that doesn't necessarily help the 10 current members of the Big 12, opening the existing contract would allow for a negotiation beyond that $1 billion figure."

The networks will come back and make a deal and the new members maybe left with a smaller cut. Now I am sure it will be more than they make now, but UC and some of these others are in a large pile of debt, that is going to sting for a while.

[xubrew]

Thought it was 2022, doesn't matter.

AS for renegotiating, "While on its face that doesn't necessarily help the 10 current members of the Big 12, opening the existing contract would allow for a negotiation beyond that $1 billion figure."

The networks will come back and make a deal and the new members maybe left with a smaller cut. Now I am sure it will be more than they make now, but UC and some of these others are in a large pile of debt, that is going to sting for a while.

This is a huge assumption that is based on things that are just not likely to happen. I suppose Iceland could join the UK and change its name to Northern Great Britain. It's possible. But, to assume that something like that would happen without any real basis is a very big assumption. Whatever schools are invited to this league will start off making between $23 and $25 million while the other schools are making upwards of $33 million or so. That's what all the networks are anticipating, and that's what all of the current members are anticipating. That's what all of the schools who want into the league are anticipating. There is nothing in play to suggest that will change. Even the articles you have posted indicate that's what it's going to be. I don't know why that is so hard to accept.

[throwbackmuskie]

This is a huge assumption that is based on things that are just not likely to happen. I suppose Iceland could join the UK and change its name to Northern Great Britain. It's possible. But, to assume that something like that would happen without any real basis is a very big assumption. Whatever schools are invited to this league will start off making between $23 and $25 million while the other schools are making upwards of $33 million or so. That's what all the networks are anticipating, and that's what all of the current members are anticipating. That's what all of the schools who want into the league are anticipating. There is nothing in play to suggest that will change. Even the articles you have posted indicate that's what it's going to be. I don't know why that is so hard to accept.

Everything right now is an assumption. My point is the new members won't get the same money, as proven by the TCU and WVU deals. Yes the current contract states new members get the same cut, but when the Scope of the contract changes, as it will when new members join, both parties have the right to renegotiate.

All I am saying is and have been saying is I really don't think the new members are all of a sudden going to be rich and living high off the hog.

I the grand scheme of things, UC at $23M will just about break even since they lose about $20M a year.

[94GRAD]

Everything right now is an assumption. My point is the new members won't get the same money, as proven by the TCU and WVU deals. Yes the current contract states new members get the same cut, but when the Scope of the contract changes, as it will when new members join, both parties have the right to renegotiate.

All I am saying is and have been saying is I really don't think the new members are all of a sudden going to be rich and living high off the hog.

I the grand scheme of things, UC at $23M will just about break even since they lose about $20M a year.

So you're sayimg they would make 3mil a year instead of losing 20mil? I wounder why they are lobbying so hard to join the Big12 then?

[throwbackmuskie]

So you're sayimg they would make 3mil a year instead of losing 20mil? I wounder why they are lobbying so hard to join the Big12 then?

I don't disagree that making $3m is better than losing $20M, but with added expenses of the new conference, they may still lose money or just breakeven. Still better than losing $20M a year. Also that $20M is not taking into account the other $139M in debt the athletic department has on the books.

[LA Muskie]

Everything right now is an assumption. My point is the new members won't get the same money, as proven by the TCU and WVU deals. Yes the current contract states new members get the same cut, but when the Scope of the contract changes, as it will when new members join, both parties have the right to renegotiate.

All I am saying is and have been saying is I really don't think the new members are all of a sudden going to be rich and living high off the hog.

I the grand scheme of things, UC at $23M will just about break even since they lose about $20M a year.
You appear to be operating on the "they will renegotiate because everything is negotiable" model. The problem is, that's not really the case. Because the Big XII doesn't want to renegotiate -- they will never get as good a deal as they have right now, whether they throw 2-4 new schools under the bus or not. And they know that.

On the other hand, while the TV networks would love to renegotiate, it would be because they are overpaying already. And they know it. They aren't going to better line the schools' pockets in a renegotiated deal.

If UC joins the Big XII, they are going to make $23-25 mil in year one (less costs associated with leaving the AAC). All the hatred in the world for UC isn't going to change that fact. Live with it and move on.

[throwbackmuskie]

We will see what happens, IF expansion does in fact happen.

[fellahmuskie]

The rumor on Twitter is that UC is splitting games next season between Cintas and US Bank.

[BMoreX]

The rumor on Twitter is that UC is splitting games next season between Cintas and US Bank.

Oh boy. They'll never live this down haha.

[kellernr]

The rumor on Twitter is that UC is splitting games next season between Cintas and US Bank.

can you post the tweet? I want to make fun of my friends that root for uc.

[Lamont Sanford]

The rumor on Twitter is that UC is splitting games next season between Cintas and US Bank.

Please God say it ain't so. I don't want those assclowns in the 'Tas more than once every two years.

[MuskieXU]

After trying to find more about this, I believe the person who made this claim redacted it. I would be VERY surprised if UC ever played a home game at the Tas.

[fellahmuskie]

Yeah, I just checked too. He's a uc student, and now says his source lied. Sorry about the false alarm.

[coasterville95]

Now I am hearing they are thinking about playing at NKU. It's a nice newer arena and all but seems to have come from left field.

Or is this the latest in just trying to squeeze a lower bid out of US Dump.

[ReturnOfTheMack]

Now I am hearing they are thinking about playing at NKU. It's a nice newer arena and all but seems to have come from left field.

Or is this the latest in just trying to squeeze a lower bid out of US Dump.

UC isn't just THINKING of playing at NKU, it's more than likely going to happen. I have a few friends who took the wrong path in life and are now UCATS members/season ticket holders and they've already received correspondence as to how a move to NKU would affect them next season. It's not a done deal as apparently there are a few items to left to finalize but NKU is definitely the leader in the clubhouse. US Bank has publicly shown interest to host UC but behind closed doors apparently the tenor of the discussions has been lukewarm at best.

[bleedXblue]

This whole thing just cracks me up. I don't know what they're spending on the renovation, but what a total cluster. Their campus is basically out of room and there's nowhere to go. Nippert should have been bulldozed 5 years ago and UC could be playing at PBS. That's would free up some much needed space to do some things that are actual money makers for the school. Poorly run school for the last 10-15 years IMHO. They keep investing in the area and the crime just keeps chugging right along.

[X-band '01]

Calling it lukewarm is putting it very nicely. USBank Arena wanted to do major renovations with UC as a primary tenant. Once UC announced that they planned on renovating 5/3 Arena, it was pretty much a given that they weren't going to play downtown except for an occasional show game.

I've been to a couple of NKU games and it is very easy (albeit a little long if you're in Ohio) to get in and out of campus/BB&T Arena. It's a very nice place (and also a much safer neighborhood) that will at least fill up for their conference games. Noncon games won't look much different than typical NKU crowds would.

[X-band '01]

This whole thing just cracks me up. I don't know what they're spending on the renovation, but what a total cluster. Their campus is basically out of room and there's nowhere to go. Nippert should have been bulldozed 5 years ago and UC could be playing at PBS. That's would free up some much needed space to do some things that are actual money makers for the school. Poorly run school for the last 10-15 years IMHO. They keep investing in the area and the crime just keeps chugging right along.

If they had the same administrators that Pitt did about a decade ago, the notion of bulldozing Nippert to move the football team downtown to Paul Brown Stadium (and build a new arena) wouldn't sound too far-fetched. 5/3 Arena would be decent by MAC standards but not for a Power 5 conference that UC is desperate to get into.

Keep in mind that Pitt's arena (Petersen Events Center) was built on the ground of the old Pitt Stadium that was razed.

[muskiefan82]

I hope NKU added a guaranteed series for a few years as part of the deal

[XMuskieFTW]

I hope NKU added a guaranteed series for a few years as part of the deal

I'm sure they did. I just hope they make UC play their home game in 17-18 and NKU gets a home game in 18-19. That would've been my demands.

[American X]

I'm sure they did. I just hope they make UC play their home game in 17-18 and NKU gets a home game in 18-19. That would've been my demands.

My demands would be before we let you leave, Mick Cronin must cross the court, present himself before the student section, put his head between his legs, and kiss his own arse.

[xubrew]

Playing at NKU in and of itself isn't that bad of a deal. It's actually better than what a lot of other teams had to do.

SMU played at a high school for a season.

Clemson played an hour away all last season.

Rhode Island had to play all their games at the Dunk for at least one season, and maybe more.

Florida played all over the state for the first half of the season this year.

DePaul plays about forty minutes away and they aren't even building a new arena.

US Bank is lousy to deal with from what I understand. So, they went elsewhere and it appears like it's going to work out rather nicely for them. When it comes to temporary homes, NKU is actually pretty good. It's about ten mintues away, and I bet they're thrilled that UC is playing there, which isn't always the case when teams get displaced. Some teams have it easier than others. UCLA and Georgia Tech were able to play in their own cities in nice facilities. Clemson, Florida, and SMU...not so much.

[THRILLHOUSE]

Playing at NKU in and of itself isn't that bad of a deal. It's actually better than what a lot of other teams had to do.

SMU played at a high school for a season.

Clemson played an hour away all last season.

Rhode Island had to play all their games at the Dunk for at least one season, and maybe more.

Florida played all over the state for the first half of the season this year.

DePaul plays about forty minutes away and they aren't even building a new arena.

US Bank is lousy to deal with from what I understand. So, they went elsewhere and it appears like it's going to work out rather nicely for them. When it comes to temporary homes, NKU is actually pretty good. It's about ten mintues away, and I bet they're thrilled that UC is playing there, which isn't always the case when teams get displaced. Some teams have it easier than others. UCLA and Georgia Tech were able to play in their own cities in nice facilities. Clemson, Florida, and SMU...not so much.

TCU had to play at a high school arena for a season as well. (And I think SMU's time at a high school arena was only for a half season.)

[xavierj]

Playing at NKU in and of itself isn't that bad of a deal. It's actually better than what a lot of other teams had to do.

SMU played at a high school for a season.

Clemson played an hour away all last season.

Rhode Island had to play all their games at the Dunk for at least one season, and maybe more.

Florida played all over the state for the first half of the season this year.

DePaul plays about forty minutes away and they aren't even building a new arena.

US Bank is lousy to deal with from what I understand. So, they went elsewhere and it appears like it's going to work out rather nicely for them. When it comes to temporary homes, NKU is actually pretty good. It's about ten mintues away, and I bet they're thrilled that UC is playing there, which isn't always the case when teams get displaced. Some teams have it easier than others. UCLA and Georgia Tech were able to play in their own cities in nice facilities. Clemson, Florida, and SMU...not so much.

I believe DePaul does have a new arena being built, unless they stopped during construction.

[xubrew]

TCU had to play at a high school arena for a season as well. (And I think SMU's time at a high school arena was only for a half season.)

I think you're right

[X-band '01]

I believe DePaul does have a new arena being built, unless they stopped during construction.

Wintrust Arena will be the new place at McCormick Place in Chicago. Xavier will be the last team DePaul plays at AllState Arena.