State of the Athletic Department

[bearcat8290]

Quite frankly, I'm concerned about the UC athletic department. Having been a part of and spectator for nearly 40 years (started paying attention in 1976), UC athletics has spent years and years low balling all coaches. When the coaches become successful, UC usually lets them go. They are not willing to pay for the coaches and their local recruiting efforts. Therefore, much of the inroads made by these successful coaches in local recruiting is wasted by the penny pinching administration. We spend millions in facilities but somehow drop the ball when it comes to coaching. The only impressive coaching tenure was that of Brian Kelly. The administration nearly kept Kelly here, but ND was too much. Take a look at the standings at the AAC website. Hardly, the UC athletic department is not worth talking about. Football, tied for first but does not win tiebreaker, Men's soccer finishes 7th of 8 teams, women's soccer finishes 6th of 10 teams, women's volleyball finishes 7th of 11 teams, men's basketball tied for 3rd of 11 teams, women's basketball, 9th of 11 teams, baseball 8th of 8 teams, If we seek a new conference and are banking on a great performance in the AAC, I'm not seeing it at all. We are a middle of the road AAC team at this point and unless we start investing in coaches and recruiting, we will remain at that level and hardly fodder for the Big 12.

 

[david aka the TYZ]

Quite frankly, I'm concerned about the UC athletic department. Having been a part of and spectator for nearly 40 years (started paying attention in 1976), UC athletics has spent years and years low balling all coaches. When the coaches become successful, UC usually lets them go. They are not willing to pay for the coaches and their local recruiting efforts. Therefore, much of the inroads made by these successful coaches in local recruiting is wasted by the penny pinching administration. We spend millions in facilities but somehow drop the ball when it comes to coaching. The only impressive coaching tenure was that of Brian Kelly. The administration nearly kept Kelly here, but ND was too much. Take a look at the standings at the AAC website. Hardly, the UC athletic department is not worth talking about. Football, tied for first but does not win tiebreaker, Men's soccer finishes 7th of 8 teams, women's soccer finishes 6th of 10 teams, women's volleyball finishes 7th of 11 teams, men's basketball tied for 3rd of 11 teams, women's basketball, 9th of 11 teams, baseball 8th of 8 teams, If we seek a new conference and are banking on a great performance in the AAC, I'm not seeing it at all. We are a middle of the road AAC team at this point and unless we start investing in coaches and recruiting, we will remain at that level and hardly fodder for the Big 12.

All I'll say is money doesn't grow on trees. When and only when fans/donors put money into the athletic department will they be able to compete at the same level as the big boys. UC will not get tax dollars nor will they raise tuition to fund the athletic department. Nippert's expansion was 100% done and funded as a means to create a new revenue stream that didn't exist prior. And that funding came through private donations and through advanced ticket sales.

And I'd say Huggins had a pretty good coaching tenure here and he didn't leave because we wouldn't pony up the money other schools would. I would say the same for Cronin. He's compensated very well and we offered more money to Dantonio and Jones to stay.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

Quite frankly, I'm concerned about the UC athletic department. Having been a part of and spectator for nearly 40 years (started paying attention in 1976), UC athletics has spent years and years low balling all coaches. When the coaches become successful, UC usually lets them go. They are not willing to pay for the coaches and their local recruiting efforts. Therefore, much of the inroads made by these successful coaches in local recruiting is wasted by the penny pinching administration. We spend millions in facilities but somehow drop the ball when it comes to coaching. The only impressive coaching tenure was that of Brian Kelly. The administration nearly kept Kelly here, but ND was too much. Take a look at the standings at the AAC website. Hardly, the UC athletic department is not worth talking about. Football, tied for first but does not win tiebreaker, Men's soccer finishes 7th of 8 teams, women's soccer finishes 6th of 10 teams, women's volleyball finishes 7th of 11 teams, men's basketball tied for 3rd of 11 teams, women's basketball, 9th of 11 teams, baseball 8th of 8 teams, If we seek a new conference and are banking on a great performance in the AAC, I'm not seeing it at all. We are a middle of the road AAC team at this point and unless we start investing in coaches and recruiting, we will remain at that level and hardly fodder for the Big 12.

I've said the same thing for years! This AD is operating at a MAC level, no olympic sports are even competitive. Central Florida has shown to be the class of the AAC, if they ever could put together a good basketball team they'd be outta here.

 

[bearcat8290]

That's a great point. UC wants to play with the big boys so to speak but continues with a MAC budget. It's always been that way or for as long as I remember. That tells me that many of the same forces holding back the universities athletic department are still in place in some form or fashion. The university should be adding women's softball and men's lacrosse. These are two very popular sports. We already have the field for men's lacrosse and would need to find a sport for women's softball. Mt St Joe has a nice field on US 50 west of the MT St Joe campus that could be utilized with a little money from the UC athletic department. We all know there are plenty of softball and lacrosse athletes in the Cincinnati area.

By the way, UC needs changes in the women's basketball coaching position and men's soccer head coach. Both have been big time losers for the most part over the past five years. Once again, the administration fails to correct itself and terminate these coaches. Both were given new contracts and are in the middle of those contracts. I don't think UC wants to pay either of them to leave. However, it should be noted that this waste of time may be costing the university in many other ways. Winning did a lot for Louisville. Louisville was recognized by the ACC because many of UL's athletic teams were winning and gaining national attention. UC came in late to the ACC meetings (not literally but seemingly did not recognize the ACC was expanding until it was too late), was transitioning with it's new AD and had many programs losing and losing big that it was not attractive in that way as a possible major player in the ACC. Louisville has top teams and won titles in women's basketball, baseball in just it's first year in the ACC.

 

[M64W]

YES--MONEY!

UC has champagne taste with beer money! For a school that wants to go big time, I agree with the previous posts. UC does not have Wrestling, Gymnastics, Fencing, Ice Hockey, Men's Lacrosse, Pistol, Rifle, Rowing, Softball, etc.----because they don't have money.

 

[bearcat8290]

only asking for mens lacrosse and women's softball. We will need women's softball if we move to the Big 12. It should be in place prior to the move and could be done at a limited expense. Many of the women softball players are in the area. UC could virtually field a team with seniors from a 100 mile radius of Cincinnati. Then all we would need is a field, equipment and money for travel. UC needs to be more proactive in all of it's efforts rather than reacting after decisions have been made.