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

Good ESPN Story on the Bearcats

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-attention

good story keep it up coach cant wait for this season

Good write-up. I think these players were definitely not happy with 4-8 last year (or the lackluster results of previous years) and were willing to accept Fickell's attention training to get better. Hope it reflects on the field this year.

Perhaps just as important, Coach Fickell and his staff have the attention of recruits.

Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I guess, by definition, it's not a permanent indoor facility since they put it up and take it down every year.

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I had to reread that one a few times as well. I'm guessing that since it is technically only "indoors" for about 5 months per year, it isn't considered a permanent indoor facility. The author didn't mention that for most intents and purposes, it functions as an indoor facility.

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

Nah, that thing sorta stinks but it fit the small footprint and small budget.

Rutgers' bubble is permanent and the quality is much different. Ours is a tent full of holes that we put up for a few months.

Miami now has a permanent indoor facility and it's pretty sharp.

I sure love all the buzz around Fickell, and hope the results match.

Was looking for a thread via search regarding your practice bubble.


After the winter do you guys having any comments as we are in a 4-5 month quiet period before our indoor practice facility is announced.

Quote:BUBBLE BUILDING — Bamford said UMass is in the early stages of soliciting donations for an indoor practice facility. It’s primary tenant would be football, but all outdoor teams could benefit from it.

The project ranges from a temporary bubble, which can be inflated and deflated based on weather, or a permanent facility.

Costs range from $5 million for a temporary bubble to $35 million for a higher-end permanent structure. How much money UMass is able to fundraise will likely determine the caliber of structure.

“If I had to guess, we’ll be somewhere in the mid-$20s,” Bamford said. “If we can’t get the funding right, we’re not opposed to a season bubble like BC and Harvard have, but I’d like to build something fixed if we could.”

Bamford said there’s preliminary interest among donors.

“We have a couple of soft (donation) commitments on it that we feel pretty good about,” he said. “We’re going to go through a quiet phase over the next three or four months and figure out who’s in. That’ll dictate what we do with the indoor facility and the stadium.”

http://www.gazettenet.com/Contract-exten...g-16754878

I think the bubble has worked out well for UC. Since UC is in the city it no longer has that pristine white look.

Here is a recent practice video.

(04-18-2017 03:02 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I had to reread that one a few times as well. I'm guessing that since it is technically only "indoors" for about 5 months per year, it isn't considered a permanent indoor facility. The author didn't mention that for most intents and purposes, it functions as an indoor facility.

I think I recall Bohn making a thinly veiled reference to a permanent indoor football facility in a recent interview. Guess that's the next weapon needed in the facilities arms race but I would be surprised if it flipped a recruit away from UC to a MAC school that had one.

Any rumblings on where this could even be located? Space is at a premium.

Keep in mind, part of the reason that we have an inflatable bubble, is because it is placed on our Lacrosse Stadium.



Our AD said a permanent football facility is down the road.

(04-10-2018 01:01 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 03:02 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I had to reread that one a few times as well. I'm guessing that since it is technically only "indoors" for about 5 months per year, it isn't considered a permanent indoor facility. The author didn't mention that for most intents and purposes, it functions as an indoor facility.

I think I recall Bohn making a thinly veiled reference to a permanent indoor football facility in a recent interview. Guess that's the next weapon needed in the facilities arms race but I would be surprised if it flipped a recruit away from UC to a MAC school that had one.

Any rumblings on where this could even be located? Space is at a premium.

I suspect they would just put a permanent structure on the Sheakley field. Could it still be used as a Lacrosse stadium if they did that?

Was curious and thanks for the reply.

(04-10-2018 01:01 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 03:02 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I had to reread that one a few times as well. I'm guessing that since it is technically only "indoors" for about 5 months per year, it isn't considered a permanent indoor facility. The author didn't mention that for most intents and purposes, it functions as an indoor facility.

I think I recall Bohn making a thinly veiled reference to a permanent indoor football facility in a recent interview. Guess that's the next weapon needed in the facilities arms race but I would be surprised if it flipped a recruit away from UC to a MAC school that had one.

Any rumblings on where this could even be located? Space is at a premium.

My best guess? I would think they would bulldoze the building behind the existing half field, and place it there, rotating the field the other way.

(04-10-2018 01:06 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Was curious and thanks for the reply.

They actually had it inflated ALMOST all of the past year. They moved the weight room in there for a period of time during our basketball arena construction.

(04-10-2018 01:07 PM)djtothemoney Wrote:  

(04-10-2018 01:01 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 03:02 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I had to reread that one a few times as well. I'm guessing that since it is technically only "indoors" for about 5 months per year, it isn't considered a permanent indoor facility. The author didn't mention that for most intents and purposes, it functions as an indoor facility.

I think I recall Bohn making a thinly veiled reference to a permanent indoor football facility in a recent interview. Guess that's the next weapon needed in the facilities arms race but I would be surprised if it flipped a recruit away from UC to a MAC school that had one.

Any rumblings on where this could even be located? Space is at a premium.

My best guess? I would think they would bulldoze the building behind the existing half field, and place it there, rotating the field the other way.

The building is Daniel's Hall. My guess is if the University no longer needed dorm, they might consider this. My hope is they imminent domain some property off campus.

(04-10-2018 01:44 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(04-10-2018 01:07 PM)djtothemoney Wrote:  

(04-10-2018 01:01 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 03:02 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 02:57 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote:  Said we didnt have a permanent indoor facility. I thought that was the practice bubble?

I had to reread that one a few times as well. I'm guessing that since it is technically only "indoors" for about 5 months per year, it isn't considered a permanent indoor facility. The author didn't mention that for most intents and purposes, it functions as an indoor facility.

I think I recall Bohn making a thinly veiled reference to a permanent indoor football facility in a recent interview. Guess that's the next weapon needed in the facilities arms race but I would be surprised if it flipped a recruit away from UC to a MAC school that had one.

Any rumblings on where this could even be located? Space is at a premium.

My best guess? I would think they would bulldoze the building behind the existing half field, and place it there, rotating the field the other way.

The building is Daniel's Hall. My guess is if the University no longer needed dorm, they might consider this. My hope is they imminent domain some property off campus.

I think Daniels is still needed with record enrollment. And there is hardly any space left adjoining campus with all the recent development. The only possibilities in my mind might be the area being developed near Deaconess Hospital or Hughes High School property if there could be some shared use arrangement. Burnett Woods has always been strictly off limits though I did hear some rumblings more recently that change may happen there. And of course none of these offer the convenience of proximity to Varsity Village the current bubble offers.

djtothemoney was talking about the building beside the half field, not Daniels.