UC's Denial is Not Accurate

Last night, the Enquirer's UC beat reporter Bill Koch posted on his Enquirer blog a denial by UC of our report yesterday that the Bengals were driving a hard bargain with the university about leasing PBS for some upcoming UC football games.  Bob Arkeilpane, deputy director of athletics at UC and the administrator in charge of football said that UC will continue to focus its efforts on keeping games at Nippert Stadium and that WDR's report that the University was looking to play some of its games at PBS is "not accurate."

Koch explains that UC is investigating the costs of renovating Nippert and takes Mr. Arkeilpane at his word, summing the post up "So there you have it."

As Lee Corso would say, "Not so fast my friend."

First, Koch only talks to one UC official, who is clearly not going to go on the record to reveal confidential negotiations. Second, following our report yesterday, WDR has learned that the University officials were worried that the initial cost to renovate Nippert Stadium would be too expensive, perhaps over $150M. This knowledge was what prompted the meeting between UC and the Bengals as this cost was seemingly prohibitive for the university and they hoped by partnering with the the Bengals they could work out a mutually beneficial deal.  And regardless of what Mr. Arkeilpane wants you to believe, UC officials who participated in the negotiations with the Bengals did express that the Bengals asking price to lease PBS was five times the rate that South Florida and Pitt were being charged.

Lance McAlister talked to one booster (who is different than our source) and had this report:

Things I'm told
I talked with a major UC booster today concerning the Who Dey Revolution report linked below:
"I can't tell you if the asking price for UC to play a game at PBS is five times the rate that other Big East Schools are paying at NFL stadiums. I can tell you that from 2002 when UC hosted Ohio State at PBS to now, it's a significantly different contract presentation from the Bengals.....much more aggressive on the Bengals part"

That makes 2 independent UC boosters who have confirmed that the Bengals are being unreasonable with UC.  There is MUCH more to the story than Mr. Koch or Mr. Arkeilpane want you to believe.

Hopefully, UC is using this sunshine on the negotiations to bargain for a better deal from the Bengals, while denying the reports publicly as it could burn bridges.  No one is going to talk to the traditional journalists - or at least, not enough so they get enough confirmation they can report on it.

I hope that the traditional journalists who have better access investigate this further.

Regardless of the official statements of UC and the Bengals around this issue, the facts are that UC and the Bengals did talk about UC football playing more games at PBS and that the Bengals demands are unreasonable to the tune of 5 times more than what South Florida and Pitt pay.

Comments

[GoBearcats]

I hope the Cincinnati media is asking some serious questions of all parties involved. This is a public university, wanting to use a publicly funded stadium, and having to pay Mike Brown to do so. Someone needs to get to the bottom of this, and not just rely on official statements from UC and/or the Bengals.

[Thom Tadsen]

God I love this site.

[Rich]

Does anyone else have a hard time reconciling the fact that the Bengals basically own Paul Brown Stadium? It is in the county's best interest for their to be as many events in PBS as possible. How the hell did this all happen? It just seems like this stadium deal keeps getting worse and worse.
I have always sort of vacillated between thinking that the Bengals are incompetent vs scheming and incompetent. This certainly supports the scheming argument.

[votasi]

interesting stuff, but go easy on saying the facts are this: you have two boosters who claim to know some inside info that supposedly negatively impacts one side, yet that side is officially saying it's not the case. you don't have facts yet. you might want to believe it, it might likely be true, but you don't have facts yet.

there was some brief mention of it, but really all i heard was some rumblings that mike was embarrassed that the bearcats were better than the bengals. i would like some of your sources to speculate as to why the bengals are much more aggressive. why would they not jump at an opportunity to make more profit at fair market value? what's in it for them to NOT rent the stadium to UC for a few games?

[tony d]

You guys with your fabricated stories continue to look like complete fools and totally unreliable. Not only is your story denied by the parties involved, but you claim they are not correct lol! This site has lost all credibility if there ever was any to begin with. You truely look like nothing but haters and have nothing but ill will towards the team and franchise. How does it feel to make up stories to help your agenda, then have everyone to see what you are really about, great work!

This team has had a very good offseason and it is killing you guys here, even the good things done, you seem to spin the negative. Your cover is blown, made up stories and then try to keep up the lie, wow, just wow!

[Wiggles]

@Tony D - You're sooo right. No one in history has ever denied something because it would hurt or break off the negotiations. Let's all not get our panties in an uproar just because officials are feeding lines of bullshit to the enquirer.

[Jay W]

I doubt the Bengals are reaching for 5x the cost of other stadium costs. Kentucky is playing Miami of Ohio at Paul Brown stadium this fall. There is no way they would pay the extreme costs you are reporting about to play a non conference game at Paul Brown.

[Nate]

I personally verified your story was false yesterday, and in the meantime a published report with named sources has also verified your story was innacurate.

Further, Lance's source contradicts your claim as well. In business, changing a price and getting agressive means lowering your price to attempt to strike a deal. The fact that the Bengals recently approached UC (not the other way around) would also lend strength to the argument that the Bengals are trying to 'sell' the stadium time.

You have been exposed as a fraud who publishes false rumors. Own up to it.

To take from your writing style, this makes 3 sources (Direct from UC, Lance's source, my personal verification) that directly refute your claim. I hope traditional journalists further expose you for the fraud you are.

Regardless of the claims of some un-named internet hack who has now been refuted and proven wrong SEVERAL times, the truth is that the Bengals approached UC with a proposal and that proposal NEVER made it to the point where prices were discussed.

FURTHER, the contention that a single UC booster has offered to pay for the practice facility with a stipulation that UC be able to play at PBS is not only unfounded, it's illogical.

Boosters support schools, if this booster wanted to donate a practice facilty to UC, they would do so, and they would likely demand it ONLY be used by UC... not demand that UC share it with the Bengals, and that UC be granted access to PBS (which they currently have, as evidenced by previous & future games to be held there).

Keep trying, you've fooled some, but your flaws are becoming more and more open.

[Marc]

Look, I have no idea what the true story is here and I'll save the speculation for others. But just because there are people saying the story isn't true, certainly doesn't mean it isn't true. And conversely, just because a source or two say it's true, also doesn't mean it's true. Nobody knows for sure, but why would it surprise anyone that Mike Turd would be doing this?

And to answer the commenter votasi above..."what's in it for them (the Bengals) to NOT rent the stadium to UC for a few games?".....uh, really, you don't see this? What's in it for the Bengals is to keep UC from continuing to grow its fanbase by stealing season ticket holders and disposable sports entertainment $'s from them. I know the Bengaals make $ if UC plays there, but the Benglas also stand to lose much more than that if people lose interest in the Bengals and throw more support behind UC.

[MikeBrownNever]

Cmon Nate. Lance's report directly conflicts with UC's statement. There was discussion about UC using PBS. They were unable to come to a financial agreemet. The Bengals were askign for far more than they the teams agreed upon in 2002. One booster has said it is 5 times what Pitt/S. Fla pay. THe UC statement says that "money was not discussed", but that flys in the face of Lance's report. The UC statement is trying to keep this quiet so they can engage in private negotiatons. Why do you think boosters are talking to WDR and Lance? They want to get this done and Mike Brown is not being reasonable. UC can not go public with it, so the boosters are using the media to put pressure on Brown. Why WDR? Because the Enquirer and other will not report a story without more hard evidence.

This is playing out exactly how the Boosters want it to. The issue is out there. People are asking questions. UC and the Bengals better be honest, because UC is a public institution and you can bet your ass that some Freedom of Information Requests are about to be filed to get some info.

[Comrade Robert]

Interesting reports/denials etc.
What stands out for me is the 5X claim. Notice how the actual $ amount is never stated?
For all we know Univ of Pitt pays $100 a game. If WDR is so sure of it's self why not print what Univ of Pitt pays?
That's what a journalist would do; back up their report w/ facts. And while the writers will surely claim they are not journalist that appears to be the part they are trying to play.
Let's see some facts and then we'll have a better idea of who is blowing smoke and who is telling the truth.

[2Kirkalypse]

MikeBrownNever<

This is not at all playing directly into the boosters hands, it is doing the exact opposite. People are asking questions but are finding out that the booster who leaked the info and WDR obviously embellished the story. All this has done is make the booster and WDR look extremely unreliable and not trustworthy. Also, Pitt and USF have agreements in place with the Stealers and Bucs because Pitt/USF were part of those stadiums being built and are part of the original lease. That is something UC should have had the foresight to do before PBS was built.

If the Bengals/Hamilton County were being unreasonable, the KU/Miami game would never have been scheduled.

[Danno]

I don't understand the people here whom are taking this reporting as true journalism. This has been purported as rumor and hearsay from the get-go. There could be truth in it; there may not. However, I don't see how WDR is trying to put this story out there as 100% true, accurate, and ground-breaking journalism. This is talking about rumors and what they hear. Much like ProFootballTalk. Last time I check, that is ok. Especially from a Blog.

To WDR: Keep up the interesting tidbits, despite what some suggest.