Alumni Arena

[dutchcountry7]

14 hours ago, bull_trojan said:

Can ya'll define "consistently good program" in both level of success to be considered "good" and length of time needed to be considered "consistent"

I think sometimes easy answers like "consistently good" are easy answers because they are undefined.

There is a difference between being good and being good enough to get people to bandwagon.  The Bulls have been good.  But winning the MAC isn't nationally good.  And nationally good is when you get the bandwagon effect.  Unfortunately, one win at the tournament doesn't do it.  It was a HUGE win but every year there are some Mid-Majors that get those wins and you don't see them suddenly packing out their stands.

The program needs a few years of winning games at the tournament.  The fans need to see that Buffalo is not just the best team in the MAC but one of the best teams in the country and that it is expected that they will be good every year.

It is still a ways off from turning the heads of people in the Buffalo community.  A lot of them like the idea of the Bulls doing well but getting them to show up to a game is a whole other issue. 

[ATL_92]

I think upgrading our level of competition at home would have a significant impact in attendance at Alumni Arena.  My wish list is to see us make our way into the AAC should that conference ever expand.   Anyone else share that vision.

[mikescherrer8]

30 minutes ago, ATL_92 said:

I think upgrading our level of competition at home would have a significant impact in attendance at Alumni Arena.  My wish list is to see us make our way into the AAC should that conference ever expand.   Anyone else share that vision.

AAC would be nice. 

Not sure how long it would take to move to a better conference. For example, when Butler started to become consistently good, starting in 1996, 4 coaching changes, including Brad Stevens (now head coach of the Boston Celtics), whom led them to 2 national championship games in 2010-2011, found themselves in the A-10 for one year in 2012-2013, and then moved to the Big East in the 2013-2014 season. 

All of that was a span of 17 years for Butler to move from the Horizon League to the Big East. 

[bull_trojan]

7 hours ago, BrooklynBull said:

Around that time SMU hired Larry Brown and he brought a lot to the program that increased interest, until they found violations.

Brown was hired for the 2012-13 season, won 15 games, Attendance avg 3,443, 38% full.

Next year, renovated arena, AAC conference, 27 wins, NIT berth, Attendance avg 5,653 81% full.

[bull_trojan]

2 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

I think those are some blue tinted glasses.

I don't think SMU is a good comparison.  WKU and UNCW are probably the better comparison.

Also, as much as we rip on Bona not having anything to do down there, the reality is that most people at their games aren't from Olean.  Based on the conversations I have had with fans from the school most of their fans drive in from the games and many of them are from the south towns.

 

I don't get how it is a blue-tinted comparison, I did the research first, conclusion after, there was no intent to pair UB and SMU, because honestly I don't put SMU up there as a great basketball school.

WKU is a good comparison, although they were more consistently good 10 years ago than now. UNCW hasn't had our level of success. Moreover, only SMU has the competition from a NHL/NBA team.

Wins past 10 years:
UB 199
WKU 199
SMU 197
Bona 184
UNCW 141

Wins past 5 years:
SMU 126
UB 106
Bona 104
WKU 101
UNCW 92

NCAA Tourney past 10 years
UB 3 appearances, 1 round of 32
WKU 3 appearances, 1 round of 32
SMU 2 appearances
Bona 2 appearances
UNCW 2 appearances

[bull_trojan]

2 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

The program needs a few years of winning games at the tournament.  The fans need to see that Buffalo is not just the best team in the MAC but one of the best teams in the country and that it is expected that they will be good every year.

I only ask, because I feel the UB community had this conversation 10 years ago, but "consistently good" was annually competing for the MAC championship and winning it every couple of years.

I don't want to look back in 5 years in the #15-#30 level basketball and have the conversation be, well to really win Buffalo you gotta be top 10. 

[dutchcountry7]

43 minutes ago, bull_trojan said:

I don't get how it is a blue-tinted comparison, I did the research first, conclusion after, there was no intent to pair UB and SMU, because honestly I don't put SMU up there as a great basketball school.

WKU is a good comparison, although they were more consistently good 10 years ago than now. UNCW hasn't had our level of success. Moreover, only SMU has the competition from a NHL/NBA team.

Wins past 10 years:
UB 199
WKU 199
SMU 197
Bona 184
UNCW 141

Wins past 5 years:
SMU 126
UB 106
Bona 104
WKU 101
UNCW 92

NCAA Tourney past 10 years
UB 3 appearances, 1 round of 32
WKU 3 appearances, 1 round of 32
SMU 2 appearances
Bona 2 appearances
UNCW 2 appearances

When SMU or Bonas get bids it is because they are at-large type programs.  Even when teams from those conferences win the conference they have to beat at-large teams to get there.

That is a lot different than the MAC.  Buffalo hasn't had a at-large team yet.  We know this because at-large teams play in a seed at or above the play-in game. 

This is why you can't compare them to SMU.  Yes, they both compete with pro sports but when they are getting into the tournament they are at a much higher level nationally.

I don't think anyone cares about the MAC.  Winning the MAC isn't going to impress casual fans anymore than winning the Ohio Valley, CUSA, or the CAA.

Getting wins in the MAC aren't the same as getting wins in the A10 or the American. 

You notice Bonas hasn't had a spike in fans either and they have had at-large bids and play in a conference that gets them some really good home games with top teams. 

[mikescherrer8]

23 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

I don't think anyone cares about the MAC.  Winning the MAC isn't going to impress casual fans anymore than winning the Ohio Valley, CUSA, or the CAA.

Does Gonzaga winning the WCC every year impress fans? Or is their ability to beat really good out of conference opponents and win numerous games in the NCAA tournament do the trick? 

[promotherobot]

On 11/19/2018 at 11:41 AM, dutchcountry7 said:

I can tell you don't run a business.  Revenue is less important than the bottom line.  You don't build an expensive facility with a ton of seats for them to sit empty.  You want every seat to not only be utilized but also to have the revenue cover the cost of the outlay.

You'd have to show me that fans are being turned away because they can't get a ticket to the game.  Or that fans would be beating down the door to get into Alumni Arena if they could get tickets for $5 rather than $10. 

 

No.  The arena is not the problem.  The Pavilion is more popular with Villanova fans despite the Wells Fargo Center being 'big time' as you say.  The cavernous venues are hard to make a good atmosphere and the seats are far from the court since the court is much smaller than the hockey arena the seats are setup for. 

You don't understand why Alumni is not sold out every game.  And that's the thing.  You're a rare fan for a program that doesn't have many fans.  Buffalo has a lot of casual observers--a lot of people who would like to see the program be successful.  But they have very few actual fans that are going to attend the game.  That is changing but it is still a ways off. 

The Bulls have played at the Sabres Arena before and the fans don't turn out. 

What do I think the issue is?  Well, for one, the program doesn't have sustained success.  It is just starting to get into that category where people can expect the team to be good every year.  Having four year players and not transfers helps fans to get to know the players.  But the biggest issue is the lack of home games and the lack of home games against quality opponents.

The St. Bona game has been significant for the program and this year's Southern Illinois game will be big.  But playing all the good games away from campus and then playing no-name games at home is a killer.

The last four years have been the pinnacle of the Bulls basketball history.  Who have they scheduled at home in that time? Le Moyne, Central Penn, Nazareth, Pitt-Bradford...

No one is going to get pumped about non-D1 games.  Right now, the only thing you can sell fans on is the MAC schedule and who gets excited about teams in the MAC? 

The fact that the Bulls aren't scheduling Albany, Binghamton, and Stony Brook is crazy.  Teams like Vermont, Bucknell, Hofstra, or Harvard should be scheduled.  You need teams that people have heard of and that they know can have a good team from time to time.  The problem is that you have to give up a game where a P5 pays you to get these games because they would be home/home.  And the Bulls just can't afford to turn down the money.

 

 

It doesn't help that UB games are sometimes scheduled up against the Sabres. Gotta fix that. You can't have fans needing to choose between Sabres and Bulls. Tonight for example.

Edited November 21, 2018 by promotherobot

[Jeseph]

So in summary: we should win all games (especially against ranked opponents), make the sweet 16 (or better) every year, improve the arena, only play games on nights w/o local entertainment while all students are in town and improve student seating without taking good seats away from the public.

I think we should be able to do this all starting next year.

[dutchcountry7]

25 minutes ago, Jeseph said:

So in summary: we should win all games (especially against ranked opponents), make the sweet 16 (or better) every year, improve the arena, only play games on nights w/o local entertainment while all students are in town and improve student seating without taking good seats away from the public.

I think we should be able to do this all starting next year.

And don’t forget if you don’t do all of those things you’re accepting mediocrity...

[bull_trojan]

I agree that AAC would be more of a draw for local fans, than MAC.

One of the big negatives about UB to AAC you hear from AAC fans is our facilities. Again an image thing, but they want to be seen as the P6. They want all teams to have near-P5 level facilities.

Guess at the end of the day, we just gotta win this year, trust that Buffalo will come around now that we have a shiny Number in front of our name, and hope that we're cashing in on this season via donations so we can keep building our program up.

[nyquil]

This is a shot from when the student section made up half (probably over half this game) of the attendance.

 

[dutchcountry7]

6 hours ago, mikescherrer8 said:

Does Gonzaga winning the WCC every year impress fans? Or is their ability to beat really good out of conference opponents and win numerous games in the NCAA tournament do the trick? 

Why do you think the team that is the only ticket in town and just knocked off Duke has a smaller facility than UB?

but let’s not pretend that Akron and Ball State are anywhere near the level of St Mary’s and BYU. 

[mikescherrer8]

2 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

Why do you think the team that is the only ticket in town and just knocked off Duke has a smaller facility than UB?

but let’s not pretend that Akron and Ball State are anywhere near the level of St Mary’s and BYU. 

1. Great Coaching (Mark Few)

2. Constant success in a mid major conference, Yes, it is a mid major conference, do not stray away from that. That constant success that lead to them building a fan base and into a national powerhouse (with a 6,000 seating capacity that didn't require to expand the seating capacity)

3. Ability to recruit players.

4.  The university's commitment to basketball. 

That's to just name a few.

Let this stick in your head...... 20 years ago, Gonzaga was a nobody, tiny mid-major team. Until Dan Monson found success with them and then they hired Mark Few and the rest is history with that team. 

I'm not saying the MAC is on the same level as the WCC, in fact, it's much worse. However, the WCC, IS STILL A MID MAJOR CONFERENCE......a conference in which UB can probably beat every single team in, perhaps except Gonzaga, sort of like UB can do in the MAC. Nobody cares Gonzaga is in a shit tier conference, Gonzaga beats really good teams every year, and that is something UB can do in the future on a consistent basis. But for you to take the easy route and say, oh well, obviously people around here aren't going to care that much, since they play in the MAC, what a weak take. This is Bills and Sabres country, an area with NO college sports atmosphere. 

UB finds true success in the last 5 years or so, and you expect Bills and Sabres country to just jump all-in and fill the stands? Not going to happen. It's going to take a while, a long while.. Nate Oats is already headed into that same direction as Butler or Gonzaga and is showing that he can contend with good teams. UB has to win, and win a lot. Pretty soon, WNY is going to notice, and they're going to fill that so-called "high school gym looking arena". It's going to take a long time for the community to catch up. And all of that has nothing to do with what conference they play in and what arena they play in. Gonzaga has already proved that, with winning, and winning a lot year after year. And that's just what UB has to do. Can Nate Oats take us there? I guess we will find out.

Sorry for the cluster from my stance. I think the blame of the arena and conference excuses is a weak cop out, and those are not the reasons from a lack of community support. 




 

[bull_trojan]

29 minutes ago, mikescherrer8 said:

2. Constant success in a mid major conference, Yes, it is a mid major conference, do not stray away from that. That constant success that lead to them building a fan base and into a national powerhouse (with a 6,000 seating capacity that didn't require to expand the seating capacity)

Gonzaga started being a major player in 1999,  their current arena opened in 2004. Prior to that, their arena sat 4,000.

[rma]

3 hours ago, nyquil said:

This is a shot from when the student section made up half (probably over half this game) of the attendance.

 

Not in any way to discount the achievements of the track/cross country teams, but it is really nice to not have to hang banners of teams that don't even compete in AA just to have something on the walls.

We had a similar student turnout a few years back vs Kent State.  Evans stepback 3 game.  Students filled both baselines and a couple sections in the 300's.  Unreal night.

[ed]

1 hour ago, bull_trojan said:

Gonzaga started being a major player in 1999,  their current arena opened in 2004. Prior to that, their arena sat 4,000.

And they just beat #1 Duke in a tourney that seats like 2000 people. Not a single f#ck was given by anyone about the stadium. 

[MillenniumBull]

Duke will still never play at Gonzaga. Keep winning and start seasons ranked and get invited to better tournaments.  Takes time. Unless this new arena is equipped with a time machine, don’t bother.  Blue bloods aren’t playing an away game anywhere they could possibly lose anyway.

lets play well in these nationally televised games coming up.

[bull_trojan]

37 minutes ago, ed said:

And they just beat #1 Duke in a tourney that seats like 2000 people. Not a single f#ck was given by anyone about the stadium. 

The arena is not attached to a University that has to play and attract a full slate of home games. It's an MTE, put on by ESPN for television. The gym didn't even have AC until 2005.

[dutchcountry7]

7 hours ago, ed said:

And they just beat #1 Duke in a tourney that seats like 2000 people. Not a single f#ck was given by anyone about the stadium. 

You know Maui is not about the fans, right?

[dutchcountry7]

7 hours ago, MillenniumBull said:

Duke will still never play at Gonzaga. Keep winning and start seasons ranked and get invited to better tournaments.  Takes time. Unless this new arena is equipped with a time machine, don’t bother.  Blue bloods aren’t playing an away game anywhere they could possibly lose anyway.

Yup. 

9 hours ago, mikescherrer8 said:

1. Great Coaching (Mark Few)

2. Constant success in a mid major conference, Yes, it is a mid major conference, do not stray away from that. That constant success that lead to them building a fan base and into a national powerhouse (with a 6,000 seating capacity that didn't require to expand the seating capacity)

3. Ability to recruit players.

4.  The university's commitment to basketball. 

That's to just name a few.

Let this stick in your head...... 20 years ago, Gonzaga was a nobody, tiny mid-major team. Until Dan Monson found success with them and then they hired Mark Few and the rest is history with that team. 

I'm not saying the MAC is on the same level as the WCC, in fact, it's much worse. However, the WCC, IS STILL A MID MAJOR CONFERENCE......a conference in which UB can probably beat every single team in, perhaps except Gonzaga, sort of like UB can do in the MAC. Nobody cares Gonzaga is in a shit tier conference, Gonzaga beats really good teams every year, and that is something UB can do in the future on a consistent basis. But for you to take the easy route and say, oh well, obviously people around here aren't going to care that much, since they play in the MAC, what a weak take. This is Bills and Sabres country, an area with NO college sports atmosphere. 

UB finds true success in the last 5 years or so, and you expect Bills and Sabres country to just jump all-in and fill the stands? Not going to happen. It's going to take a while, a long while.. Nate Oats is already headed into that same direction as Butler or Gonzaga and is showing that he can contend with good teams. UB has to win, and win a lot. Pretty soon, WNY is going to notice, and they're going to fill that so-called "high school gym looking arena". It's going to take a long time for the community to catch up. And all of that has nothing to do with what conference they play in and what arena they play in. Gonzaga has already proved that, with winning, and winning a lot year after year. And that's just what UB has to do. Can Nate Oats take us there? I guess we will find out.

Sorry for the cluster from my stance. I think the blame of the arena and conference excuses is a weak cop out, and those are not the reasons from a lack of community support. 




 

You act like no other programs have done what UB is doing. 

Gonzaga is the extreme outlier that every program in the country playing in a one bid league aspires to be.  

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by dutchcountry7

[mikescherrer8]

5 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

Yup. 

You act like no other programs have done what UB is doing. 

Gonzaga is the extreme outlier that every program in the country playing in a one bid league aspires to be.  

 

Except, I never insinuated that no other programs have done what UB is doing. In fact, comparing it to what Gonzaga and Butler have done. Stop being so dense. 

[dutchcountry7]

58 minutes ago, mikescherrer8 said:

Except, I never insinuated that no other programs have done what UB is doing. In fact, comparing it to what Gonzaga and Butler have done. Stop being so dense. 

So you’re saying UB is like Gonzaga and Butler?

You mean where they were 20-25 years ago when they were getting at large bids?

 

[ed]

12 hours ago, dutchcountry7 said:

You know Maui is not about the fans, right?

What D1 game / tournament is really "about the fans"? We going to Ireland for... the Irish u fans? We expecting a huge travelling contingent?

Edited November 23, 2018 by ed