dutchcountry7

Not a bad team? Dartmouth is #259 in Kenpom and #271 in Sagarin. That’s worse than EVERY team in the MAC. Sure, they are better than Central Penn, Nazareth, and Pitt-Bradford but is that actually considered not bad?

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.

You know Maui is not about the fans, right?

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.

Imagine this is the first game someone comes to because they see Buffalo was ranked. Do you think they enjoined the game and will want to return to buy tickets for more of this?

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

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.

This isn't even going to be close. Get ready for the highlights.

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.

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.

Let's hope the same doesn't happen to UB...

Seriously. I would first have to see that people are showing up the Bulls games and leaving saying "Never again will I go to that facility." How many people are showing up to Bulls games in the first place?

That is the reason no one will go to the Carrier Dome. You can't share a football, basketball, and lacrosse facility. The people will revolt and not show up in protest. If it is one thing we know about people of Western New York it's that they are accustomed to fine things. When you live a life of luxury, you expected to have the best arena in the world and wouldn't be caught seen in anything less!

Stop! they have had dial up for at least three years now...

First: Alumni Arena is a sunk cost. It is already built and fitted out. Building a new or expanded facility changes your figures drastically. Second: that’s not how buy games work. You can’t buy West Virginia for $90k. You can buy Hofstra or Vermont for $90k.

Not being a jerk. I think it is crazy that they, and other schools like them, are building those facilities. St. Mary's has great success with a high school gym. LINK The reality is that there are high schools that are building lavish facilities. But that doesn't mean that Alumni Arena is a problem for UB or that a renovation is a wise use of the limited money the program has.

I can think of a few but my favorite is the Katy Independent School District. Link

It's just two different tournaments with some cross over games. Just a little strange since all the programs are really peers of each other.

The red areas in the picture above are a lot of dead space and has been the one things that has been on my list of things I would change, but with that said, the facility isn't a problem. And I agree 1000% that the football stadium is the real issue with facilities.

Interesting that they moved up when their ranking is based on the WVU win and WVU has dropped a few games and then fell from the rankings. I am cautiously optimistic but hope that the program isn't over ranked so that they fall hard with one stumble.

Sure, they have been competitive (top-150 team) on a pretty regular basis in the last 15 years but that doesn't really move the needle for the casual observer. It isn't until they see some national recognition or competition against programs they respect that they take notice. Beating WVU is big. Beating Syracuse will be bigger. Niagara, Canisius, and St. Bona have had more success. That is part of the reason they have fans. The UB students who are at the school now and are going to games will be the fans that return to campus to buy tickets in five years. Your graduating students who enjoy going to games are going to become your biggest fans and the most loyal to the program. The program is so young.

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.

No. That is nonsense. The arena isn’t the problem. 10k seats? Seriously? Do you know anything about college basketball arenas? That would give UB more seats than Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Gonzaga, VCU, Notre Dame, Butler, Stanford, Villanova, Virginia Tech, Northern Iowa and many other good programs. Packing in fans and selling out games make a better venue than empty seats. When Gonzaga built their new arena they only put in 6k seats to ensure it would be a good atmosphere and not have empty seats. Buffalo is no where being as hot a ticket as Gonzaga.

No, they were in under the old system. The structure changed with the adoption of the playoff with new contracts for bowls, revenue sharing, and other factors.

Construction on campus would be considered a New York State project and those are notoriously more expensive than similar projects done in other states...