dutchcountry7
-
Posts
1,053 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by dutchcountry7
-
-
Just now, promotherobot said:
Nothing was wrong with NYBI other than thin-skinned locals feeling insulted. And the reason to brand NEW YORK over BUFFALO was so we looked like what we say we are: the flagship public university of New York State.
The fact that it was called NYBI was comical.
The branding literally had “initiative” in it. Nothing like making it obvious that it is a marketing ploy to shape a narrative.
It was horrible. It caused misalignment with the academic side of the house as the branding and marketing were not aligned. It didn’t change the actual name of the teams for athletic purposes. So the moniker on the ticker and on the scoreboard on the screen said Buffalo but the field and Uniforms said New York.
It caused confusion; it wasn’t succinct. It was the antithesis of everything marketing is meant to be.
And yes it did alienate some of the local fans. Though I am not too concerned about that because there wasn’t much of a local fan base to begin with. And they would ultimately come back.
The problem I have was not that the name was changed but that the name wasn’t changed. SUNY denied the request for a name change and to try to elevate UB to the flagship namesake. And as a result there was a fools plan devised to try it anyways. It was horribly executed. It was like it was the only idea they had and when it was denied they felt committed to it and tried to force it through despite all of the stakeholders withdrawing their support and not going along with it.
It was horrible and had nothing to do with locals having thin skin. If it did we wouldn’t be talking about Buffalo today. It wasn’t the locals that made it a failure. It was the rest of the state that scratched their head and shrugged when they saw the pitiful preening that you call the NYBI.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, CheerUB80/84 said:
I agree with everyone saying bring UB downstate. I do not think we need a home and home even. One game a year during Thanksgiving or Christmas break. Then you get some Alumni and some current Students. Make it an annual thing and it builds on itself
No home/home?
You want to give away a game?
Who do you propose to play? Where do you propose to play?
-
1 hour ago, UB92 said:
That's not a snowball...that's a snowflake. Our robot overlords will be well in place before we get to a reasonable fanbase using what you mention.
You’re wrong
Leta assume that this is simply limited to the “True Blue” and not simply a proxy for former people who had an affiliation with or interest in UB who now live in the metro area.
True Blue was established in 2007. It’s been around for nearly 15 years and there are thousands of students who join each year of which approximately 25% are freshmen—a proxy for graduation year.
That’s somewhere in the ballpark of 10,000 former True Blue members who are no longer at UB.
If only 5% of those members who have since left school are now located in the metro area (a low number for sure), then that would be 500 people.
But they aren’t likely to attend a game alone. Some will bring friends and family. 2,000 people would be over 10% of capacity at MSG or Barclays Center.
That’s more than the traveling team allotment of tickets for any midMajor in the NYC area and is enough fans to give UB the home court advantage. I would love to see UB fans take over a road game, even if if is against LIU, Hofstra, Columbia, or some other school we don't consider to be our peer.
Of course not all of these people would go to one game. But we also wouldn’t be limiting the prospective fans to only former True Blue members especially considering most people here were probably never a member.
There are many people who would attend. Graduates from the 90s, long before the True Blue existed would bring their kids. Graduates from the 70s would bring their grand kids.
If the games are on breaks you’d have current students from the metro area meeting up to catch the game. Possibly with their parents or just Westchester kids meeting their friends from Long Island at the game.
You may scoff at 500 people attending a road game but I can tell you that it is a solid start and is how you build a great base. And your attitude is part of the problem with the lack of vision.
Let’s put it another way, Hofstra got to host Kentucky in a home game at Barclays center in 2017 (in front of a crowd of 7,500 mostly Kentucky fans) all because the promoter knew Hofstra could sell a few thousand tickets to their alumni for a big game. That assurance of a few tickets made it so there wasn't risk for the promoter. Hofstra home games averaged 1,800 people that year.
The same exact thing happened in 2018 when Monmouth got to host Kentucky at Madison Square Garden in front of a crowd of 10,000 people because the promoters knew that Monmouth could sell a few thousand tickets despite only averaging 2,300 fans a game to their home games and the game being an hour away from campus.
This is the exact same way that Manhattan College got to play South Carolina and LIU got to play Temple each in NBA arenas in a city with their alumni base. The same way that Fordham is hosting Miami at Barclays this year.
The Bulls have got the call before but not delivered and that’s because it hasn’t been cultivated. You need to lay the ground work to get there. You can’t snap your fingers and expect people to care.
I don't know about you but I would be okay with hosting a home game with Florida in NYC. I wouldn't mind having to play a neutral site game against UConn where they were at the (relative) home court advantage of playing in NYC.
The New York team lines were always lines. I am of the opinion that we need to act like New York's Public Powerhouse and actually walk the walk to build it. Not just try to pretend that our name is New York. We are The University at BUFFALO and we are New York's Public Powerhouse. And that means being able to attract fans in the largest city in the state. If that happens then we will be getting games with top programs in NYC. And from there we can grow to home games.
-
1 hour ago, UB92 said:
Imagine trying to capture that massive downstate alumni audience in some way (considering they aren't driving 8 hours to a game)...
If only someone tried that...
At any rate, the stadium is not a good experience and that needs to be worked on -- wherever it may end up.
I may not be alive to see the next (large) steps of UB athletics, but at least I got to see them win a bowl game in my lifetime AND win some games in the NCAA tournament. 20 years ago, that seemed like a pipedream.
Don’t need to capture the massive NYC audience.
Just need to engage the former True Blue members who now live downstate and have them come to one game a year in NYC and give a little money to the program every year.
That alone would lead to a substantial increase in donations to the program, increase in viewership on streaming services (which is a metric used for conference realignment), increase in engagement between alumni and fans in the NYC area (creating a downstate booster chapter stronghold) which would end up with the teams getting invited to the showcase events at Barclays and MSG that you see Iona, Hofstra, and Monmouth getting invited to from time to time where they get to play major programs.
It’s a snowball. Yes, it will start small. But every year you build on it. That’s how you build a fan base. You can’t jump around with no vision and strategy.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, BrooklynBull said:
Very simple money. UB would like home and home games. However, there are so many schools in so many conferences in the New York metro area that there is no need to spend the money, even for a bus, plus hotel rooms to play UB. Whey spend all of the money to go to UB?
America East: 2
Atlantic 10: 1
Big East: 2 (not counting UConn)
Colonial: 1
Ivy: 1
MAAC: 6
Northeast: 5
Patriot: 1
With all of these schools to choose from why would they do a home and home? For the schools in the MAAC why would they want to make a second trip to Buffalo? Wagner could literally have a travel party of 25 and play at LIU and St. Francis for a total of $275.00.
That only accounts for a few games.
They aren’t filling up their home/home slate with subway rides.
UB hasn’t wanted these games. Most of the NYC area schools would love to get a home game against a team of our quality.
A sampling from 2019 season (season before Covid):
Hofstra played home/home deals with CSU Fullerton, Bucknell, and Kennesaw State.
Marist played at Stetson and New Hampshire because both offered a home/home deal. The only NYC team they played was LIU and that was in a tournament (same tournament that brought Marist to Buffalo).
Columbia went to Colgate, Binghamton, and Delaware. Despite already playing at neighboring Cornell and Penn every year.
Fordham was in the middle of a home/home with ETSU and Maine. (Though they don’t travel a lot because they have money and need wins.)
Stony Brook played at Norfolk State in a home/home.
St Pete’s played a home/home with Hampton.
Wagner was in the middle of a home/home with American and Lowell.
St Francis Brooklyn played home/homes with Presbyterian, Delaware State, and Longwood.
There are a few teams that tend to stay in the greater metro NYC area but most play a handful of games outside to get their team some quality games and get in front of recruits in other cities. -
2 hours ago, clodney said:
The locals made it very clear that UB doesn't represent anything East of ROC.
This is a cop out.
The push to remove the Buffalo name was a poor plan that was clunky and had the worst execution.
Buffalo is the name of the school. Just like Syracuse is the name of a school. That doesn’t stop the Orange from playing in NYC to reach an alumni base. The same with how many other schools play games in large metro areas where they have a large concentration of alumni.
The athletic department never made a push to reach alumni by bringing the teams to them. The thinking was that the team needed to play home games to try to cultivate local fans (while trying to remove the Buffalo brand at the same time).
And the idea was that it was more important to get a paycheck from the highest bidder no matter where they were located and only play other mid-majors in tournaments if they couldn’t get into top tournaments.
The issue was that the strategy wasn’t consistent. They were constantly at odds with their strategy as it changed constantly based on whatever they wanted at any given moment.
Think about it…
(1) We are New York’s team and need to drop the Buffalo brand because it holds us back from down state alums caring about us but (2) we need to have a major push to engage the local fans and sponsors because they are the lifeblood that will keep the program alive.
(1) We need to make sure that we brand ourselves as New York’s team to gain favor with downstate so they will follow the team but (2) we need to play games in Texas against big name schools because that will get people in Texas familiar with the the Buffalo brand.
(1) We need to play a non-D1 team every season because we don’t have the budget to play anyone else but (2) we can’t play a home/home with Hofstra, Albany, or Iona in front of alumni because they aren’t big time enough.
(1) We need to play games that get on Regional sports networks in California and Florida because that will get people familiar with Buffalo who haven’t heard of them but (2) can’t play games against Siena, Colgate, or Cornell that will be shown across New York on cable because it will only reach people in the Eastern part of the state or downstate despite being New York’s Public Powerhouse.
(1) We need to focus on recruiting in the Great Lakes region because that’s where our conference is located and where recruits are familiar with us but (2) need to drop the Buffalo brand because it makes the alumni and prospective students down state seem like they are we are in the Midwest.
(1) Need to play a game against Canisius at Key Bank Center so that we are in front of our fans who don’t travel to Amherst while getting experience playing in a game that mimics the NCAA tournament but can’t play a home/home deal with Fairfield (Webster Bank Arena) which would be closer to the alumni base.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Gxtrex said:
Why don't they play ooc games downstate?
*Shrugs*
One of the great mysteries that makes no logical sense when you market yourself as the flagship State Public Powerhouse.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, trueblue32 said:
NIT field was half the size that it usually is. They would’ve been in in a normal year regardless
That isn’t certain.
The field was half the size but they didn’t award NIT auto-bids last year. If you win the regular season conference championship you earn a bid to the NIT. A lot of teams would have normally taken bids to the NIT even though they weren’t good enough to earn at at-large bid to the NIT.
-
8 hours ago, CheerUB80/84 said:
How about adding Iona College (basketball only) Downstate for NYC, Long Island And Westchester Alumni
No.
There would be zero reason to add them. They add no value to a conference that UB would be in.
That doesn’t mean you don’t play OOC games downstate though. Just no value in Iona.
-
13 minutes ago, Tee4three said:
You are underestimating what good metrics will do for a team. Which buffalo will have (they have had since oats)
New Mexico in offense and defense efficiency they were 134 offense and 184 defense while buffalo last year was 97 offense and 64 defense (per kenpom) not to include top 5 rebounding team in the nation
So while new mexico had the q1 and q2 they didn't put up good efficiency numbers which with each year is becoming increasingly important.
I agree with you a quad 4 loss will make it very difficult but that resume with good metrics will be a bubble team. Its how ub got an at large NIT bid last year
You need the wins.
Metrics don’t get you in without some notable wins.
when a .500 Cuse gets in and they point to metrics it is because Cuse also has a few wins against top teams to go with their quad three losses.
You’re not getting an at large without a marquee win.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, DocCas86 said:
Here is my take on it - first I have tried to identify potential quad 1 / quad 2 games using rankings from Massey, Barttorvik and Kenpom. I may have the wrong formulas, but this resulted in the following games as quad 1 / quad 2 in our schedule:
I used the approach to split quad 3/ quad 4 as well. I then pulled bt projections for Indiana (whom they rank 30) and UCF (rank 40). I debated leaving off my #40 estimate - as I think we will have to do better 22 or 23 wins. I could be wrong, but I think the floor for an at large would be 23 wins.
The projection said 0-2 vs quad 1 and you’ve now changed it to 1-1 to try to get the data to the conclusion you want.
-
1 hour ago, Tee4three said:
Using just quads as references
Quad 1: 0-2
quad 2: 2-1
Quad 3: 8-2
Quad 4: 13-1
Say the quad 3 and 4 losses are mac teams. Getting to and losing the mac championship game puts that team in the conversation for an at large. They can sneak in based on their metrics and how they looked against the q1 opponents
Its a resume that at least gets your logo on the bubble watch
Biggest issue to me is I'm not sure we have enough quad 2 games. Could really use a mac team to step up or a team like uc irvine to take off. Better yet western kentucky to play to their usual standards
That’s not getting you on the bubble
https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2019/net-nitty-team
That was worse that NM State for instance and they were below the at last play in game despite winning their conference and the conference tournament. They already weren’t getting in. They couldn’t afford a quad 4 loss and not winning their conference tournament.
-
20 minutes ago, Tee4three said:
The football stadium is absolutely miserable. The stadium gets fixed the crowd will come
College football in the north especially in pro football towns will always be a tough draw. The weather is a killer. Does the die hard football fan in buffalo want to spend both Saturday and Sunday in 30 degree weather out doors on a weekend?
Would a roofed facility be beneficial? (If money wasn't an issue)
The facility is a major issue.
I would much rather have the stadiums at Albany or Stony Brook.
Removing the track doesn’t solve the problem.
The problem is that the seats are just too far away.
Lower the field and you can add 8 rows of seating but you’re still left with 20,000 seats no one wants to sit in.
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, Tee4three said:
A good out of conference schedule and good offensive/defensive metrics plus 4 or less losses in conference would do exactly that
There are years where with a weak bubble they could sneak in
Four or less conference wins has to be paired with a stellar OOC record/results. Need some big wins OOC if you have losses or need to run the table against weak OOC teams.
-
49 minutes ago, UB92 said:
If you legit think that KU beating Texas more than OSU, Baylor and K-State combined in the last ten years is a good argument for your point, you would be wrong.
Why?
49 minutes ago, UB92 said:I know (and have referenced several times) how crappy Kansas football has been for decades, save for Mangino.
What I am stating is that Kansas moving from historically bad to a mid-tier team in the conference has a higher probability of happening when you remove OU and UT (yes...they are adding in others, but they aren't OU and UT).
OU and UT are the blue bloods of that conference. Without them, there are no real blue bloods anymore.
The Blue Bloods are irrelevant here. And in fact, one of the Blue Bloods hasn't been a Blue Blood on the field. Which is evidence by Kansas beating them recently.
The question is if Kansas can make it to the middle of the pack in the Big 12. And they need to see a big pickup in recruiting for that to happen. Their problem has not been primarily one of bad coaching. It isn't that they have star players who just didn't have the coaching. They were mediocre players. They have had coaches hired who have had some success in college football.
Kansas got a nice boost in talent due to the poaching of UB players. I am not sure they will continue to build on that and get more depth in the program.
That's what they need.
Their ability to beat Oklahoma State, Baylor, Kansas State, and others is what we are talking about. And that has noting to do with OU and UT.
That's like saying that Portland would be better positioned to compete in the WCC if Gonzaga wasn't there. Gonzaga dominating the conference has zero impact on Portland being able to beat Pepperdine, Loyola, and San Diego.
Kansas's inability to compete is in large part based on talent.
In fact, I would argue that the other Big 12 teams are more likely to see a boost now that they will be able to compete for the Big 12 championship and the path to the CFP moving forward. I think it will get harder for Kansas.
-
16 minutes ago, UB92 said:
There is a lot to the "there is nothing else to do" argument. Certainly Boone benefits from that. Many other places benefit from that as well.
But, of course, it doesn't preclude a program from having attendance success in a larger market, like Buffalo. It just hasn't happened yet, for a variety of reasons.
I categorically reject the notion that it can't happen (as several people, here and elsewhere, are obsessed to point out). It could happen...but the right strategy (and I use that word in a very broad way) has not been identified and/or implemented.
It absolutely can happen at UB.
But there is no doubt that the strategies that have been employed are generic ones that try to replicate what seems to have worked elsewhere and are not ones that work for UB's unique situation.
App State has captured students. That is how they were able to benefit. They had nothing to do as students and so they went to football games. Students went to "small time" FCS games and the school made it feel big time. And they produced winners in FCS. Those students returned to campus to see their friends and did so when the leaves would change in the Fall. The most beautiful time in Boone I have been told. (Never been myself.) Over the years alums would continue to make the trips back to campus in the fall as it could be a nice weekend getaway to the mountains. The same way UB fans might go to Letchworth, ADK, or the Catskills.
And when those fans return to Boone they would catch a football game. They would stay semi engaged, if not fully engaged. And because football was a success and something people shared they would talk about it with other alums even if they didn't follow the program closely themselves. "How is the team doing this year? I was thinking of heading up for a game next month."
Over the decades this built. And when they moved to FBS there was a backing of casual and loyal fans to build a base around. But now they actually had something to really get behind. It was now the big time. (Sure, the Michigan win really helped.)
UB has a very different situation. Buffalo is not seen as a destination for a fall getaway. Much of the alumni is downstate.
The locals in the region who follow football are largely die hard Bills fans who already dedicate their weekends to watching the Bills. They don't have time available to be UB fans and get their fall chores done and spend time with the family. They will casually observe and might watch some of a game if it is on TV but they aren't planning a day around it and aren't planning a trip for it.
I absolutely believe that UB can get there but the strategy and vision has been gimmicky and trying for a quick start which just isn't going to happen. It requires an unconventional approach for UB's unique situation.
-
12 minutes ago, UBlearns said:
This is basically what I was thinking. UConn basketball is a plus, Army football is a plus, and Temple's programs are a plus. The rest of that is frankly far worse than the MAC, and UConn/Army would never join that conference for basketball/football (respectively).
And if you think UB is a geographical outlier now, it's just as much a geographical outlier in a proposed conference like this. Buffalo to Binghamton is about the same drive as Akron/Kent, Buffalo to Albany is about the same as Toledo/BG, Buffalo to Amherst (UMass) about the same as Ohio.
Hell, the only two MAC schools that are a further drive (per Google Maps) than Stony Brook are CMU (by 10 minutes - and that's assuming they have to drive in the US only and can't cross the border through Canada), and NIU, which is a fair point and a 2-hour further trip.
Yup. The ideal conference for UB would be something like:
- Buffalo
- Ohio U
- Miami-OH
- Toledo
- Kent State
- Marshall
- UMass
- UConn
- Temple
- Army (football only)
This would be the perfect balance of geography and talent for UB right now and would make a nice conference for basketball and football with perfect locations for recruiting.
But there is no reason for the other schools to move to a conference that makes UB the center of the conference.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, promotherobot said:
There aren't enough Northeast schools floating loose to make a conference. UB, UMass and Temple is a start. UCONN maybe but just for football. Basketball is happy in the Big East. Army? Possibly. After that, I can't think of anyone other than FCS schools like URI, Maine and UNH. Or maybe SUNY centers like Albany, Binghamton and Stoney Brook?
UMass won't leave the A10.
UConn won't leave the Big East to play the teams you mentioned (would probably be interested in a football only membership though).
Army may be interested in football only membership.
Temple won't leave the American for the conference you proposed unless UConn basketball came into the fold. (They won't give up games with Memphis and Wichita State for the ones proposed.
Even with those numbers you still don't have enough for a conference.
And there is the issue that you can't start a new conference and get auto-bids to the NCAA tournament without continuity. So if a new all-sports conference was formed then our basketball team wouldn't have a path to the NCAA tournament for a few years. I think it takes four years of playing as a conference to get an auto-bid granted to you. The only way to get bids to a new conference is to split off from an established conference and you have to take six or seven schools with you.
This isn't possible because all of the schools we are talking about are all in other conferences. It isn't like when the New Big East broke off from the American and took half the teams with them.
Sure, we could try to get America East schools to break off to form a new conference. But do you think it helps UB to be in the same conference as the rest of the SUNYs? We lose that advantage if we are all in the same conference. And do you think UMass, UConn, and Temple want to be in a new version of the America East?
-
56 minutes ago, UB92 said:
Oklahoma and Texas leaving will tend to level the playing field. It wouldn't be unheard of to have Kansas be a mid-tier team in their conference in two years.
I disagree.
If UT and OU were the only issues then Kansas would be competitive with the other teams in the conference. But they haven't been. And the teams moving into the conference are going to be in a better position than Kansas.
Kansas was always at the bottom of the conference and a long way down from even the middle of the remaining eight. They have five conference wins in the last 10 years. It wasn't OU and UT they made it hard for them to compete. They beat Texas in that period more times than they beat Oklahoma State, Baylor, and Kansas State combined.
-
I am really curious to see how Kansas does in the future.
I can't help but think that the transfers offered a nice boost that they wouldn't have otherwise had. They kind of were able to combine recruiting classes. Which makes me wonder if they will be able to sustain the improvement moving forward.
I am not sure they will be able to recruit to Kansas and if they don't see a big improvement in recruiting their momentum will drop off. You need the horses. You can't develop ponies into winners in the Big 12.
-
Does anyone know the order of the games?
I think the three games are:
Daemen vs Franklin Pierce
UB vs Canisius
Niagara vs Albany
Our Bulls are suppose to play around 5. Is that the last game of the night?
-
On 10/19/2021 at 3:26 PM, promotherobot said:
What really was a cold shot was how Buffalo was never even mentioned, not even as an outsider, to join the AAC. For cripes sake. Hillbilly schools like App State, Liberty and Georgia Southern get mentioned. Why is that? What do those schools have that we don't? Buffalo is in media market #57. We have an alumni base that stretches into metro NYC. Our teams have been ranked recently. Why are we ignored?
We knew we weren't going to be considered from day one.
The American Conference set a strategic vision a few years ago and made the decision that they will be a southern based conference. The believe that football is the driving force that matters and that demographic shifts will make the south even bigger moving forward. They look at Syracuse, BC, and other northern schools and don't see the interest in football.
It was known that they would only be considering Southern schools. Temple isn't going to get any regional partner.
And the reality is that App State is delivering. Look at their Wednesday night win against Coastal. They sold out the stadium and had a huge crowd on a Wednesday night. Their fans are engaged.
Yes, Buffalo is a bigger media market than Boone but media markets don't matter anymore. Streaming and national broadcasts have changed the game. If it is a national broadcast then the media market size doesn't matter. It's more about general interest. And if you're not on national TV then it is about streaming viewership and App State has some very energetic and loyal fans.
Rice seems like an odd ball but that serves their Southern Strategy. It gives them a presence in Houston where teams want to be able to recruit and it continues some Texas rivalries.
I have said it before and I will say it again. UB should be in a conference with Temple and UMass. Those should be the peer schools we should be with. But even they don't have a good fit. It's unfortunate but if we are going to be in a conference then the MAC is our only option.
The American isn't what it use to be. Travel would have killed the budget and other than a few schools there wouldn't be been a step up in games.
-
1
-
-
52 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:
The MAC has eliminated the interconference transfer policy. Allowing players to transfer from one Mac school to another without losing a year of eligibility.
-
- MAC Regular Season Runner-up.
- MAC conference tournament runner-up. (One win from dancing)
- NIT at-large Selection
- Finished top-75 nationally in nearly every computer ranking.
This isn’t doom and gloom. This talk just undermines recruiting.
-
2
-
Conference Realignment
in Buffalo Bulls Basketball
Posted
That’s why you do it as a home/home to establish your fan base and be able to dependably market to them.
You don’t start out getting those deals without fans. Unless you’re willing to provide a financial guarantee to rent the arena yourself and pay the guarantee to bring in the opponent.