...created by a blark84 who is member of the HoyaTalk Georgetown message board.
"So I've created a spreadsheet to compare non-football playing members of the Big East with teams being considered for inclusion (and a few others) to see how they stack up. You can view that here:(blark84) "
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlfWy6_OYXQRdExSWlMzTm1odDNXalVVNERtWFZRQmc&output=html
I pulled this from the following thread: Seven Schools To Leave Big East, http://hoyatalk2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=26380&page=43
so gonzaga averages 200 more fans in attendance per year then there arena seats, that's kinda crazy.
Could be the games they play in Seattle.
Great data. That was very interesting! :)
Edit: I'm really looking forward to the outcome of tomorrow's meeting!
Quote from: LAMUfan on January 03, 2013, 12:21:59 PM
so gonzaga averages 200 more fans in attendance per year then there arena seats, that's kinda crazy.
It looks like an error--see bottom of pg. 2.
Per the Gonzaga stats, they averaged 6,000 for 16 home games.
http://www.gozags.com/fls/26400/MBBSTATS/2012%20MBX%20STATISTICS.pdf (http://www.gozags.com/fls/26400/MBBSTATS/2012%20MBX%20STATISTICS.pdf)
I prefer to think that you can just buy a ticket to sit on someones lap 8-)
Quote from: LAMUfan on January 03, 2013, 12:56:44 PM
I prefer to think that you can just buy a ticket to sit on someones lap 8-)
Depending on the quality of fans, you may have to pay extra to have someone sit on your lap.
Nice to see MU, even with a middling school size, come out at the top of a lot of those.
The revenue/expenses columns were surprising!
They sell standing room only tickets, thus more tickets sold than seats.
And they usually play a game or two at the 16k seat Spokane Arena. At least when I was there they played Memphis there.
Xavier and Dayton have pretty good profit margins. Wonder what they're doing differently. I'd like MU to keep a little more of that $15 million plus in annual revenue. Maybe we can (1) have the team walk in lockstep to home games (2) car pool to games at DePaul, (3) rent cheaper leer jets for Buzz's recruiting trips, (4) re-negotiate royalties between MU apparel and Jordan, I don't know, I'm spit-balling here.
Quote from: windyplayer on January 03, 2013, 02:37:41 PM
Xavier and Dayton have pretty good profit margins. Wonder what they're doing differently. I'd like MU to keep a little more of that $15 million plus in annual revenue. Maybe we can (1) have the team walk in lockstep to home games (2) car pool to games at DePaul, (3) rent cheaper leer jets for Buzz's recruiting trips, (4) re-negotiate royalties between MU apparel and Jordan, I don't know, I'm spit-balling here.
Actually, if the Bucks leave, could/would MU get a better gameday lease rate from the BC?
In theory, the BC will really NEED MU at that point... but it's not like MU can go elsewhere. The arena is just too small now with the amount of season ticket holders.
The Zags play a few games at the Spoke and at least one at the Key, hence the higher avg attendance over The Kennel. It would be great to be part of the new conference. It just feels right.
No college from the state of Florida on the list? That ends my career back-up plan to move to the Tampa - Orlando corridor and still have the ability to watch Marquette road games.
Quote from: windyplayer on January 03, 2013, 02:37:41 PM
Xavier and Dayton have pretty good profit margins. Wonder what they're doing differently. I'd like MU to keep a little more of that $15 million plus in annual revenue. Maybe we can (1) have the team walk in lockstep to home games (2) car pool to games at DePaul, (3) rent cheaper leer jets for Buzz's recruiting trips, (4) re-negotiate royalties between MU apparel and Jordan, I don't know, I'm spit-balling here.
D-I Athletics Accounting 101:
Revenues and expenses by sport cannot be compared amongst schools due to non-standardized accounting methods.
I would be in utter shock if MU could be doing something to to increase margins (while not sacrificing quality) yet was simply choosing not to do so.
This spreadsheet does not include the most important category. "Marginal revenue that it would generate through an enhanced television contract."
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 03, 2013, 02:55:03 PM
This spreadsheet does not include the most important category. "Marginal revenue that it would generate through an enhanced television contract."
Bingo!
It'd be much easier to read with commas in the numbers or at least using a monospaced font for the numbers.
Quote from: CAGASS24 on January 03, 2013, 02:13:15 PM
And they usually play a game or two at the 16k seat Spokane Arena. At least when I was there they played Memphis there.
Checking their statsheet, they did play one game at Spokane against Western Michigan.
It's listed as the "Ronald McDonald Charities Classic" and Gonzaga lists it as a neutral court game, but it appears whoever put the spreadsheet together counted it as a home game.
They drew 9,610.
The math checks out:
(16 x 6000 + 1 x 9,610)/17 = 6212
So that explains the 6,212 reported average in 2012.
There leads to an interesting observation.
The Spokane Arena lists a capacity of 12,210 for basketball
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_Veterans_Memorial_Arena
They only drew 10,778 for Memphis in 2011 and 9,610 for WMU in 2012. So that probably represents the top end of Gonzaga fandom in the Spokane area.
Clearly the demand is > 6000/game, which explains why they can sell out their home court for just about any opponent. But even with an artificial limit, they don't sell out a 12,000 seat venue once a year--even for a game with national interest like Memphis.
And before someone suggests that its too far for students to get to, I checked. Its not distance from campus--the Spokane Arena is just 1.5 miles from the MAC.
Quote from: Benny B on January 03, 2013, 02:52:44 PM
I would be in utter shock if MU could be doing something to to increase margins (while not sacrificing quality) yet was simply choosing not to do so.
Well, yes, no one consciously chooses to waste money barring the baby in the Capital One commercials. My suggestions were made in jest.
Quote from: Benny B on January 03, 2013, 02:52:44 PM
D-I Athletics Accounting 101:
Revenues and expenses by sport cannot be compared amongst schools due to non-standardized accounting methods.
Correct. Not just an issue with accounting methods by sports, but by departments. Some schools charge things like stadium maintenance against a department that is not related to athletics. Just one of a number of examples.
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 03, 2013, 03:18:06 PM
Checking their statsheet, they did play one game at Spokane against Western Michigan.
It's listed as the "Ronald McDonald Charities Classic" and Gonzaga lists it as a neutral court game, but it appears whoever put the spreadsheet together counted it as a home game.
They drew 9,610.
The math checks out:
(16 x 6000 + 1 x 9,610)/17 = 6212
So that explains the 6,212 reported average in 2012.
There leads to an interesting observation.
The Spokane Arena lists a capacity of 12,210 for basketball
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_Veterans_Memorial_Arena
They only drew 10,778 for Memphis in 2011 and 9,610 for WMU in 2012. So that probably represents the top end of Gonzaga fandom in the Spokane area.
Clearly the demand is > 6000/game, which explains why they can sell out their home court for just about any opponent. But even with an artificial limit, they don't sell out a 12,000 seat venue once a year--even for a game with national interest like Memphis.
And before someone suggests that its too far for students to get to, I checked. Its not distance from campus--the Spokane Arena is just 1.5 miles from the MAC.
Take a program on par with Memphis (Xavier? MU? whatever) and create a conference rivalry with Gonazaga, and I think you'd see a nice bump in attendance.
We see the same thing for MU games, conference opponents/rivals draw more fans.
10K for Memphis is decent. They might get 12K+ for a good conf. opponent.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on January 03, 2013, 12:49:47 PM
Great data. That was very interesting! :)
Edit: I'm really looking forward to the outcome of tomorrow's meeting!
Which meeting?
We used to have an annual game with UDub until Romar punked out since we beat them every year. Sounds like Marquette Wisconsin is a lot like Zags UDub with lots of animosity and loathing and tradition.
http://www.seattlepi.com/sports/article/Frosty-finish-to-UW-Gonzaga-rivalry-1221992.php
Dawgs are mighty arrogant though I cannot fathom why.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 03, 2013, 03:28:19 PM
Which meeting?
http://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc-big-east-basketball-0104-20130103,0,6953614.story
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 03, 2013, 03:18:06 PM
Checking their statsheet, they did play one game at Spokane against Western Michigan.
It's listed as the "Ronald McDonald Charities Classic" and Gonzaga lists it as a neutral court game, but it appears whoever put the spreadsheet together counted it as a home game.
They drew 9,610.
The math checks out:
(16 x 6000 + 1 x 9,610)/17 = 6212
So that explains the 6,212 reported average in 2012.
There leads to an interesting observation.
The Spokane Arena lists a capacity of 12,210 for basketball
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spokane_Veterans_Memorial_Arena
They only drew 10,778 for Memphis in 2011 and 9,610 for WMU in 2012. So that probably represents the top end of Gonzaga fandom in the Spokane area.
Clearly the demand is > 6000/game, which explains why they can sell out their home court for just about any opponent. But even with an artificial limit, they don't sell out a 12,000 seat venue once a year--even for a game with national interest like Memphis.
And before someone suggests that its too far for students to get to, I checked. Its not distance from campus--the Spokane Arena is just 1.5 miles from the MAC.
Their fans have to get in the habit. When you're used to not going to a game because you can't get a ticket in a 6,000 seat arena, you're less likely to jump on the band wagon for the one game a year you can go to.
It's gotta be tough to sell many more than 6,000 seats playing in the West Coast. They should at least come close to selling out the Spokane Arena if they get into the new league, making this a
very good move for them.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 03, 2013, 03:23:59 PM
Correct. Not just an issue with accounting methods by sports, but by departments. Some schools charge things like stadium maintenance against a department that is not related to athletics. Just one of a number of examples.
You know that Butler, Creighton, DePaul, Fairfield, Holy Cross, Memphis, Richmond, Seton Hall, etc. are playing accounting games when their revenue matches their income
to the dollar.
I just noticed how our attendance has fallen almost a 1,000 fans 2008. Any ideas why? I know our enrollment is up.
Quote from: shannonboyle on January 03, 2013, 02:47:35 PM
The Zags play a few games at the Spoke and at least one at the Key, hence the higher avg attendance over The Kennel. It would be great to be part of the new conference. It just feels right.
Welcome to you, dweller of the inland northwest. On behalf of the more reasonable half of Scoopers, it goes without saying that - cost and logistics of travel aside - everyone would welcome Gonzaga with open arms into the new conference.
Of course, that is until the first time we as fans travel to Spokane; please don't think less of us for having some serious buyer's remorse those first few years.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on January 03, 2013, 04:29:11 PM
I just noticed how our attendance has fallen almost a 1,000 fans 2008. Any ideas why? I know our enrollment is up.
I'm no economy expert but pretty sure 2008 was the year that sh!t hit the fan and a lot of sports team's ticket sales have fallen (pro and college).
Quote from: cbowe3 on January 03, 2013, 04:42:50 PM
I'm no economy expert but pretty sure 2008 was the year that sh!t hit the fan and a lot of sports team's ticket sales have fallen (pro and college).
(http://imgsrv.965thebuzz.com/image/krbz2/UserFiles/Image/We%20Landed%20On%20The%20Moon.jpg)
Quote from: LittleMurs on January 03, 2013, 03:43:04 PM
Their fans have to get in the habit. When you're used to not going to a game because you can't get a ticket in a 6,000 seat arena, you're less likely to jump on the band wagon for the one game a year you can go to.
You're a fan. You can't get to any games because they're sold out in advance. Its the hottest ticket in town. You don't know when the next opportunity to see a game might be. And when a rare opportunity arises, and it happens to be against one of the best opponents in years--you take a pass simply becuase "you're not in the habit"?
I have a hard time following that logic.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on January 03, 2013, 02:40:52 PM
Actually, if the Bucks leave, could/would MU get a better gameday lease rate from the BC?
In theory, the BC will really NEED MU at that point... but it's not like MU can go elsewhere. The arena is just too small now with the amount of season ticket holders.
I would think it would go the other way. They would need more money from MU to cover fixed costs. MU would not go back to Mecca or whatever it is called today, so they are stuck. On the positive side MU woud get more open dates to pick from.
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 03, 2013, 04:53:37 PM
You're a fan. You can't get to any games because they're sold out in advance. Its the hottest ticket in town. You don't know when the next opportunity to see a game might be. And when a rare opportunity arises, and it happens to be against one of the best opponents in years--you take a pass simply becuase "you're not in the habit"?
I have a hard time following that logic.
+1. See Duke fans.
Quote from: bilsu on January 03, 2013, 05:01:10 PM
I would think it would go the other way. They would need more money from MU to cover fixed costs. MU would not go back to Mecca or whatever it is called today, so they are stuck. On the positive side MU woud get more open dates to pick from.
I guess it's a Mexican stand-off.
If the Bucks leave and MU tells the BC to pound sand... they are left with hockey, monster trucks, country music shows and the Globetrotters. Nothing wrong with any of those things, but the building will certainly be operating at a loss.
MU gives them 20 solid dates/rental fees.
However, you are correct that building operations don't necessarily get cheaper if the Bucks leave, so somebody is going to have to cover the costs.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on January 03, 2013, 05:15:31 PM
I guess it's a Mexican stand-off.
If the Bucks leave and MU tells the BC to pound sand... they are left with hockey, monster trucks, country music shows and the Globetrotters. Nothing wrong with any of those things, but the building will certainly be operating at a loss.
MU gives them 20 solid dates/rental fees.
However, you are correct that building operations don't necessarily get cheaper if the Bucks leave, so somebody is going to have to cover the costs.
WWE, don't forget WWE. And those Christmas Mannheim Steamroller shows with the Globetrotters a couple days later.
Quote from: PTM on January 03, 2013, 05:26:39 PM
WWE, don't forget WWE. And those Christmas Mannheim Steamroller shows with the Globetrotters a couple days later.
My apologies to John Cena and Transiberian(sp) Orchestra.
I covered the 'Trotters in my previous post.
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 03, 2013, 04:53:37 PM
You're a fan. You can't get to any games because they're sold out in advance. Its the hottest ticket in town. You don't know when the next opportunity to see a game might be. And when a rare opportunity arises, and it happens to be against one of the best opponents in years--you take a pass simply becuase "you're not in the habit"?
I have a hard time following that logic.
You don't "take a pass", you're a lot less likely to even realize that you
can get a ticket this time because you're not following the team like you would be if you had season tickets or even if you were in the habit of going a few times a year. You've got a routine built around watching the game on TV. I bet the majority of the increased ticket sales are for traveling fans (Memphis has many) and increased student interest for a big game.
Quote from: Benny B on January 03, 2013, 04:37:58 PM
Welcome to you, dweller of the inland northwest. On behalf of the more reasonable half of Scoopers, it goes without saying that - cost and logistics of travel aside - everyone would welcome Gonzaga with open arms into the new conference.
Of course, that is until the first time we as fans travel to Spokane; please don't think less of us for having some serious buyer's remorse those first few years.
The New Kennel is still brand new so I don't see the Zags leaving. Lotta pride in that facility and it's a great home court advantage. Maybe some big games get played downtown.
I think the Zags also play an annual game in the Key Arena in Seattle.
It's usually against a top opponent and draws about 16,000
Is there any way to get our expenses down? Anybody know why they are so much higher than everyone else?
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on January 03, 2013, 04:29:11 PM
I just noticed how our attendance has fallen almost a 1,000 fans 2008. Any ideas why? I know our enrollment is up.
Tom Crean left.......(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lw5obuQqsB1qztmnoo1_500.gif)
First, many thanks for posting that and the Gtown fan who put it together. I'm sure some consulting company would have charged ten grand for a similar product.
Second, this absolutely confirms for me that there shod be ZERO interest in VCU. Their Final 4 run was very impressive, but other than that I'm not interested. I'll take SLU, Creighton, or Dayton way before VCU.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on January 03, 2013, 02:40:52 PM
Actually, if the Bucks leave, could/would MU get a better gameday lease rate from the BC?
In theory, the BC will really NEED MU at that point... but it's not like MU can go elsewhere. The arena is just too small now with the amount of season ticket holders.
You're under the impression the BC is too small for Marquette? I'd argue the contrary. With the exception of 4 or 5 games each season, the building has far too many empty seats - so many that it simply looks bad from a PR perspective, if nothing else.
Part of the lure of schools like Duke is that they pack the place every night. Yes, you lose out on boasting an enormous attendance figure, but you have an incredible atmosphere and keep demand at its peak.
Quote from: MUFlutieEffect on January 03, 2013, 07:31:21 PM
You're under the impression the BC is too small for Marquette? I'd argue the contrary. With the exception of 4 or 5 games each season, the building has far too many empty seats - so many that it simply looks bad from a PR perspective, if nothing else.
Part of the lure of schools like Duke is that they pack the place every night. Yes, you lose out on boasting an enormous attendance figure, but you have an incredible atmosphere and keep demand at its peek.
Sorry, I should have put "Arena" in CAPS as I was referring to the US Cellular Arena, which is too small for MU.
The BC is probably a little too big for MU, but realistically MU needs as much revenue is possible, so they can't afford to play in smaller arena and sell out every game. They will be missing out on some possible revenue from when they due draw 16,000+.
The Duke formula works for them, but probably wouldn't work for MU.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on January 03, 2013, 04:29:11 PM
I just noticed how our attendance has fallen almost a 1,000 fans 2008. Any ideas why? I know our enrollment is up.
2008/2009 was the all-time high water mark. It was the three amigos junior/senior year.
Then, as I detailed in this thread last year
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=30382.msg354336#msg354336
It really comes down to whether we play Wisconsin at home and how many weekend vs weekday games we have. Weekend games average a few thousand more than weekday games. Marquee conference games matter too. ND, Georgetown and Louisville are big Marquee games for us. So is any highly ranked team (like Uconn when they are #1). How many marquee games did we play at home (versus Providence and Seton Hall). Did we have more weekend games one year versus another?
Sum it up and our "average attendance" is about 15,500 to 15,800. Last year we average 15,100 but if we replaced one of our RPI 300 buy games that averages 10,000 to 11,000 with Wisconsin that will draw near 19,000, then we would have had about 15,500 last year, making it an average year as opposed to a below average year. We had Wisconsin at home this year (attendance was 18,588) so that alone should make attendance higher this year over last year.
Bottom line, we are a solid 15,500 to 15,800 in the years we play Wisconsin at home. 2008/2009 we had a "draw" in the three amigos and ranked in the top ten for the all-time high.
My guess is of the "Milwaukee's Best" recruiting class pans out as expected/hoped and we are again highly ranked in two years (a year we play Wisconsin at home), we can make a run at the peak year of 16,239 in 2008. Ditto four year from now when Milwaukee's best are seniors and we play Wisconsin. If that year Diamond Stone is a Sophomore at MU (Looney a Junior??), we should smash the attendance record.
Or forget this and say it was all Crean's magnetic personality that dragged everyone into the BC in 2008!
Add one more point ...Conference play starts Jan 1. Between that date and the day school starts we have low student section attendance. Do we have two or three home conference games over break will affect overall attendance.
We play Georgetown at home Saturday. If school is in session, this game is almost always a sell-out (and Georgetown is repeatedly in our 10 all-time attendance games). So, we should get near 19,000 for that game but it might come up short because it's happening over break.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 03, 2013, 09:50:23 PM
2008/2009 was the all-time high water mark. It was the three amigos junior/senior year.
Then, as I detailed in this thread last year
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=30382.msg354336#msg354336
It really comes down to whether we play Wisconsin at home and how many weekend vs weekday games we have. Weekend games average a few thousand more than weekday games. Marquee conference games matter too. ND, Georgetown and Louisville are big Marquee games for us. So is any highly ranked team (like Uconn when they are #1). How many marquee games did we play at home (versus Providence and Seton Hall). Did we have more weekend games one year versus another?
Sum it up and our "average attendance" is about 15,500 to 15,800. Last year we average 15,100 but if we replaced one of our RPI 300 buy games that averages 10,000 to 11,000 with Wisconsin that will draw near 19,000, then we would have had about 15,500 last year, making it an average year as opposed to a below average year. We had Wisconsin at home this year (attendance was 18,588) so that alone should make attendance higher this year over last year.
Bottom line, we are a solid 15,500 to 15,800 in the years we play Wisconsin at home. 2008/2009 we had a "draw" in the three amigos and ranked in the top ten for the all-time high.
My guess is of the "Milwaukee's Best" recruiting class pans out as expected/hoped and we are again highly ranked in two years (a year we play Wisconsin at home), we can make a run at the peak year of 16,239 in 2008. Ditto four year from now when Milwaukee's best are seniors and we play Wisconsin. If that year Diamond Stone is a Sophomore at MU (Looney a Junior??), we should smash the attendance record.
Or forget this and say it was all Crean's magnetic personality that dragged everyone into the BC in 2008!
Add one more point ...
Conference play starts Jan 1. Between that date and the day school starts we have low student section attendance. Do we have two or three home conference games over break will affect overall attendance.
We play Georgetown at home Saturday. If school is in session, this game is almost always a sell-out (and Georgetown is repeatedly in our 10 all-time attendance games). So, we should get near 19,000 for that game but it might come up short because it's happening over break.
Many good points. Though it was the amigos junior year which is why I was confused. I was also confused as Jae and DJO seemed to be as big or bigger of a draw and yet the 2010 and 2011 teams had higher attendance rates. Good points about UW though I disagree with the school in session comments as I remember driving up to winter break games my freshman year against nova and GTown which were sold out.
Last year ...
* we were robbed of a few weekend games because of the NBA lockout forced a condensed 66 game schedule. The Bucks had priority in scheduling as we had to move some game to weekdays. After January 1, only three of our remaining 8 home BE games were weekends (Pitt Jan 14, Cincy Feb 2 and GU Mar 3).
* If you assume MU fans also attend Bucks games, between these two last year the games were coming fast and furious in the BC. Their night have been some over-saturation.
* We also did not play Wisconsin
* We had a really weak early non-conference schedule (Mount St. Marys, Norfolk, Jacksonville and Northern Co)
So yes, the highly ranked team and DJO/Jae should have dragged people to the BC. But, all the stars aligned in the wrong way to make last year a crappy year for attendance.
Using the spreadsheet provided by the Georgetown fan, I thought I'd see how the teams stacked up when comparing stats. I ranked each of the most plausible teams for the new conference by awarding points (14 the best, 1 the worst) in the following categories: 5-year home attendance average, 2012 home attendance, AP poll appearances 2000-2009, AP poll appearances 2010-2012, NCAA appearances the last 10 years, NCAA wins the last 10 years, NCAA appearances the last 5 years, NCAA wins the last 5 years, NCAA appearances all time, NCAA wins all time, Final Four appearances, and NCAA championships. Here's how they stacked up:
149 Marquette
143 Villanova
138 Georgetown
125 Xavier
105 Butler
104 Gonzaga
99 Creighton
94 Dayton
85 St. John's
83 DePaul
72 VCU
67 Providence
65 Seton Hall
61 Saint Louis
Not scientific by any means, just a fun exercise combining present success with past success. The bottom four of the C7 (St. John's, DePaul, Providence and Seton Hall) sure need to step things up and be more consistent in the future.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 03, 2013, 10:47:12 PM
Last year ...
* we were robbed of a few weekend games because of the NBA lockout forced a condensed 66 game schedule. The Bucks had priority in scheduling as we had to move some game to weekdays. After January 1, only three of our remaining 8 home BE games were weekends (Pitt Jan 14, Cincy Feb 2 and GU Mar 3).
* If you assume MU fans also attend Bucks games, between these two last year the games were coming fast and furious in the BC. Their night have been some over-saturation.
* We also did not play Wisconsin
* We had a really weak early non-conference schedule (Mount St. Marys, Norfolk, Jacksonville and Northern Co)
So yes, the highly ranked team and DJO/Jae should have dragged people to the BC. But, all the stars aligned in the wrong way to make last year a crappy year for attendance.
There is a danger in drawing assumptions simply by looking at the 2012 schedule in isolation. Compare the points you make about 2012 with what happened in 2008:
* The Bucks actually played 23 home games January through March 2008 (compared to 22 in what you call an "oversaturated" 2012).
* In 2008 we also did not play Wisconsin at home.
* In 2008 We had a really weak non-conference which included Savanna Sate, Coppin State, Sacremento State, Utah Valley State, IUPUI, IUPU-FW and Florida Gulf Coast. We actually played one less crappy non-conference opponent in 2012, adding a quality SEC team in Vanderbilt to the schedule.
* In 2008 only 4 home BE conference games were on Saturdays, but there were no Sunday (Villanova) or Holiday (Louisville) games as there were in 2012, and two of those Saturday games were against crappy Big East teams (DePaul, Rutgers).
Mabye the stars did align in 2012 for a crappy year for attendance. But the stars aligned in a similar way in 2008, and we managed to overcome it.
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 04, 2013, 12:44:57 AM
There is a danger in drawing assumptions simply by looking at the 2012 schedule in isolation. Compare the points you make about 2012 with what happened in 2008:
* The Bucks actually played 23 home games January through March 2008 (compared to 22 in what you call an "oversaturated" 2012).
* In 2008 we also did not play Wisconsin at home.
* In 2008 We had a really weak non-conference which included Savanna Sate, Coppin State, Sacremento State, Utah Valley State, IUPUI, IUPU-FW and Florida Gulf Coast. We actually played one less crappy non-conference opponent in 2012, adding a quality SEC team in Vanderbilt to the schedule.
* In 2008 only 4 home BE conference games were on Saturdays, but there were no Sunday (Villanova) or Holiday (Louisville) games as there were in 2012, and two of those Saturday games were against crappy Big East teams (DePaul, Rutgers).
Mabye the stars did align in 2012 for a crappy year for attendance. But the stars aligned in a similar way in 2008, and we managed to overcome it.
I was not arguing that last year attendance should have approached 2008/2009's all-time record. I was arguing that last year's below average 15,100 would have been a more average 15,500 to 15,800 if a few things (like Wisconsin at home) had broke our way last year. They did not.
When you only have 15 home dates spread over 5 months, one or two games difference in the scheduling, like an extra week-end game here or, more marquee games (GU, 'ville, ND) and Wisconsin at home will affect the average attendance for the season by several hundred.
Lastly, if you look at college basketball attendance everywhere it is down. MU's 2008 high water mark of 16,239 was the 14th largest average attendance in college basketball. 2011 15,586 was the 11th largest that year. Our absolute attendance was down by almost 700 but our relative position improved three spots,
-------------
More on waning attendance everywhere else ....
Our Student section is 3,670. Duke's Student section is 1,200
MU undergrad enrollment is 8,000 Duke Undergrad enrollment is 6,500
As this article says, Duke can only sell 650 student tickets. The rest are sold to the public.
http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/low-attendance-forces-duke-athletics-sell-student-seats
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 04, 2013, 06:30:23 AM
I was not arguing that last year attendance should have approached 2008/2009's all-time record. I was arguing that last year's below average 15,100 would have been a more average 15,500 to 15,800 if a few things (like Wisconsin at home) had broke our way last year. They did not.
When you only have 15 home dates spread over 5 months, one or two games difference in the scheduling, like an extra week-end game here or, more marquee games (GU, 'ville, ND) and Wisconsin at home will affect the average attendance for the season by several hundred.
Fine, let's use this year, when we have Wisconsin on the schedule.,
Overall Non-Confernce average attendance:
2008 (No Wisconsin): 14,384
This year (WITH Wisconsin) 14,027
Even with Wisconsin pulling up attenance this year, we're down over 350/game.
For example, compare season openers--both times aginst cupcakes:
2008: IUPUI drew 13,991
This year: Colgate drew 13,065
Best attended non-conference game:
2008: UW-Milwauee 18,283
This year: Wisconsin 18,588
Final Non-conference tuneup:
Savannah State: 15,060
North Carolina Central: 13,600
First Big East home game:
2008: Providence: 17,041
This year: Uconn: 14,159
Our attendance is down this year--and that's WITH Wisconsin on the non-conference schedule.
Anything yet on today's meeting?
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 04, 2013, 01:03:23 PM
Our attendance is down this year--and that's WITH Wisconsin on the non-conference schedule.
We have played 7 home games, have 8 left ... what is your point? That you can predict how the next 8 are going to turn out?
Quote from: shannonboyle on January 03, 2013, 06:01:32 PM
The New Kennel is still brand new so I don't see the Zags leaving. Lotta pride in that facility and it's a great home court advantage. Maybe some big games get played downtown.
This is the exact kind of situation DePaul needs. Build a small on-campus arena, no more than 8,000 fans. Sell it out and make it a "kennel" or "barn" or some other kind of rowdy atmosphere visiting teams hate. Then, if you get good enough and/or when a super-attractive opponent comes to town, play them at the United Center. This was the way it was at UConn back before they became great -- tough little arena in Storrs, gradually playing more home games in Hartford.
Gonzaga is to be commended for doing things right and making each Zags game a hot ticket.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 04, 2013, 02:45:13 PM
We have played 7 home games, have 8 left ... what is your point? That you can predict how the next 8 are going to turn out?
If he thinks it can make MU look bad, he can.
No doubt MU attendance has suffered a bit from the peak in 2008. Economic conditions have simply dictated. But there's little doubt that most other schools have suffered more and that our strong 2013 conference dates this year will allow us to have a good overall average here in 2012-13.
One thing I'd like to add. The university made the decision to lower student season tickets back to $99 this season after experimenting with $125 last year. I sense the decision to increase the price last year had a fairly dramatic impact. $99 is the correct price point in my mind and they'd do well to maintain that long term. The more kids we pack in (within reason), the better the experience is for all.
Quote from: tower912 on January 04, 2013, 03:38:29 PM
If he thinks it can make MU look bad, he can.
He presents logical arguments that are usually fact based...lets the data be heard and usually has an opinion that is tied to the data.
I've always liked his approach...one of the smartest guys on this board from an educational perspective. Very impressive background.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 04, 2013, 04:49:51 PM
He presents logical arguments that are usually fact based...lets the data be heard and usually has an opinion that is tied to the data.
I've always liked his approach...one of the smartest guys on this board from an educational perspective. Very impressive background.
Can't speak to his background but I'll take your word for it.
As to his "approach" (long winded, fact twisting misrepresentations of other's statements), I don't find a whole lot to like. I think you're getting dangerously close to being in a "vast minority" ;)
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 04, 2013, 02:45:13 PM
We have played 7 home games, have 8 left ... what is your point? That you can predict how the next 8 are going to turn out?
I was responding to your list of suggestions as to why attendance was declining, none of which fit with reality. Good theories. But all were wrong.
If you have some other idea, I'd be happy to hear it. Meanwhile, the facts suggest the decline in attendance over the last five years can't be easily explained away by your theories of Wisconsin games, crappy cupcakes, or not enough marquee weekend opponents.
I don't know for sure what the next 8 games will bring attendance-wise, but we'll know more after Georgetown, which we can compare to Pitt last year (18,404 for a marquee Saturday opponent during winter break).
Quote from: tower912 on January 04, 2013, 03:38:29 PM
If he thinks it can make MU look bad, he can.
Nothing I can say could make MU look any worse than losing to Green Bay, blowing a 21 point lead to LSU, or suffering a 30+ point blowout against Florida.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 04, 2013, 06:09:24 PM
As to his "approach" (long winded, fact twisting misrepresentations of other's statements), I don't find a whole lot to like. I think you're getting dangerously close to being in a "vast minority" ;)
To correct your error, my approach is quoting the twisted misreprensentations of
others (like you above), then rebutting them with facts.
I beleiev your "long-winded" argument is code for "you got me, but I'll be damned if I admit it."
Quote from: The Equalizer on January 04, 2013, 08:03:57 PM
I was responding to your list of suggestions as to why attendance was declining, none of which fit with reality. Good theories. But all were wrong.
If you have some other idea, I'd be happy to hear it. Meanwhile, the facts suggest the decline in attendance over the last five years can't be easily explained away by your theories of Wisconsin games, crappy cupcakes, or not enough marquee weekend opponents.
Year Rank Avg. Attendance
2003 11 15,553
2004 12 15,291
2005 21 11,965
2006 18 13,998
2007 20 15,345
2008 14 16,239
2009 10 16,200
2010 10 15,617
2011 11 15,586
2012 15,100
Since you're not listening to me, I will SAY IT SLOWLY. Above is our attendance numbers. I never argued we were are near the 2008/2009 peaks. Instead I argued that last year's 15,100 was more like 15,500 to 15,800 like the previous two years if we had played Wisconsin at home and had one more Saturday home game. Had that happened, like it did in previous years, last year's attendance could have been more like 15,500+. That is all I was saying, You took that and compared it to 2008 and a bunch of other stuff I never implied.
Now why is our attendance declining from 2008? Again I will speak SLOWLY ... All schools are seeing attendance fall. Notice that our national attendance rank goes up even though our attendance goes down. That means ... everyone else is falling faster.
Go see the Duke link on the previous page, They cannot sellout their student section of 900 anymore. We get 3,000 students in a student section of 3,6000 and we get 10 threads about why the student section sucks.
Boys ... boys ... boys ... do I have to turn this car around right now?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 04, 2013, 08:43:35 PM
Since you're not listening to me, I will SAY IT SLOWLY. Above is our attendance numbers. I never argued we were are near the 2008/2009 peaks. Instead I argued that last year's 15,100 was more like 15,500 to 15,800 like the previous two years if we had played Wisconsin at home and had one more Saturday home game.
Had that happened, like it did in previous years, last year's attendance could have been more like 15,500+. That is all I was saying, You took that and compared it to 2008 and a bunch of other stuff I never implied.
I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure your comment was in response to a post that mentioned the 1000+ decline in attendance since 2008. Re-read the comment that you replied to:
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=35270.msg435028#msg435028 (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=35270.msg435028#msg435028)
I think you overplay the Wisconsin and weekend angles, but I'll play along just for fun.
Let's pretend that instead of UWM we played Wisconsin. Attendece would have grown from 14,917 by about 4,000. Lets also pretend that instead of playing Louisville on a Monday that drew 16,688, we played them on a Saturday and drew 2,332 more.
6,332 more fans over 16 games comes to an average of 396 more per game. 15,138 + 396 is 15,533 (which is well short of 15,800 end of the range you provided).
And it still leaves an unexplained decline of more than 700 per game from 2008.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 04, 2013, 08:43:35 PM
Now why is our attendance declining from 2008? Again I will speak SLOWLY ... All schools are seeing attendance fall. Notice that our national attendance rank goes up even though our attendance goes down. That means ... everyone else is falling faster.
Everyone else?
Why don't we actually compare the top 15 from last year and see if everyone else is falling faster?
2012 top 15 (change from 2008)
1. UK 23721 (up 1167 since 2008)
2. Syr. 23618 (up 3273)
5. UL 21,503 (up 2022)
4. UNC 20159 (down 335)
5. UW 17181 (down 9)
6. Creighton 16,665 (up 1,328)
7. Tenn. 16,543 (down 3724)
8. Ohio State 16,462 (down 76)
9. Indiana 16,462 (down 405)
10. Kansas 16,445 (up 36)
11. Memphis 16,234 (down 541)
12. BYU 15,424 (up 1906)
13. MU 15,138 (down 1,101)
14. Illinois 14,986 (down 1,650)
15. MSU 14,797 (up 38)
Not only is everyone else NOT falling faster, 7 of the top 15 actualy grew!
And of those falling, most aren't falling faster than us--only TWO of those teams fell faster than we did.
So, no matter how slowly you say it, your comment that all schools are seeing attendance fall faster than ours is simply not consistent with the facts.
I don't think you're making a fair argument there, 84. Not saying there may not be accuracy to it, but unless you compare the positions of all of the 2008 top attendance schools, there's a huge potential for inaccuracy. Are all the top schools the same? I suspect there are some below 15 that were above Marquette in 2008.
Regardless, I think a big difference that I haven't seen mentioned (granted, I'm jumping in late) is Tom Crean. The guy was pure salesman. He drew people to the game by sheer force of personality. And while some would point to the Indiana numbers and say "they're down and he's there" I'd be curious to see what the numbers were between 2008 and 2012, my guess is they were lower than that and are rising, and likely this year will be back at 2008 levels or even higher.
Though I fail to see what any of this has to do with the prospective new members for the conference.
Obviously winning% affects those numbers up or down with the number falling for just MU to 11,965 in 2004-05 after the F4 hangover. So does new construction like the Yum! Center in 2010. The recession hit hard after those 2008 seats were reseated so 2009 took a hit. More so, the Amigos created a F4 buzz that saw a steady climb since 2004-05 with the entry into the BE. Also, the AD while Crean was there gave away a lot of freebies to amp crowd size, whether these figures represent those I am unsure. MU switched to the $99 plans after to encourage the occasional/weekend fans, and to garner some revenue. And I agree that Crean as a salesman was a major factor...the dude for better or worse was spinning every day in the national media.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 05, 2013, 06:24:07 AM
I don't think you're making a fair argument there, 84. Not saying there may not be accuracy to it, but unless you compare the positions of all of the 2008 top attendance schools, there's a huge potential for inaccuracy. Are all the top schools the same? I suspect there are some below 15 that were above Marquette in 2008.
Regardless, I think a big difference that I haven't seen mentioned (granted, I'm jumping in late) is Tom Crean. The guy was pure salesman. He drew people to the game by sheer force of personality. And while some would point to the Indiana numbers and say "they're down and he's there" I'd be curious to see what the numbers were between 2008 and 2012, my guess is they were lower than that and are rising, and likely this year will be back at 2008 levels or even higher.
Though I fail to see what any of this has to do with the prospective new members for the conference.
My guess is the 2008/2009 years saw the peak as they were driven by an expectation that those teams were something special (three amigos). As was pointed out before, 2009 was after the economy collapsed and 2009 was also Buzz's first year. So the Crean and economy arguments for changing attendance fall short.
Following on this, my guess is the hype around next year's recruiting class could duplicate the 2008/2008 attendance number, but not next year. ASSUMING that class lives up to its billing, and nothing else materially changes (like Buzz leaving), in 2 to 4 years we could see attendance numbers back near the 2008/2009 peaks.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on January 05, 2013, 07:13:38 AM
Obviously winning% affects those numbers up or down with the number falling for just MU to 11,965 in 2004-05 after the F4 hangover. So does new construction like the Yum! Center in 2010. The recession hit hard after those 2008 seats were reseated so 2009 took a hit. More so, the Amigos created a F4 buzz that saw a steady climb since 2004-05 with the entry into the BE. Also, the AD while Crean was there gave away a lot of freebies to amp crowd size, whether these figures represent those I am unsure. MU switched to the $99 plans after to encourage the occasional/weekend fans, and to garner some revenue. And I agree that Crean as a salesman was a major factor...the dude for better or worse was spinning every day in the national media.
Thanks dr. My larger point in answering the question why are the attendance numbers down about a thousand from the peak. Or, where did those 15,000 people go? Their are almost too many variables to answer this question in one sentence, or even a paragraph.
Equalizer, in 2008 we drew 16,239 and ranked 14th in national attendance. In 2012 we drew 15,138 and ranked 13th. How did we move up one spot? Answer, you have the wrong table above. Need to compare the 2008 list, not the 2012 list. A bunch of other schools from the 2008 list fell faster than us allowing us to move up one spot despite our drop in attendance.
Are we really arguing about causes of and conclusions to be drawn from attendance numbers?
It's like reading a book on how to win at roulette.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/618dvB5In-L.jpg)