Who would've guessed!!! What a joke that MU does this, the number fudging fetish. There is no way there were more people there than the Pitt game last year, and thats just the first one that came to mind. (I will admit there was a larger crowd there than what I anticipated...I suppose they did sellout.) BIGGEST CROWD EVER!!!!! Whew-hooo!!! Is there like an orgy @ O'hara hall if they break the attendance record? Is that why this keeps happening?
What was the official attendance?
19,037 according to espn.com
I posted this in another thread .. but the highest attended game past and future will always be MU vs. UW. That's the hottest ticket, period. Every luxury box is maxed.
Tonight vs. DePaul was a good crowd, but no where close to the UW game in 2006.
No fudging...tickets sold or distributed, turnstyles are not counted for release of official attendance numbers.
yeah, i always feel a little skeptical when they say that now
seriously . . . i can think of 3 other games for sure:
Pitt Gameday last year
MU vs. ND, with Novak 2006
and probably MU vs. Gtown & PItt in 06 too
seriously, that first year in the BE was almost heaven . . . beating then #2 UConn on our first game ever, then ND Home & Home, Gtown AND Pitt @ home . . . playing our hearts out in SD vs. Alabama, scoring 50 points in a half!!!! i miss Steve! ( i know, there were some ugly games too like losing to Cinci & L'ville)
maybe MU v. UWM . . although weren't we making fun of it b/c it wasn't really sold out? can't quite remember, but it involved making fun of UWM fans i think
Well .. I wouldn't say for sure that those games (Pitt, ND, Gtown, etc) had more people or even sold more tickets.
DePaul is an old rival, and the school is only 90 miles South. Not the same for Pitt or GTown .. and I highly doubt fans from ND are going to come up to MU in great numbers. There was a good number of DPU fans at the BC last night.
So MU vs. DePaul has a shot at a huge attendance figure .. but no where near MU vs. UW.
There is no way the Pitt game had more people...that was the most ridiculous "biggest crowd" announcement ever. They had to eliminate seats for the ESPN studio guys. That was absolutely pre-ordained so that they would say that during the telecast. It gets old.
Last night was a huge crowd, though. Anybody else think the process of getting into the BC was unusually tortuous? And I didn't see that many DePaul fans. A few, yes. But not that many.
Yes, that was the longest wait to get through the turnstyles that I can recall.
But checking out the south end upper level, there seemed to be tons of rows of empty seats. I suppose those might have been group tickets that went unused, but it sure didn't look like a complete "sell-out" to me judging by people missing in the seats.
Quote from: muhoosier260 on January 26, 2008, 10:48:33 PM
Who would've guessed!!! What a joke that MU does this, the number fudging fetish. There is no way there were more people there than the Pitt game last year, and thats just the first one that came to mind. (I will admit there was a larger crowd there than what I anticipated...I suppose they did sellout.) BIGGEST CROWD EVER!!!!! Whew-hooo!!! Is there like an orgy @ O'hara hall if they break the attendance record? Is that why this keeps happening?
Hoosiers...what would you have them do? Are they supposed to say "well we sold the most tickets ever but since not everyone showed up it's not the biggest attendance game ever"?
This is the God's honest truth how it works (or did when I was there). Usually with about 10 minutes to go in the game, the ticket manager and/or the head of the ticket off at the Bradley Center would give me a piece of paper with the ticket sales numbers on them. I then passed that number on to the SID who put it officially into the box score as the home team is responsible for that.
As I stated before, there are two numbers...turnstyle and tickets sold/distributed (those include free tickets as youth giveaways, allotment to other team, etc).
As a rule of thumb we would typically inflate the number announced as the final sold by about 100. This is because not everyone has a ticket and not everyone goes through a turnstyle. Cheerleaders, band, the teams, referees, game administrators, the press. Add all those up and it typically was around 100 people.
MU reports tickets sold/distributed as reflected in the Ticketmaster system. Indiana did it this way when I was there, Kansas did it this way when I was there, the Anaheim Angels did it this way when I was there, the Anaheim Ducks did it this way when I was there, so do roughly 90% of the programs / teams that are out there. Some exceptions exist, but not many.
So when the public address announcer is notified of the attendance number, he's going to look in the media guide and if it's the highest ever he's going to announce it. The only thing preventing that would be someone in the AD to say "don't announce it" because of no shows, but I just don't think that would ever happen.
There is no question that you guys are right, the Wisconsin game and a few others have all the suites filled, etc so there will be more bodies in the building. But those suites are sold whether they are in the building or not, so they are counted either way.
Right, suites are counted .. but I thought the suiteholders could buy extras, basically for standing room in the suites.
I'm not doubting that it happened. I'm just shocked it (MU vs. DPU) could ever best a MU/UW game and the intense demand that generates, where people would buy a SRO type ticket without thinking twice.
I thought last night was one of the most crowded games in recent memory. Lots of people, long, lines...
Regardless of whether it was or it wasn't, it's embarrassing how they keep announcing it.
While we're winning the state's attendance battle, UW is working on their 10 straight NCAA appearance; in which they've gone to a Final Four, an Elite 8 and a couple of Sweet 16s. Which would you rather have?
Win some games in March Tom, then start counting heads.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 04:12:20 PM
Regardless of whether it was of it wasn't, it's embarrassing how they keep announcing it.
While we're winning the state's attendance battle, UW is working on their 10 straight NCAA appearance; in which they've gone to a Final Four, an Elite 8 and a couple of Sweet 16s. Which would you rather have?
Win some games in March Tom, then start counting heads.
I don't recall anyone claiming that attendance is a sunstitute for success in March. Our attendance is very good. MU should just ingnore that because they've lost a couple of first round games? Makes sense.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 27, 2008, 02:54:19 PM
Quote from: muhoosier260 on January 26, 2008, 10:48:33 PM
Who would've guessed!!! What a joke that MU does this, the number fudging fetish. There is no way there were more people there than the Pitt game last year, and thats just the first one that came to mind. (I will admit there was a larger crowd there than what I anticipated...I suppose they did sellout.) BIGGEST CROWD EVER!!!!! Whew-hooo!!! Is there like an orgy @ O'hara hall if they break the attendance record? Is that why this keeps happening?
Hoosiers...what would you have them do? Are they supposed to say "well we sold the most tickets ever but since not everyone showed up it's not the biggest attendance game ever"?
This is the God's honest truth how it works (or did when I was there). Usually with about 10 minutes to go in the game, the ticket manager and/or the head of the ticket off at the Bradley Center would give me a piece of paper with the ticket sales numbers on them. I then passed that number on to the SID who put it officially into the box score as the home team is responsible for that.
As I stated before, there are two numbers...turnstyle and tickets sold/distributed (those include free tickets as youth giveaways, allotment to other team, etc).
As a rule of thumb we would typically inflate the number announced as the final sold by about 100. This is because not everyone has a ticket and not everyone goes through a turnstyle. Cheerleaders, band, the teams, referees, game administrators, the press. Add all those up and it typically was around 100 people.
MU reports tickets sold/distributed as reflected in the Ticketmaster system. Indiana did it this way when I was there, Kansas did it this way when I was there, the Anaheim Angels did it this way when I was there, the Anaheim Ducks did it this way when I was there, so do roughly 90% of the programs / teams that are out there. Some exceptions exist, but not many.
So when the public address announcer is notified of the attendance number, he's going to look in the media guide and if it's the highest ever he's going to announce it. The only thing preventing that would be someone in the AD to say "don't announce it" because of no shows, but I just don't think that would ever happen.
There is no question that you guys are right, the Wisconsin game and a few others have all the suites filled, etc so there will be more bodies in the building. But those suites are sold whether they are in the building or not, so they are counted either way.
i guess there's no other way, its just amusing that they keep selling out and keep break their own record. i mean, once you sell out, don't you sell out? How do you out do a sell out? And a game like this where there clearly aren't as many ppl there as other recent games, just makes you wonder thats all.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on January 27, 2008, 04:23:28 PM
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 04:12:20 PM
Regardless of whether it was of it wasn't, it's embarrassing how they keep announcing it.
While we're winning the state's attendance battle, UW is working on their 10 straight NCAA appearance; in which they've gone to a Final Four, an Elite 8 and a couple of Sweet 16s. Which would you rather have?
Win some games in March Tom, then start counting heads.
I don't recall anyone claiming that attendance is a sunstitute for success in March. Our attendance is very good. MU should just ingnore that because they've lost a couple of first round games? Makes sense.
Why do they keep having to hammer home that it is the largest crowd in WISCONSIN history? Who gives a rats behind about the state of Wisconsin? The State of Wisconsin, are you kidding me? Shouldn't we have bigger fish to fry than the state of WISCONSIN?
Why can't they just announce it as a Marquette single game record?
By the way, did anybody ever find out how that CBSsportsline writer got his (incorrect) information about us being ranked for the longest period of time in its history?
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 04:12:20 PM
Regardless of whether it was or it wasn't, it's embarrassing how they keep announcing it.
While we're winning the state's attendance battle, UW is working on their 10 straight NCAA appearance; in which they've gone to a Final Four, an Elite 8 and a couple of Sweet 16s. Which would you rather have?
Win some games in March Tom, then start counting heads.
And prior to those 10 years....60 years of nothing.
Kudos for their nice run, I like the fact we've done it in 6 straight decades. I'll take that streak over theirs any day of the week. I'll take our 25 NCAA appearances to their 13 any day of the week.
It's not Tom's call to mention the attendance, that is a function of the ticket department and marketing.
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
why are bucks sellouts (when they used to have them) listed around 18,700 yet MU claims to fit 19,000 +? SRO tickets not sold/counted for the bucks?
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
The Hammock is right as usual...Chicos, our coach was talking about setting the record in his pre game speech ! No wonder he's earned the nickname CMO. He's more into marketing than X's & O's.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
The Hammock is right as usual...Chicos, our coach was talking about setting the record in his pre game speech ! No wonder he's earned the nickname CMO. He's more into marketing than X's & O's.
Agreed. He's just a marketer, he doesn't know anything about x and o's. Let's fire him and bring back Dukiet or Deane. Those guys knew how to draw up x and o's.
Find a new topic to bitch about, guys. This one is lame.
While we are blaming coach for MU announcing a record crowd this past Saturday, I hear that coach is also to blame for
snow in Wisconsin
the Marquette interchange
that Dickie V loves Duke
that ESPN Sportscenter loves to only show dunks
that college football won't come up with a legit playoff system
and us being involved in the Iraq war and all wars preceding that one.
At least bring up something legit to air your grievances about coach, all of us already know some of you really don't like the guy.
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 28, 2008, 08:29:44 AM
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
The Hammock is right as usual...Chicos, our coach was talking about setting the record in his pre game speech ! No wonder he's earned the nickname CMO. He's more into marketing than X's & O's.
Agreed. He's just a marketer, he doesn't know anything about x and o's. Let's fire him and bring back Dukiet or Deane. Those guys knew how to draw up x and o's.
Find a new topic to bitch about, guys. This one is lame.
I'd bring back KO...he sort of knew what he was doing. And Deane was the coach for my last 3 years at MU - we were NIT Runners Up, 2nd Round NCAA and 1st NCAA with CUSA Championship. See he wasn't 100% terrible, just like Coach Crean isn't 100% perfect.
Unless UW plays @ the BC for a non-conf (like Maryland couple years back) or plays a game @ Miller Park, the record is safely in MU's hand as the Kohl Hole only holds 17,500. Why do we keep beating the proverbial dead horse on this issue?
Slightly OT: Hammock, what is up with your name? Are you an ex-swimmer?
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 28, 2008, 08:54:09 AM
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 28, 2008, 08:29:44 AM
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
The Hammock is right as usual...Chicos, our coach was talking about setting the record in his pre game speech ! No wonder he's earned the nickname CMO. He's more into marketing than X's & O's.
Agreed. He's just a marketer, he doesn't know anything about x and o's. Let's fire him and bring back Dukiet or Deane. Those guys knew how to draw up x and o's.
Find a new topic to bitch about, guys. This one is lame.
I'd bring back KO...he sort of knew what he was doing. And Deane was the coach for my last 3 years at MU - we were NIT Runners Up, 2nd Round NCAA and 1st NCAA with CUSA Championship. See he wasn't 100% terrible, just like Coach Crean isn't 100% perfect.
You are right... Crean isn't perfect.
But, complaining about his "marketing" or claiming he doesn't know his x and o's is lame.
No coach is beyond criticism, but come up with something worth while to discuss. If you don't like his X and O's, then lets discuss it intelligently... don't take a swipe at him because of the attendance thing.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 28, 2008, 08:54:09 AM
I'd bring back KO...he sort of knew what he was doing. And Deane was the coach for my last 3 years at MU - we were NIT Runners Up, 2nd Round NCAA and 1st NCAA with CUSA Championship. See he wasn't 100% terrible, just like Coach Crean isn't 100% perfect.
Mike Deane was top-notch when it came to winning with another coach's players. Too bad college coaches actually have to, you know, recruit their own guys once in a while.
Yeah, I sure wish Crean would stop marketing our program. It was much better at the Bradley Center when it was less full. Stupid people cheering and making all that racket. Students especially. Ah, the good old days when you could spread out, had a couple chairs for your coat, and way fewer of those pesky students. ::)
I think the whole "Crean has really boosted attendance" thing is somewhat of a myth. I was looking at the numbers a few weeks ago for Bradley Center attendance during the O'Neil, Deane, and Crean eras. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but they were roughly:
O'Neil (5 years) 13,400/game
Deane (5 years) 12,200/game
Crean (8 years) 13,200/game
So Crean had improved attendance (less than 10%)over Deane, but is still behind O'Neil's average - and that's with two years of Wade and two years of big name Big East opponents.
Pehaps more people are showing up for the games now and that's made the crowds seem much bigger.
You're telling me there was a basketball program at Marquette before Crean arrived? I can hardly believe it the way people around here credit him for everything from widening the lane to cutting holes in the bottom of the peach baskets.
We were poor for a very short time when Dukiet came on board. And we've always attracted high profile, sought-after coaches (Dukiet included).
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 28, 2008, 01:48:26 PM
You're telling me there was a basketball program at Marquette before Crean arrived? I can hardly believe it the way people around here credit him for everything from widening the lane to cutting holes in the bottom of the peach baskets.
We were poor for a very short time when Dukiet came on board. And we've always attracted high profile, sought-after coaches (Dukiet included).
Thanks for setting me straight.
When I arrived in 1998, MU hoops was really exciting when we had to listen to road games on the radio and could show up at halftime for home games and still sit in the lower deck.
Those were the days.
Oh and just to be clear, 1998 was light years ahead of where Dukiet had the program... so I can only imagine it back then.
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 28, 2008, 01:53:46 PM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 28, 2008, 01:48:26 PM
You're telling me there was a basketball program at Marquette before Crean arrived? I can hardly believe it the way people around here credit him for everything from widening the lane to cutting holes in the bottom of the peach baskets.
We were poor for a very short time when Dukiet came on board. And we've always attracted high profile, sought-after coaches (Dukiet included).
Thanks for setting me straight.
When I arrived in 1998, MU hoops was really exciting when we had to listen to road games on the radio and could show up at halftime for home games and still sit in the lower deck.
Those were the days.
Oh and just to be clear, 1998 was light years ahead of where Dukiet had the program... so I can only imagine it back then.
We averaged 11,508 in 1998. Most programs would kill for that kind of attendance.
Incidentally, in 2005 -- two years removed from the Final Four -- we averaged 11,965.
Quote from: ChuckyChip on January 28, 2008, 01:39:14 PM
I think the whole "Crean has really boosted attendance" thing is somewhat of a myth. I was looking at the numbers a few weeks ago for Bradley Center attendance during the O'Neil, Deane, and Crean eras. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but they were roughly:
O'Neil (5 years) 13,400/game
Deane (5 years) 12,200/game
Crean (8 years) 13,200/game
So Crean had improved attendance (less than 10%)over Deane, but is still behind O'Neil's average - and that's with two years of Wade and two years of big name Big East opponents.
Pehaps more people are showing up for the games now and that's made the crowds seem much bigger.
For fairness sake, though, please keep in mind that just as Deane (and therefore the attendance figures while he was coach) benefited from the O'Neill era, Crean's early peformance, both in won-loss and attendance, suffered from the tail end of the Deane era. Remember, nobody comes to see Mike Deane or Tom Crean stalk the sidelines. They come to watch the players. And, with perhaps a couple of exceptions, the players left behind by Deane weren't exactly crowd pleasers.
Toss out Crean's first two seasons, when he essentially was coaching Deane's teams, and his attendance figures look much better.
MU attendance under Crean, 2002-07: 14,135
It's probably safe to say that 1,900 more paid customers x 16 games = a nice chunk of Tom Crean's salary.
FWIW, in two years with Big East opponents, MU's average is 14,671.
What a great world we fans live in where, as a top 20 team, we have the luxury of complaining about attedance numbers and how they are directly an effect of how "bad" our coach is.
What would we do if we were looking at a sub .500 year or struggling to make the NIT? What kind of crap would we spend our days arguing over on this site then? That would probably lead towards some tangible discussions over how poor of a coach and team we would have.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
The Hammock is right as usual...Chicos, our coach was talking about setting the record in his pre game speech ! No wonder he's earned the nickname CMO. He's more into marketing than X's & O's.
::)
Silly, absolutely silly. Maybe we should go back to the days of having 12,000 announced attendance. It amazes me the complaints, truly does.
Quote from: muarmy81 on January 28, 2008, 02:18:26 PM
What a great world we fans live in where, as a top 20 team, we have the luxury of complaining about attedance numbers and how they are directly an effect of how "bad" our coach is.
Pretty much sums it up.
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
why are bucks sellouts (when they used to have them) listed around 18,700 yet MU claims to fit 19,000 +? SRO tickets not sold/counted for the bucks?
Do I think the marketing people told him the game was already 98% sold out when he does his pre game clips? Yes, I do.
Crean asks for input on what he should talk about that week...the department gives the input from various folks and he chooses what to talk about.
When I said the announced attendance, I was talking about during the game.
And why are the attendance configurations different? Because there are more seats available to sell for MU then there are for an NBA game.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 28, 2008, 02:04:59 PM
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 28, 2008, 01:53:46 PM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 28, 2008, 01:48:26 PM
You're telling me there was a basketball program at Marquette before Crean arrived? I can hardly believe it the way people around here credit him for everything from widening the lane to cutting holes in the bottom of the peach baskets.
We were poor for a very short time when Dukiet came on board. And we've always attracted high profile, sought-after coaches (Dukiet included).
Thanks for setting me straight.
When I arrived in 1998, MU hoops was really exciting when we had to listen to road games on the radio and could show up at halftime for home games and still sit in the lower deck.
Those were the days.
Oh and just to be clear, 1998 was light years ahead of where Dukiet had the program... so I can only imagine it back then.
We averaged 11,508 in 1998. Most programs would kill for that kind of attendance.
Incidentally, in 2005 -- two years removed from the Final Four -- we averaged 11,965.
Now we average 15,000, play in one of the top 2 conferences in the nation, go to the NCAAs....imagine how many people/programs would kill for that...yet we have a group here that bitches constantly about it.
Go figure....I noticed you brought out 2005 but ignored the years prior and post...interesting.
Quote from: ChuckyChip on January 28, 2008, 01:39:14 PM
I think the whole "Crean has really boosted attendance" thing is somewhat of a myth. I was looking at the numbers a few weeks ago for Bradley Center attendance during the O'Neil, Deane, and Crean eras. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but they were roughly:
O'Neil (5 years) 13,400/game
Deane (5 years) 12,200/game
Crean (8 years) 13,200/game
So Crean had improved attendance (less than 10%)over Deane, but is still behind O'Neil's average - and that's with two years of Wade and two years of big name Big East opponents.
Pehaps more people are showing up for the games now and that's made the crowds seem much bigger.
Crean's first year was 9000 or so, after Deane...it was brutal. Throw out the high and the low for all those you'll have a clear leader. Also the 2005 year included the NIT home game where the university had 18 hours to sell a game against Western Michigan with our star player in cast and the team struggling.
Come on, the agendas here continue to amaze. Careful what you wish for...I've seen what we used to have, lived it...worked in it....you guys are NUTS if you want to go back to that...absolutely nuts.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 27, 2008, 02:29:21 PM= They had to eliminate seats for the ESPN studio guys. That was absolutely pre-ordained so that they would say that during the telecast. It gets old. =
Point taken -- i forgot about them; I think the PITT gameday came to mind because it was such an AWESOME game and so who cares how many ppl are there as long as they are going bananas???
and... yes we should really stop whining about this-- I agree it is kinda lame that we keep "breaking" the sell out record and they keep announcing it, but if you think about it, there are a whole slew of things that get publicized and highlighted that are similarly insignificant/trivial. I mean, come on, the bells and whistles are there for a reason people. To entertain. And apparently give us something to fight about that really doesn't involve our beloved sport.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:21:22 PM
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 27, 2008, 10:46:25 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
The Hammock is right as usual...Chicos, our coach was talking about setting the record in his pre game speech ! No wonder he's earned the nickname CMO. He's more into marketing than X's & O's.
::)
Silly, absolutely silly. Maybe we should go back to the days of having 12,000 announced attendance. It amazes me the complaints, truly does.
Case in point:
In 2001, after Al McGuire died, I decided to head up to Milwaukee for the first game post-Al, a Saturday afternoon matchup with Tulane. Less than 24 hours before the game, I was able to go online to Ticketmaster and buy two tickets about 15 rows up, barely offset from center court.
Today, I can't even get two seats together via Ticketmaster for a Saturday afternoon game against Rutgers nearly four weeks from now.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:29:58 PM
Quote from: ChuckyChip on January 28, 2008, 01:39:14 PM
I think the whole "Crean has really boosted attendance" thing is somewhat of a myth. I was looking at the numbers a few weeks ago for Bradley Center attendance during the O'Neil, Deane, and Crean eras. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but they were roughly:
O'Neil (5 years) 13,400/game
Deane (5 years) 12,200/game
Crean (8 years) 13,200/game
So Crean had improved attendance (less than 10%)over Deane, but is still behind O'Neil's average - and that's with two years of Wade and two years of big name Big East opponents.
Pehaps more people are showing up for the games now and that's made the crowds seem much bigger.
Crean's first year was 9000 or so, after Deane...it was brutal. Throw out the high and the low for all those you'll have a clear leader. Also the 2005 year included the NIT home game where the university had 18 hours to sell a game against Western Michigan with our star player in cast and the team struggling.
Come on, the agendas here continue to amaze. Careful what you wish for...I've seen what we used to have, lived it...worked in it....you guys are NUTS if you want to go back to that...absolutely nuts.
also, slightly OT but this whole thread about "inheriting" other coaches' teams and such is starting to smack of political tones . . . yes we aren't winning conference champs and have our post-season struggles, but seriously, TC put MU back on the bball map, and so our athletics teams as a whole are definitely reaping benefits too. idk, my only real gripe on crean is that he gets ppl injured in practices right before post-season!!
peace
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:24:33 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
why are bucks sellouts (when they used to have them) listed around 18,700 yet MU claims to fit 19,000 +? SRO tickets not sold/counted for the bucks?
Do I think the marketing people told him the game was already 98% sold out when he does his pre game clips? Yes, I do.
Crean asks for input on what he should talk about that week...the department gives the input from various folks and he chooses what to talk about.
When I said the announced attendance, I was talking about during the game.
And why are the attendance configurations different? Because there are more seats available to sell for MU then there are for an NBA game.
Why does he have to talk at all? Honest question. Do other Division 1 schools have the coach talk to the crowd on the Jumbotron before the game? Seems completely unnecessary.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:26:27 PM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 28, 2008, 02:04:59 PM
Quote from: 2002mualum on January 28, 2008, 01:53:46 PM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on January 28, 2008, 01:48:26 PM
You're telling me there was a basketball program at Marquette before Crean arrived? I can hardly believe it the way people around here credit him for everything from widening the lane to cutting holes in the bottom of the peach baskets.
We were poor for a very short time when Dukiet came on board. And we've always attracted high profile, sought-after coaches (Dukiet included).
Thanks for setting me straight.
When I arrived in 1998, MU hoops was really exciting when we had to listen to road games on the radio and could show up at halftime for home games and still sit in the lower deck.
Those were the days.
Oh and just to be clear, 1998 was light years ahead of where Dukiet had the program... so I can only imagine it back then.
We averaged 11,508 in 1998. Most programs would kill for that kind of attendance.
Incidentally, in 2005 -- two years removed from the Final Four -- we averaged 11,965.
Now we average 15,000, play in one of the top 2 conferences in the nation, go to the NCAAs....imagine how many people/programs would kill for that...yet we have a group here that bitches constantly about it.
Nobody is bitching about it! People are simply pointing out that hearing the self congratulations over and over and over again is tired as hell!
good point, TonyR:
"why does he talk at all?"
as I recall coach Al wouldn't allow the announcer (a relative of mine) to introduce him at games until very late in the season. He did the starting 5, asst coaches and that's it. Maybe melodrama, maybe humbleness...
Quote from: rugbydrummer on January 28, 2008, 02:41:38 PM
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:29:58 PM
Quote from: ChuckyChip on January 28, 2008, 01:39:14 PM
I think the whole "Crean has really boosted attendance" thing is somewhat of a myth. I was looking at the numbers a few weeks ago for Bradley Center attendance during the O'Neil, Deane, and Crean eras. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but they were roughly:
O'Neil (5 years) 13,400/game
Deane (5 years) 12,200/game
Crean (8 years) 13,200/game
So Crean had improved attendance (less than 10%)over Deane, but is still behind O'Neil's average - and that's with two years of Wade and two years of big name Big East opponents.
Pehaps more people are showing up for the games now and that's made the crowds seem much bigger.
Crean's first year was 9000 or so, after Deane...it was brutal. Throw out the high and the low for all those you'll have a clear leader. Also the 2005 year included the NIT home game where the university had 18 hours to sell a game against Western Michigan with our star player in cast and the team struggling.
Come on, the agendas here continue to amaze. Careful what you wish for...I've seen what we used to have, lived it...worked in it....you guys are NUTS if you want to go back to that...absolutely nuts.
also, slightly OT but this whole thread about "inheriting" other coaches' teams and such is starting to smack of political tones . . . yes we aren't winning conference champs and have our post-season struggles, but seriously, TC put MU back on the bball map, and so our athletics teams as a whole are definitely reaping benefits too. idk, my only real gripe on crean is that he gets ppl injured in practices right before post-season!!
peace
The funny thing is that we've only won two conference regular season championships in our history...one under O'Neill and one under Crean.
O'Neill didn't want to be here, publicly said his contract wasn't worth the paper it was written on and worth only wiping his nose with.
Deane fished for other jobs at FSU and St. John's...love the guy, but he wasn't here for the long haul.
Now we get a guy that wants to be here, goes to the post season almost every year, competes at a high level, brings in players that go to the NBA, and people are upset with the fact he's "marketing" the team or pushing it as much as possible. Are we serious? He has a bully pulpit, the news will put him on the air and on the radio and in print...damn right I want my coach pushing us as much as possible, especially in a city with a ton of other options. This isn't Madison or East Lansing or Bloomington.
Quote from: tonyreeder on January 28, 2008, 02:54:01 PM
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:24:33 PM
Quote from: bananahammock on January 27, 2008, 06:24:41 PM
TC used most of his pre-game speech (the one on the jumbotron) to talk about the potential of an attendance record. does anyone really think he was told by the people in marketing that he should focus on that topic? he is the marketing machine of the program!
why are bucks sellouts (when they used to have them) listed around 18,700 yet MU claims to fit 19,000 +? SRO tickets not sold/counted for the bucks?
Do I think the marketing people told him the game was already 98% sold out when he does his pre game clips? Yes, I do.
Crean asks for input on what he should talk about that week...the department gives the input from various folks and he chooses what to talk about.
When I said the announced attendance, I was talking about during the game.
And why are the attendance configurations different? Because there are more seats available to sell for MU then there are for an NBA game.
Why does he have to talk at all? Honest question. Do other Division 1 schools have the coach talk to the crowd on the Jumbotron before the game? Seems completely unnecessary.
Different strokes for different folks. Some people like it, some don't. Take it away and there would be people that say "Why doesn't Crean do that thing where he talks to people anymore".
Next coach comes in and doesn't talk about attendance, doesn't push the team and there will be people that will scream he's only an X's and O's guy and doesn't understand the need to constantly be pushing the program.
Can't win for losing.....meanwhile we're ranked 16th in the nation guys. Try to have fun.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: rugbydrummer on January 28, 2008, 02:41:38 PM
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on January 28, 2008, 02:29:58 PM
Quote from: ChuckyChip on January 28, 2008, 01:39:14 PM
I think the whole "Crean has really boosted attendance" thing is somewhat of a myth. I was looking at the numbers a few weeks ago for Bradley Center attendance during the O'Neil, Deane, and Crean eras. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but they were roughly:
O'Neil (5 years) 13,400/game
Deane (5 years) 12,200/game
Crean (8 years) 13,200/game
So Crean had improved attendance (less than 10%)over Deane, but is still behind O'Neil's average - and that's with two years of Wade and two years of big name Big East opponents.
Pehaps more people are showing up for the games now and that's made the crowds seem much bigger.
Crean's first year was 9000 or so, after Deane...it was brutal. Throw out the high and the low for all those you'll have a clear leader. Also the 2005 year included the NIT home game where the university had 18 hours to sell a game against Western Michigan with our star player in cast and the team struggling.
Come on, the agendas here continue to amaze. Careful what you wish for...I've seen what we used to have, lived it...worked in it....you guys are NUTS if you want to go back to that...absolutely nuts.
also, slightly OT but this whole thread about "inheriting" other coaches' teams and such is starting to smack of political tones . . . yes we aren't winning conference champs and have our post-season struggles, but seriously, TC put MU back on the bball map, and so our athletics teams as a whole are definitely reaping benefits too. idk, my only real gripe on crean is that he gets ppl injured in practices right before post-season!!
peace
The funny thing is that we've only won two conference regular season championships in our history...one under O'Neill and one under Crean.
O'Neill didn't want to be here, publicly said his contract wasn't worth the paper it was written on and worth only wiping his nose with.
Deane fished for other jobs at FSU and St. John's...love the guy, but he wasn't here for the long haul.
Now we get a guy that wants to be here, goes to the post season almost every year, competes at a high level, brings in players that go to the NBA, and people are upset with the fact he's "marketing" the team or pushing it as much as possible. Are we serious? He has a bully pulpit, the news will put him on the air and on the radio and in print...damn right I want my coach pushing us as much as possible, especially in a city with a ton of other options. This isn't Madison or East Lansing or Bloomington.
There are a ton of reasons why TC is better than Deane, but using the FSU & St John's card is not one of them. TC puts his name out there for every job, every year. It doesn't bother me, but it's true. What bothers me and others is he seems to be more preoccupied with marketing than Xs & Os. After watching McNeal take ill-advised shot after ill advised shot to start the game, I wondered why he was jacking up 3s like he was Novak while Crean was announcing attendance records like he was the Andy Henry.
Didn't Mike Deane start thee Jumbotron thing? I seem remember a coach using the Jumbotron before TC and I think he wore tinted glasses. :)
i don't mind the jumbotron gig but i could do without the state's largest attendance line.
does anyone have an answer on how MU can fit an extra 300 people in the BC than the bucks?
wheresgerald posey- to answer your question, it's an attire of choice!
Who cares that Tom Crean "markets" his team. It is good for the program in general. While I agree that he should not slack on his coaching of x's and o's, the guy has made a few NCAA tournaments in his day so I don't think that is a problem. MU should be proud that it had the largest crowd in the state ever @ a basketball game. Think about how much that affects recruiting. What 18 yr old kid wouldn't want to play in front of a pack gym and on TV. If the Bradley Center would allow, im sure they would try to fit more people into the stadium. The energy the fans bring is amazing, the more people in the stadium, the better the home-court advantage. Yes MU has only won 2 conference championships, but lets be realistic here. The Big East is a HARD conference to win...for every team. If MU had stayed in CUSA they easily would have challenged with Memphis for the title every year. The challenge and exposure the Big East brings is much more important right now then winning conference championships.
To make a connection here... the marketing concerns do not make sense to me. Why are people worried about Crean marketing himself and the team? In my experience with TN, Bruce Pearl has marketed his team to the max. He paints his chest, he announced a game for the Lady Vols. He wears an orange blazer against Kentucky and Vanderbilt. He helped in the studio for CBS after UT was eliminated from the tournament last year. Yes he markets himself, but he is also marketing his team. His stunts are comical and people mock him, but they talk about UT when they talk about him. Pearl will do anything and everything to keep his team in the national media. What you people don't realize is that the coach is truly the only one who can be marketed. Kids come and go, recruiting classes exhaust their eligibility and graduate or go pro. But Crean, and Pearl, are consistently the image of their programs. I say Crean should continue to do what he is doing, maybe even push harder for attention because great basketball players are everywhere. The only way a kid from the middle of nowhere Oregon can see MU, is through the marketing of Crean and the TV games that MU plays. If these kids see how hard Crean pushes to make MU basketball relevant, they can see the type of guy who is really behind his players and school. It attracts recruits. It is great for the school.
Before people jump all over me, let me be clear on the winning conference championships. I have stated before that winning championships is the only thing that matters. I still believe this. But MU, when they came into the BE, and even this year is not especially suited to win the BE without a few breaks, they just are not good enough to win it themselves. They will need to play outstanding against teams like Gtown, Pitt, and UCONN to win games due to their lack of big men. They are good enough to finish in the top 4, but not good enough to be the clear favorite in any season. This is where the marketing is important. Its also why I say the BE exposure is more important for MU right now. This comment may shock a lot of you, but the reality is that the majority of the country could not locate Marquette on a national map. I know this because I have lived outside the state for a long time, in various regions of the country. While I was irritated at first by this, I have come to accept this as a reality. The more exposure the team (and the school) gets from being in the big east and Crean marketing the basketball team really helps the MU community. The basketball team can recruit more players who are elite, thus resulting in more marketing and exposure. Correct me if Im wrong, but, didn't MU (the school) have its highest enrollment in years the schoolyear following the final four. This was also the season where MU had the most exposure. So you can see how the exposure helps everyone from basketball to the school in general.
The wiki has the stats, btw:
http://wiki.muscoop.com/doku.php/men_s_basketball/season_by_season_attendance
(http://wiki.muscoop.com/lib/exe/fetch.php/men_s_basketball/attendance.gif?w=&h=&cache=cache)
So 2004-2005 wasn't necessarily a great year for MU, but i think the stats go deeper than the chart for attendance. MU was 18-11 that year, their final one in CUSA. The low attendance number may be related to the fact that MU did not play many good home games that year. Wisc, Arizona, and Louisville is about it. Somehow they managed to play Cincy once -away. CUSA was not very good that year, so the amount of hyped games was much less in years previous, and the years of the BE where the majority of games are Prime-Time events.. Other factors go into attendance other than MU's performance, a weaker conference and less big-time games is probably the cause of that year( which in fact) would hurt Creans overall attendance numbers.
Quote from: DamonKeysContactLens on January 28, 2008, 04:15:05 PM
What bothers me and others is he seems to be more preoccupied with marketing than Xs & Os.
Just out of curiosity, on a percentage basis how much of Crean's time do you think he spends preoccupied with marketing?