siena03
Team Manager
Posts: 84
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 13:26:34 GMT -5
Post by siena03 on Feb 28, 2013 13:26:34 GMT -5
Again.. pressure must be put on the Admin. by the Siena community via calls and e-mails !
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 14:22:13 GMT -5
Post by mattglassman312 on Feb 28, 2013 14:22:13 GMT -5
By the way, I disagree that we couldn't be competitive in the C7. College hoops is ALL about coaching (though that does include recruiting by said coach). Providence is held up as the bottom feeder. The reason PC has been poor was due to 10 years of Tim Welch and a few years of Keano Davis. Look at what Cooley has done in just his 2nd season. PC will be at or near .500 in league play. That isn't the MAAC. In a year or 2 PC could be contending for a title. Demographically, PC is nearly identical to Siena. The key is making the tough choices and cutting bad coaches quickly. PC, like Siena, has had good ones (Pitino, Gillen, Barnes) and not so good ones. The good ones get them to Final Fours or elite 8's. Siena *could* be competitive in that company too. I'm just not sure the admins have the stones for it. Whether it is the C7 or A10 we could be successful. Whether it is the C7, A10 or MAAC we've also shown we can stink. I think the fan base is running out of patience paying for and A10 program and getting NEC results. If Siena is serious about their strategic plan they have to do more than simply talk about it and pray for good things to happen. The Lord helps those who help themselves. I think you are underestimating the difference between Siena and PC. PC had won the NIT twice in the 60's (back when it meant something) and played in the Final Four in '73, and played either the NIT or NCCA tourney 8 of the 9 year prior to joining the Big East in '79. Their first six years in the big East? They were 17-65 in conference play. You are right that it's wrong to say "we can't be competitive," but that's certainly not what I said. My point was that if we went to the C7, there would be a *serious chance* we could become a bottom-feeder. Right now, in the MAAC, we have structural advantages (arena, fan base, relative financial commitment) that basically ensure we will never be a perennial bottom-feeder. We can have down years (lord knows), but we will basically always be able to potentially recruit as well or better than our conference rivals. All of those advantages disappear in the C12. The arena is no longer something special, the fan base is average, and the financial resources --- even if tremendously upgraded --- will only put us on par with the lower-financed teams in the league. That's not an impossible situation to overcome. But it raises the question of whether we'd be better off in a somewhat weaker conference, where we might be in better position structurally. I don't have any doubt we could compete along these dimensions in the A10. But even with the biggest commitment you can imagine from the school, we probably would find ourselves financially to look like PC, and not like the top teams in the C7.
|
|
siena03
Team Manager
Posts: 84
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 14:27:31 GMT -5
Post by siena03 on Feb 28, 2013 14:27:31 GMT -5
By the way, I disagree that we couldn't be competitive in the C7. College hoops is ALL about coaching (though that does include recruiting by said coach). Providence is held up as the bottom feeder. The reason PC has been poor was due to 10 years of Tim Welch and a few years of Keano Davis. Look at what Cooley has done in just his 2nd season. PC will be at or near .500 in league play. That isn't the MAAC. In a year or 2 PC could be contending for a title. Demographically, PC is nearly identical to Siena. The key is making the tough choices and cutting bad coaches quickly. PC, like Siena, has had good ones (Pitino, Gillen, Barnes) and not so good ones. The good ones get them to Final Fours or elite 8's. Siena *could* be competitive in that company too. I'm just not sure the admins have the stones for it. Whether it is the C7 or A10 we could be successful. Whether it is the C7, A10 or MAAC we've also shown we can stink. I think the fan base is running out of patience paying for and A10 program and getting NEC results. If Siena is serious about their strategic plan they have to do more than simply talk about it and pray for good things to happen. The Lord helps those who help themselves. I think you are underestimating the difference between Siena and PC. PC had won the NIT twice in the 60's (back when it meant something) and played in the Final Four in '73, and played either the NIT or NCCA tourney 8 of the 9 year prior to joining the Big East in '79. Their first six years in the big East? They were 17-65 in conference play. You are right that it's wrong to say "we can't be competitive," but that's certainly not what I said. My point was that if we went to the C7, there would be a *serious chance* we could become a bottom-feeder. Right now, in the MAAC, we have structural advantages (arena, fan base, relative financial commitment) that basically ensure we will never be a perennial bottom-feeder. We can have down years (lord knows), but we will basically always be able to potentially recruit as well or better than our conference rivals. All of those advantages disappear in the C12. The arena is no longer something special, the fan base is average, and the financial resources --- even if tremendously upgraded --- will only put us on par with the lower-financed teams in the league. That's not an impossible situation to overcome. But it raises the question of whether we'd be better off in a somewhat weaker conference, where we might be in better position structurally. I don't have any doubt we could compete along these dimensions in the A10. But even with the biggest commitment you can imagine from the school, we probably would find ourselves financially to look like PC, and not like the top teams in the C7. You sound like someone who works for the Admin
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 14:31:02 GMT -5
Post by mattglassman312 on Feb 28, 2013 14:31:02 GMT -5
I think you are underestimating the difference between Siena and PC. PC had won the NIT twice in the 60's (back when it meant something) and played in the Final Four in '73, and played either the NIT or NCCA tourney 8 of the 9 year prior to joining the Big East in '79. Their first six years in the big East? They were 17-65 in conference play. You are right that it's wrong to say "we can't be competitive," but that's certainly not what I said. My point was that if we went to the C7, there would be a *serious chance* we could become a bottom-feeder. Right now, in the MAAC, we have structural advantages (arena, fan base, relative financial commitment) that basically ensure we will never be a perennial bottom-feeder. We can have down years (lord knows), but we will basically always be able to potentially recruit as well or better than our conference rivals. All of those advantages disappear in the C12. The arena is no longer something special, the fan base is average, and the financial resources --- even if tremendously upgraded --- will only put us on par with the lower-financed teams in the league. That's not an impossible situation to overcome. But it raises the question of whether we'd be better off in a somewhat weaker conference, where we might be in better position structurally. I don't have any doubt we could compete along these dimensions in the A10. But even with the biggest commitment you can imagine from the school, we probably would find ourselves financially to look like PC, and not like the top teams in the C7. You sound like someone who works for the Admin Wouldn't that be great --- even better if I could pull some strings and get Mitch canned tonight! In reality, I just think a move to the C12 would, on balance, be a long-term mistake. I'd much rather see Siena land in a reconfigured A10.
|
|
siena03
Team Manager
Posts: 84
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 14:57:24 GMT -5
Post by siena03 on Feb 28, 2013 14:57:24 GMT -5
You sound like someone who works for the Admin Wouldn't that be great --- even better if I could pull some strings and get Mitch canned tonight! In reality, I just think a move to the C12 would, on balance, be a long-term mistake. I'd much rather see Siena land in a reconfigured A10. OK, my bad ...and agree with you. What I'm afraid of is the Admin. not caring what the fan base thinks ...and just B.S. this program along. And sell this brand of " Siena Basketball "- the fan base is not STUPID ! They want: 1. Mitch gone 2. A coach with credibility and respect 3. A move to another conference like the A10 The Siena community should DEMAND IT from the Admin.
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 15:34:53 GMT -5
Post by section2 on Feb 28, 2013 15:34:53 GMT -5
I'm not sure how you can say "an average fan base". Siena is consistently Top 70 in attendance playing a weak schedule. Get decent competition, you're looking at Top 40-50 yearly. That's not average.
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 16:23:59 GMT -5
Post by mattglassman312 on Feb 28, 2013 16:23:59 GMT -5
I'm not sure how you can say "an average fan base". Siena is consistently Top 70 in attendance playing a weak schedule. Get decent competition, you're looking at Top 40-50 yearly. That's not average. I meant average for our conference. Right now, we are way above average in attendance, and that's a recruiting advantage. Our current attendance, however, would be *below* average in the Big East. Here's last year BE attendance: Syracuse 23,618 Louisville 21,503 Marquette 15,183 Connecticut 12,640 Georgetown 11,283 West Virginia 9,930 Pittsburgh 9,321 Villanova 8,923 Cincinnati 8,069 Notre Dame 7,999 Providence 7,883 St. John's 7,831 DePaul 7,740 Seton Hall 6,941 Rutgers 5,362 South Florida 3,849 Translation: your recruiting will no longer be advantaged by having the best arena and biggest fan base. No chance. There are those who will say we would have better attendance in the C12. Yes, if we were winning. But ticket prices will have to go up too. Do you really think we draw 10k/game with a bad team? Not a chance.
|
|
hoopjunkie
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 12,529
Member is Online
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 16:32:54 GMT -5
Post by hoopjunkie on Feb 28, 2013 16:32:54 GMT -5
If we played a Big East conference schedule, we could go 1-25 and we'd still draw 10,000+....at least for the first couple years.
|
|
siena70
Freshman
Posts: 291
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 16:50:16 GMT -5
Post by siena70 on Feb 28, 2013 16:50:16 GMT -5
I understand the concerns of posters who don't want us to become another Providence. I disagree. Siena has been Top 70 in attendance with the worst entertainment value of MAAC level teams. If we had high caliber teams come to the TUC we could be a Top 40 in attendance. The watered down A-10 is only a small step up, not a major one.
Take Butler as an example. Butler only averages 50+ people per game more tickets than Siena. Why? Because we have limited competion in an 875K market population. Butler has to compete with the Pacers, and a host of better entertainment consumer options.
Other than UAlbany, Siena has very little competition. Higer attendance means more advertising, sponsorships, and a better rent deal with the TUC, who will realize more concession sales. I agree that it comes down to recruiting players that are comparable to Georgetown, Villanova etc. and a real coach comparable to a Fran or Hewitt. We have been able to attract good coaches in the past ( probably just dumb luck). In any event , We should pursue an invitation to the new C-14, as its a one time only opportunity. If it doesn't work out, the other members may kick us out. Can it be much worse than what we have endured under Mitch?
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 17:00:49 GMT -5
Post by billmurray on Feb 28, 2013 17:00:49 GMT -5
I agree, Siena would take a beating initially, but could be competitive in either the C-7/12 or the new A-10 overtime, but in the initital few years the quality of competition would be a big draw at the TUC and with the TV exposure would get larger corporate sponsorship. A jump should be made and it appears the A-10 has a much better chance of happening than the C-7/12. If I were the Siena admin, I would not rule out either if the opportunity presented itself.
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 17:15:09 GMT -5
Post by psycholojets on Feb 28, 2013 17:15:09 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see if the potential for a conference upgrade impacts the quality of the coaching candidates "if" we happen to be in the market for a new head coach in the near future.
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 17:39:23 GMT -5
Post by section2 on Feb 28, 2013 17:39:23 GMT -5
Matt, if you compare Siena to the Catholic 7, since that's who they would be competing with, their attendance is good and would be better than average after the move. Heck, the others might drop and make Siena #1.
|
|
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 17:55:46 GMT -5
Post by Tony on Feb 28, 2013 17:55:46 GMT -5
If we played a Big East conference schedule, we could go 1-25 and we'd still draw 10,000+....at least for the first couple years. Really how did Siena draw for Butler -- Stanford..hell Nova in NIT back in Laniers time ? Did they get over 10K? while I agree Siena could get the attendance-- only if they have a winner.. Albany is notorious as a front runner town.. Siena puts up 6-24 seasons.. they will be lucky to 4K in with ticket prices that would be anywhere from 20 ( for nose bleed seats) to over a $100 for decent seats. You guys think people will automatically come... not the case especially if Siena is a bottom feeder-- just my opinion
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 17:57:49 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2013 17:57:49 GMT -5
I understand the concerns of posters who don't want us to become another Providence. I disagree. Siena has been Top 70 in attendance with the worst entertainment value of MAAC level teams. If we had high caliber teams come to the TUC we could be a Top 40 in attendance. The watered down A-10 is only a small step up, not a major one. Take Butler as an example. Butler only averages 50+ people per game more tickets than Siena. Why? Because we have limited competion in an 875K market population. Butler has to compete with the Pacers, and a host of better entertainment consumer options. Other than UAlbany, Siena has very little competition. Higer attendance means more advertising, sponsorships, and a better rent deal with the TUC, who will realize more concession sales. I agree that it comes down to recruiting players that are comparable to Georgetown, Villanova etc. and a real coach comparable to a Fran or Hewitt. We have been able to attract good coaches in the past ( probably just dumb luck). In any event , We should pursue an invitation to the new C-14, as its a one time only opportunity. If it doesn't work out, the other members may kick us out. Can it be much worse than what we have endured under Mitch? When was there talk of a C-14? That conference is getting HUUUGGGGGE! "Billy Fuccillo's Picture here"
|
|
gorvy
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 10,022
Dislikes:
|
The A10
Feb 28, 2013 18:42:46 GMT -5
Post by gorvy on Feb 28, 2013 18:42:46 GMT -5
If we played a Big East conference schedule, we could go 1-25 and we'd still draw 10,000+....at least for the first couple years. Really how did Siena draw for Butler -- Stanford..hell Nova in NIT back in Laniers time ? Did they get over 10K? while I agree Siena could get the attendance-- only if they have a winner.. Albany is notorious as a front runner town.. Siena puts up 6-24 seasons.. they will be lucky to 4K in with ticket prices that would be anywhere from 20 ( for nose bleed seats) to over a $100 for decent seats. You guys think people will automatically come... not the case especially if Siena is a bottom feeder-- just my opinion Can't really compare anything under the tarp era. Go back to before the tarps-- Siena consistently drew over 9K for "up" programs. The first thing they would have to do obviously is get rid of the tarps. To take care of the "losing" record, what we would do is schedule some of Dickie V's cupcakes, just like every other big time program does. Inflate your record in the beginning of the season, then coast home below .500 and hope to steal a game or two, especially at home. The fans would be getting a much better value for their season tickets, even if no NCAA tournaments were earned in the first 5 to 7 years or so. Like others have said, if the opportunity is there, we owe it to ourselves to give it a shot. The bigger question in my mind is, does the Catholic 14 really include us? It's awesome just thinking about the possibilities.
|
|