|
Post by sbu79 on Nov 23, 2014 13:08:54 GMT -5
I'm glad I read all the way through this thread before I responded with my initial reactions as I read about ticket prices. You guys should actually listen to what Sneakers is saying. Big time D1 athletics requires not attendees, but supporters. The University has to get a picture of just what the appetite is for support among the alumni and fan base. BAF giving levels are one indication, and willingness to donate to get the best seats is another.
One thing I am confused about is whether BAF donations are credited to the seat donation amount. I don't live anywhere near campus, so I haven't paid attention to this, but I thought it was the case. If so, those that have give up season tickets but have made contributions to BAF should find out about this.
Others have lamented (mockingly at times) that SBU turns out middle management grads, and not the ones that will be the whales that make big donations. This may be true, but if so, then everyone has to give to the max their circumstances allow if you really do support the idea that Bona should stay in a high level D1 conference, or D1 at all for that matter.
After reading Pinnum's latest contribution, I am editing this to add that it is perfectly reasonable to expect the program to look elsewhere if the local fan base cannot support the financial levels required for where this program is trying to compete. More Rochester and/or Buffalo games make sense if that is the case. Or, again, the alternative is a different league or Division.
|
|
|
Post by birdman on Nov 23, 2014 14:19:27 GMT -5
Great points out of sbu79! I just figured the bonnies would draw much bigger interest from the locals in the olean area.....SBU is in a major conference and have provided many thrills for SBU fans in last five years or so.......it's time for olean/Allegany to step up
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Nov 23, 2014 14:31:01 GMT -5
Being a .500 school locally is not enough to draw. There is no connection to the school for a lot of people. If they are alums, have kids there, of just appreciate high level basketball, they may attend a game.
If you can't name a kid on the roster, why would you be interested in going to a game? People have more of a connection to high school sports and thus will travel to see high school sports. Those are the kids in their community, the school they went to, where their tax dollars go. SBU needs to develop better town and gown relations. It is a process. Winning basketball helps but really it is about using the current fans as a conduit to reach others that may be interested in getting pulled in to the cult.
Think of it this way, if you lived in Boston, would you go to a Harvard basketball game? What if they were ranked in the top-20? The reality is that most people would not. They have no connection to the school. However, if they had a friend that was connected to the school most people would say "Sure, I would love to go. I have been following their results and they are having a good year. I am really curious to see their star in person."
|
|
|
Post by Sipowicz on Nov 23, 2014 15:04:33 GMT -5
I'm with you njbonnie08 the people of Olean have a D1 team in their own backyard that is in one of the highest ranked basketball conferences!! Does Rochester? Does Erie? One concern I have after attending yesterday's game is the number of senior, senior citizens there. God bless them and thanks for being there but the university has to try to cultivate the 30-50 year old crowd in the area somehow to replace these wonderful people.
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Nov 23, 2014 15:59:33 GMT -5
I'm with you njbonnie08 the people of Olean have a D1 team in their own backyard that is in one of the highest ranked basketball conferences!! Does Rochester? Does Erie? One concern I have after attending yesterday's game is the number of senior, senior citizens there. God bless them and thanks for being there but the university has to try to cultivate the 30-50 year old crowd in the area somehow to replace these wonderful people. I always wonder where this notion that the people of the Enchanted Mountains don't step up to support the team comes from. There are two key metrics to look at your potential--your student body and your local population. I just took a sample of a few A10 schools to see how we compare in this department. I used the radio market size to gage population since this is the local target audience. Then used undergraduate enrollment to determine the target student body. Here is the data. School … Radio Market … Radio Market Size … Average Attendance … Percent captured St. Bona … Olean … 167,800 … 3,900 … 2.32 Rhode Island** … New London … 224,700 … 5,000 … 2.23 Dayton … Dayton … 833,900 … 12,300 … 1.47 Umass … Springfield … 520,100 … 6,600 … 1.27 VCU … Richmond … 876,700 … 7,700 … 0.88 Richmond … Richmond … 876,700 … 6,000 … 0.68 Saint Louis … St Louis … 2,210,800 … 8,400 … 0.38 Rhode Island** … Providence … 1,383,300 … 5,000 … 0.36 Davidson … Charlotte … 1,355,800 … 3,800 … 0.28 **Rhode Island (Kingston) falls into both Providence and New London media markets. Both locations are about 30 minute drives away from campus. School … Undergrads … Average Attendance … Percent captured Davidson … 1,800 … 3,800 … 211.11 St. Bona … 1,900 … 3,900 … 205.26 Richmond … 3,400 … 6,000 … 176.47 Dayton … 7,900 … 12,300 … 155.70 Saint Louis … 8,700 … 8,400 … 96.55 Rhode Island … 13,300 … 5,000 … 37.59 VCU … 23,900 … 7,700 … 32.22 Umass … 21,300 … 6,600 … 30.99 SBU does a great job. They capture their markets well. There is a diehard group of loyal fans. You can't expect much more from them. I know some people hate the idea of losing RC games but until you start writing large checks, SBU needs to start capturing the Rochester market of 932,000 people. They don't need to capture more of the pie, they need a larger pie!
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Nov 23, 2014 17:38:35 GMT -5
County … Cattaraugus … Monroe Population … 78,892 … 749,660 Median Household Income … $43,202 … $52,700 Population Change since 2010 … -1.80% … 0.70% Percent over 65 Years old … 16.60% … 15.10% Percent under 18 Years old … 22.80% … 21.70%
|
|
|
Post by ceharv on Nov 23, 2014 17:47:32 GMT -5
I ws told there'd be no math.
|
|
|
Post by Sipowicz on Nov 23, 2014 18:41:45 GMT -5
Living in the Olean area and working at one of the larger manufacturers I talk with a lot of the "locals" and it seems rare that many actually say they attend any games but still seem to be interested in how the BONNIES are doing.
|
|
|
Post by jh on Nov 23, 2014 20:05:39 GMT -5
I agree. We all know the end goal is to increase revenue. The question is if forcing your most loyal fans to pay a surcharge has resulted in an increase in revenue or if it has disenfranchised fans resulted in less revenue and fan engagement. Obviously, without looking at the data, I don't know the answer. I don't see the solution as trying to get more money out of the current base but rather growing the base. Rochester, I believe, is the key to this for Basketball. It is the largest city in the United States without a D1 school (RIT Ice Hockey being an exception). I would like to see up to three games a year in Rochester. Once you get to that number of games you can actually start to build a reoccurring base for ticket sales and you can get a decent return on concentrated advertising dollars. Additionally, it is a great way for the development and alumni offices to reconnect to alums and build relationships. I would like to see an increase in the student body (and local community) with a following of the women's team. They are a quality program. And I think scarcity would help. I would like to see one basketball game a week at SBU, on average. Either men or women and have a real focus on making it an event. MSoccer has already pared down their D1 schedule and having other programs do the same would save money. Cutting a road trip is the same as having someone write a decent sized check. Joint efforts with the Big 4 WNY schools to attract teams to come to the region for games (and tournaments) is a great way to save money. As great as I think it is that the softball team is going to Hawaii this spring, I hope it is not being covered by the team's operating budget. I would much rather see some partnerships with MEAC and SWAC schools where we package basketball guarantees that include an exchange for other sports. Baseball goes to Florida and pays to be a part of a tournament, they might as well save some money by having Jackson State host a series in Mississippi. Jackson State has a similar RPI to Maine and Lehigh who baseball is scheduled to play in Florida and schools are always interested in getting home contests so their athletes don't have to travel. I could go on and on. I think there are a lot of strategic measures that can be taken. However, it is a lot of work. You grow the base by winning - and that means improving recruiting - focus should be there You do realize your 2 LOWEST paid asst coaches are responsible for most of the recruiting - your 2 highest Schmidt & Moore are virtually exempt apparently focus on x's & o's - though 600k HC personally scouted and delivered backup juco PG Iakeem Alston Many hoop programs choose to make their 2 highest paid coaches responsible for recruiting... maybe this can be looked at Thank you Coach Curran for delivering Griffin & Woods and trying to deliver Lavon Long the year before. New coach Jerome R is close on the talented Canadians,,,
|
|
|
Post by sbu79 on Nov 23, 2014 20:43:10 GMT -5
...and you increase recruiting success, and the pay of the lowest assistants, by raising more revenue. So, the question is how to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jh on Nov 23, 2014 20:50:09 GMT -5
...and you increase recruiting success, and the pay of the lowest assistants, by raising more revenue. So, the question is how to do that. Can you name any time in SBU history when your LOWEST paid coaches are responsible for recruiting? Or are we not allowed to ask for accountability there?
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Nov 23, 2014 21:14:05 GMT -5
You grow the base by winning - and that means improving recruiting - focus should be there You do realize your 2 LOWEST paid asst coaches are responsible for most of the recruiting - your 2 highest Schmidt & Moore are virtually exempt apparently focus on x's & o's - though 600k HC personally scouted and delivered backup juco PG Iakeem Alston Many hoop programs choose to make their 2 highest paid coaches responsible for recruiting... maybe this can be looked at Thank you Coach Curran for delivering Griffin & Woods and trying to deliver Lavon Long the year before. New coach Jerome R is close on the talented Canadians,,, I am a little confused by your comments and change in direction here. For arguments sake, I will accept your assumption that if SBU starts winning sell outs will become regular and donations will drastically increase. I am not sure what level of success would have to be achieved to constitutes "winning" but let's just assume that when SBU hits that metric there will see a windfall. I have known a lot of college coaches of various sports. I have known various management styles and recruiting methods. I have seen many methods work, including the one you say is being utilized. There is one thing I never support and that is micromanaging a head coach. Schmidt can run his program however he would like. If he thinks his time and resources are best spent developing talent, studying game film, and any other tasks you say he is focusing on, I have no problem with it. It is his program. If he wants to charge his assistants with identifying talent and securing that talent, I am fine with it. It is Schmidt that has the vision for the program and is charged with leading it. It is his responsibility and he should have the freedom to do it his way with only the oversights that are necessary. It is Schmidt that will be held accountable for the total body of work. It is Schmidt that will be fired if results aren't realized. So, as I see it, the question is do you think Schmidt should be fired? Do you think Schmidt should be put on notice that his results are not acceptable? If not, then I don't think there is any reason to mention it.
|
|
|
Post by jh on Nov 23, 2014 21:26:09 GMT -5
You grow the base by winning - and that means improving recruiting - focus should be there You do realize your 2 LOWEST paid asst coaches are responsible for most of the recruiting - your 2 highest Schmidt & Moore are virtually exempt apparently focus on x's & o's - though 600k HC personally scouted and delivered backup juco PG Iakeem Alston Many hoop programs choose to make their 2 highest paid coaches responsible for recruiting... maybe this can be looked at Thank you Coach Curran for delivering Griffin & Woods and trying to deliver Lavon Long the year before. New coach Jerome R is close on the talented Canadians,,, I am a little confused by your comments and change in direction here. For arguments sake, I will accept your assumption that if SBU starts winning sell outs will become regular and donations will drastically increase. I am not sure what level of success would have to be achieved to constitutes "winning" but let's just assume that when SBU hits that metric there will see a windfall. I have known a lot of college coaches of various sports. I have known various management styles and recruiting methods. I have seen many methods work, including the one you say is being utilized. There is one thing I never support and that is micromanaging a head coach. Schmidt can run his program however he would like. If he thinks his time and resources are best spent developing talent, studying game film, and any other tasks you say he is focusing on, I have no problem with it. It is his program. If he wants to charge his assistants with identifying talent and securing that talent, I am fine with it. It is Schmidt that has the vision for the program and is charged with leading it. It is his responsibility and he should have the freedom to do it his way with only the oversights that are necessary. It is Schmidt that will be held accountable for the total body of work. It is Schmidt that will be fired if results aren't realized. So, as I see it, the question is do you think Schmidt should be fired? Do you think Schmidt should be put on notice that his results are not acceptable? If not, then I don't think there is any reason to mention it. Your team just lost to Siena who was missing its starting center and played toe to toe with a Canisius program projected for 10th in the MAAC on your home court - is this your level of expectation? If not what is? Two seasons ago we missed the A10 tourney all together You claim you have seen various formulas work - where have you seen where the bulk of recruiting was left to the 2 lowest paid coaches? It seems an odd concept in a sport where the jimmy & joes typically outgun the x's & os I have no desire to micro manage at all - just looking at results that seem mostly a result of not a lack of x's and o's but simply we seem similar or lower in talent level to our maac opponents - or have you seen otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by Pinnum on Nov 23, 2014 21:47:48 GMT -5
It is only three games in and they have a winning record. The sky isn't falling. I only look at a whole body of work; I am not reactionary.
There have been plenty of coaches and programs that have hit some rough patches before everything clicked. I believe that you give a coach the ability to see the season through. This actually reminds me of all the equity traders that sell off at the first sign of distress. That's when I like to buy!
We can talk at the end of the season when we see how it turns out. Until that time he has my full support to do it his way.
|
|
|
Post by sbu79 on Nov 23, 2014 21:49:37 GMT -5
...and you increase recruiting success, and the pay of the lowest assistants, by raising more revenue. So, the question is how to do that. Can you name any time in SBU history when your LOWEST paid coaches are responsible for recruiting? Or are we not allowed to ask for accountability there? I am not knowledgeable about the roles of the coaching staff members over the course of the program, but I would not be surprised to hear it has varied from staff to staff. I have my doubts that compensation level has a strong causality with regards to the ability to recruit, but I could understand it going the other way. Also, as the leader, if Schmidt judges that recruiting is not a strength of his, giving that role to others makes sense. I don't know what you mean by "accountability there." Accountability for what? Recruiting success? Wins? Attendance? Compensation?
|
|