|
Post by OceanStateBonnie on Aug 6, 2015 5:35:00 GMT -5
Time to chill.
|
|
|
Post by Bona84 on Aug 9, 2015 21:54:30 GMT -5
Finally got around to reading through this thread. Some pretty comical posts here. My first reaction to this new row of seats was not positive, but I've come around to it. It may not be ideal, but in the end, it shouldn't be as big a deal as certain posters are making it out to be.
As for for Firstdev, perhaps the answer is to just tear down the Reilly Center and play the games in Butler Gym or the Armory. Did the Board or Administration solicit the input of students, alumni and faculty when the decision to build the UC was made? The damn building blocks the view of Merton's heart!
|
|
|
Post by firstdev on Aug 10, 2015 14:45:34 GMT -5
Bona84 - Just a couple of quick points here - this university at this time and this place is in no position to alienate any part of its main constituency - whether that be the alumni base, student fan base, season ticket holder base or FOSBU. If you are going to make a decision that that has a major impact on any of these groups then you better be absolutely sure that you have properly vetted that decision. Letting a brand spanking new AD with no background or knowledge of SBU base constituencies make that type of decision in a vacuum is really counterproductive and shows a slight smell of panic. The outcry against this precipitous decision was swift and strong. Not a positive outcome for a university attempting bring folks into the tent, not reject them. Do you really think the students will put up with being harassed by the security troopers who will now be proactively "protecting" the 710 folks in the floor seats from the trials and tribulations of students acting out as they always have done in the modern era? Do you think AD/TK maybe just maybe made a miscalculation? A wise man would say yes he did. A wise man would just re-evaluate the decision, pause, reflect and cancel the seats in front of the student section, sell the floor seats across from our bench and move on.
And, yes in retrospect, the RC was built in a poor location, when sited in 1965/1966. It was built on the site of the old ROTC barracks and next to the old vets family housing (Rob Fal is on most of the vets family barrack site). Any rational alum who visits campus in the late spring or early fall is treated to a spectacular view of the valley......it is without a doubt a grand panoramic shot of the beauty in which we were lucky enough to live and be educated. Look up, don't look down, enjoy the graces God has sent us.......
|
|
|
Post by Bona84 on Aug 11, 2015 9:04:22 GMT -5
It's a row of seats.
And, last time I visited Bona's, the heart was still there. Sit on the hill, take in a ballgame, smell the fresh air, and enjoy the view.
|
|
|
Post by sneakers on Aug 11, 2015 10:22:29 GMT -5
Bona84 - Just a couple of quick points here - this university at this time and this place is in no position to alienate any part of its main constituency - whether that be the alumni base, student fan base, season ticket holder base or FOSBU. If you are going to make a decision that that has a major impact on any of these groups then you better be absolutely sure that you have properly vetted that decision. ..... Actually, this university at this time and place is also in no position to do nothing and merely retain status quo so as not to upset those that fear change. The University is not a democracy or a town meeting where everyone gets their say in how to go forward. The University hires experts to make decisions, some of them hard decisions. Significant changes need to be made in order to improve enrollment and the school's financial situation. It would be wonderful if every change was met with 100% enthusiastic approval of every constituency of the University. You and I both know that this will never (NEVER) be the case. Each significant change is a trade-off. Some good some bad. In this instance the row of seats decreases the university's potential liability for someone getting injured with students on the court and brings in much needed revenue. On the bad side the students will be 18 inches further from the court and behind one row of seats. If the University held a forum to ask for the opinion of every constituency it would be a blood bath of an argument. In the end, some people would still be against the change, but the school needs to do what is right for the institution liability-wise and financially. It is unfortunate that some fans and FOSBU can't seem to understand the need for some changes and be thankful that the University is doing all it can do to keep a Division 1 sports program running successfully in a school with 1,700 students. SBU is one of the smallest Universitys in the country that makes the kind of commitment at the level (A-10) that it does. I suggest you read the letter from Sister Margaret and Bob Daugherty, Chairman of the Board of Trustees, in this month's Bonalumnus magazine. It is a straight forward discussion of the current state of the University including its commitment to D1 sports. It concludes that to continue to offer this experience we need the help of all alums. Whether that comes in the form of treasure, time or talent the school needs your help. Certainly that includes , at a minimum, understanding why some changes need to be made for the long-term health of the University and supporting these difficult decisions. The alternative is much worse. People just clinging to the past and insisting on no changes are simply out of touch with the current reality of colleges sports and the current reality of the situation at the University.
|
|
|
Post by old timer on Aug 11, 2015 15:01:56 GMT -5
Sneakers: What a superb post! Well written, rational and convincing.
|
|
|
Post by thebonafan08 on Aug 12, 2015 1:23:00 GMT -5
Nothing is more frustrating than this claim going around that critics of the seat plan have a “fear of change” or want to keep “status quo”. We all know times are tough, we all know real tough decisions need to be made, please spare us with this as if no one understands the dire situation Bonaventure is in. The problem is this particular solution to this particular issue. Ignoring tradition and other emotional issues the biggest problem with putting seats in front of the students is that its a long term bad financial decision. Anyone who knows Bonaventure and knows that feeling the energy the students on the court bring to the team would see the current plan as a terrible decision for the long term of the programs viability and success. Question: What does the RC have that the arenas of Duke, UNC, Kentucky, more relevant…Dayton, VCU, Richmond etc...don’t? ….. Answer: The RC has/had a student section on the court. WE have/had a student section that impacts the game a student section that is wild and unlike any other per student pop. capita in the country. WE HAVE SOMETHING THE BIG BOYS DON’T! We have an advantage in a Division 1 world seemingly built against Bonaventure we have one advantage! Yet we put this advantage in jeopardy with half empty seats? We put at risk the one thing we have because someone said so? We put a row of seats in because we want to do what every other small school in the country is failing at and be like a less cool Duke? (Tim’s rationalization) Its really unbelievable how shortsighted some people are in all of this. We have something few teams have, and we are just going to gamble it away. Sure the low level accountant will say but we can bring in 14K with the 20 seats in front of student section. The strong CEO looks at that and says sure but for 14k (if we even come close to that and if its even new revenue and not just money from blue seats) your going to crush our biggest basketball draw and advantage that few programs have. We will no longer be different or have any unique pitch to possible recruits. The students on the court bring wins and are an investment you don't want to sell for anything. It is unfathomable that in a world where Bona has to struggle for every little inch of everything whether it is finances or wins we are going to throw away the one advantage we have over the majority of the basketball playing D1 country. This is why people are angry, we are giving away in a time where Bonaventure needs to be protecting and fighting for everything it has and can get. The solution to the A-10 “pressure” and “Liability” is easy actually and keeps most happy…• Keep almost everything about the seating proposal/plan with only a minor adjustment to about 20 seats. o Dedicate all of the 20 or so seats in front of the student section for student use only. o Charge $10 per ticket per game for these seats, tickets can be sold in packs of 2 or 4 and students get right to purchase through lottery system o All tickets will be sold with name of group or individual and will not be transferable (behavior accountability) o These Tickets come with responsibility of being VIP and have higher standards than student section o When students are not in session offer tickets to the public for market price.
• Alumni and fan base are ecstatic that students keep their court. • Appeases A-10 wish for something to control the floor access. • We stay true to what we are known for and the only thing that makes the RC unique. • During a court storm situation we don’t have to worry about a 70 year old donor and his grandson getting trampled by inebriated 20 year olds. • Provides a great way to invigorate student fan base, for example imagine the exciting student competitions at a “midnight madness” event to show Bona loyalty with the winner(s) getting season court-side seats in front of their peers. • Shooting from the hip here: Maybe the 20 students who win/buy the seats become part of a club and meet with the athletic dept. 2x a semester to talk about how they can get more fans to game or get more student participation in cheers. This gives those students incentive and sense of responsibility to not be a jackass on the court. • Athletic Department has an incredible new tool to control the most visible part of our student section. If students act up, are clearly intoxicated, incredibly vulgar, have too close a call with a player then the individual/group are kicked out and ticket holder(s) are banned from the lottery for entirety of tenure at Bona. Assuming the offense was forgivable the student(s) can still attend games behind the court seats. • Athletic Department is not put in a situation where they have to weigh wealthy donors behavior complaints against a rowdy student section. • No empty seats in front of TV camera’s zooming in on student section. Enough about this “Fear of Change”, "tough times require tough decisions", or my favorite “we had to it” argument it’s all completely false for this situation.
|
|
|
Post by thesocalkid on Aug 12, 2015 8:59:31 GMT -5
thebonafan08: What a superb post! Well written, rational and convincing.
" or my favorite “we had to it” argument it’s all completely false for this situation. " I wish that, I could tell you what I know but, I can't. All I can say is this, " there is something afoot at the Circle K " ( Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure )
|
|
|
Post by tastylicks on Aug 12, 2015 9:11:15 GMT -5
Nothing is more frustrating than this claim going around that critics of the seat plan have a “fear of change” or want to keep “status quo”. We all know times are tough, we all know real tough decisions need to be made, please spare us with this as if no one understands the dire situation Bonaventure is in. The problem is this particular solution to this particular issue. Ignoring tradition and other emotional issues the biggest problem with putting seats in front of the students is that its a long term bad financial decision. Anyone who knows Bonaventure and knows that feeling the energy the students on the court bring to the team would see the current plan as a terrible decision for the long term of the programs viability and success. Question: What does the RC have that the arenas of Duke, UNC, Kentucky, more relevant…Dayton, VCU, Richmond etc...don’t? ….. Answer: The RC has/had a student section on the court. WE have/had a student section that impacts the game a student section that is wild and unlike any other per student pop. capita in the country. WE HAVE SOMETHING THE BIG BOYS DON’T! We have an advantage in a Division 1 world seemingly built against Bonaventure we have one advantage! Yet we put this advantage in jeopardy with half empty seats? We put at risk the one thing we have because someone said so? We put a row of seats in because we want to do what every other small school in the country is failing at and be like a less cool Duke? (Tim’s rationalization) Its really unbelievable how shortsighted some people are in all of this. We have something few teams have, and we are just going to gamble it away. Sure the low level accountant will say but we can bring in 14K with the 20 seats in front of student section. The strong CEO looks at that and says sure but for 14k (if we even come close to that and if its even new revenue and not just money from blue seats) your going to crush our biggest basketball draw and advantage that few programs have. We will no longer be different or have any unique pitch to possible recruits. The students on the court bring wins and are an investment you don't want to sell for anything. It is unfathomable that in a world where Bona has to struggle for every little inch of everything whether it is finances or wins we are going to throw away the one advantage we have over the majority of the basketball playing D1 country. This is why people are angry, we are giving away in a time where Bonaventure needs to be protecting and fighting for everything it has and can get. The solution to the A-10 “pressure” and “Liability” is easy actually and keeps most happy…• Keep almost everything about the seating proposal/plan with only a minor adjustment to about 20 seats. o Dedicate all of the 20 or so seats in front of the student section for student use only. o Charge $10 per ticket per game for these seats, tickets can be sold in packs of 2 or 4 and students get right to purchase through lottery system o All tickets will be sold with name of group or individual and will not be transferable (behavior accountability) o These Tickets come with responsibility of being VIP and have higher standards than student section o When students are not in session offer tickets to the public for market price.
• Alumni and fan base are ecstatic that students keep their court. • Appeases A-10 wish for something to control the floor access. • We stay true to what we are known for and the only thing that makes the RC unique. • During a court storm situation we don’t have to worry about a 70 year old donor and his grandson getting trampled by inebriated 20 year olds. • Provides a great way to invigorate student fan base, for example imagine the exciting student competitions at a “midnight madness” event to show Bona loyalty with the winner(s) getting season court-side seats in front of their peers. • Shooting from the hip here: Maybe the 20 students who win/buy the seats become part of a club and meet with the athletic dept. 2x a semester to talk about how they can get more fans to game or get more student participation in cheers. This gives those students incentive and sense of responsibility to not be a jackass on the court. • Athletic Department has an incredible new tool to control the most visible part of our student section. If students act up, are clearly intoxicated, incredibly vulgar, have too close a call with a player then the individual/group are kicked out and ticket holder(s) are banned from the lottery for entirety of tenure at Bona. Assuming the offense was forgivable the student(s) can still attend games behind the court seats. • Athletic Department is not put in a situation where they have to weigh wealthy donors behavior complaints against a rowdy student section. • No empty seats in front of TV camera’s zooming in on student section. Enough about this “Fear of Change”, "tough times require tough decisions", or my favorite “we had to it” argument it’s all completely false for this situation. outstanding post. thanks for capturing the long term perspective that is needed. Also, thank you for creatively showing that there are other options than just Kenney's crappy proposal or nothing. that its not about not wanting to see ANY changes and more about hating THE proposed change.
|
|
|
Post by fan4ever on Aug 12, 2015 12:17:37 GMT -5
Super post that speaks to the heart of the SBU small, rural private college challenge. My own feelings are along similar lines and also involve wishing for substantially increased transparency by the SBU Administration and Board as well as much improved communication with stakeholders. I find it just incredible that SBU is home to a renowned J/MC school yet the Administration and Board fall flat when communicating with critical constituencies like the alumni. Also, what is the SBU Office of Marketing and Communication supposed to be about anyway? This is as puzzling to me as the SBU Director of Safety and Security apparently not being consulted with regard to the student seating safety matter. I mean.... if the Administration and Board are not going to fully utilize the in-house resources available them then what is the University paying these resources for?
|
|
|
Post by sneakers on Aug 12, 2015 13:32:23 GMT -5
Super post that speaks to the heart of the SBU small, rural private college challenge. My own feelings are along similar lines and also involve wishing for substantially increased transparency by the SBU Administration and Board as well as much improved communication with stakeholders. I find it just incredible that SBU is home to a renowned J/MC school yet the Administration and Board fall flat when communicating with critical constituencies like the alumni. Also, what is the SBU Office of Marketing and Communication supposed to be about anyway? This is as puzzling to me as the SBU Director of Safety and Security apparently not being consulted with regard to the student seating safety matter. I mean.... if the Administration and Board are not going to fully utilize the in-house resources available them then what is the University paying these resources for? Two Questions: 1. What method would you suggest that this change be communicated in a way that would not result in an uproar? 2. How do you know that the Director of Safety and Security was not consulted? Thanks
|
|
|
Post by firstdev on Aug 12, 2015 15:39:43 GMT -5
The bottom line here is that TK screwed up big time by failing to include the entire SBU community constituency in his decision to sacrifice the student fans, and many other alumni and support groups and individuals in order to generate a very few bucks in revenue. The revenue generated from one row of floor seats will not make or break this university or the BAF in any way, shape or form in answer to some comments that the entire fate of our universe rested on the $10,000 in revenue to be generated. But it sure did strike a raw nerve with the most loyal of fans, yes, fans and alums who live and die with the brown and white, not to mention the students who are among the most dedicated in fandom anywhere (how easy it is for some to throw groups like student fans overboard without remorse).
Apparently that thought has been lost with TK and his supporters who continue to defend the indefensible. SBU is a university and the classic characteristic of a university is of an institution which treasurers and respects all elements of its community. Respect for that community would include being open and honestly soliciting opinion on major issues impacting the university. In this particular case TK and his allies on the BoT ignored that imperative. Is a university a democracy? Yes, in many ways it takes on characteristics of a democracy, especially in essential nature of the concept of open debate and discussion of important issues that impact the university. It is very, very different from the hierarchical nature of a corporate board room for example, where open discussion may be allowed or may be repressed. There is no such option in a university setting in the classical sense. Rule number one in running a university - do not alienate your core constituency groups, rejoice in them and cherish them. Rule two repeat rule one and commit it to memory. Best solution here is to can this really, really dumb plan to manipulate the student seating section, and start the search process for a new AD. This one has no credibility left. None. Is Steve Watson available? Oh that's right I forgot the BoT dropped the ball on that one too.
|
|
|
Post by tomgleason on Aug 12, 2015 15:57:23 GMT -5
Ok...my final 2 cents on this issue...I originally called for a boycott of both M and W home openers...knee jerk reaction...I, like most everyone on here, do not know who the AD did of did not talk to about this decision. I, like EVERYONE on here, can do nothing else but support my Bonnies in any and every way I can. I will no longer scream and cry (post) like a 3 year old that had his favorite toy taken away. It would be nice and mature if everyone else (firstdev) did the same. Unless you personally want to buy out the AD contract, shhhhhh. They are not going to dump him. Everyone always talks on here about Franciscan values, of which patience is one. Sit back, enjoy the season, and then after the year...we can have an INFORMED discussion on whether or not this had an adverse effect on the teams...GOOOOOO BONNIES
|
|
|
Post by fan4ever on Aug 12, 2015 16:22:46 GMT -5
Again, I get back to communication and transparency with stakeholders (constituents). Certainly a 30 day "Comment Period" soliciting input from the alumni, students and fans through an electronic survey medium (SurveyMonkey as an example) hosted on the SBU website would have been doable. Those inputs... coupled with the inputs of the AD, the Director of Safety and Security, Coach Schmidt, the players, the University attorneys and the A-10....could have all gone into the mix. The seating safety item, the decision process for making a change and the final seating decision/plan itself might then be openly communicated to the stakeholders through a communications plan developed by the Office of Marketing and Communications. Would a process like this take longer? Yep! Would it be inclusive of stakeholders? Yep! Would it upset multiple stakeholders? Some folks might be unhappy but stakeholders sure wouldn't be alienated as they presently are with the new student seating process and plan.
|
|
|
Post by 123Rob on Aug 12, 2015 16:32:59 GMT -5
How bout those Mets??
|
|