|
|
Post by PantherLou on Dec 17, 2011 11:14:40 GMT -6
Apples and Oranges to compare UW and MU.
Marquette plays its home games across the street from the cell. If you are a MU season ticket holder, or even a non-ticket holder who attends a few games a year, why give up the relative comfort of the Bradley Center to come to the Cell? For this reason, I think it is unreasonable for us to expect a huge number of MU fans to purchase tickets to this game. We are far better off trying to sell to the casual fan in town who may choose this as one of the few college basketball games they will attend in a given year
Wisconsin is different. They play their home games 90+miles away, and they have a lot of fans and alumni in the Milwaukee area. For a large number of these people, a game in Milwaukee, be it against us or MU, is the best opportunity to see their team play live. Thus, we are likely to draw a lot of these fans when we host Madison - far more than we will draw Marquette fans to the MU game.
Furthermore, Marquette is a private institution who owes us nothing more than professional courtesy due a fellow institution of higher learning. UW-Madison, on the other hand, is a member of our family. We are part of the same system, and we share resources (albeit - we receive a lesser share). I believe that this does play a role in determining what is equitable.
So to wrap this all up in a single sentence: I don't think we should consider MU and UW to be the same when we consider the terms on which to play them.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyfred on Dec 17, 2011 14:14:49 GMT -6
Something also tells me that if UWM sold out every game, your stance wouldn't change one iota. When miracles happen, let us know. This series, however, was sold on the remarks by bone headed columnists and especially some fans (two in particular here) that this game was a definite sellout waiting to happen. Those of us that knew that wouldn't happened were trashed for saying so. In the end, who was right? The game simply doesn't have the cache and never will. 38-0 about to become 39-0 but we can read about how "proud" one poster is? That's always the best part...the I am so proud post. |
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on Dec 18, 2011 9:06:26 GMT -6
Something also tells me that if UWM sold out every game, your stance wouldn't change one iota. When miracles happen, let us know. This series, however, was sold on the remarks by bone headed columnists and especially some fans (two in particular here) that this game was a definite sellout waiting to happen. Those of us that knew that wouldn't happened were trashed for saying so. In the end, who was right? The game simply doesn't have the cache and never will. 38-0 about to become 39-0 but we can read about how "proud" one poster is? That's always the best part...the I am so proud post. At the end of the day, you can use this as a way to slam our program all you want. But my point wasn't that Marquette SHOULD give us this, that they owe us something or anything. I'm merely stating that a 4-for-1 is a road-heavy series that we do not need to force on ourselves just because it's a city game. It's good for the city to have the game, but not important enough to me that I'm willing to give up the home court 80% of the time. I came to this realization completely independent of the opponent. If Milwaukee was wrapping up a 4-for-1 on the road with Michigan State, my conclusion would be the same - it's a nice game to have, it draws buzz, but ultimately we're setting ourselves up for failure by playing four times on the road. This series was, as the title of my article states, "Loss by Design." It was designed to be a MU-heavy series. You and some of our posters can argue til you're blue in the face about who "deserves" what in the series. I'm not interested in that. I simply stated a fact, that a 4-for-1 series, opponent is irrelevant, should not be signed again for the same stacked-odds reasoning. If you don't think we can get 2-for-1's with Cincy or Missouri, that's fine. We know that first-year date issues were the only thing that stood in the way of those match-ups. We have a 2-for-2 with UNI, who has accomplished a recent Sweet 16 just as Marquette has and they had to go through the #1 seed to do it. That contract was signed about a month after their Sweet 16 run. We can get tournament teams to agree to better series for us. My point is that if Marquette isn't willing to extend that same courtesy, we should look elsewhere. That isn't to say that if I were Marquette, I'd accept a 2-for-1. As xtown stated without the douchebag airiness of different posters, MU is in a no-win situation. Obviously some fans think a 2-for-1 with Milwaukee would be unacceptable as we haven't reached the level they prefer to make it a more equitable series. In that instance, all I can do is point to the Green Bay 2-for-1 and be done with it. |
|
Rawls
Junior
Everyone's Entitled To My Opinion
|
Post by Rawls on Dec 18, 2011 16:56:08 GMT -6
Single game tickets were available through ticketmaster no less than two weeks prior. (The game took place the 27th) MU fans didn't show up because they either had Thanksgiving plans, work/school commitments, or didn't want to go. Same can be said about Milwaukee fans, and the casual college ball fan. |
|
|
|
Post by xtownfan on Dec 19, 2011 11:25:38 GMT -6
Single game tickets were available through ticketmaster no less than two weeks prior. (The game took place the 27th) MU fans didn't show up because they either had Thanksgiving plans, work/school commitments, or didn't want to go. Same can be said about Milwaukee fans, and the casual college ball fan. By that time, lots of Marquette fans had given up. Many tried to score tickets as soon as the date was set, but did not want to buy a 4-pack. That and the fact that it was Thanksgiving weekend did not help. The combination was not the best strategy to assure a sell-out. I do not take issue with UWM's four-pack strategy. To the extent that it was designed to prevent Marquette fans from completely taking over the arena, it worked. And of course, Marquette did the same thing with the first game of the series. The difference was that Marquette packaged the game with three good Big East games. I do not recall exactly which ones, but lots of people who bought the 4-pack did so because they wanted to see Georgetown or Notre Dame and the like, not because they wanted to see UWM. Selling tickets that way and scheduling the game for Thanksgiving weekend surely did not help sell tickets. Ultimately, as Black Panther has pointed out, such decisions should be made by each school in accord with its own interests. So if UWM can strike a better deal elsewhere, good for you. I just have not seen any evidence of that yet. However, that has not been how the topic has traditionally be addressed here or by UWM fans in general, and this is what has prompted so much animosity from Marquette fans. It has been suggested here that Marquette could easily afford to give up a home game or two in order to let UWM have them and make the series more fair. True, Marquette could afford it. But that money has to come from somewhere. The last couple years, Marquette has skipped exhibition games to play scrimmages instead. Those do not bring in any money, and when they are played on the road, like they were this year, they actually cost a fair amount. But they are in the coach's opinion better for preparing the team. So money gets spent on them. Marquette just added two lacrossse teams. Those are expensive. These are all better uses of Marquette's money than being a good neighbor. And that feeling still persists here a bit. One poster in this thread complained that Marquette refused to play during the Bruce Pearl years, when the series could have turned into a national showcase. Well, as has been explained, Marquette did not refuse to play. UWM under Bo Ryan declined to extend the contract without a home game. And the idea that the series would have been a national showcase is ridiculous, as were the expectations behind it. When the series resumed, one of the regulars here complained that Marquette refused to let UWM bring its band. I have been to hundreds of Marquette games and a fair number on the road, and do not recall a single instance in which the visiting team brought its band. Typically, they do not even bring cheerleaders. Bringing a band would have been a logistical nightmare, among other things. Even if we had "played you when you were good," it would not have made much of a difference. Marquette played Green Bay when they were good, even lost a couple, and then dropped the series for a number of years. Nobody cared. It was not national news. What Marquette fans have always resented was the idea that the game should be played and expanded and made super duper cool just like the Big 5 in Philadelphia. The problem is that the series did not begin in order to preserve a beloved local arena where all the teams played, it did not originate long ago, when the economics of college basketball were quite different, and it has not been going on for fifty years. The idea that the series should be used as the basis of a showcase for Wisconsin basketball which would gain national attention and benefit everybody was a ridiculous one. Marquette fans objected to the idea that it should happen, because, well, just because. So run your program to the best of your ability. Good luck. If it turns out to be in the best interests of both teams to play and they can work out acceptable terms, great. If not, good luck and Godspeed. |
|
Rawls
Junior
Everyone's Entitled To My Opinion
|
Post by Rawls on Dec 19, 2011 15:41:09 GMT -6
If they had given up two weeks (or more) before, the game was simply not important to them. Hence they didn't want to go. I've missed two of the MU-MKE games at the Bradley Center because of price. Each time I could have afforded to go, but I wasn't willing to pay x for view y of the court. I didn't want to go. I'm sorry, but if you've given up hope two weeks (plus?) before the game, the game was not a priority for you. The game just isn't that popular, and yes that means many Milwaukee fans were wrong.
What seems to have reignited the discussion recently is the 2:1 to which MU and GB have agreed. If a 2:1 with Milwaukee isn't in MU's best interest, GB would be no more in their interests, if not even less so. That's not to say MU owes anything to anybody, just that there's no more gained by said series than a 2:1 with Milwaukee.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spirit of Bruce on Dec 19, 2011 17:03:52 GMT -6
Xtown, if you are suggesting that Marquette can't give us a 2 for 1 because they added lacrosse as a sport, that is the stupidest excuse I've heard yet. With that said, we could start a new thread questioning why any university would add lacrosse in the first place, as I fail to see the incentive of having a sport in which MAYBE 15 people in Greater Milwaukee are interested in.
|
|
|
|
Post by xtownfan on Dec 19, 2011 18:52:37 GMT -6
Xtown, if you are suggesting that Marquette can't give us a 2 for 1 because they added lacrosse as a sport, that is the stupidest excuse I've heard yet. With that said, we could start a new thread questioning why any university would add lacrosse in the first place, as I fail to see the incentive of having a sport in which MAYBE 15 people in Greater Milwaukee are interested in. Let's start with the fact that I did not say that. I said that the suggestion that Marquette should give UWM a home game because it can supposedly afford to is unsupportable. Marquette has other things to spend money on, like a couple of lacrosse teams. But your post raises another question. Put aside the question of whether you think lacrosse is a good sport. What is the point of an athletic program? If you think it is to entertain people in the Greater Milwaukee area, then why does UWM even have an athletic department? Most of the sports other than men's basketball are entirely superfluous for that purpose, and basketball is questionable. Why have a cross country team? Why have any women's teams? Do you seriously mean to tell me that a lot of people in the Greater Milwaukee area are paying attention? But behind even that is the question of what criteria Marquette should use to run its athletic department. There are some pretty good reasons for adopting lacrosse, like the fact that it is a fast-growing sport, popular in areas of the country where Marquette is recruiting students and growing in the Midwest. It also provides Marquette a couple of more teams so as to remain above the minimum for D-1. You on the other hand seem to think that decisions should be made on the basis of what provides entertainment to sports fans, or more specifically, what benefits the UWM athletic program. And that is what has caused the most grief between Marquette and UWM fans. There have been a lot of reasons put forth for playing the series at all, playing it one place or another, and all the rest. Despite the rationales that have been suggested, like "it would be good for basketball in the state," they all boil down to one thing: That it would be good for UWM's program. All the stuff about "good for the state" or "code of the playground" or "there are a million billion fans who want this game" or all that boil down to that one thing. As several here have noted, Marquette owes nothing to UWM. The programs ought to operate in their own best interests. So if UWM can cut a better deal with Cincinnati or Missouri, go for it. But my bet is that it is in UWM's best interest to keep the series going. I also believe that the two schools can work out something mutually agreeable, be it a 2, 3, or 4 for one or whatever they come up with. But I do not believe that anybody owes anybody else anything, regardless of what you think of lacrosse. |
|
|
|
Post by Spirit of Bruce on Dec 19, 2011 20:49:18 GMT -6
Xtown, if you are suggesting that Marquette can't give us a 2 for 1 because they added lacrosse as a sport, that is the stupidest excuse I've heard yet. With that said, we could start a new thread questioning why any university would add lacrosse in the first place, as I fail to see the incentive of having a sport in which MAYBE 15 people in Greater Milwaukee are interested in. Let's start with the fact that I did not say that. I said that the suggestion that Marquette should give UWM a home game because it can supposedly afford to is unsupportable. Marquette has other things to spend money on, like a couple of lacrosse teams. But your post raises another question. Put aside the question of whether you think lacrosse is a good sport. What is the point of an athletic program? If you think it is to entertain people in the Greater Milwaukee area, then why does UWM even have an athletic department? Most of the sports other than men's basketball are entirely superfluous for that purpose, and basketball is questionable. Why have a cross country team? Why have any women's teams? Do you seriously mean to tell me that a lot of people in the Greater Milwaukee area are paying attention? But behind even that is the question of what criteria Marquette should use to run its athletic department. There are some pretty good reasons for adopting lacrosse, like the fact that it is a fast-growing sport, popular in areas of the country where Marquette is recruiting students and growing in the Midwest. It also provides Marquette a couple of more teams so as to remain above the minimum for D-1. You on the other hand seem to think that decisions should be made on the basis of what provides entertainment to sports fans, or more specifically, what benefits the UWM athletic program. And that is what has caused the most grief between Marquette and UWM fans. There have been a lot of reasons put forth for playing the series at all, playing it one place or another, and all the rest. Despite the rationales that have been suggested, like "it would be good for basketball in the state," they all boil down to one thing: That it would be good for UWM's program. All the stuff about "good for the state" or "code of the playground" or "there are a million billion fans who want this game" or all that boil down to that one thing. As several here have noted, Marquette owes nothing to UWM. The programs ought to operate in their own best interests. So if UWM can cut a better deal with Cincinnati or Missouri, go for it. But my bet is that it is in UWM's best interest to keep the series going. I also believe that the two schools can work out something mutually agreeable, be it a 2, 3, or 4 for one or whatever they come up with. But I do not believe that anybody owes anybody else anything, regardless of what you think of lacrosse. You make interesting points, but you could say the EXACT same thing about Marquette. No one gives a hoot about anything but you're men's basketball as well. Also, as I said in an earlier post on this subject, I am of the opinion that I don't see the series with MU as a rivalry. While I'd like to see the series continue, it wouldn't hurt my feelings at all if Coach Jeter and Costello walk away from a bad deal. I also find it funny that the MU posters on our board will berate our program time and again, but have no answer as to the fact that Green Bay gets a 2 for 1, but they think we shouldn't. I expect that to continue for no other reason than Green Bay=Wardle=Marquette. And that's fine with me, because I expect that Bo Ryan would extend Coach Jeter the same courtesy when we renegotiate the Wisconsin deal. |
|
|
|
Post by xtownfan on Dec 19, 2011 22:56:02 GMT -6
Let's start with the fact that I did not say that. I said that the suggestion that Marquette should give UWM a home game because it can supposedly afford to is unsupportable. Marquette has other things to spend money on, like a couple of lacrosse teams. But your post raises another question. Put aside the question of whether you think lacrosse is a good sport. What is the point of an athletic program? If you think it is to entertain people in the Greater Milwaukee area, then why does UWM even have an athletic department? Most of the sports other than men's basketball are entirely superfluous for that purpose, and basketball is questionable. Why have a cross country team? Why have any women's teams? Do you seriously mean to tell me that a lot of people in the Greater Milwaukee area are paying attention? But behind even that is the question of what criteria Marquette should use to run its athletic department. There are some pretty good reasons for adopting lacrosse, like the fact that it is a fast-growing sport, popular in areas of the country where Marquette is recruiting students and growing in the Midwest. It also provides Marquette a couple of more teams so as to remain above the minimum for D-1. You on the other hand seem to think that decisions should be made on the basis of what provides entertainment to sports fans, or more specifically, what benefits the UWM athletic program. And that is what has caused the most grief between Marquette and UWM fans. There have been a lot of reasons put forth for playing the series at all, playing it one place or another, and all the rest. Despite the rationales that have been suggested, like "it would be good for basketball in the state," they all boil down to one thing: That it would be good for UWM's program. All the stuff about "good for the state" or "code of the playground" or "there are a million billion fans who want this game" or all that boil down to that one thing. As several here have noted, Marquette owes nothing to UWM. The programs ought to operate in their own best interests. So if UWM can cut a better deal with Cincinnati or Missouri, go for it. But my bet is that it is in UWM's best interest to keep the series going. I also believe that the two schools can work out something mutually agreeable, be it a 2, 3, or 4 for one or whatever they come up with. But I do not believe that anybody owes anybody else anything, regardless of what you think of lacrosse. You make interesting points, but you could say the EXACT same thing about Marquette. No one gives a hoot about anything but you're men's basketball as well. Also, as I said in an earlier post on this subject, I am of the opinion that I don't see the series with MU as a rivalry. While I'd like to see the series continue, it wouldn't hurt my feelings at all if Coach Jeter and Costello walk away from a bad deal. I also find it funny that the MU posters on our board will berate our program time and again, but have no answer as to the fact that Green Bay gets a 2 for 1, but they think we shouldn't. I expect that to continue for no other reason than Green Bay=Wardle=Marquette. And that's fine with me, because I expect that Bo Ryan would extend Coach Jeter the same courtesy when we renegotiate the Wisconsin deal. Yes, but I am not the one suggesting that the only reason for having an athletic program is to entertain the public. You are the one who suggested that starting lacrosse at Marquette was a bad idea because the public does not care. True perhaps, but irrelevant. Neither school is going to give up its non-revenue sports, because they serve different purposes: Publicity, alumni relations, most importantly, giving students an opportunity to compete. Your original post seemed to suggest that Marquette ought to be spending its money giving away basketball games as opposed to starting another non-revenue sport. As for why Marquette gives one deal to Green Bay and another to UWM, I do not know and do not care. Like most Marquette fans, I do not care overmuch who they play as long as the schedule is interesting and competitive. UWM is more interesting than someone like Northern Colorado or Jacksonville, less so than Vanderbilt, and much less so than a Big East game. So with that in mind, as long as the powers that be in the athletic department want to schedule things a certain way, it is fine with me. If they change their minds, that is also fine with me. Good luck to UWM. Seriously. Hope you remain on the schedule. It will not upset me too much if you do not. |
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on Dec 19, 2011 23:21:55 GMT -6
The lesson I'm taking from this last volley is that Marquette's athletic department is so unstable in its financial situation that it can't take a road game every three years and needs it every five instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by xtownfan on Dec 20, 2011 5:57:53 GMT -6
The lesson I'm taking from this last volley is that Marquette's athletic department is so unstable in its financial situation that it can't take a road game every three years and needs it every five instead. That's just silly. Clearly, the Marquette athletic department could do a whole bunch of things, including playing road games at UWM or anywhere else for that matter. Of course, it could not play all its games on the road, and since men's basketball is virtually the only source of income for the program, decisions have to be made about how those resources are allocated. Last night Marquette played a road game against a major opponent. If Marquette gives away lots of road games against lesser opponents, (and frankly, UWM is a lesser opponent,) perhaps it cannot schedule that game and has to play someone weaker at home instead. The point UWM fans seem to miss is that when these decisions are made, nobody pipes up to say, "But how is this going to effect the series with UWM?" It is just not that important. So Marquette is going to cut the best deal it can with UWM as well as with anyone else. Marquette is going to try to come up with the schedule that most benefits the basketball program and the department as a whole. I cannot address the question of whether that means spending the money on lacrosse teams or on closed scrimmages as opposed to exhibition games, or on charter flights for teams or whatever, as I do not claim to know the details, but frankly, it has little to do with UWM and is not the concern of UWM fans or administrators. Go run your own program and don't worry about how Marquette chooses to spend its money. Make some of your own. If that means taking your ball and going elsewhere, good luck. But the last time UWM tried that, it did not work out so well, and UWM fans are still blaming Marquette that it didn't. Oh, well. |
|
|
|
Post by jhart05 on Dec 20, 2011 11:01:12 GMT -6
Personally I have no use for Chicago North and don't care if we play them in any sport.
|
|
|
|
Post by DunneDeal on Dec 20, 2011 12:07:52 GMT -6
IMO.
Let just see what happens. Lets not worry what deal we get. Lets see if we play them again, I hope we do because its a fun game for those who enjoy Milwaukee and MU.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spirit of Bruce on Dec 20, 2011 13:25:26 GMT -6
The lesson I'm taking from this last volley is that Marquette's athletic department is so unstable in its financial situation that it can't take a road game every three years and needs it every five instead. Go run your own program and don't worry about how Marquette chooses to spend its money. Make some of your own. If that means taking your ball and going elsewhere, good luck. But the last time UWM tried that, it did not work out so well, and UWM fans are still blaming Marquette that it didn't. Oh, well. First of all, I haven't read anyone "blaming" Marquette for anything on this thread. Second, I for one will be happy to keep my nose out of your elitist program. The only school in America with a more inflated opinion of themselves is Notre Dame. There was a time not so long ago when I willingly cheered for all of Wisconsin's D-1 teams, but in my relatively short time as a Panther, I've come to see the true colors of both Marquette and Madison fans. I give credit to xtown for being bluntly honest and not paying phony lip service to UWM in his argument. I for one will not show deference to him simply because he went to almighty Marquette, and neither should any of the rest of you. Marquette won ONE national championship 34 years ago, and they act like they are Duke or UConn. They forget how little success they had under the likes of Bob Dukiet, Kevin O'Neill, Mike Deane, and Tom Crean before Dwayne Wade. I could rant on Wisconsin too, because before 2000, they had THREE tournament appearances since Pearl Harbor. We've all had our lean times, so get off your high horse! Green Bay had more tournament appearances in the 90s than Marquette or Wisconsin. The 2000s gave rise to three very successful D-1 programs in our state, and Green Bay also had a few 20-plus win seasons(with no postseason success, but hey, their coach got a "better job" with Toledo out of it.) The bad thing about all of this is if we don't renew these deals, no matter what the terms are, we are always going to have to deal with MU and UW fans trashing us all the time. So we may as well keep playing them in the hope that we can get lucky and stick it to them once and a while. On the other hand, jhart's viewpoint is also an easy one to take. |
|
