|
|
Post by steveisback on Jan 30, 2018 10:52:04 GMT -6
Paul
I get your point and do not disagree at all. I know this is like Christopher Walken...more cowbell!!! but the announced attendance is total tickets sold not people actually in the seats . This is what every team does...so we could trash Marquette, the Bucks anyone whose announced attendance numbers do not match. The problem is the no shows. That is what we should be railing against because apparently the announced attendance is accurate based on the standard criteria. Case in point , I am a masochist not only being a Panther fan but a long suffering White Sox fan. Their announced attendance is way higher than people there but no one is ripping them or any other team. I am going to gnaw my are off if I see one more comment about announced attendance being way off....IT IS NOT!!! unless thy criteria for us and everyone else is changed to actual people . Announced attendance contemplates tickets sold and this is in all sports...again, selective use of facts...
|
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Jan 30, 2018 11:22:53 GMT -6
Forget actual vs. announced attendance, Steve. My point was really that we're now losing far too often at home ... and often by large margins!
But since you brought it up, I'm not as concerned about the obvious discrepancy as much as I am about the fact that at the present time OUR ATTENDANCE IS AWFUL!!!!
I worked in the AD in 1997-98 during the throes of the Cobb era and this is WORSE! What is being done to fix this?!?!
There were 1,804 people who attended Saturday night's Concordia (Mich.) at Concordia (Wis.) game in Mequon. (I fully believe the number because, frankly, why would they lie?) That's nearly twice what we declared for attendance last night! Is this alarming to anyone else?!?!
|
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Jan 30, 2018 11:27:20 GMT -6
You're missing the point Steve! We are now at a place where the WILDLY INFLATED "attendance" numbers are themselves PATHETIC!! You really think that on a regular basis half or more of the ticket buyers aren't coming? If that's true it is a powerful judgment about the state of the program. What do you think the chances are that those people, who have thrown their money down the drain this year -- will buy tickets next year? How can the University possibly continue to justify paying Arena-size rent for high-school size crowds? Last week Concordia -- CONCORDIA!! -- had a crowd nearly DOUBLE the size of the "crowd" last night! I hope Pat Baldwin's attorney or agent wrote an opt-out with a good separation payment into his contract if the school moves the program back to the Klotsche or down to a lower division. I would have.
You can spin these absurd attendance numbers any way you want but the facts are indisputable. Even assuming the facts about our attendance in the BEST light for the department, attendance has utterly collapsed. The simple truth is that the ticket buying public has deserted the program since our AD decided to "fix" everything by destroying everything.
Every fan base has a vocal minority that thinks their current coach is terrible, no matter who the coach is or what he accomplishes. The verdict is in that here at Milwaukee, that was a VERY small minority. If that wasn't true, I have one simple question: where is everybody?
|
|
|
|
Post by steveisback on Jan 30, 2018 11:43:34 GMT -6
Fran
You are missing my point as well. I totally agree the attendance has collapsed. These numbers are terrible and we should be absolutely worried. All I am saying is that it does not make sense to say the announced attendance numbers are wrong or misrepresented. Once again. all teams announce based on tickets sold........ more cowbell??
Now I totally agree the problem is no shows. We are on a downward attendance spiral and those no shows as you say will not translate to any kind of decent retention much less growth going forward. It truly is horrible. It is not though a tacit vote that things were better before and this is totally why .. I know you would say yes but how many would sign up for another 11 years of Rob. Of course that would be better than the last two years taken in isolation. We are going to start winning again and then lets judge down the line and let history prove. We have Jeters cumulative history, not all his fault, and Braun's recent reign of hell.....lets move forward and not be totally immersed in pessimism
|
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Jan 30, 2018 12:03:39 GMT -6
Steve, at this point I think you are provably wrong. I don't question the sincerity of your opinion about Jeter and where he had the program headed -- I just think it's now indisputable that VERY few people agreed with you. If that wasn't true, there would be fans in the Arena. There aren't. Quite obviously the greater part of our fan base saw a program they liked ripped apart with nothing but the most uncertain of prospects moving forward, and have decided to move on to other interests. A mid-major program is very fragile that way, and our AD was either too foolish to understand that or didn't care because she had to have her way.
Whatever the reason for her imprudence, we are all experiencing the consequences now. The attendance collapse is a vicious cycle. The few people that show up find an atmosphere that is depressing. Even the great majority of the concession stands are locked up! In a BEST case scenario it will take years from NOW -- with two years ALREADY lost -- just to build interest back to the point it was at in 2016. How many down years of a program is it worth to get rid of a guy who has taken you to multiple championships and run a clean program filled with great people? Madness!
So what do we do now since we can't revisit that idiotic move? All I know is that the rot starts at the top. Until a change is made there, we're going no place.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveisback on Jan 30, 2018 12:11:51 GMT -6
Fran Thank you and I may indeed be wrong. Agree it was an idiotic move and what was done was worse than not doing anything . I struggle with the fact though that the program would not have sunk down anyway with keeping Jeter, it was stale and not going anywhere but maybe not just as quickly as Braun's torpedo. Not so sure so few agree with me on Jeter it is just the way it was handled which as dishonest and atrocious . I fear you are right on the last point. The only thing though is that maybe Baldwin can over the couple years get some wins and some buzz back despite the head of the serpent . Then again, it is not just Braun. It is the total tone deafness of the administration on athletics and mens basketball in particular so what else is new  I kind of feel sometimes like one of your earlier comments....retiring to bedlam. What a mess |
|
|
|
Post by A Statement By SHAUN on Jan 30, 2018 12:13:31 GMT -6
Steve, at this point I think you are provably wrong. I don't question the sincerity of your opinion about Jeter and where he had the program headed -- I just think it's now indisputable that VERY few people agreed with you. If that wasn't true, there would be fans in the Arena. There aren't. Quite obviously the greater part of our fan base saw a program they liked ripped apart with nothing but the most uncertain of prospects moving forward, and have decided to move on to other interests. A mid-major program is very fragile that way, and our AD was either too foolish to understand that or didn't care because she had to have her way. Whatever the reason for her imprudence, we are all experiencing the consequences now. The attendance collapse is a vicious cycle. The few people that show up find an atmosphere that is depressing. Even the great majority of the concession stands are locked up! In a BEST case scenario it will take years from NOW -- with two years ALREADY lost -- just to build interest back to the point it was at in 2016. How many down years of a program is it worth to get rid of a guy who has taken you to multiple championships and run a clean program filled with great people? Madness! So what do we do now since we can't revisit that idiotic move? All I know is that the rot starts at the top. Until a change is made there, we're going no place. Curious to hear your opinion about this - say that change is made at the top, what happens next? What are the steps to get people back at the games? |
|
|
|
Post by theDarkHawkReturns on Jan 30, 2018 12:55:31 GMT -6
Steve, at this point I think you are provably wrong. I don't question the sincerity of your opinion about Jeter and where he had the program headed -- I just think it's now indisputable that VERY few people agreed with you. If that wasn't true, there would be fans in the Arena. There aren't. Quite obviously the greater part of our fan base saw a program they liked ripped apart with nothing but the most uncertain of prospects moving forward, and have decided to move on to other interests. A mid-major program is very fragile that way, and our AD was either too foolish to understand that or didn't care because she had to have her way. Whatever the reason for her imprudence, we are all experiencing the consequences now. The attendance collapse is a vicious cycle. The few people that show up find an atmosphere that is depressing. Even the great majority of the concession stands are locked up! In a BEST case scenario it will take years from NOW -- with two years ALREADY lost -- just to build interest back to the point it was at in 2016. How many down years of a program is it worth to get rid of a guy who has taken you to multiple championships and run a clean program filled with great people? Madness! So what do we do now since we can't revisit that idiotic move? All I know is that the rot starts at the top. Until a change is made there, we're going no place. Curious to hear your opinion about this - say that change is made at the top, what happens next? What are the steps to get people back at the games? That would depend on the change, now wouldn't it? We made a "change at the top" to get to this point. Change, as such, is not a strategy. Pining for "change" for "change's sake" is a path to destruction. Now, if that change involved an admission that the program has not been managed properly, and that the input and importance of alumni and donors was not recognized, and that the stated mission of the program is to win, period, that would be a good first step. But that would only be a first step. There must be follow up actions like hiring a proven AD with a track record of building a program. We cannot settle for an(other) Assistant AD from a miniscule program in the North East because they tick off certain, um, demographic boxes. We cannot allow hiring to be, even one bit, influenced by anything other that performance and PROVEN capabilities. The input of "the community" is not to be considered. That UW-M is an "urban school" cannot be considered, either, and used as a criteria for a litmus test. The new AD in this hypothetical must be a winner, no matter what he or she is otherwise. That AD must then be charged with re-engaging the donors who have fled, ingratiating the program with them, and building a foundation from which to operate. Do you realize how many alums UW-M has? There is a lot to be gained from this effort. UW is a great case study. The hiring of the right AD, the engagement of the alumni community, and the willingness to do what is necessary to win in college athletics is all it took to go from being the other Northwestern to the cream of the crop in the Big 10. It took only a few years, and once established, self perpetuates. But that means Mone needs to look up from his spreadsheets, find his, um....courage, and actually do something. That, my friends, is not going to happen. He is not that type of man. He is a professor. We are, essentially, being led by Sheldon Cooper, assisted by a gagle of nerds who may have never watched sports, much less played any. |
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Jan 30, 2018 12:56:40 GMT -6
I'm going to kick that to BPU for some specific ideas because he has thought about it a lot.
But do you remember that press conference she had when she said that nothing was more important to Milwaukee Athletics than the health and success of the men's basketball program, and that it was going to get all the support it needed to accomplish that?
Yeah, no one else remembers that either -- for a very good reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Jan 30, 2018 12:57:29 GMT -6
"The majority of the concession stands are locked up!"
All I wanted last night was a lousy barbecue sandwich! At least then I might have satisfied one of my senses!
|
|
|
|
Post by steveisback on Jan 30, 2018 13:03:33 GMT -6
Maybe can do like at the ballpark. Carry in a picnic lunch!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Cactus Panther on Jan 30, 2018 16:44:30 GMT -6
Curious to hear your opinion about this - say that change is made at the top, what happens next? What are the steps to get people back at the games? That would depend on the change, now wouldn't it? We made a "change at the top" to get to this point. Change, as such, is not a strategy. Pining for "change" for "change's sake" is a path to destruction. Now, if that change involved an admission that the program has not been managed properly, and that the input and importance of alumni and donors was not recognized, and that the stated mission of the program is to win, period, that would be a good first step. But that would only be a first step. There must be follow up actions like hiring a proven AD with a track record of building a program. We cannot settle for an(other) Assistant AD from a miniscule program in the North East because they tick off certain, um, demographic boxes. We cannot allow hiring to be, even one bit, influenced by anything other that performance and PROVEN capabilities. The input of "the community" is not to be considered. That UW-M is an "urban school" cannot be considered, either, and used as a criteria for a litmus test. The new AD in this hypothetical must be a winner, no matter what he or she is otherwise. That AD must then be charged with re-engaging the donors who have fled, ingratiating the program with them, and building a foundation from which to operate. Do you realize how many alums UW-M has? There is a lot to be gained from this effort. UW is a great case study. The hiring of the right AD, the engagement of the alumni community, and the willingness to do what is necessary to win in college athletics is all it took to go from being the other Northwestern to the cream of the crop in the Big 10. It took only a few years, and once established, self perpetuates. But that means Mone needs to look up from his spreadsheets, find his, um....courage, and actually do something. That, my friends, is not going to happen. He is not that type of man. He is a professor. We are, essentially, being led by Sheldon Cooper, assisted by a gagle of nerds who may have never watched sports, much less played any. WooHoo! This thread has gone from the usual rehashing of past history that seems to happen after each disappointing loss to some forward thinking! Thanks for asking the question, Shaun. I disagree with almost every one of DarkHawk's posts, but for the most part, I like this one. Like I have been stating, we need an experienced savvy business-minded person with proven success, not someone from the world of academia with more degrees piled in a box that even Amazon would refuse to deliver for free. UW-Madison's athletic director switch from Elroy Hirsch to Pat Richter is a perfect example of what could turn a program around. This does seem like an almost impossible challenge for Milwaukee though, as there is no indication the current administration is interested in making this happen. In the unlikely event an athletic director change would be made soon, the failed bureaucratic hiring process would not likely change either. |
|
|
|
Post by circle70 on Jan 30, 2018 17:05:57 GMT -6
Sure, it may have been a terrible home loss to an awful team P.S. Do you want to know what UIC's "best" win this year has been -- apart from their TWO beatdowns of Milwaukee? It was at home against #281 ranked North Carolina Central of the mighty MEAC. My goodness, the company we keep in this brave new era. And yet somehow we are now 7-3 and in 3rd place in the HL.  |
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Jan 30, 2018 17:20:12 GMT -6
Good for you. I have nothing against UIC -- in fact, the chances are good that I've been a UIC fan as long or longer than you, since I started following the Flames when Bob Hallberg was the coach, back in the late 80s when Milwaukee was mired in lower divisions. I even liked Jimmy Collins!
But here's the thing: your 7 conference wins this year besides the two against Milwaukee? Two against #302 IUPUI; one each against #290 UWGB, against #318 YSU and against #330 Cleveland State.
So what's your guess for what at-large seed you'll get?
|
|
|
|
Post by circle70 on Jan 30, 2018 17:56:33 GMT -6
Good for you. I have nothing against UIC -- in fact, the chances are good that I've been a UIC fan as long or longer than you, since I started following the Flames when Bob Hallberg was the coach, back in the late 80s when Milwaukee was mired in lower divisions. I even liked Jimmy Collins! But here's the thing: your 7 conference wins this year besides the two against Milwaukee? Two against #302 IUPUI; one each against #290 UWGB, against #318 YSU and against #330 Cleveland State. So what's your guess for what at-large seed you'll get? Actually, I've been a fan longer than that. The "70" in my ID indicates the year I graduated from UIC, then known as University of Illinois at Chicago Circle. So far as the quality of our wins is concerned, we can only play the teams on our schedule. We just happen to be part of a really crappy conference (ranked 26th out of 33). Not even slightly implying that we are a quality team on a national level. All we're looking for this year is probably an invite to one of those "buy in" tourneys like the CBI or CIT. |
|
I kind of feel sometimes like one of your earlier comments....retiring to bedlam. What a mess 
