|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 1, 2019 11:35:37 GMT -5
Did we really average 2-3K per game in 2001-2008? I'm a tad skeptical. I know I went to a few decent crowd games back then, Wintah Homecoming, the rare decent OOC game (St Joe's), PL tourney games etc....but I think there were many nights then when we didn't draw anywhere near 2K. 00-01: 2,195 (during the 99-00 season we averaged 995) 01-02: 1,990 02-03: 3,010 03-04: 2,548 04-05: 2,515 05-06: 2,428 06-07: 3,044 07-08: 2,678 08-09: 2,404 09-10: 2,196 All years after the 09-10 season have been sub 2,000. |
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Mar 1, 2019 11:38:27 GMT -5
The Hart played to 100% of its capacity for the first 5 years of its existence. For the last 39 years, I am guessing that figure is south of 50%. We are what we are and I don't see it changing any time soon if ever. Very sad. Not true. There was a stretch from around 2001-2008 where average home attendance was somewhere between 2,500 - 3,000. Attendance spiked after the 01-02 season, from just under 2,000 to about 3,000 in 02-03. Drifted gradually, but generally, down from there through the Kearney and Brown years until hitting a low of 1,370 in FCMB's final season.
Low, that is, until now. This year, average Hart attendance has been 1,308.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Mar 1, 2019 11:42:06 GMT -5
Yes it is 100% unreasonable to expect under the current regime. But as we've seen with Loyola, Gonzaga, etc., with the right regime it is perfectly reasonable in the sport of basketball. You only need 5 guys on the floor at once.
It is also perfectly reasonable to think HC can assemble that regime if so inclined. Hire the wrong guy or gal and we're screwed. This hire, to me, is a barometer of where the admin's thought process is right now as it relates to athletics. I hope, for the sake of alumni and the Luth family, and other donors, that this hire reflects a commitment to achieving more than just participation trophies and endless kudos for good grades, etc.
People have not, do not, and will not come out to games and will stop giving money to programs that generate these results. Simple. |
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Mar 1, 2019 11:43:24 GMT -5
Hart attendance figures (actual fannies in actual seats) have been inflated since RP Jr took his diploma from Fr Brooks on Fitton Field in 1980.
|
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Mar 1, 2019 12:08:13 GMT -5
I can quite get on board with the gym vs. arena thing. When it's full, in a big game, it's a GREAT place to watch a game imho. No one sees the bleacher seats when there are a$$es in them. And the sightlines are as good as it gets. Colgate is managing with their barn.....and has anyone seen St. Mary's McKeon Pavilion? I'd take their program in a heartbeat. Two things, NAD: 1-- I love a full Hart Center. One of my fondest memories of Holy Cross was standing in the rafters with guys from the football team while we played Princeton in front of a packed house. Hot, stuffy, loud, exciting. The experience can't be beat. 2-- The Hart Center isn't bopping like that lately. It doesn't appear to be bopping like that anytime soon. So if you're a 6'12" big in the words of HC70, or a stud guard from somewhere NOT Massachusetts for a change, who is touring campus to see what the school is about, and you walk into a place that has bleachers, or could be smaller than your high school gym, it may not pass the eye test. It's not the "wow" that I let out when I went to my first game at Bucknell. These are the things that are competing for the athletes, much like I said the events are competing for the attendees/patrons just the same. What can you bring to the table? What can you offer? Now, if Hart had a regional or national reputation as one of the wildest places to play... one of the most hostile environments for opposing players and coaches to come and compete against the Crusaders-- and I believe it has been and could be again-- that's another story. I can only think of dirty analogies, so I will leave them to your imagination. But what I'm saying here is that the Hart is a book that has to be judged by a cover, because if a prospect is "reading" it lately, the story comes up short. Six kids in a band, four cheerleaders, and 27 students, where the radio announcers have to whisper during free throws to not appear to be willingly distracting shooters, is not that environment you and I both love and desire. Fair point, Sports. On the other hand, I do remember hearing comments from the current sophomore class that they were actually impressed with the facilities, and it was a factor in their decision to come. Maybe it was just BS, or maybe beauty is in the eye of the beholder; I don't know. In the end, I think winning consistently will solve some problems, although I still think future attendance is at risk for many schools at this level. I just don't agree with the sentiment that moving up a level is going to automatically cure all ills - anytime I get a feeling like that I click on ESPN+ to see all the empty Mullins Center seats at a UMass game, then I switch over to a packed gym at a UVM game.
What's really sad to me is that quite a few students have gone through school at HC in the last decade without even seeing a tournament game at the Hart (I'm sure spring break occured during at least a couple of the few games that have actually been played). Never mind regular season games like that Princeton game you mentioned, the American game in 2003 when we had to hold our breath to see that top of the key jumper by that AU kid (Cresnik?) rim out, or the infamous Friday night duel with Bucknell, with Willard and Flannery going at it, and AK34 yelling with emotion as he came off the floor with blood streaming down his face.
|
|
|
|
Post by classof83 on Mar 1, 2019 12:34:00 GMT -5
Wasn't one of the biggest complaints about the Basketball Facilities was the Locker Rooms and that was addressed with the renovations?
As I recall, RW did not like to show recruits the locker rooms because they were so bad.
So I don't it is accurate to say that renovations did not address some of the concerns of the basketball program.
|
|
|
|
Post by realism on Mar 1, 2019 12:41:02 GMT -5
Personally, I kinda like football. Basketball is fine but football is still my #1 HC sport. Basketball, maybe 1A. As for the PL, I think Bucknell and to a lesser extent, Lehigh, have gotten the PL noticed in post season play in men's basketball. We can't blame the PL for basketball obscurity. It's on us and no one else to blame. Certainly not the league. Other than perhaps LAX, which I really don't follow, the PL is reportedly very good at that sport. But, if anything, I would say the PL is a basketball league first. Football second thanks to Colgate. Ehhh, I’d actually say the PL is a football league more so than hoops right now and certainly historically. The basketball league certainly is deeper than it was 12-15 years ago when Army, Navy, Lafayette and Colgate were amongst the absolute worst programs in th country in DI. However, we still have Wednesdays where the whole league draws a combined 2,500 for four games. Holy Cross - proud traditions in both football and basketball. Definitely more of a basketball school during the 2000s despite maintaining a loyal football following. 2010s - we draw FLIES at the Hart. Colgate - Basketball Program has been competitive recently but this has not grown attendance or interest. When was the last time 1,000+ were in Kotterelll — when they hosted the 08 semi against Bucknell? Definitely a football school and our flagship one at that. Lehigh - CJ McCollum and the Duke win put basketball on the map here. But Bethlehem has always been a football town. I’ll take a day at Goodman over a game in Stabler any day (though I enjoyed the ‘16 PLC). Lafayette - Relatively loyal following for both but the rivalry football game with Lehigh is the elephant in the room. O’Hanlon overall has done a good job here with basketball. They need to right the ship in football. Fordham - football history trumps hoops, hands down. And if they weren’t in the A10, NO ONE would go to basketball games here, minus Battle of the Bronx or the occasional home game they get against ST JOHNS. Bucknell - No doubt a basketball school. FLAGSHIP. Loyola - only FULL Division I member in the COUNTRY where LAX is the top spectator sport. BU - Its Hockey and then everything else Navy/Army - their entire athletic departments and a lot of their public outreach for the academies revolve around their FBS football membership. Navy couldn’t even fill Alumni Hall for a game against Maryland this year — basketball a wasteland for whatever reason at West Point and Annapolis despite having strong niche followings in other sports (Navy lax, Army hockey). American - no one cares about sports here in general. Like AT ALL. Georgetown - Obviosuly their affiliate membership has added absolutely NOTHING to the leagues football culture. With all due respect, I think you have a dated and bizarre understanding of what the more established PL athletic athletic programs are all about. Your list appears to be a a perspective of an alum looking out at the PL world from the limited, undeveloped and primitive state of HC athletics. There's a lot of meaningful success at the national level at most of the PL institurions you've cited, in a full range of m's and w's sports. They are also an integral part of the institutions' athletic brands. There are diverse audiences that interpret these athletic identities in varied ways.The audience is not limited to the "pop culture" appetites of alumni. Do some research. |
|
|
|
Post by crusader12 on Mar 1, 2019 12:56:41 GMT -5
Wasn't one of the biggest complaints about the Basketball Facilities was the Locker Rooms and that was addressed with the renovations? As I recall, RW did not like to show recruits the locker rooms because they were so bad. So I don't it is accurate to say that renovations did not address some of the concerns of the basketball program. No it did not. The Luth is lipstick on a pig. |
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Mar 1, 2019 12:59:53 GMT -5
Ehhh, I’d actually say the PL is a football league more so than hoops right now and certainly historically. The basketball league certainly is deeper than it was 12-15 years ago when Army, Navy, Lafayette and Colgate were amongst the absolute worst programs in th country in DI. However, we still have Wednesdays where the whole league draws a combined 2,500 for four games. Holy Cross - proud traditions in both football and basketball. Definitely more of a basketball school during the 2000s despite maintaining a loyal football following. 2010s - we draw FLIES at the Hart. Colgate - Basketball Program has been competitive recently but this has not grown attendance or interest. When was the last time 1,000+ were in Kotterelll — when they hosted the 08 semi against Bucknell? Definitely a football school and our flagship one at that. Lehigh - CJ McCollum and the Duke win put basketball on the map here. But Bethlehem has always been a football town. I’ll take a day at Goodman over a game in Stabler any day (though I enjoyed the ‘16 PLC). Lafayette - Relatively loyal following for both but the rivalry football game with Lehigh is the elephant in the room. O’Hanlon overall has done a good job here with basketball. They need to right the ship in football. Fordham - football history trumps hoops, hands down. And if they weren’t in the A10, NO ONE would go to basketball games here, minus Battle of the Bronx or the occasional home game they get against ST JOHNS. Bucknell - No doubt a basketball school. FLAGSHIP. Loyola - only FULL Division I member in the COUNTRY where LAX is the top spectator sport. BU - Its Hockey and then everything else Navy/Army - their entire athletic departments and a lot of their public outreach for the academies revolve around their FBS football membership. Navy couldn’t even fill Alumni Hall for a game against Maryland this year — basketball a wasteland for whatever reason at West Point and Annapolis despite having strong niche followings in other sports (Navy lax, Army hockey). American - no one cares about sports here in general. Like AT ALL. Georgetown - Obviosuly their affiliate membership has added absolutely NOTHING to the leagues football culture. With all due respect, I think you have a dated and bizarre understanding of what the more established PL athletic athletic programs are all about. Your list appears to be a a perspective of looking out at the PL world from the limited, undeveloped and primitive state of HC athletics. There's a lot of meaningful success at the national level at most of the PL institurions you've cited, in a full range of m's and w's sports. They are central to their identity. Do some research. And about 2% (maybe) of the American sports fan population cares not a whit about college sports not named Men's basketball and football. It is what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by crusader1970 on Mar 1, 2019 13:00:00 GMT -5
I've read all the posts here. Many are very substantive and they all come from HC fans who really care about our program. Count me in that group.
That said, a long journey begins with the first step and in my opinion THAT step is hiring a young energetic coach (like a Chesney) who will "use" HC as a stepping stone to a bigger job. He will not break the rules and, as his success starts to get traction, we must have his successor on the bench next to him.
The facilities are NOT the problem. The Hart Center will rock if this young coach puts winning teams on the floor for a couple of years in a row.
But it will not happen overnight. It will take time and the right coach.
We've seen what RW did to reinvigorate the program. That CAN happen again.
We just need a coach who has a contagious optimism that will attract recruits and fans alike.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 1, 2019 13:00:30 GMT -5
Hart attendance figures (actual fannies in actual seats) have been inflated since RP Jr took his diploma from Fr Brooks on Fitton Field in 1980. They were inflated before then too. Back in the Perry days there were a lot fewer season ticket holders with less than 100 percent attendance, but I''m sure there was an occasional unused ticket, which is all that is required to inflate numbers. I don't think there has ever been a count of actual fannies, or even torn ticket stubs. It has always been paid attendance. Students go to a desk to check in for their free admission. I assume there is some mechanism for counting those kids too. Today there are absolutely more no shows. I know some season ticket holders who are going to 2-3 games a year. Still I wouldn't say the figures are inflated. The phrase makes it sound like someone's manipulating numbers rather than following standard practice On the other hand, the once or twice a year a bunch of football players come after a lifting session, they're sneaking in the back door and probably aren't counted |
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Mar 1, 2019 13:05:50 GMT -5
You can't with a straight face say that we had anywhere near close to reported attendance at some of the games this year (or in many years past).
I've seen games this year reported to have say 1,500 people at Hart when there couldn't have been more than 300-400 people there.
|
|
|
|
Post by realism on Mar 1, 2019 13:07:31 GMT -5
With all due respect, I think you have a dated and bizarre understanding of what the more established PL athletic athletic programs are all about. Your list appears to be a a perspective of looking out at the PL world from the limited, undeveloped and primitive state of HC athletics. There's a lot of meaningful success at the national level at most of the PL institurions you've cited, in a full range of m's and w's sports. They are central to their identity. Do some research.
It is what it is.It's really embarrassing that as a "coach/educator," you don't understand that these athletic programs aren't designed solely to amuse you or the rest of the great unwashed. They're an integral part of the curricular and extra-curricular experiences colleges offer to help students develop into well rounded adults. |
|
coachrt
Climbing Mt. St. James
Posts: 92 
|
Post by coachrt on Mar 1, 2019 13:08:36 GMT -5
Time to bring in Mike Lonergan.......that will get people's attention.....maybe not the attention your looking for but they will be talking.
|
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Mar 1, 2019 13:10:49 GMT -5
And about 2% (maybe) of the American sports fan population cares not a whit about college sports not named Men's basketball and football.
It is what it is. It's really embarrassing that as an educator, you don't understand that these athletic programs aren't designed to amuse you or the rest of the great unwashed. They're an integral part of the curricular and extra-curricular experiences colleges offer to help students develop into well rounded adults. There is a direct correlation between HC's drop in academic standing and its drop in athletic (primarily basketball) success....fact. See: Villanova and PC...2 schools that were "safety schools" for HC at one point, now with greater reach through athletics, have caught up or surpassed HC in academic standing.. |
|
|
|
Post by lou on Mar 1, 2019 13:22:14 GMT -5
Wasn't one of the biggest complaints about the Basketball Facilities was the Locker Rooms and that was addressed with the renovations? As I recall, RW did not like to show recruits the locker rooms because they were so bad. So I don't it is accurate to say that renovations did not address some of the concerns of the basketball program. No it did not. The Luth is lipstick on a pig. The locker rooms are new and nice |
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 1, 2019 13:24:08 GMT -5
No it did not. The Luth is lipstick on a pig. The locker rooms are new and nice If they are, it’s weird they’re not shown on the website, while hockey is. |
|
|
|
Post by lou on Mar 1, 2019 13:27:44 GMT -5
The locker rooms are new and nice If they are, it’s weird they’re not shown on the website, while hockey is. Yeah, that is weird |
|
|
|
Post by crusader1970 on Mar 1, 2019 13:42:08 GMT -5
Time to bring in Mike Lonergan.......that will get people's attention.....maybe not the attention your looking for but they will be talking. Lonergan left us at the altar, not once but twice.
With what went on in his program at GW and in this political environment he is toxic and will have trouble finding another job.
|
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Mar 1, 2019 13:46:23 GMT -5
And rightfully so
|
|
|
|
Post by unhfan on Mar 1, 2019 15:52:12 GMT -5
Greetings from beautiful Naples, FL! As I was reading the Naples Daily News this morning there was a nice article about #24 ranked Wofford Terriers. A school of 1800 students and playing in the Big South which is a good academic league and their nationally ranked under a coach who has been their 17 years. It shows you can win and get national recognition no matter what league you’re in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ignutz on Mar 1, 2019 16:20:08 GMT -5
It's really embarrassing that as an educator, you don't understand that these athletic programs aren't designed to amuse you or the rest of the great unwashed. They're an integral part of the curricular and extra-curricular experiences colleges offer to help students develop into well rounded adults. There is a direct correlation between HC's drop in academic standing and its drop in athletic (primarily basketball) success....fact. See: Villanova and PC...2 schools that were "safety schools" for HC at one point, now with greater reach through athletics, have caught up or surpassed HC in academic standing.. Two quick points: - PC has not now, nor has it ever, nor do I hope/expect it will ever surpass HC in academic standing. Villanova is, in my mind, an equivalent academic institution. From an overall standpoint, however, it's my understanding from current (and recently graduated) students, that VU is well deserving of its Villa-no-fun reputation.
- With regard to the Hart Center, and the basketball arena, I don't think there's a better facility at a school our size in the Northeast. As someone mentioned elsewhere on Crossports, no one sees the bleacher seats when there are butts in 'em. When the space is filled or SRO, I think it's as much a "pit" as any school around. Have you seen the basketball space at Harvard, BU, Iona, or any number of other on-campus places where we've played in recent years? When the Hart was in its infancy, and was SRO every night, it was as good a pit as anyplace in the country. Sports Illustrated was on hand to experience the place for an article on basketball pits in the Hart's second or third year, but we didn't make it into the article because we lost the game that night on a buzzer-beater.
If you build it (i.e., a winning program), they will come.
|
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on Mar 1, 2019 17:05:29 GMT -5
It's really embarrassing that as an educator, you don't understand that these athletic programs aren't designed to amuse you or the rest of the great unwashed. They're an integral part of the curricular and extra-curricular experiences colleges offer to help students develop into well rounded adults. There is a direct correlation between HC's drop in academic standing and its drop in athletic (primarily basketball) success....fact. See: Villanova and PC...2 schools that were "safety schools" for HC at one point, now with greater reach through athletics, have caught up or surpassed HC in academic standing.. The use of sunsceen has increased dramatically in the last 40 year ... fact The incidence of skin cancer has also gone up dramatically in the last 40 years ... fact Therefore sunsceen must cause skin cancer. If I go with your premise (which particualrly in the case of PC I don't) the inference one draws from your post is similar. Correlation does not equal causation. |
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Mar 1, 2019 17:11:54 GMT -5
There is a direct correlation between HC's drop in academic standing and its drop in athletic (primarily basketball) success....fact. See: Villanova and PC...2 schools that were "safety schools" for HC at one point, now with greater reach through athletics, have caught up or surpassed HC in academic standing.. The use of sunsceen has increased dramatically in the last 40 year ... fact The incidence of skin cancer has also gone up dramatically in the last 40 years ... fact Therefore sunsceen must cause skin cancer. If I go with your premise (which particualrly in the case of PC I don't) the inference one draws from your post is similar. Correlation does not equal causation. As the son of a dermatologist, I stand by my earler statement.  There may be other factors at play as well.... I'll freely admit...but not joining the BE really hurt HC in a lot of ways. One of them was a drop in national relevance and its consequential drop in how it is viewed as an academic institution. |
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 1, 2019 18:01:30 GMT -5
How do the "second chance" BE schools like Creighton feel about their new conference? Any lessons for a "first chance" school? What does Omaha have that Worcester doesn't ... other than the Oracle?
|
|
