(10-05-2015 08:59 AM)JesseTU Wrote:  U agree, Hurricane Monte deserves better support.

Tulsa attendance is usually weak, we had 3.5 times more people in the stadium than we have students enrolled... but that is still only ~18k people. OU and OSU were at home. Morning games in Oklahoma also mean the choice between college football and taking your kid to Pop Warner football. Add the first weekend of the Fair...

None of those are good excuses, but they are the cause of the weak attendance this week. I'd say a home OU game or a home OSU game costs us ~2,000 fans each. Just not a lot of Tulsa fans, after the 15k hard core fans everyone else is just a casual fan who may choose other entertainment. Many of the "platinum" level seats arent even filled. Donors write a check and don't care. 3rd fiddle in our own media market (OU, OSU. And maybe even Arkansas when they are having a good year).

BUT - at least we report real numbers. The figure is supposed to be attendance, not tickets sold. Given that there were few butts in the platinum seating or box seating Saturday in Tulsa... can we just add 4k to the total? Then every student is entitled to a ticket but only 50% of our student body showed up, so lets add another 2k. POOF -- decent "attendance."

USF and Tulane straight up invented numbers this week. Old habit from when there was minimum attendance requirements for D-1?





Houston fans showed up - so props to them. They probably had 2k people in Tulsa for the game.

Every school adds a bit of fluff to their actual attendance, but damn that's nowhere near 22k.

(10-05-2015 09:47 AM)FastTheo Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 09:07 AM)JesseTU Wrote:  This blew my mind:

Western KY v. Rice, this past weekend:



Official Attendance: 20,124

http://www.riceowls.com/sports/m-footbl/...ice05.html

I thought Rice was a good school That could, you know, count? Integrity isn't that big of a word.

Wow. I will never again complain about empty seats at ECU. That's a Legion Field level of terrible.

I think part of it has to do with the fact that stadium of theirs is getting worse and worse. They need to renovate it yesterday.

(10-05-2015 09:52 AM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 08:59 AM)JesseTU Wrote:  U agree, Hurricane Monte deserves better support.

Tulsa attendance is usually weak, we had 3.5 times more people in the stadium than we have students enrolled... but that is still only ~18k people. OU and OSU were at home. Morning games in Oklahoma also mean the choice between college football and taking your kid to Pop Warner football. Add the first weekend of the Fair...

None of those are good excuses, but they are the cause of the weak attendance this week. I'd say a home OU game or a home OSU game costs us ~2,000 fans each. Just not a lot of Tulsa fans, after the 15k hard core fans everyone else is just a casual fan who may choose other entertainment. Many of the "platinum" level seats arent even filled. Donors write a check and don't care. 3rd fiddle in our own media market (OU, OSU. And maybe even Arkansas when they are having a good year).

BUT - at least we report real numbers. The figure is supposed to be attendance, not tickets sold. Given that there were few butts in the platinum seating or box seating Saturday in Tulsa... can we just add 4k to the total? Then every student is entitled to a ticket but only 50% of our student body showed up, so lets add another 2k. POOF -- decent "attendance."

USF and Tulane straight up invented numbers this week. Old habit from when there was minimum attendance requirements for D-1?





Houston fans showed up - so props to them. They probably had 2k people in Tulsa for the game.

Every school adds a bit of fluff to their actual attendance, but damn that's nowhere near 22k.

I won't claim that Tulane had an actual 20,000 or whatever on Saturday, but that picture was taken from the side that was full and cuts out most of the student section to the right. The fans were probably at their highest number toward the end of the first quarter this game because of the start time and weather.

Examples from the other side (still don't show the student section):



Our attendance is certainly not where it should be and still needs improvement, but that first picture isn't exactly representative either.

(10-05-2015 09:28 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  What happens at private schools (Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Wake Forest, Miami, etc.) is that they count the number of tickets that alumni/fans have purchased. They do not care if these people actually show up provided that someone is holding the ticket to the football game.

I object to being lumped in (Tulsa). Our stadium seats ~32k, it was over half full and we reported 17-18k. Always seems legit to me. But you are right, many people in the high dollar seats don't show up.

Not that I'm bragging about 17k. but damn it, it's an honest 17k!

(10-05-2015 08:45 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:01 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Rhode Island has some basketball history (Jim Harrick and Tom Penders era) and could move up to FBS and draw roughly what UConn has lately. And UMass basketball has gotten to UConn's level before, so much so that the annual rivalry game used to be a very big deal. I'm sure their football program can get to where UConn currently is.

Don't take everything as an insult, I'm just a straight shooter.

UConn hoops is elite. Period. One of the top programs in history. UMass has never and will never get close to that. It's not shooting straight at all to say UConn could fall to a URI level of obscurity after being the most dominant program in the last two decades based on titles.

But UMass was really, really good and nationally relevant. How hard is it to understand that I know UConn has far bigger accomplishments? That's not the argument. And programs come and go, as DePaul, Houston, St. John's, UNLV, NC State, Arkansas, etc... have all been at that level and fallen off. That's not to say UConn is next but no one stays on top forever and now that they're not in a major conference, UConn could very well fall to a level of UMass or URI (though I do think they'd make the Tournament more often, so I'd compare them to Arkansas).

(10-05-2015 02:38 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 08:45 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:01 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Rhode Island has some basketball history (Jim Harrick and Tom Penders era) and could move up to FBS and draw roughly what UConn has lately. And UMass basketball has gotten to UConn's level before, so much so that the annual rivalry game used to be a very big deal. I'm sure their football program can get to where UConn currently is.

Don't take everything as an insult, I'm just a straight shooter.

UConn hoops is elite. Period. One of the top programs in history. UMass has never and will never get close to that. It's not shooting straight at all to say UConn could fall to a URI level of obscurity after being the most dominant program in the last two decades based on titles.

But UMass was really, really good and nationally relevant. How hard is it to understand that I know UConn has far bigger accomplishments? That's not the argument. And programs come and go, as DePaul, Houston, St. John's, UNLV, NC State, Arkansas, etc... have all been at that level and fallen off. That's not to say UConn is next but no one stays on top forever and now that they're not in a major conference, UConn could very well fall to a level of UMass or URI (though I do think they'd make the Tournament more often, so I'd compare them to Arkansas).

I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though. Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something. C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far as historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 02:38 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 08:45 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:01 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Rhode Island has some basketball history (Jim Harrick and Tom Penders era) and could move up to FBS and draw roughly what UConn has lately. And UMass basketball has gotten to UConn's level before, so much so that the annual rivalry game used to be a very big deal. I'm sure their football program can get to where UConn currently is.

Don't take everything as an insult, I'm just a straight shooter.

UConn hoops is elite. Period. One of the top programs in history. UMass has never and will never get close to that. It's not shooting straight at all to say UConn could fall to a URI level of obscurity after being the most dominant program in the last two decades based on titles.

But UMass was really, really good and nationally relevant. How hard is it to understand that I know UConn has far bigger accomplishments? That's not the argument. And programs come and go, as DePaul, Houston, St. John's, UNLV, NC State, Arkansas, etc... have all been at that level and fallen off. That's not to say UConn is next but no one stays on top forever and now that they're not in a major conference, UConn could very well fall to a level of UMass or URI (though I do think they'd make the Tournament more often, so I'd compare them to Arkansas).

I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though. Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI or UMass or something. C'mom. Let's be serious.

Troll gonna troll. Not surprising that it's a Houston fan - completely irrelevant basketball program with the worst attendance in the AAC.

(10-05-2015 09:07 AM)JesseTU Wrote:  This blew my mind:

Western KY v. Rice, this past weekend:



Official Attendance: 20,124

http://www.riceowls.com/sports/m-footbl/...ice05.html

I thought Rice was a good school That could, you know, count? Integrity isn't that big of a word.

I've been to a middle school game with more people than that

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though.

No, they're not. UConn has only been really good for about a quarter century. The rest have been really good for over 50 years (Duke to a lesser extent, Coach K took them to the next level). UConn almost always cashes in when they get to the Final Four (something Georgetown, Arkansas and Houston could learn from) and their accomplishments are impressive but they are not on that level, they don't even make the NCAA Tournament every year.

Quote: Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something.

You're missing the point. First, UCLA rarely wins championships (they've only won 1 title since Wooden) but they're good every year and just went to three straight Final Fours relatively recently, so they've obviously been relevant lately. And second, if UConn goes a while without making the Final Four or winning a title people won't treat them any worse so long as they make the Tournament every year. If not, UConn could become UMass or URI, it is possible. It happened to Houston years back.

Quote:C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far has historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

No you be serious. UConn is a fine program and an elite at the moment but they aren't infallible or incapable of falling back to the pack. And just because they have better luck in the crapshoot of the NCAA Tournament doesn't mean they're historically better than numerous programs that more or less have the same amount of history. They weren't close to the best team in 2011 or '14 for example. And high level recruits guarantee nothing.

That said, I foresee UConn continuing on at a high level but they don't have to stay on top forever. No one does, especially when their legendary coach leaves (Houston, Indiana, DePaul, UNLV, etc...). We'll see if UConn becomes a UNC/Louisville or a UNLV/Houston or even a UMass/URI as their new coach takes full control. Good luck.

(10-05-2015 02:44 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Troll gonna troll. Not surprising that it's a Houston fan - completely irrelevant basketball program with the worst attendance in the AAC.

I'm not trolling, I'm just a straight observer about sports and life. You call me a troll because you don't want to hear it (naturally, you guys are homers, we all are). UConn is elite now but that can change. Like I said, good luck.

(10-05-2015 03:24 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though.

No, they're not. UConn has only been really good for about a quarter century. The rest have been really good for over 50 years (Duke to a lesser extent, Coach K took them to the next level). UConn almost always cashes in when they get to the Final Four (something Georgetown, Arkansas and Houston could learn from) and their accomplishments are impressive but they are not on that level, they don't even make the NCAA Tournament every year.

Quote: Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something.

You're missing the point. First, UCLA rarely wins championships (they've only won 1 title since Wooden) but they're good every year and just went to three straight Final Fours relatively recently, so they've obviously been relevant lately. And second, if UConn goes a while without making the Final Four or winning a title people won't treat them any worse so long as they make the Tournament every year. If not, UConn could become UMass or URI, it is possible. It happened to Houston years back.

Quote:C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far has historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

No you be serious. UConn is a fine program and an elite at the moment but they aren't infallible or incapable of falling back to the pack. And just because they have better luck in the crapshoot of the NCAA Tournament doesn't mean they're historically better than numerous programs that more or less have the same amount of history. They weren't close to the best team in 2011 or '14 for example. And high level recruits guarantee nothing.

That said, I foresee UConn continuing on at a high level but they don't have to stay on top forever. No one does, especially when their legendary coach leaves (Houston, Indiana, DePaul, UNLV, etc...). We'll see if UConn becomes a UNC/Louisville or a UNLV/Houston or even a UMass/URI as their new coach takes full control. Good luck.

The bolded part shows your stupidity. At the very worst, UCONN would be a UNLV/Houston. It's not possible to be a UMass/URI given the past successes.

We'll also always have more than 400 fans attend a basketball game so we'll never be as bad as a Houston. Continue your troll.

(10-05-2015 03:24 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though.

No, they're not. UConn has only been really good for about a quarter century. The rest have been really good for over 50 years (Duke to a lesser extent, Coach K took them to the next level). UConn almost always cashes in when they get to the Final Four (something Georgetown, Arkansas and Houston could learn from) and their accomplishments are impressive but they are not on that level, they don't even make the NCAA Tournament every year.

Quote: Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something.

You're missing the point. First, UCLA rarely wins championships (they've only won 1 title since Wooden) but they're good every year and just went to three straight Final Fours relatively recently, so they've obviously been relevant lately. And second, if UConn goes a while without making the Final Four or winning a title people won't treat them any worse so long as they make the Tournament every year. If not, UConn could become UMass or URI, it is possible. It happened to Houston years back.

Quote:C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far has historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

No you be serious. UConn is a fine program and an elite at the moment but they aren't infallible or incapable of falling back to the pack. And just because they have better luck in the crapshoot of the NCAA Tournament doesn't mean they're historically better than numerous programs that more or less have the same amount of history. They weren't close to the best team in 2011 or '14 for example. And high level recruits guarantee nothing.

That said, I foresee UConn continuing on at a high level but they don't have to stay on top forever. No one does, especially when their legendary coach leaves (Houston, Indiana, DePaul, UNLV, etc...). We'll see if UConn becomes a UNC/Louisville or a UNLV/Houston or even a UMass/URI as their new coach takes full control. Good luck.

OK.

(10-05-2015 03:33 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 03:24 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though.

No, they're not. UConn has only been really good for about a quarter century. The rest have been really good for over 50 years (Duke to a lesser extent, Coach K took them to the next level). UConn almost always cashes in when they get to the Final Four (something Georgetown, Arkansas and Houston could learn from) and their accomplishments are impressive but they are not on that level, they don't even make the NCAA Tournament every year.

Quote: Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something.

You're missing the point. First, UCLA rarely wins championships (they've only won 1 title since Wooden) but they're good every year and just went to three straight Final Fours relatively recently, so they've obviously been relevant lately. And second, if UConn goes a while without making the Final Four or winning a title people won't treat them any worse so long as they make the Tournament every year. If not, UConn could become UMass or URI, it is possible. It happened to Houston years back.

Quote:C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far has historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

No you be serious. UConn is a fine program and an elite at the moment but they aren't infallible or incapable of falling back to the pack. And just because they have better luck in the crapshoot of the NCAA Tournament doesn't mean they're historically better than numerous programs that more or less have the same amount of history. They weren't close to the best team in 2011 or '14 for example. And high level recruits guarantee nothing.

That said, I foresee UConn continuing on at a high level but they don't have to stay on top forever. No one does, especially when their legendary coach leaves (Houston, Indiana, DePaul, UNLV, etc...). We'll see if UConn becomes a UNC/Louisville or a UNLV/Houston or even a UMass/URI as their new coach takes full control. Good luck.

The bolded part shows your stupidity. At the very worst, UCONN would be a UNLV/Houston. It's not possible to be a UMass/URI given the past successes.

We'll also always have more than 400 fans attend a basketball game so we'll never be as bad as a Houston. Continue your troll.

I don't see how we could even fall to a Houston/UNLV level unless we had to vacate some titles.

(10-05-2015 03:33 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  The bolded part shows your stupidity. At the very worst, UCONN would be a UNLV/Houston. It's not possible to be a UMass/URI given the past successes.

We'll also always have more than 400 fans attend a basketball game so we'll never be as bad as a Houston. Continue your troll.

Well the comparison I was making is that UConn could continue being elite, could be an okay FBS program with a great past or just a regional flagship not at a low level but not too high either.

Granted UH hasn't been okay lately but has more or less been okay since Tom Penders took over.

(10-05-2015 03:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 03:33 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  The bolded part shows your stupidity. At the very worst, UCONN would be a UNLV/Houston. It's not possible to be a UMass/URI given the past successes.

We'll also always have more than 400 fans attend a basketball game so we'll never be as bad as a Houston. Continue your troll.

Well the comparison I was making is that UConn could continue being elite, could be an okay FBS program with a great past or just a regional flagship not at a low level but not too high either.

Granted UH hasn't been okay lately but has more or less been okay since Tom Penders took over.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-b...-all-time/

And look, we know women's hoops doesn't get you any points here, but it is what it is. It's part of the reason why UConn is so popular in CT. Younger people and males follow the men, while the women's fanbase skews older and more female. Either way, UConn and the people in CT feel that we breathe rarified air and will work very hard to make sure that success is maintained for both programs. UConn hoops is the only special thing in sports that CT owns and we won't relinquish it lightly.

Well see if they can continue their trajectory there once Geno retires. Tennessee has already slipped without Pat Summit though they were already trending downward before she left.

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though. Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something. C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far as historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

No doubt UConn is an elite bball school. But for whatever reason the term "blue blood" seems to apply only to those schools you mentioned. It appears to be something set in stone in the 70s or so.

Sort of like joining an old social club in a place like Boston or New Orleans--you're good to go based on your grandfather, but no up and comers allowed even if they've been elite for 20 years.

(10-05-2015 06:03 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(10-05-2015 02:42 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  I guess. UConn is in the conversation with programs like UCLA, UNC, Duke, UK, IU and KU though. Those are the only comparable programs to UConn. I mean UCLA hasn't really been relevant in a long time, but people don't treat them like some URI, UMass, DePaul, UNLV or something. C'mon. Let's be serious. UConn occupies a much higher rung as far as historically elite hoops programs go and we are still elite. We have a top 3 class coming in next year and a very good group this year. We have a shot to make deep runs and win chips for the forseeable future.

No doubt UConn is an elite bball school. But for whatever reason the term "blue blood" seems to apply only to those schools you mentioned. It appears to be something set in stone in the 70s or so.

Sort of like joining an old social club in a place like Boston or New Orleans--you're good to go based on your grandfather, but no up and comers allowed even if they've been elite for 20 years.

Perhaps UCONN is not a "blue blood" but those schools mentioned are its peers. Anyone who categorizes UCONN with the likes of UMass is nothing more than a troll.

I never said you were like UMass or Rhode Island, I said you could fall back to that level and the reality is that you could. Or you could end up like North Carolina.

Those schools are not your peers, yet anyways, as they have more decades of success as compared to UConn. Houston had about as many Final Fours as Duke (more, and as many title game appearances), Indiana and Kansas as of 1984 and even played in some of the most important games in college basketball history, did that make UH a part of that group?

UConn is a notch below that group, in a place with Georgetown, Oklahoma State, Louisville, Arkansas, Michigan State, Syracuse, Ohio State, Cincinnati, Michigan, Arizona, and Florida (Houston and UNLV may also fit but not imo). THOSE are your peers.