2016-17
--------------
Brown 6,504
Albany 5,864
Samford 7,422
Lipscomb 5,724
Bowling Green 7,162
Texas South 6,612
Farleigh Dickenson 7,017
Marshall 10,540
Tulane 10,328
SMU 11,344
Temple 10,718
Xavier 13,477
USF 12,576
Uconn 13,428
UCF 9,510
Tulsa 13,386
Memphis 12,787
Houston 13,176


2016-17
Total Average 9,865 +4.8%
Non Conf Avg 7,814 -0.9%
Conf Avg 11,917 +10.6%

Prior Year 2015-16
Total Average 9,415
Non Conf Avg 7,882
Conf Avg 10,778

Can't complain a bit with the attendance post Christmas.

Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Please write a big check to the Athletic Department and request that it be used to fund OOC BB scheduling. That still wouldn't work because good teams don't like to play OOC road games.

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with losing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

Bohn most recently said "about 12,000" in this article from about a month ago

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/ne...r-87m.html

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

(03-03-2017 10:55 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Please write a big check to the Athletic Department and request that it be used to fund OOC BB scheduling. That still wouldn't work because good teams don't like to play OOC road games.

It doesn't have anything to do with money. Unfortunately Michigan screwed them and it was to late to go to any plan B, but there are still quite a few teams that will do home and away even in some cases where you have to give more than 1 game. I would definitely be in favor of adding Dayton once again home and away and some of the mac teams. They garner more interest attendance wise than some of the other ooc teams. The balance this year just didn't work out given the give back for Iowa St. and Butler were both on the road. It is what it is, but when it come to attendance it's as much marketing the product as anything when you are competing with football in November and December. You have to have some sizzle. If they can make a decent run in both tourneys this year, it will likely ease the ooc burden next year as momentum will carry over.

(03-03-2017 03:20 PM)dsquare Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:55 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Please write a big check to the Athletic Department and request that it be used to fund OOC BB scheduling. That still wouldn't work because good teams don't like to play OOC road games.

It doesn't have anything to do with money. Unfortunately Michigan screwed them and it was to late to go to any plan B, but there are still quite a few teams that will do home and away even in some cases where you have to give more than 1 game. I would definitely be in favor of adding Dayton once again home and away and some of the mac teams. They garner more interest attendance wise than some of the other ooc teams. The balance this year just didn't work out given the give back for Iowa St. and Butler were both on the road. It is what it is, but when it come to attendance it's as much marketing the product as anything when you are competing with football in November and December. You have to have some sizzle. If they can make a decent run in both tourneys this year, it will likely ease the ooc burden next year as momentum will carry over.

His OOC comment I read as a general statement and not the Michigan game.

Scheduling is very difficult because everybody wants 18 home games and teams don't want to travel to a facility where they have a chance of losing. Outside of a few TV generated games a year this holds true.

And since the American Conference is not seen as a money generator we don't get invited to those parties. We also do not get invited to holiday tournaments.

All this changes with a good March run. At least the invited games. Most good teams still won't come to the Shoe.

(03-03-2017 05:45 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 03:20 PM)dsquare Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:55 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Please write a big check to the Athletic Department and request that it be used to fund OOC BB scheduling. That still wouldn't work because good teams don't like to play OOC road games.

It doesn't have anything to do with money. Unfortunately Michigan screwed them and it was to late to go to any plan B, but there are still quite a few teams that will do home and away even in some cases where you have to give more than 1 game. I would definitely be in favor of adding Dayton once again home and away and some of the mac teams. They garner more interest attendance wise than some of the other ooc teams. The balance this year just didn't work out given the give back for Iowa St. and Butler were both on the road. It is what it is, but when it come to attendance it's as much marketing the product as anything when you are competing with football in November and December. You have to have some sizzle. If they can make a decent run in both tourneys this year, it will likely ease the ooc burden next year as momentum will carry over.

His OOC comment I read as a general statement and not the Michigan game.

Scheduling is very difficult because everybody wants 18 home games and teams don't want to travel to a facility where they have a chance of losing. Outside of a few TV generated games a year this holds true.

And since the American Conference is not seen as a money generator we don't get invited to those parties. We also do not get invited to holiday tournaments.

All this changes with a good March run. At least the invited games. Most good teams still won't come to the Shoe.

Which is imperative given our conference situation. And a conference championship would not hurt either. UC absolutely must establish itself as THE BEST in the AAC.

(03-03-2017 11:35 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

Where's CougarRed to come count all of the dots when you need him?

(03-03-2017 11:35 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

When I get a detailed summary of seating - section by section - of the new 5/3, I'll get back with you.

(03-03-2017 11:38 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:35 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

Where's CougarRed to come count all of the dots when you need him?

For two dudes who get really annoyed by this topic, you sure like to talk about it.

(03-03-2017 11:38 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:35 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

Where's CougarRed to come count all of the dots when you need him?

He's like Beetlejuice... Except once you've got him here, you can't make him go away by saying his name three times again...

(03-04-2017 08:17 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:38 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:35 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 10:52 AM)dsquare Wrote:  Agree, considering how bad the home ocs was, a solid year. If you can beat a good team at home early, it will fuel attendance. We really didn't have that this year to get some momentum.

Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

Where's CougarRed to come count all of the dots when you need him?

He's like Beetlejuice... Except once you've got him here, you can't make him go away by saying his name three times again...

Which makes you wonder why they continue to talk about it, particularly on threads with unrelated topics.

I've always felt a bit sorry for Mick and his inability to draw like his predecessor. To a certain extent, his biggest sin is that he's not Bob Huggins. This is a shame, because Mick is a much better man than Huggins could hope to be.

(03-04-2017 08:59 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(03-04-2017 08:17 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:38 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:35 AM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(03-03-2017 11:26 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  Drop 13,176 in the equation against Michigan and you likely break through the 10,000 barrier for the season. I'm fine with loosing some capacity for a more comfortable 5th/3rd in '18 but I'd hate to see it drop below 11,500. With an improving team and a first class facility that should fill up most every night. It seems UC has been vague with regard to the new capacity but they may not really know until they tear out the current infrastructure.

BearcatUC in 3...2...1

Or doesn't he care about BB capacity conspiracies?

Where's CougarRed to come count all of the dots when you need him?

He's like Beetlejuice... Except once you've got him here, you can't make him go away by saying his name three times again...

Which makes you wonder why they continue to talk about it, particularly on threads with unrelated topics.

I've always felt a bit sorry for Mick and his inability to draw like his predecessor. To a certain extent, his biggest sin is that he's not Bob Huggins. This is a shame, because Mick is a much better man than Huggins could hope to be.

(Just to be clear, I was referencing the Houston guy...)

Agree with you on the rest.