(12-19-2011 02:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 02:22 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 01:03 PM)mjs Wrote:  Mike never did anything to me. He was always extremely nice to me, my wife, and young son. I remember he spent about an hour at the bar at the hotel in Shreveport talking to my wife and I, after a particularly tough loss to Centenary. He was friendly to my son and remembered his name. I loved his enthusiasm and his sense of humor. While attendance was certainly better back then, there were many times that it was embarrassingly poor. Back then I really worried about attendance because the survival of our program depended on it. I think it is human nature to focus on the good things about the past. Most seem to have forgotten how big a fight it was to get folks out to games even during the Newell era. It took a lot of us begging folks to buy season tickets to help the program survive. I'm not a good salesman and hate to ask folks for money, but I believe I sold 42 season tickets that year. Of course, I think Dr. J is the only one left on board.

That's not a bad percentage, 41 smart people out of 42. Wish we could shoot free throws like that.

The thing about those $75 season tickets as compared to today's season tickets is, the $75 folks showed up and most ticket buyers today don't. Why, I really don't know for sure, but I think that part of it is, we don't win like we did then, and the teams aren't as exciting, and neither is the coach.

I also tend to believe the folks who bought tickets from me (and others) felt like if they spent the money they were going to use the tickets. Most of the prime ticket holders today seem to be just using it as a tax write-off or a way to say "I support the local team".

I think you have hit on a very important aspect of what has happened. When you and I were out pounding the pavement to sell tickets, we sold them mostly to individuals and not corportations. The emphasis now is on corporate sales, not people sales. This has always led to empty seats. When individuals buy season tickets, they are far more likely to show up to occupy the seats they bought.

But although individuals show up more, they are far more sensitive to pricing, etc. than corporations, and the quality of the entertainment provided is also highly relevant. Corporations may renew their tickets year after year for tax purposes whether anybody shows up or not, and are not nearly as concerned about the cost. We have lost a lot of individual ticket holders for primarily two reasons:

1) The price of a season ticket went through the roof when the Jack Stephens Center opened. This turned off a tremendous amount of previous season ticket holders. They have never returned, in large part due to the price, and reason #2 below;

2) The quality of the product in the last few years has been mediocre to poor. Grinderball just isn't going to make most people's idea of a fun night out. And when you lose individuals for this reason, without any readily apparent changes, they aren't likely to come back.

First time in awhile I've heard the term "Grinderball" used. I normally expect to hear it from LRTrojan, but maybe it's becoming part of the vernacular of several of our fans.

(12-19-2011 04:05 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  First time in awhile I've heard the term "Grinderball" used. I normally expect to hear it from LRTrojan, but maybe it's becoming part of the vernacular of several of our fans.

Actually I think it was Insideualr that coined the phrase.

"Grinderball" is somewhat a derogative sounding term. How about "conservative game strategy"?

(12-19-2011 04:11 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  "Grinderball" is somewhat a derogative sounding term. How about "conservative game strategy"?

In Your Face post-up half-court offense. Blue collar.

Whatever.

(12-18-2011 06:27 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 04:46 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  I do remember there were games when the enthusiasm was greater than we are having now when we are 3-9. We won more games . . . and that will cause more enthusiasmin more people . . . regardless of the teams we are beating. There are many fans that are more enthusiastic beating Hardin-Simmons like a drum every time than losing close ones to SMU and Missouri State. To each his own. Not me. I want the tougher competition and would HATE going back to the previous scheduling, even if it meant more enthusiasm in the masses. As to every home game being exciting in the old days, I can only assume that was hyperbole to make a point. For your average non-basketball-junkies in our midst, there were plenty of nights that the puny crowds and beating pitiful competition left something to be desired on the excitement scale.
I would have no problem with giving away a few tickets as prizes. I just think that to compare the size of crowds receiving giveaways and the size of crowds paying real money to get in is not a really valid comparison.

It's not just because we're 3-9 that the enthusiasm is down. There hasn't been much enthusiasm in this program in years. It hasn't been worth a **** since we moved to the Jack. Sure there have been some exciting games over the years. The only problem is that there aren't very many people there to get excited. But, there have been a lot of dull grinder games too. I like the better competition also, but the enthusiasm was much better when you are a winner.

I don't seem to remember all of the "plenty of nights that the puny crowds and beating pitiful competition". I remember we beat some "pitiful" competition some, just as we do now. I don't remember lots of "puny" crowds in those days. "Puny" crowds are what Steve Shields coached teams draw. Sure the Sun Belt is a better league than the TAAC was overall. I stayed with Steve for about five or six years. His teams go up and down like a yo-yo, depending on the type of recruits he can bring in and the caliber of the rest of the Sun Belt.

I didn't expect any of Shields' fan club to agree with my post. But you can't truthfully say that I didn't state the facts. Anyone who is truly pleased and satisfied with the present state of this program, the pitiful crowds, and this coach, it's pretty obvious that it doesn't take much to please them.

And no hyperbole or any other bull****. Most all home games were exciting to me, and they must have been for most all those other folks who have dropped by the wayside since then.

I'm not criticizing anyone for selective memory. We're all probably guilty of that at times. And I didn't mean to imply that mixed in with your opinions were absolutely no facts. I'm not satisfied with our record, but I'm OK with a program who sends its team to the Big Dance. And I'm pleased that you used to get excited at the games. By my definition, I got excited at the SMU, Oral Roberts, Milwaukee games, and I was excited listening to the LaTech game. Most of all, I was excited attending 4 straight upsets in Hot Springs last March.

I'd love to know the real head count of "all those folks" at our Hardin-Simmons and Stetson games.

Could Newell have kept up the winning? Who knows, but after winning 17 his first year, he won twenty or more each year he was the coach. He didn't even flirt with a losing season.


I guess I'm alone in my thoughts about Coach Newell . . . just me and every D1 AD who has had an opportunity to hire him over the last many years.

(12-19-2011 01:08 AM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 12:23 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 10:42 PM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:38 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 06:48 PM)mjs Wrote:  I certainly give credit to Newell for some of the excitement generated and we certainly had some nice crowds on occasion. So when Newell took over he eventually made UALR the new and exciting thing to do in Little Rock. Could that have continued? Maybe, maybe not.
Yes, we may draw more when we are winning or have a flamboyant coach, but those folks will likely be gone when the losing starts or the coach changes.

If you aren't going to give Newell the credit, who the **** are you going to give it to?

And we only had "nice" crowds on occasion huh? After Newell's first year, I don't ever remember a crowd as piss poor as the crowds we've drawn this year, and that's after winning the tournament. I don't give a damn if cheap tickets or cheap whores drew them to the games. They were there and they were enthusiastic. They aren't there now and the ones that are, aren't very enthusiastic.

Could Newell have kept up the winning? Who knows, but after winning 17 his first year, he won twenty or more each year he was the coach. He didn't even flirt with a losing season. If he'd stayed long enough, he very likely would have had a down year sometime. I'll bet that had he stayed, we wouldn't be drawing these puny 1,200 or 1,500 a game, that is before that tack another thousand on the count.

And the part about having a flamboyant coach and drawing good crowds, and then they drop off when he starts losing. Well, if you're gonna give Newell credit for anything, it would have to be that he was flamboyant. As far as the crowds dropping off when the coach started losing. Well, again we'll never know. Newell never came close to losing here.

LRTrojan- I can't find any fault in your points about Newell. Why some don't want to give him his due is beyond me. And I also agree that things have gotten pretty flat as far as enthusiasm in our program. And having a regular season like we did last year, and what appears to probably be an even worse season this year, certainly isn't going to get what little fan base we have fired up. Much less attract any new fans. I am not satisfied with the program in its present state, and frankly, I'm surprised by some of the long time guys who seem to be.

Yes, Newell occasionally drew nice crowds. We actually sold out the State House Convention Center a few times. We would list the attendance as 5200. No way that place sat more than 2500. If you remember there were risers about 10 rows up on each side and bleachers in the end zones. It did not seat as much as the lower bowl at Stephens. I was involved in the program back then and Newell was frequently disgusted with the attendance. When we moved to Barton he wanted to curtain off both ends of the arena so it wouldn't look so empty. He reduced tickets to $3 dollars in the corners and $2 in the endzones. Tickets were often given away by businesses and promotions by Affiliated Foods were plentiful. As Jim said we had to beg and plead with friends, family, etc. to buy season tickets for $75 so the program wouldn't shut down. I won't disagree that attendance was better and enthusiasm higher, but a lot of folks have selective memory about how "great" attendance and support was back then.

I know several things for sure:

1) Enthusiasm for the program was at an all time high under Newell. And this was without the facilities the program has now.
2) No matter what it cost (or didn't cost) the attendees back then, they at least showed up. Not only at the Convention Center, but also at Barton, in greater numbers than they do today.
3) Support was certainly greater from an interest standpoint, if maybe not from a financial standpoint.
4) UALR basketball had some relevance to the community. Now it has next to none.
5) While we now have a beautiful on campus arena that was a dream to so many of us those years ago, the pizzazz has seemed to have gone. Instead we have Seat Police making sure the seats stay empty and pristine for people that never show to sit in them.
6) Lately, we just don't win very much.

Balogna sandwiches and grocery give-aways were nice. Bigger crowds make for more "excitement." Give-away tickets make for bigger crowds. Running your program into the financial toilet not so good.

(12-19-2011 03:23 PM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 02:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 02:22 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 01:03 PM)mjs Wrote:  Mike never did anything to me. He was always extremely nice to me, my wife, and young son. I remember he spent about an hour at the bar at the hotel in Shreveport talking to my wife and I, after a particularly tough loss to Centenary. He was friendly to my son and remembered his name. I loved his enthusiasm and his sense of humor. While attendance was certainly better back then, there were many times that it was embarrassingly poor. Back then I really worried about attendance because the survival of our program depended on it. I think it is human nature to focus on the good things about the past. Most seem to have forgotten how big a fight it was to get folks out to games even during the Newell era. It took a lot of us begging folks to buy season tickets to help the program survive. I'm not a good salesman and hate to ask folks for money, but I believe I sold 42 season tickets that year. Of course, I think Dr. J is the only one left on board.

That's not a bad percentage, 41 smart people out of 42. Wish we could shoot free throws like that.

The thing about those $75 season tickets as compared to today's season tickets is, the $75 folks showed up and most ticket buyers today don't. Why, I really don't know for sure, but I think that part of it is, we don't win like we did then, and the teams aren't as exciting, and neither is the coach.

I also tend to believe the folks who bought tickets from me (and others) felt like if they spent the money they were going to use the tickets. Most of the prime ticket holders today seem to be just using it as a tax write-off or a way to say "I support the local team".

I think you have hit on a very important aspect of what has happened. When you and I were out pounding the pavement to sell tickets, we sold them mostly to individuals and not corportations. The emphasis now is on corporate sales, not people sales. This has always led to empty seats. When individuals buy season tickets, they are far more likely to show up to occupy the seats they bought.

But although individuals show up more, they are far more sensitive to pricing, etc. than corporations, and the quality of the entertainment provided is also highly relevant. Corporations may renew their tickets year after year for tax purposes whether anybody shows up or not, and are not nearly as concerned about the cost. We have lost a lot of individual ticket holders for primarily two reasons:

1) The price of a season ticket went through the roof when the Jack Stephens Center opened. This turned off a tremendous amount of previous season ticket holders. They have never returned, in large part due to the price, and reason #2 below;

2) The quality of the product in the last few years has been mediocre to poor. Grinderball just isn't going to make most people's idea of a fun night out. And when you lose individuals for this reason, without any readily apparent changes, they aren't likely to come back.

The style of basketball has nothing to do with it. The number of wins against the better competition does.

(12-19-2011 06:23 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  Could Newell have kept up the winning? Who knows, but after winning 17 his first year, he won twenty or more each year he was the coach. He didn't even flirt with a losing season.


I guess I'm alone in my thoughts about Coach Newell . . . just me and every D1 AD who has had an opportunity to hire him over the last many years.

While I was extolling Newell's virtues I forgot that little factoid.

(12-19-2011 06:28 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 01:08 AM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 12:23 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 10:42 PM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 09:38 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  If you aren't going to give Newell the credit, who the **** are you going to give it to?

And we only had "nice" crowds on occasion huh? After Newell's first year, I don't ever remember a crowd as piss poor as the crowds we've drawn this year, and that's after winning the tournament. I don't give a damn if cheap tickets or cheap whores drew them to the games. They were there and they were enthusiastic. They aren't there now and the ones that are, aren't very enthusiastic.

Could Newell have kept up the winning? Who knows, but after winning 17 his first year, he won twenty or more each year he was the coach. He didn't even flirt with a losing season. If he'd stayed long enough, he very likely would have had a down year sometime. I'll bet that had he stayed, we wouldn't be drawing these puny 1,200 or 1,500 a game, that is before that tack another thousand on the count.

And the part about having a flamboyant coach and drawing good crowds, and then they drop off when he starts losing. Well, if you're gonna give Newell credit for anything, it would have to be that he was flamboyant. As far as the crowds dropping off when the coach started losing. Well, again we'll never know. Newell never came close to losing here.

LRTrojan- I can't find any fault in your points about Newell. Why some don't want to give him his due is beyond me. And I also agree that things have gotten pretty flat as far as enthusiasm in our program. And having a regular season like we did last year, and what appears to probably be an even worse season this year, certainly isn't going to get what little fan base we have fired up. Much less attract any new fans. I am not satisfied with the program in its present state, and frankly, I'm surprised by some of the long time guys who seem to be.

Yes, Newell occasionally drew nice crowds. We actually sold out the State House Convention Center a few times. We would list the attendance as 5200. No way that place sat more than 2500. If you remember there were risers about 10 rows up on each side and bleachers in the end zones. It did not seat as much as the lower bowl at Stephens. I was involved in the program back then and Newell was frequently disgusted with the attendance. When we moved to Barton he wanted to curtain off both ends of the arena so it wouldn't look so empty. He reduced tickets to $3 dollars in the corners and $2 in the endzones. Tickets were often given away by businesses and promotions by Affiliated Foods were plentiful. As Jim said we had to beg and plead with friends, family, etc. to buy season tickets for $75 so the program wouldn't shut down. I won't disagree that attendance was better and enthusiasm higher, but a lot of folks have selective memory about how "great" attendance and support was back then.

I know several things for sure:

1) Enthusiasm for the program was at an all time high under Newell. And this was without the facilities the program has now.
2) No matter what it cost (or didn't cost) the attendees back then, they at least showed up. Not only at the Convention Center, but also at Barton, in greater numbers than they do today.
3) Support was certainly greater from an interest standpoint, if maybe not from a financial standpoint.
4) UALR basketball had some relevance to the community. Now it has next to none.
5) While we now have a beautiful on campus arena that was a dream to so many of us those years ago, the pizzazz has seemed to have gone. Instead we have Seat Police making sure the seats stay empty and pristine for people that never show to sit in them.
6) Lately, we just don't win very much.

Balogna sandwiches and grocery give-aways were nice. Bigger crowds make for more "excitement." Give-away tickets make for bigger crowds. Running your program into the financial toilet not so good.

I have to admit I miss the bologna sandwichs. Rick Mello finally decided to stop that as he told me "We are the only DI program in the country who feeds all our fans". That actually pissed a lot of people off- that and messing with the parking caused several people sitting around me to drop their season tickets. Too each his own. I guess we've gone from one extreme to the other- free dinner and cheap/or free tickets to quite high priced tickets and expensive concessions. Maybe there is room for some middle ground.

(12-19-2011 06:41 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:28 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 01:08 AM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 12:23 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 10:42 PM)PTJR Wrote:  LRTrojan- I can't find any fault in your points about Newell. Why some don't want to give him his due is beyond me. And I also agree that things have gotten pretty flat as far as enthusiasm in our program. And having a regular season like we did last year, and what appears to probably be an even worse season this year, certainly isn't going to get what little fan base we have fired up. Much less attract any new fans. I am not satisfied with the program in its present state, and frankly, I'm surprised by some of the long time guys who seem to be.

Yes, Newell occasionally drew nice crowds. We actually sold out the State House Convention Center a few times. We would list the attendance as 5200. No way that place sat more than 2500. If you remember there were risers about 10 rows up on each side and bleachers in the end zones. It did not seat as much as the lower bowl at Stephens. I was involved in the program back then and Newell was frequently disgusted with the attendance. When we moved to Barton he wanted to curtain off both ends of the arena so it wouldn't look so empty. He reduced tickets to $3 dollars in the corners and $2 in the endzones. Tickets were often given away by businesses and promotions by Affiliated Foods were plentiful. As Jim said we had to beg and plead with friends, family, etc. to buy season tickets for $75 so the program wouldn't shut down. I won't disagree that attendance was better and enthusiasm higher, but a lot of folks have selective memory about how "great" attendance and support was back then.

I know several things for sure:

1) Enthusiasm for the program was at an all time high under Newell. And this was without the facilities the program has now.
2) No matter what it cost (or didn't cost) the attendees back then, they at least showed up. Not only at the Convention Center, but also at Barton, in greater numbers than they do today.
3) Support was certainly greater from an interest standpoint, if maybe not from a financial standpoint.
4) UALR basketball had some relevance to the community. Now it has next to none.
5) While we now have a beautiful on campus arena that was a dream to so many of us those years ago, the pizzazz has seemed to have gone. Instead we have Seat Police making sure the seats stay empty and pristine for people that never show to sit in them.
6) Lately, we just don't win very much.

Balogna sandwiches and grocery give-aways were nice. Bigger crowds make for more "excitement." Give-away tickets make for bigger crowds. Running your program into the financial toilet not so good.

I have to admit I miss the bologna sandwichs. Rick Mello finally decided to stop that as he told me "We are the only DI program in the country who feeds all our fans". That actually pissed a lot of people off- that and messing with the parking caused several people sitting around me to drop their season tickets. Too each his own. I guess we've gone from one extreme to the other- free dinner and cheap/or free tickets to quite high priced tickets and expensive concessions. Maybe there is room for some middle ground.

I actually had people sitting next to me (I sold them season tickets) who stopped coming because they were mad about the Trojan standing in their line of sight. If you're not a real basketball fan, there are many excuses you can latch on to for not coming.

(12-19-2011 06:44 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:41 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:28 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 01:08 AM)PTJR Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 12:23 AM)mjs Wrote:  Yes, Newell occasionally drew nice crowds. We actually sold out the State House Convention Center a few times. We would list the attendance as 5200. No way that place sat more than 2500. If you remember there were risers about 10 rows up on each side and bleachers in the end zones. It did not seat as much as the lower bowl at Stephens. I was involved in the program back then and Newell was frequently disgusted with the attendance. When we moved to Barton he wanted to curtain off both ends of the arena so it wouldn't look so empty. He reduced tickets to $3 dollars in the corners and $2 in the endzones. Tickets were often given away by businesses and promotions by Affiliated Foods were plentiful. As Jim said we had to beg and plead with friends, family, etc. to buy season tickets for $75 so the program wouldn't shut down. I won't disagree that attendance was better and enthusiasm higher, but a lot of folks have selective memory about how "great" attendance and support was back then.

I know several things for sure:

1) Enthusiasm for the program was at an all time high under Newell. And this was without the facilities the program has now.
2) No matter what it cost (or didn't cost) the attendees back then, they at least showed up. Not only at the Convention Center, but also at Barton, in greater numbers than they do today.
3) Support was certainly greater from an interest standpoint, if maybe not from a financial standpoint.
4) UALR basketball had some relevance to the community. Now it has next to none.
5) While we now have a beautiful on campus arena that was a dream to so many of us those years ago, the pizzazz has seemed to have gone. Instead we have Seat Police making sure the seats stay empty and pristine for people that never show to sit in them.
6) Lately, we just don't win very much.

Balogna sandwiches and grocery give-aways were nice. Bigger crowds make for more "excitement." Give-away tickets make for bigger crowds. Running your program into the financial toilet not so good.

I have to admit I miss the bologna sandwichs. Rick Mello finally decided to stop that as he told me "We are the only DI program in the country who feeds all our fans". That actually pissed a lot of people off- that and messing with the parking caused several people sitting around me to drop their season tickets. Too each his own. I guess we've gone from one extreme to the other- free dinner and cheap/or free tickets to quite high priced tickets and expensive concessions. Maybe there is room for some middle ground.

I actually had people sitting next to me (I sold them season tickets) who stopped coming because they were mad about the Trojan standing in their line of sight. If you're not a real basketball fan, there are many excuses you can latch on to for not coming.

Yes, and I have heard them all. Well, maybe not. Never heard someone blame the mascot for not buying tickets.

(12-19-2011 06:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  While I was extolling Newell's virtues I forgot that little factoid.

You post about how nice Newell was to you and your wife, and that he remembered the name of you kid, and that you don't have anything against him, and then you stick that knife in him every chance you get. Why don't you just come out and tell us how you really feel about him like Jim does. One post he's okay, then the next post, LOOK OUT FOR THAT KNIFE.

By the way, you never have told us who should get the rest of the credit that you weren't going to give Newell for what he accomplished here.

(12-19-2011 08:25 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  While I was extolling Newell's virtues I forgot that little factoid.

You post about how nice Newell was to you and your wife, and that he remembered the name of you kid, and that you don't have anything against him, and then you stick that knife in him every chance you get. Why don't you just come out and tell us how you really feel about him like Jim does. One post he's okay, then the next post, LOOK OUT FOR THAT KNIFE.

By the way, you never have told us who should get the rest of the credit that you weren't going to give Newell for what he accomplished here.

I liked Newell, personally. I appreciate what he did for the program. It's simply a fact that he hasn't had a DI job in 20 years. It's also a fact that he doesn't walk on water.

(12-19-2011 09:28 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 08:25 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  While I was extolling Newell's virtues I forgot that little factoid.

You post about how nice Newell was to you and your wife, and that he remembered the name of you kid, and that you don't have anything against him, and then you stick that knife in him every chance you get. Why don't you just come out and tell us how you really feel about him like Jim does. One post he's okay, then the next post, LOOK OUT FOR THAT KNIFE.

By the way, you never have told us who should get the rest of the credit that you weren't going to give Newell for what he accomplished here.

I liked Newell, personally. I appreciate what he did for the program. It's simply a fact that he hasn't had a DI job in 20 years. It's also a fact that he doesn't walk on water.

What does that have to do with the success he had on the court here?
And, I didn't know he was supposed to have walked on water, but can you prove that that he couldn't? Have you actually seen him try, and then get his feet wet? I like the way you say "I liked Newell" and then, here comes the knife.

(12-19-2011 06:15 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 06:27 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-18-2011 04:46 PM)Jim Tripcony Wrote:  I do remember there were games when the enthusiasm was greater than we are having now when we are 3-9. We won more games . . . and that will cause more enthusiasmin more people . . . regardless of the teams we are beating. There are many fans that are more enthusiastic beating Hardin-Simmons like a drum every time than losing close ones to SMU and Missouri State. To each his own. Not me. I want the tougher competition and would HATE going back to the previous scheduling, even if it meant more enthusiasm in the masses. As to every home game being exciting in the old days, I can only assume that was hyperbole to make a point. For your average non-basketball-junkies in our midst, there were plenty of nights that the puny crowds and beating pitiful competition left something to be desired on the excitement scale.
I would have no problem with giving away a few tickets as prizes. I just think that to compare the size of crowds receiving giveaways and the size of crowds paying real money to get in is not a really valid comparison.

It's not just because we're 3-9 that the enthusiasm is down. There hasn't been much enthusiasm in this program in years. It hasn't been worth a **** since we moved to the Jack. Sure there have been some exciting games over the years. The only problem is that there aren't very many people there to get excited. But, there have been a lot of dull grinder games too. I like the better competition also, but the enthusiasm was much better when you are a winner.

I don't seem to remember all of the "plenty of nights that the puny crowds and beating pitiful competition". I remember we beat some "pitiful" competition some, just as we do now. I don't remember lots of "puny" crowds in those days. "Puny" crowds are what Steve Shields coached teams draw. Sure the Sun Belt is a better league than the TAAC was overall. I stayed with Steve for about five or six years. His teams go up and down like a yo-yo, depending on the type of recruits he can bring in and the caliber of the rest of the Sun Belt.

I didn't expect any of Shields' fan club to agree with my post. But you can't truthfully say that I didn't state the facts. Anyone who is truly pleased and satisfied with the present state of this program, the pitiful crowds, and this coach, it's pretty obvious that it doesn't take much to please them.

And no hyperbole or any other bull****. Most all home games were exciting to me, and they must have been for most all those other folks who have dropped by the wayside since then.

I'm not criticizing anyone for selective memory. We're all probably guilty of that at times. And I didn't mean to imply that mixed in with your opinions were absolutely no facts. I'm not satisfied with our record, but I'm OK with a program who sends its team to the Big Dance. And I'm pleased that you used to get excited at the games. By my definition, I got excited at the SMU, Oral Roberts, Milwaukee games, and I was excited listening to the LaTech game. Most of all, I was excited attending 4 straight upsets in Hot Springs last March.

I'd love to know the real head count of "all those folks" at our Hardin-Simmons and Stetson games.

"I'm not satisfied with our record, but I'm OK with a program who sends its team to the Big Dance."

Jim, I love ya man. But this quote has got to be talked about. One Big Dance appearance in 21 years, after a fluke run from a bottom seed in the conference tournament, just doesn't justify that statement.

(12-19-2011 11:15 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 09:28 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 08:25 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  While I was extolling Newell's virtues I forgot that little factoid.

You post about how nice Newell was to you and your wife, and that he remembered the name of you kid, and that you don't have anything against him, and then you stick that knife in him every chance you get. Why don't you just come out and tell us how you really feel about him like Jim does. One post he's okay, then the next post, LOOK OUT FOR THAT KNIFE.

By the way, you never have told us who should get the rest of the credit that you weren't going to give Newell for what he accomplished here.

I liked Newell, personally. I appreciate what he did for the program. It's simply a fact that he hasn't had a DI job in 20 years. It's also a fact that he doesn't walk on water.

What does that have to do with the success he had on the court here?
And, I didn't know he was supposed to have walked on water, but can you prove that that he couldn't? Have you actually seen him try, and then get his feet wet? I like the way you say "I liked Newell" and then, here comes the knife.

You have said you like Coach Shields, but have no problem criticizing him. I liked Mike personally, but if I say anything unflattering about him I'm stabbing him in the back. I don't see the difference.

(12-19-2011 11:15 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 09:28 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 08:25 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 06:35 PM)mjs Wrote:  While I was extolling Newell's virtues I forgot that little factoid.

You post about how nice Newell was to you and your wife, and that he remembered the name of you kid, and that you don't have anything against him, and then you stick that knife in him every chance you get. Why don't you just come out and tell us how you really feel about him like Jim does. One post he's okay, then the next post, LOOK OUT FOR THAT KNIFE.

By the way, you never have told us who should get the rest of the credit that you weren't going to give Newell for what he accomplished here.

I liked Newell, personally. I appreciate what he did for the program. It's simply a fact that he hasn't had a DI job in 20 years. It's also a fact that he doesn't walk on water.

What does that have to do with the success he had on the court here?
And, I didn't know he was supposed to have walked on water, but can you prove that that he couldn't? Have you actually seen him try, and then get his feet wet? I like the way you say "I liked Newell" and then, here comes the knife.

I was out at Lake Maumelle the other day, and darn if I didn't see some blond headed man walking across the water. I can't be sure, but could it have been.................?