(06-25-2014 10:04 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 09:56 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  [quote='Tigers2B1' pid='10859608' dateline='1403707508']
The conference will certainly take an attendance hit with Louisville's 21,000 plus leaving a.....

What did Rutgers Avg last year???

The avg attendance might fall. But, the cumulative attendance might be close-ish to the same if Tulsa, ECU, and Tulane attendance rise a bit (let's say 6K + 5K + 2.5K) as well as SMU having more on campus games than last year with a good team. We might get close to the same cumulative numbers. Maybe 5K short per game?

Edit: Very, Very, Very rough math.

ECU drew 75,370 over 17 games (4,434 per game)
Tulsa drew 63,389 over 14 games (4,528 per game)
Tulane drew 31,857 ove 19 games (1,677 per game)

Total attendance: 170,616 (over 50 games...3,412 per game)

Louisville drew 383,070 over 18 games (21,282 per game).

UL drew more fans than DOUBLE the combine totals of ECU, Tulsa and Tulane.

(06-25-2014 10:21 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:04 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 09:56 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  [quote='Tigers2B1' pid='10859608' dateline='1403707508']
The conference will certainly take an attendance hit with Louisville's 21,000 plus leaving a.....

What did Rutgers Avg last year???

The avg attendance might fall. But, the cumulative attendance might be close-ish to the same if Tulsa, ECU, and Tulane attendance rise a bit (let's say 6K + 5K + 2.5K) as well as SMU having more on campus games than last year with a good team. We might get close to the same cumulative numbers. Maybe 5K short per game?

Edit: Very, Very, Very rough math.

ECU drew 75,370 over 17 games (4,434 per game)
Tulsa drew 63,389 over 14 games (4,528 per game)
Tulane drew 31,857 ove 19 games (1,677 per game)

Total attendance: 170,616 (over 50 games...3,412 per game)

Louisville drew 383,070 over 18 games (21,282 per game).

UL drew more fans than DOUBLE the combine totals of ECU, Tulsa and Tulane.

FWIW, you started a thread just last year (2012-2013) showing CUSA's attendance through the OOC games. UCF was fifth in attendance at that time at 4,424 which was just behind 4th place Tulsa (4,455) and barely in front of 6th place ECU (4,414). This year UCF played an AAC schedule and their attendance jumped up over 800 people per game to 5,298, which put them in the top 100 in the country. IMO if can reasonably be expected that ECU and Tulsa should experience the same jump in the AAC.

http://csnbbs.com/thread-612910-post-882...pid8828796

(06-24-2014 10:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Most non-trollers realize that UCONN plays games in 2 different size arenas.

Doesn't matter. Those attendance numbers are just plain low for a top-shelf program.

Doesn't matter. Attendance is mostly a proxy for revenue-generating ability and for TV-audience size, neither of which is a problem for UConn basketball.

(06-25-2014 10:21 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:04 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 09:56 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  [quote='Tigers2B1' pid='10859608' dateline='1403707508']
The conference will certainly take an attendance hit with Louisville's 21,000 plus leaving a.....

What did Rutgers Avg last year???

The avg attendance might fall. But, the cumulative attendance might be close-ish to the same if Tulsa, ECU, and Tulane attendance rise a bit (let's say 6K + 5K + 2.5K) as well as SMU having more on campus games than last year with a good team. We might get close to the same cumulative numbers. Maybe 5K short per game?

Edit: Very, Very, Very rough math.

ECU drew 75,370 over 17 games (4,434 per game)
Tulsa drew 63,389 over 14 games (4,528 per game)
Tulane drew 31,857 ove 19 games (1,677 per game)

Total attendance: 170,616 (over 50 games...3,412 per game)

Louisville drew 383,070 over 18 games (21,282 per game).

UL drew more fans than DOUBLE the combine totals of ECU, Tulsa and Tulane.

Tulsa started out very, very rough and only played one game at home as a +.500 team as it was having to dig itself out of its early season hole. That fact combined with the lack-luster C-USA lineup resulted in poor attendance.

Our schedule this year is pretty lights out. We should hit at least 6K maybe 6.5K to sellout(8K) if we're really doing well. Tulane's numbers should get a bump from conference play as should ECU's.

Hopefully Cincinnati can get back to consistently averaging 10k or more. We've got a solid OOC home schedule with Xavier, San Diego State and VCU along with conference home games against UConn, Memphis and SMU. Temple should be much improved as well, I cannot say I care to see the rest of the league though...

(06-25-2014 10:21 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  UL drew more fans than DOUBLE the combine totals of ECU, Tulsa and Tulane.

Hard to replace a program like Louisville --- but what a major hit to the conference.

(06-25-2014 11:10 AM)Cali_Cat Wrote:  Hopefully Cincinnati can get back to consistently averaging 10k or more. We've got a solid OOC home schedule with Xavier, San Diego State and VCU along with conference home games against UConn, Memphis and SMU. Temple should be much improved as well, I cannot say I care to see the rest of the league though...

Don't sleep on Tulsa. I guess we may not be a huge draw for Cincy fans, but we should be dangerous.

(06-25-2014 10:46 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 10:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Most non-trollers realize that UCONN plays games in 2 different size arenas.

Doesn't matter. Those attendance numbers are just plain low for a top-shelf program.

Doesn't matter. Attendance is mostly a proxy for revenue-generating ability and for TV-audience size, neither of which is a problem for UConn basketball.

You're kidding, right? UConn's basketball revenue, around $7.5m, is lousy for such an elite program (somewhere between Iowa State and Dayton), and their TV value is ... whatever peanuts the AAC gets paid for basketball.

This is a list of all the MBB games Tulane has played at New Orleans Arena. After playing 13 games there the first two years, just seven games in the past 13 years. Due to several factors, but attendance dropped off a cliff in the 2000-01 season and has never fully climbed back.

1999-2000
Fordham - W
Texas A&M - W
#25 North Carolina State - W
#1 Cincinnati - L
UNO - W
Memphis - W

2000-01
#5 Florida - L
Southern - W
Louisville - L
Memphis - L
Southern Miss - W
Charlotte - L
DePaul - L

2001-02
Vanderbilt - W
Mississippi State - L

2002-03
Louisiana State (Sugar Bowl Classic) - L

2003-04
Mississippi State (Sugar Bowl Classic) - L

2004-05 (Finney)
DePaul - L

2005-06
none (pre-New Year "home" games played at College Station, TX)

2006-07
#10 Louisiana State - L

2007-08
Louisiana State - W

2008-14
none

(06-25-2014 12:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:46 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 10:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Most non-trollers realize that UCONN plays games in 2 different size arenas.

Doesn't matter. Those attendance numbers are just plain low for a top-shelf program.

Doesn't matter. Attendance is mostly a proxy for revenue-generating ability and for TV-audience size, neither of which is a problem for UConn basketball.

You're kidding, right? UConn's basketball revenue, around $7.5m, is lousy for such an elite program (somewhere between Iowa State and Dayton), and their TV value is ... whatever peanuts the AAC gets paid for basketball.

Is that number just ticket rev and ignoring the $45.5 million Nike sponsorship and $80m IMG deal? Both of which are in year 6 of 10.

Gampel is getting old though and discussions have begun about an on campus replacement. Plans could be finalized as early as next year if the plan coincides with Puck Barn required for Hockey East by 2016.
I'm sure a new arena to include luxery suites on campus will improve attendance revenue.

(06-27-2014 09:59 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 12:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:46 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 10:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Most non-trollers realize that UCONN plays games in 2 different size arenas.

Doesn't matter. Those attendance numbers are just plain low for a top-shelf program.

Doesn't matter. Attendance is mostly a proxy for revenue-generating ability and for TV-audience size, neither of which is a problem for UConn basketball.

You're kidding, right? UConn's basketball revenue, around $7.5m, is lousy for such an elite program (somewhere between Iowa State and Dayton), and their TV value is ... whatever peanuts the AAC gets paid for basketball.

Is that number just ticket rev and ignoring the $45.5 million Nike sponsorship and $80m IMG deal? Both of which are in year 6 of 10.

Gampel is getting old though and discussions have begun about an on campus replacement. Plans could be finalized as early as next year if the plan coincides with Puck Barn required for Hockey East by 2016.
I'm sure a new arena to include luxery suites on campus will improve attendance revenue.

That would be great for you guys, because currently your attendance revenue (and attendance) is really low for an elite program. Schools that have never sniffed a Final 4 the past quarter century are making more than UConn.

(06-27-2014 09:59 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 12:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:46 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 10:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 09:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  Most non-trollers realize that UCONN plays games in 2 different size arenas.

Doesn't matter. Those attendance numbers are just plain low for a top-shelf program.

Doesn't matter. Attendance is mostly a proxy for revenue-generating ability and for TV-audience size, neither of which is a problem for UConn basketball.

You're kidding, right? UConn's basketball revenue, around $7.5m, is lousy for such an elite program (somewhere between Iowa State and Dayton), and their TV value is ... whatever peanuts the AAC gets paid for basketball.

Is that number just ticket rev and ignoring the $45.5 million Nike sponsorship and $80m IMG deal? Both of which are in year 6 of 10.

Gampel is getting old though and discussions have begun about an on campus replacement. Plans could be finalized as early as next year if the plan coincides with Puck Barn required for Hockey East by 2016.
I'm sure a new arena to include luxery suites on campus will improve attendance revenue.

UCONN Hoops (Men's and Women) bring a lot of $$$ to UCONN but more importantly, UCONN knows how to spend it. (i.e. its not how much you bring in that's important, its what you DO with the $$$ that leads to the results that come with it).

Challenge for UCONN (Gampel is now 24 years ago, was expanded in 2002 from 8,241 to 10,027 in 1996. Renovation in 2002 leaves capacity at 10,167 but without many/any high revenue $$$ amenities like clubs/loges/suites) is that their on-campus arena and of course the old Harford Civic Center/XL Center both need upgrades and/or replaced to help bring in more future $$$$.

Good news for UCONN is that either can be torn down and replaced while the teams just play at the other during that time.

One obstacle that would come up for either a new Gampel (maybe 11,000-12,000 seats with high revenue $$$ amenities) or new a Civic Center in Hartford is that whoever builds a new one first will want more UCONN HOME GAMES than what they had in the past...and that's where some infighting could occur....as neither probably wants to spend $100 Million - $200 Million or more if they still only have 8-10 home games per year.

(06-28-2014 07:22 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 09:59 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 12:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-25-2014 10:46 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(06-24-2014 10:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Those attendance numbers are just plain low for a top-shelf program.

Doesn't matter. Attendance is mostly a proxy for revenue-generating ability and for TV-audience size, neither of which is a problem for UConn basketball.

You're kidding, right? UConn's basketball revenue, around $7.5m, is lousy for such an elite program (somewhere between Iowa State and Dayton), and their TV value is ... whatever peanuts the AAC gets paid for basketball.

Is that number just ticket rev and ignoring the $45.5 million Nike sponsorship and $80m IMG deal? Both of which are in year 6 of 10.

Gampel is getting old though and discussions have begun about an on campus replacement. Plans could be finalized as early as next year if the plan coincides with Puck Barn required for Hockey East by 2016.
I'm sure a new arena to include luxery suites on campus will improve attendance revenue.

UCONN Hoops (Men's and Women) bring a lot of $$$ to UCONN but more importantly, UCONN knows how to spend it. (i.e. its not how much you bring in that's important, its what you DO with the $$$ that leads to the results that come with it).

This confuses cause and effect, or else stands the issue on its head: Colleges do not have basketball programs and spend money on basketball programs to win basketball games, they have basketball programs and try to win basketball games in order to make money. Money is the ultimate outcome, not winning. Schools try to have winning basketball programs because winners tend to generate more money - in ticket sales, merchandise sales, higher enrollment, alumni donations - etc. But unless winning does in fact translate into higher dollars, the mission has not been achieved.

And apparently, no school has managed to translate such massive winning into such few dollars as UConn men's basketball. In 2012, the AP reported that even factoring in their Nike/IMG dollars, UConn's men's basketball revenue was 8th in the Big East. Not 8th nationally, but in the Big East. In the past few years, their revenue has matched their regular season conference results far more than their tournament results.

(06-25-2014 11:40 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  Don't sleep on Tulsa.

Now we can't sleep on Houston OR Tulsa!