(02-07-2020 12:17 PM)ScottyB757 Wrote:  

(02-07-2020 12:10 PM)Tribe2011 Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 06:00 PM)Tribal Wrote:  Why no official word? Why communicate, anonymously, through a media outlet? Transparency is a stated goal of the athletic department .

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

On to the next straw man to get mad at the AD about!

Actually, Tribal has a point. It's been a week since the official announcement. Those who will be asked to foot the bill shouldn't have had to wait a week for clarification, and it should have been provided by TribeAthletics, not David Teel.

Precisely. You get it.

Some people either lack comprehension (doubtful) or spend their life canceling anyone who holds a different view (likely).

2011, I don't need, nor do I search for, a reason to dislike our AD's work. I want official word regarding seating capacity and I want it directly from our ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT.



Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Who holds a different view? Pretty sure everyone has been in agreement on the seating capacity from the beginning. And the plans appear right in line with that. Only difference is that some are thrilled that we're getting the first significant upgrade to our basketball arena in 50 years, while others would rather invent increasingly silly reasons to be angry at everything.

We've got what so far appears to be a good coach, are near the top of the conference in what was expected to be an abysmal year, and are getting a practically new arena. And while I don't agree with everything that's been done, we have an athletic department that is now actually being proactive and getting things done rather than just wallowing in mediocrity (at best). It's OK to be optimistic about how things are going...

(02-07-2020 03:43 PM)Tribe2011 Wrote:  Only difference is that some are thrilled that we're getting the first significant upgrade to our basketball arena in 50 years, while others would rather invent increasingly silly reasons to be angry at everything.

I agree that a proactive AD/President is much better than the sports leadership of the past.

However, please don't mistake a little foresight for "increasingly silly reasons to be angry at everything".

As my Mama used to say "if you want cherry pie instead of apple, you dang well need to tell me before it is baked...otherwise, you're gettin' apple!"

I think it's great that we're finally getting an updated arena. It's way overdue, and President Rowe and AD Huge deserve huge credit for making it happen. I also thought 4500 was too small, but I figured I'd wait for something more official before freaking out about it.

Would I have liked Huge to knock on my door and tell me the number to my face? Sure. Even better, I wish the details were included in the original announcement. But I am okay reading it through the Daily Press. I'll live.

The new plan seems close to ideal, honestly. And I think most people here agree that 4500 with the ability to expand to 8600 seems to be about right. So, here we are talking about an updated arena that seems to check most, if not all, of our boxes.....

....and we're at each others' throats. One Tribe?

2011, it's just not sinking in, is it? Oh well. Hey, have a great weekend.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(02-07-2020 12:22 PM)mrjoolius Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 05:20 PM)nogretheogre Wrote:  We have an answer...not direct from Huge, but at least we have some sort of confirmation.

The curtains/screens are retractable

https://www.pilotonline.com/sports/colum...story.html

"The facility seats 8,600, but standard capacity post-overhaul will be 4,500."

"Flexible in that a push-button screening system will allow the Tribe to unveil additional seats for games or events that might exceed the cozy 4,500."

"Saturday’s season-best crowd of 5,325 bumped average home attendance to 3,826, and the average for the previous 10 seasons ranged from 3,508 in 2018 to 2,071 in 2012. The largest crowd of the past decade was 6,028 versus Delaware in 2016."

Daily Press version not behind a pay wall
https://www.dailypress.com/sports/column...story.html

I still get this message when I try to read the Daily Press or Virginia Pilot: "You've reached your free article limit. To continue reading, subscribe now for unlimited access."

But thanks anyway, MrJ, I appreciate it!

(02-07-2020 04:34 PM)Marshall Wythe Wrote:  I think it's great that we're finally getting an updated arena. It's way overdue, and President Rowe and AD Huge deserve huge credit for making it happen. I also thought 4500 was too small, but I figured I'd wait for something more official before freaking out about it.

Would I have liked Huge to knock on my door and tell me the number to my face? Sure. Even better, I wish the details were included in the original announcement. But I am okay reading it through the Daily Press. I'll live.

The new plan seems close to ideal, honestly. And I think most people here agree that 4500 with the ability to expand to 8600 seems to be about right. So, here we are talking about an updated arena that seems to check most, if not all, of our boxes.....

....and we're at each others' throats. One Tribe?

Exactly. Try enjoying this! It's much more fun!

Hyperbole running in the red.

Folks, don't have a discussion on a messageboard about what you like, don't like, ideas, options, or share information. All of that is freaking out and not at all fun. Now, if we could always agree on everything and just accept everything thrown our way, now THAT would be a hoot. Funny how some people preach diversity of thought unless it doesn't jive with their thoughts. Again, have a great weekend and thank you for your perspective.



Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(02-07-2020 02:42 PM)88tribefan Wrote:  

(02-07-2020 12:22 PM)mrjoolius Wrote:  

(02-06-2020 05:20 PM)nogretheogre Wrote:  We have an answer...not direct from Huge, but at least we have some sort of confirmation.

The curtains/screens are retractable

https://www.pilotonline.com/sports/colum...story.html

"The facility seats 8,600, but standard capacity post-overhaul will be 4,500."

"Flexible in that a push-button screening system will allow the Tribe to unveil additional seats for games or events that might exceed the cozy 4,500."

"Saturday’s season-best crowd of 5,325 bumped average home attendance to 3,826, and the average for the previous 10 seasons ranged from 3,508 in 2018 to 2,071 in 2012. The largest crowd of the past decade was 6,028 versus Delaware in 2016."

Daily Press version not behind a pay wall
https://www.dailypress.com/sports/column...story.html

"Flexible in that a push-button screening system will allow the Tribe to unveil additional seats for games or events that might exceed the cozy 4,500."

What exactly does this mean? Where will they be in the configuration?

From what I have heard, it is for another 1000 seats. Don't discount the fact that there are a lot of areas with court seating in open areas that could be SRO. I'm sure that we could find more room to pack it if we had that much demand.

That said, doesn't it seem like it would be a great place for the tournament comparing it with the DC venue that we're going to in March?

Now that’s a problem.

Maximum capacity of 5,500?

That is not 4,500, with ability to expand to 8,600. That is 4,500, expanding to 5,500.

I don’t agree, ... if you’re not speculating.

:-)

As for being at each others’ throats...

Seating capacity is a BIG deal. It says a lot about how you perceive yourself. IMO, 4,500 sends a contradictory message, and looks like an attempt to fleece the paying customer by artificially lowering supply and creating demand.

I want the permanent ability to upgrade conferences, if we so choose. 4,500, expandable to 5,500, does not gives us that option.

Finally, have any of you gone to the games and talked to folks that don’t post here? The split in the Tribe re: Shaver is real, and it’s passionate. Some of us try to analyze it issue by issue; others don’t. To support 4,500 because the AD needs 100% support is just a bad as decrying 4,500 because one doesn’t like the Shaver firing.

4,500, expendable to 5,500, is a BIG deal.

(02-08-2020 07:12 AM)nj alum Wrote:  As for being at each others’ throats...

Seating capacity is a BIG deal. It says a lot about how you perceive yourself. IMO, 4,500 sends a contradictory message, and looks like an attempt to fleece the paying customer by artificially lowering supply and creating demand.

I want the permanent ability to upgrade conferences, if we so choose. 4,500, expandable to 5,500, does not gives us that option.

Finally, have any of you gone to the games and talked to folks that don’t post here? The split in the Tribe re: Shaver is real, and it’s passionate. Some of us try to analyze it issue by issue; others don’t. To support 4,500 because the AD needs 100% support is just a bad as decrying 4,500 because one doesn’t like the Shaver firing.

4,500, expendable to 5,500, is a BIG deal.

5,500 is smack dab in the middle of the A10, which is the conference I assume you're mostly referring to, and that's not counting the standing room options.

I've said all along that 5,500 - 6,500 is the sweet spot. I also said that, winning aside, creating a game day atmosphere is the most important thing. A raucous fun venue is a big part of that. A nice intimate 4,500 for the average mid week opponent, but the ability to expand for an anticipated Saturday matchup is pretty slick. I agree that the communication should be better to the potential donor base, but it sounds about like the correct size for our operation.

These are the A-10 numbers, courtesy of Mr. J:

Dayton (13,455) 12,957 - 96%
St. Louis (10,600) 6,890 - 65%
GMU (9,523) 4,335 - 46%
UMass (9,493) 2,792 - 29%
Rhode Island (8,000) 5,797 - 73%
VCU (7,617) 7,637 - 101%
Richmond (7,201) 5,730 - 80%
St. Bonaventure (5,480) 4,274 - 78%
Davidson (5,300) 3,800- 72%
Duquesne (4,390) 2,308 - 53%
GW (4,338) 2,382 - 55%
St. Joes (4,200) 3,692 - 88%
Fordham (3,200) 1,864 - 58%

My preference is the VCU/Richmond capacity, not St. Bonnies/Davidson.

I think that we all have preference on what size we should be & could be. I guess wherever you fall, the A10 numbers illustrate that a 5,500 max capacity arena isn't a deal breaker in that conference. That said, that may reflect the old A10. If looking to expand, they may want to go the bigger is better route and JMU would probably get looks before us.

We are adding seating for students in the open end of the court and putting up curtains around the top to make it less empty. When the curtains open you have more than 1000 extra seating available when you include sitting on all the open concrete. Think the confusion is counting the current "seats" behind the curtain versus available area also on the concrete for butts to sit. They are not tearing out the old concrete up top just hiding it with some of the "seats".

To quote David Teel: " Flexible in that a push-button screening system will allow the Tribe to unveil additional seats for games or events that might exceed the cozy 4,500"

(02-08-2020 03:59 PM)nogretheogre Wrote:  Maybe the number was left out to keep us talking about it. There's no such thing as bad publicity. Its kept this thread at the top for a couple weeks now. Fear-mongering just like the 24 hour news cycle. We've got some on here that clamor about "fake news," with others pointing to the facts and implied information from those facts. Marketing isnt always direct.

College leadership and generous donors deserve credit for migrating a big part of the strategic plan from aspiration to execution. BZ

Messaging on seating capacity could be better. If it’s a de facto reduction, leadership would be better served to confront any controversy, to elaborate what was behind the decision, and to own it, proudly. Those not close to the decision are left to speculate.

It would seem on the surface that ticket revenues are not deemed critical for program improvement. Some number of attendees will be students (when they’re in school). They’ve already been billed via student activity fees. It’s hard to imagine remaining ticket sales of fewer seats, even at higher prices, making a difference to the program.

Leadership also has to have a sense as to the demographics of its non-student attendees. There may be a lack of confidence that a younger cohort is waiting in the wings to backfill, particularly given the growth of esports (the next time you have a chance, ask an investment manager which will be more popular in 2030, traditional college sports or esports). There is different competition out there for spectator dollars and maybe more important, time, than when the Hall hosted UNC in 1970.

Lastly it’s unclear where sustainability dollars to improve the program will be found leaving coaching salary, OOC scheduling, and other shortfalls. The CAA is down this year (and it might be permanently down), but the program has to prove the capability to rise above. Repeats of recent home games will be a drag on attendance. We all want to see better future won/loss records, but there is no guarantee.

Any/all of the above and other factors may have influenced the seating capacity decision. Someone knows. I’m of the opinion that it’s better for all the fans and donors to have a clearly articulated reference point going forward.

Disagree. Putting a team on the floor that wins 90% of its home games and brings a CAA Championship to Kaplan, will say a lot about how many future seats will be needed.

Good thing they didnt plan to reduce seating permanently. Might need the extra space to socially distance...if there is ever in-person sports again.

(06-25-2020 02:20 PM)nogretheogre Wrote:  Good thing they didnt plan to reduce seating permanently. Might need the extra space to socially distance...if there is ever in-person sports again.

Yeah...umm...we're gonna want to start with those retractable screens up...and all of you packed in behind the scorer's table might want to spread out a little...