|
Post by elcoyote on Nov 27, 2017 13:51:20 GMT -6
Not to make excuses for the low turn-out, but it should be noted that the event was, well, boring. Southern Miss was probably the biggest draw from a novelty standpoint, but all three teams are home/home scheduling type of teams. The building isn't anymore. Blaring music followed by dead silence (NBA-style) is awful. And an elephant in the room: season ticket holders forked out good money for a lousy home schedule, the idea of forking out $20/ticket for more lousy games - on top of hundreds/thousands of dollars for SLT tix - and I think there was an excess supply of expensive crappy games which exceeded demand. Bingo. None of these games did a thing for me. I might have gone to one if I hadn't gone to Louisiana, but no way all three. If a yearly Pentagon experience is desired in Sioux Falls, bring in a big name like UNLV a few years back. I think that's be an easy sell. As you said, the OOC home schedule has been a snooze fest so far with the only exception being the Creighton women's game and I'm sick of paying premium prices for crap seats at the Summit Tournament. I'm half tempted to bag that after this year.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 27, 2017 17:21:57 GMT -6
I realize the opponents were just kind of average but they were still 3 quality D1 opponents that tested the team, except maybe Youngstown. So Miss was a quality opponent and UNC obviously beat the Coyotes so it didn't turn into 3 easy wins for the Yotes. UNC is an old rival so that isn't exactly an irrelevant game. I could understand if people skipped out if the opponents were Chicago State, Doane and Mount Marty but these games were worth going to.
It would be nice to get a better non conference home schedule and that is actually one of the reasons I wouldn't mind a 12 team conference with a full round robin with only the top 8 making the Summit Tourney. A 12 team conference would also likely include more double headers which is the life blood for those traveling in from out of town.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 29, 2017 9:08:51 GMT -6
Attendance issues are not just a USD thing, it is a problem across all of college sports. There are just too many entertainment options available these days.
You know what the biggest, hugest elephant in the room is? And this applies to not just USD but all of college basketball. It's that the college basketball regular season, especially for schools in one bid leagues like USD, does not matter. All of these games are nothing but meaningless exhibition games. The only games that matter are the one weekend in late April/early March and the March Madness tournament. That's it. So why should the casual fan even care about a regular season game.
Yeah, it was great to win the regular season conference title last year. Did that make you feel any better when you saw SDSU in the bracket because they went on a nice 3 game run in one weekend? No, probably not. Mid-major conferences should seriously consider scrapping conference tournaments for an autobid and instead reward the regular season conference winner with the autobid. For the high majors, yes, the regular season is about at-large berths and seeding. For everyone else all that matters is one weekend. Awarding the bid to the regular season conference winner would be a good way to add some juice and some interest to the regular season. Look what it does for football, every game the Coyotes played this year had big playoff implications. If you are not going to do that, don't complain about poor attendance for "exhibitions".
|
|
|
Post by sdyotefan on Nov 29, 2017 9:51:22 GMT -6
You're exactly right Yote53! Unfortunately conference tournaments won't go away because of fan interest which means more MONEY to the NCAA.
Interestingly there are 353 D1 men's BB teams in 32 conferences. The other option would be to give each conference 2 bids 1 for conference champ and other for tournament champ. But the major conferences would never do that since it would dilute their participation in the championship bracket. But it would be a better plan than the current format.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 29, 2017 10:23:36 GMT -6
The conference tournament money goes to the conference. That's why they have these conference tournaments in the first place. But by doing so they are killing the regular season, and interest in the regular season, which keeps attendance down, which costs the programs money. It's circular.
|
|
|
Post by gopheryote on Nov 29, 2017 11:03:22 GMT -6
I agree Yote53, well said. There is another caveat that adds depth to the issue though - the idea that 'winning is the only thing that matters'. That idea applies very appropriately to professional leagues, and didn't apply to NCAA until fairly recently (thank you ESPN). As such, if the only thing that matters is winning, then the only thing that matters is winning a national title. That is unattainable for mid-majors, so the only thing that matters is getting to the 2nd weekend. That is largely unattainable for low-majors (like the SL), so the only thing that matters is getting to the 1st weekend by winning the conference tourney. In that case, the conference tourney is the only thing that matters.
However, we all know that isn't true. The Huskers sold out the stadium for the Iowa game, but they weren't playing for anything. The Browns average over 64,000 people for home games. Duke vs. USD will be sold out, even though it bears zero relevance on Duke playing for a national title.
Sports and an affinity for a particular team can build a great community that is more complex than 'did we win?', but you have to focus and invest in it (ex - in-game experience, entertainment, atmosphere, etc.). I don't have an answer here, but always cringe when I read posts that minimize the journey or assume there is only 1 prize that matters.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Nov 29, 2017 11:20:07 GMT -6
The hard core fans love the journey and will show up anytime USD is playing. I sat through many football games during transition that were worthless, some real body bag games against some really bad teams. I did it, but Joe Casual Fan did not. The same thing applies to basketball, a sport where there is an even larger inventory of games. How do you get the casual fan to come to a game that doesn't have much meaning? My point is that if last year proved anything it is that the regular season is meaningless, it's all about what happens during that one weekend at the end of the season. My idea is to make the regular season meaningful once again by tying the autobid to the regular season conference winner. The hype and interest across all league games would skyrocket.
With regards to your last paragraph, while technology and communication have done good things for humanity they have also caused great harm to humanity. The sense of local community is breaking down as the world becomes a smaller place. Access to "winners" is like nothing we have ever seen before.
A couple of stories from my youth. I remember a kid who wore a Texas Longhorn stocking hat to school. Not so much because they were a Longhorn fan rather because it was a hat and it was warm. I remember wondering who Texas was and if they were any good. Everybody knew that the good teams were Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, and USC. Heck, I didn't even know anything about Alabama back then. You cheered for your local team and you knew the big rivals of your local team, and you knew a couple of national brands and that is about it. Compare that to today. Today we have people who are "die hard" Arsenal soccer fans, people who have never been to an Arsenal game, never set foot in England, yet follows "their team" via a bunch if digital ones and zeros that are transmitted across a wire or on a signal.
Point is people don't feel the same attachment and loyalty to their local community anymore. There is competition for their eyeballs and for their affinity at the very youngest ages. People don't just buy tickets and show up at games because it is the right thing to support their local team, they have to be sold on a reason to support their local team. Some other team out there that they have unlimited access to is competing for their loyalty.
Now excuse me while I go hit the fan board for (insert obscure team name) and talk with my friends in that community.
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Nov 29, 2017 12:31:49 GMT -6
There are plenty of great ideas that would improve mid-major basketball, but getting that one game on ESPN is worth more to them. Even the Ivy League has hopped on board and started a conference tournament. One national broadcast is more valuable than an improved regular season.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Nov 29, 2017 13:02:45 GMT -6
Adding another thing to the Summit Tourney. It isn't even a normal type tourney for a mid major. Most mid majors I am guessing are hosted by the conference regular season champ. In the Summit there is one school that has a huge advantage with attendance that helps their teams get to NCAA tourney's that they would never have gotten to otherwise. Most regular season conference champs don't have to go to a neutral site that really isn't neutral and try to win a tourney. I felt bad the year that IPFW was the #1 seed and would have had to beat USD, NDSU and SDSU in Sioux Falls if they wanted to get to the big dance. That would have been difficult for any program that is not a top 25 team let alone a Summit team. That is why the Summit as a conference would benefit greatly if the regular season champ got to go. USD would have already had 2 women's appearances and 1 men's but guess what school ruined those chances. It is one thing for the #1 seed to have home court but it is another thing all together for a conference champ to be in enemy territory trying to get to the dance. That is a big deal and that bothers me a great deal. I know money is money, but there is a such thing as competitive fairness.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Nov 29, 2017 13:16:56 GMT -6
It isn't even a normal type tourney for a mid major. Most mid majors I am guessing are hosted by the conference regular season champ. Wrong. Many of them are held in the same location. Year after year. I don't really have a problem with that, as the SLT has been one of the most successful tournaments of its kind. The problem I have is with the 2-year all-session passes and giving pass-holders first-option on renewal. It's not fair to schools like UND who just joined, and it doesn't promote any other school to build up a tournament presence as their fan base increases, or in an outstanding year. (not talking about USD) As potential beneficiaries to the "home court" advantage, us Coyote fans really should shut up about moving it from Sioux Falls.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Nov 29, 2017 16:44:25 GMT -6
So I looked it up.... for the 2017 mid major conference tournaments:
only 5 of them are held at higher-seed campus sites, and they are all conferences with lower-than-average attendance:
America East Atlantic Sun Big South Northeast Patriot
All the rest are neutral/bid locations. Here are ones held at the same location for five years or more:
26Y Missouri Valley 18Y MAC 12Y Ohio Valley 10Y Southland 10Y Big West 9Y Summit 9Y WCC 7Y WAC 6Y Southern 5Y MEAC
Most Attended per session:
Summit -9978 (more than high-majors AAC, Mountain West and A-10) MVC-----9339 WCC-----7830 MEAC----7286 Horizon 5848 Ivy ----5021 Southern 4812 MAAC ---4493 etc.
there are conferences that would benefit from switching to campus sites, but the Summit is NOT one of them:
Ohio Valley Conference, 12 years at same neutral site, session attendance is 632 lower than average home attendance
WAC, 7 years - session attendance is 806 lower than average home attendance
|
|