Messages

Have we ever played well at the Nutter Center? It sure feels like we haven't.

Anyone with a digital tier cable or satellite package as well as any sports bar in the country gets CBSSN. It's better than a game streamed online by miles.

ESPN has been willing to sell off some of the MAC games they own the rights on to (but don't select for national broadcast) to CBSSN, and now there's a MAC game on that network almost every Friday night. Wonder if the HL could convince ESPN to do something similar.

Please don't mention the coverage from The American Sports Network

It's not ESPN, but those games on ASN get good pickup on local TV stations and regional cable sports networks around the country. Watched the VU-Detroit game on ASN back in early January on local cable while I was in Southern California on a business trip.

OK, guy who trashes a player with his first post based on... ?

Quit rolling over for the NCAA. This is a punishment that would never be levied against a Power 5 program, much less levied mid-season and left to drag on for two months. I sincerely hope Jubril and VU have talked to attorneys about seeking a TRO at a minimum, and force the NCAA to try and justify their decision out in the open.

Some were wondering how the JA thing would affect us.  I guess we found out...negatively.

Being down two starters for 18 games because of NCAA unfairness finally caught up with us. (Yes, two starters. Keith Carter should be out there every game this year, and I'm now convinced the NCAA intentionally dragged their feet on that to make it difficult for VU to fill his spot). 

The big schools have tons of financial resources to not-so-subtly infer that they can tie the NCAA up in court for years if they so choose. They also have plenty of big-network media megaphones who will plead their case and put public pressure on the NCAA, to say nothing of thousands of fans lobbying as well. So the NCAA takes out their frustrations on mid-majors, who have none of those advantages.

I think WH, mentioned this earlier, "The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky they're going to give Cleveland State another year of probation." -Jerry Tarkanian

Great quote and some truth in it. Maybe we are Cleveland State and the NCAA basically is using us a warning shot to every other bigger school. I'm sorry but Jubril and our team got screwed here. The NCAA can be truly shameful and ignorant at times.

Between the NCAA snub, the Keith Carter situation and now this, it's almost like the NCAA is going out of their way to derail a successful mid-major program. While letting UNC continue to compete for Final Fours several *years* into a full-fledged, university-wide academic fraud investigation. Hmm.

What city would satisfy this criteria? The HL is so geographically compact and so urban-centric that it would be nearly impossible to play this thing in a city that would be considered to be a major media location but at the same time does not have a home court advantage for at least one league team.  Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Dayton--all of these cities potentially have a non-neutral component to them by way of  a local fan base.  So what cities would fit the criteria?  Indianapolis?  Grand Rapids?  Pull a Mid-Con part deux and host in Fort Wayne? Columbus?  Serious question.

No easy answer there. Chicago probably has the most alumni from the most schools, but then its a potential advantage for UIC. But again, that reinforces the difference between an MVC/MAC setup and the way the HL's fanbases are scattered. It also underscores my second point: if the HL is going to a neutral site, not having an all-weekend tourney setup to make it easier for fans to attend is insanity.

(I'd still like to hear a good reason why the HL headquarters remain in Indy five years after Butler's departure).

Could VU or Jubril seek injunctive relief from a court on this? The NCAA has not had a good track record getting judges to buy into their spotty and selective enforcements in recent years. And before you say, "oh, that will make enemies with the NCAA," well, what good did bending over backwards for them get VU in this case and the Carter decision?

I'm not saying a neutral site could never work. But you need to find something a) more centrally located or b) home to a large concentration of alumni from multiple schools around the league to support it. You also need to go to an all-weekend format, even if that means a less desirable TV slot for the title game.

Also, and yes I'll repeat it because its the truth - you will likely never have the support of Valpo fans due to the way the change went down: with almost no debate among the league or its fans, with less than a year's notice, with Valpo heading into a potentially historic season. The HL would never have pulled that in a million years heading into Butler's 2010 season and everyone knows it. The move may not have been specifically targeting Valpo's successful run, but it sure as heck feels that way to every VU fan I've ever talked to about this.

All of this. Everyone wants to point to the success of Arch Madness, but forgetting that it's truly a neutral site, relatively centrally-located to the conference schools (six of the 10 league schools are within a 2.5 hour drive, and the three most far flung members all have access to cheap, direct flights on Southwest), that they have a Fri.-Sat.-Sunday format (with the championship ending early afternoon on Sunday, so no one has to worry about taking work off on Monday). And St. Louis locals support the tourney like crazy. And because the MVC takes investing in facilities and scheduling by its members seriously and members pressure each other to avoid being RPI drags, they've been far more likely to not have a neutral-site tourney thwart its teams at-large chances.

A better comparison might be the MAC Tournament in Cleveland. And there's no question that has been a success, attendance wise, for that league, with semifinal and championship night attendances routinely being larger than 10,000 fans. But again, there are SIX conference members in Ohio (two within 30 minutes of the arena), more than 150,000 MAC alumni in Cleveland Metro, and two other out-of-state members within a 2.5 hour drive of The Q. But even in the MAC, there's the concern that the tourney has benefited Kent and Akron more than the rest of the league, as their ascendance to the top of the league coincides with the tourney being in those two schools' backyard. And again, the league employs a Thurs. - Sat. format, so it's possible to attend the entire shindig and only miss one day of work. It's worth pointing out that despite the gate success, this has arguably hurt the MAC from competing for at-large bids. Top teams were bounced in the early to mid 2000s, the league became known as a one-bid league, and they haven't returned (by contrast, the MAC was a two-bid league three times in the previous five seasons before moving the tourney to Cleveland).

Contrast that to Detroit, with only two league members within 4.5 hours of the venue, no local alumni outside of those two schools in the area, no local support (and while we're on the subject -- if Detroit is the answer, why in the heck is the HL home office still located in Indy instead of Detroit, or Chicago, or any other actual HL market that deserves its economic support and the associated jobs?), and an awkward Sat. - Tues. format that makes it impossible to attend without taking at least two and possibly three days off of work? Oh, and to top the sundae, the fan base of the #1 seeded team feels completely slighted, because they know that for 15 years prior to last season, they'd be rewarded by hosting the tourney instead of venturing to Detroit to play in an empty arena. Can't imagine why it won't work.

Although I concur with the basic premises of exposure in media, in our current state, what are the analytics on that exposure for regionally based businesses or national businesses? Can you tell the possible marketer -- we generated x million views in all forms of media?  What is the average audience on ESPN 3 for one of our broadcasts?  What is the average audience for an ESPN 2 Friday night HL tilt? What is our social media impressions for the "ARC?" Nationally, we would struggle even more with the business case. Further, regionally, we do not even have good TV broadcast coverage in the Chicagoland area that you could sell to Binny's, Thrivent, Allstate or even Walgreens. 

My larger point was that assuming that we play in a small town in a small arena, therefore no one would interested in naming rights is the wrong formula. It's all about how many times the brand would be on TV/radio/other media. And Valpo is on TV a lot now.

And impressions is a complex formula, but a single game on ESPN2 is going to have in the vicinity of a million viewers (obviously, some will be less and some will be more, but that's been the rule of thumb for MAC and Sun Belt games). A company logo on the court is going to be seen hundreds of times in the game, plus mentions by the announcers, score table ads, bench chairs, etc. Calculate the ad value for that and it's going to be WAY more cost-effective than trying to achieve that brand exposure through traditional advertising (which is way more expensive). Production of one high-quality TV spot plus buying airtime runs into the millions very quickly. As streaming has grown, audiences and advertising on ESPN3 have climbed, too.

And that doesn't count "bonus" exposure - SportsCenter highlights, etc. For example, think of Rowdy's buzzer beater vs. Green Bay a few years back. The repeated viewings on SC Top 10, Plays of the Week, viral videos, etc. would have been worth millions in free advertising for any company that had a logo/name on the court. There's a reason why companies continue to pay very good money for naming rights deals, even in some non-traditional venues.

Valpo is not a major regional draw or advertiser, is limited in TV exposure and the arena/city are not that big.  The ARC is not the main venue or even a competing venue for events outside of basketball in the area.  It doesn't host broader events

With a renovation that gets the building up toward 6,000 seating capacity with full chairbacks, it becomes attractive to concert and show promoters as a venue of interest. So that would be another rationale for a renovation and extend the building's economic viability. As for naming rights, being in a smaller city is less of an issue if the purchasers of the naming rights know they are getting 2 hours of brand exposure on national TV 4-5 times per year plus regional TV exposure (or potentially more, if a conference move led to additional TV appearances). Yes, a smaller venue will have fewer cross-marketing opportunities on site than a baseball stadium, but the real value in the naming rights comes in broadcast and print media exposure.

Like the Thrivent Arena thing!!

Or Centier Bank... successfully, Region-based financial institution looking to continue growth.

And to loop this back to another discussion bemoaning the uneven attendance, I'd posit the fact that sitting in the high school bleachers on the south side of the arena is a sub-optimal Division I basketball fan experience and does nothing to help encourage casual fans to attend (which is what you need to fill the ARC in addition to diehards and students). Improve the facilities, improve the amenities that fans are getting for their ticket dollar, you improve attendance.

I seriously doubt that neither Scott or Kampe was nearly as bothered by their guy's involvement as they let on publicly.

Agreed. I remember sitting courtside for the VU-Buffalo game in '98 (when Tony V. got into a fight with the center from Buffalo). There was no shortage of bad blood between those teams, but I remember the ref coming over for a conference with Homer and the Buffalo coach at the next TV timeout. Ref smoothed things over by saying something to the effect of "hey, one guy's Lithuanian, the other guy's Russian. This goes way beyond basketball. What're ya gonna do, amirite?" Both coaches laughed and nodded. But of course after the game, both coaches were like "this was SHAMEFUL, we're so disappointed, etc., etc."

The A-10 has 10 private school members and 4 public while The Valley has 4 private and 6 public.

I've actually thought this myself. Obviously, the Valley is a much better fit geographically and would be a terrific upgrade. But if an A-10 opportunity presented itself, Valpo should definitely pursue, for these reasons exactly. Also, while VU needs renovations to the ARC to be considered by any other league, the A-10 has a bunch of facilities in the same size range as VU (GW, Duquesne, St. Bona) or even smaller (St. Joe's, Fordham, LaSalle).

The arena seems to have not been a factor considering Loyola's arena size and the MVC's lack of concern about it.

The arena size might not have been a factor, but the fact that the Gentile Arena was completely gutted and rebuilt from the ground up into a sparkling new facility (with a brand new seating bowl, new concourses, concessions, corporate and group entertainment areas and a state-of-the-art weight room) certainly was.

So, he is enrolled and attending classes at a different university, and Valpo's paying for it?  Is that correct That's a new one on me.

Pretty sure it's nothing like that... his scholarship is just "burned" for this year in terms of the total scholarships allowed by NCAA. I'm not as familiar with the complexities of this rule as I used to be, but if I recall, once a player is on scholarship during an academic year, he counts towards VU's total for NCAA purposes, even if he leaves later that same year. The way the NCAA counts is pretty straightforward and unforgiving, to prevent some schools from pulling circumvent-the-salary-cap type of shenanigans. (In fact, I remember a couple of midseason transfers during Homer's tenure who had to pay their own way for their first semester on campus for that very reason - the way the rule is - or at least was - written, you basically had to prove a transfer over the scholarship limit was a paying walk-on, to prevent teams from stashing transfers on track scholarships and the like to get around it).

A few thoughts from the peanut gallery on this topic:

- On a high level, I really hope the university doesn't subscribe to the notion of "we aren't doing anything until we always sell out the seats we have." That sounds like a handy slogan, but it is incredibly short-sighted (and also discounting of a bunch of full-houses and near-full houses over the past several years despite few "name" opponents coming to the building). You build for the program you want to be in the future and for how you want the fan base to grow. And that leads to my next point...

- Making the fan experience better enables you to sell more tickets and draw more fans. Someone mentioned those 1,000 empty seats at a lot of games. There's a reason those are hard to sell -- they are largely terrible seats. Sitting in the bleachers on the south side is unpleasant even down low (no leg room, people stepping over you all game, very uncomfortable for anyone who has had back, knee or hip issues, etc.). Near the top of the mezz. you add poor sightlines and some obstructed views to that sundae. I know plenty of local folks who love to go to games as long as they are able to score a chairback seat, but rarely attend otherwise.

- Waiting until the ARC becomes a clear albatross in recruiting will be way too late. Programs that are committed to remaining successful stay ahead of the game in facilities. The administration talked a lot about the Gonzaga/Butler model during the coaching transition. Well, neither of those programs sat on their laurels when it came to facilities, either (nor have UNI, Davidson, or any other top mid-major program. Even St. Mary's is expanding their bandbox gym).

- If the MVC is looking again soon, there is absolutely no reason for Valpo to not take advantage of that and make that move. But first they have to be invited, and if VU doesn't at least have a tangible plan in place for improving their facilities (renderings, fundraising, etc.), the opportunity will be missed. If a beat writer from Terre Haute thinks your facility looks like a high school, time to act.

- In an ideal world, you build a new arena from the ground up. In the real world, you can probably renovate the ARC for less and get everything you need. Chairbacks all around (ok, maybe the student section stays bleachers, since they stand the whole game anyway). This allows you to re-set the seating angles to eliminate bad views (i.e. seats can roll out over the track). Knock out north wall (the building was designed to do that). Add another mezz and maybe a few suites or private club for premium options/revenue. Build new entry pavilion behind that with expanded restrooms/concessions. You could probably even fit a new practice court and dressing rooms underneath. Maybe add some additional concourses behind each endzone to improve access and add other amenities. Get permanent capacity around 6,000. Boom. Set for the next 25 years.

-Oh, and adding seats, amenities and the revenue that come along with them not only helps VU if the MVC/A-10/Future Conference Opportunity ever comes calling, but it helps to attract better non-conference opponents, because it will make it easier Valpo to have the money to pay to bring them in.

I've heard that VU had difficulty getting the Ball State game scheduled this year (nothing out of the ordinary, sometimes matching up dates can be trickier than most fans realize). And that was a contracted home game, so I wouldn't be surprised if a potential roadie not under contract at FW was pushed off to a future year while Valpo tried to load up its OOC schedule with the Vegas tourney and games at Kentucky and Oregon instead.

Davis often seems to be angling for the Butler SID job, so I'm not surprised he'd throw shade Valpo's way. When Butler joined the Big East, they immediately and unilaterally dropped their non-conference home-and-home series with Ball State (the two teams had played annually dating back to the 1930s, including many years in the late 80s through the mid 90s where Butler was an RPI drag on Ball State rather than the other way around). Not terribly unusual for a team to big-time an old rival like that, but Davis managed to float a column blaming *Ball State* for the series being dropped (even though Butler even admitted publicly it was their decision to end the series), for not proactively offering Butler more home games or a gilded throne or something. Take his statewide college hoops musings with massive grains of salt given his rabid BU fandom.