Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 2 of 3 ALL<123
Username Post: Dartmouth Loss Tonight        (Topic#698)
BrownAlum 
Freshman
Posts: 73

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 12:04 AM - Post#4094    
    In response to 05Brunonia

That stat about the parents is not true. However, Brown does raise more money from non-alumni parents than any other Ivy and is second most in the country.

 
columbia92 
goober
Posts: 73
columbia92
Loc: NYC
Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 03:33 PM - Post#4095    
    In response to 05Brunonia

Could apathy also be attributable to the fact that Penn's runaway with the league has eliminated any chance of Brown Basketball competing for the NCAA tournament bid?

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 03:46 PM - Post#4096    
    In response to columbia92

It wasn't a runaway when the weekend started---the Brown student paper as well as Projo both were highly optimistic that with all 7 home games remaining, Brown was right in the race. Penn's 2 game lead when the weekend started had nothing to do with lousy attendance at these games.

 
Anonymous 

Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 04:17 PM - Post#4097    
    In response to palestra38

Actually the Friday crowd was pretty good, quiite full though not a sell out. Sat. attendance was much less. Penn and Princeton usually draw pretty well, even in the pre-Miller years.

 
Anonymous 

Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 04:30 PM - Post#4098    
    In response to columbia92

Hey C92....

Isn't it refreshing to be on a board (the Brown board) whose team's most supportive fans look inward to assess problems/solutions (with the school, the student body, etc) rather than cast blame on everyone outside of their program without taking personal responsibility?

Try it sometime.

 
columbia92 
goober
Posts: 73
columbia92
Loc: NYC
Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 04:47 PM - Post#4099    
    In response to

Columbia is playing to 71% capacity in the league this year. Penn is at 59%. Brown and Yale are in the Mid-50s. Cornell, the 2nd place team, is at 34%.

My argument has never been about Columbia. I'm suggesting the league-wide malaise can be attributable to the fact that there is nothing of interest for non-diehards at these games.

For reference:
(league games only)
LEAGUE 75608 57%
HAR 4782 73%
COL 9922 71%
DAR 4417 70%
PRI 17023 62%
PEN 25598 59%
BRO 2998 54%
YAL 3194 52%
COR 7674 34%


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 05:27 PM - Post#4100    
    In response to columbia92

So Penn is averaging 5500 per Ivy home game and Columbia is averaging just over 2000 and you are trumpeting that CU is at 71% of capacity? Sigh.

 
columbia92 
goober
Posts: 73
columbia92
Loc: NYC
Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 05:49 PM - Post#4101    
    In response to palestra38

Not trumpeting anything. My point is not about Columbia vs Penn. Never has been. Never will be.

It's about the six schools which don't care about basketball versus the two that do. Just because I have Columbia in my moniker does not make me as partisan as many of those who wear redandblue colored glasses.

If we are to understand how to improve the league as an entity, perhaps we should drop our self-serving interests for a second.

The way the schedule works out, Brown and Yale are almost eliminated before they have even played a majority of their league home games. This will not increase interest on campus, even if one of the two turns it around and finishes 9-5 and in 2nd place.

Why is this such a foreign concept for many to understand. People don't go to sporting events for the aesthetics of competition. They go to cheer, to be part of a community. What's the point of cheering if there's no payoff?

Understanding this is what has made professional and collegiate sports tremendous earners. Our league despises the notion that people want to be active spectators.

 
Anonymous 

Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 06:05 PM - Post#4102    
    In response to columbia92

Well, when your school is in the city that probably has the most alumns of other Ivy schools, you'll "draw" well because of the opponents. I can't imagine that Columbia has ever really had a "home-court" advantage in Ivy play.

But I guess by making that argument I fall into the C92 trap of blaming factors outside of the school's "control" for any negatives related to the program.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 06:07 PM - Post#4103    
    In response to columbia92

But you're wrong...as I pointed out earlier, Brown had not been eliminated before last weekend. Moreover, it is typical that several teams will play 5 of the first 7 on the road---Penn did last year.

Competitiveness has little or nothing to do with the schedule, since it evens out over the years. Competitiveness has everything to do with the committment given to the sport by the schools' administration. Committment is evidenced by a number of factors, from facilities, the willingness of admissions to work with athletics, the willingness to spend money to hire the right coaches, and the willingness to promote the product and the school. Unfortunately, most of the Ivies would rather choke than promote their athletic programs. Until recently, CU fell within that category---it seems to be changing, but the verdict is still out. If Brown promoted its product in a town like Providence, I think it could be very successful. Only Dartmouth has built in disadvantages that seemingly preclude it from making the kind of committment that could lead to a winner (small school size, far from population center, not exactly a basketball hotbed). The other Ivies choose to be bad....because they refuse to make a committment to being successful. Contrary to your repeated assertions, neither scheduling nor the lack of a playoff is a significant factor in the lack of success of the non-P's.

 
columbia92 
goober
Posts: 73
columbia92
Loc: NYC
Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 06:10 PM - Post#4104    
    In response to

Quote:

Well, when your school is in the city that probably has the most alumns of other Ivy schools, you'll "draw" well because of the opponents. I can't imagine that Columbia has ever really had a "home-court" advantage in Ivy play.




I guess you didn't see the Yale game on YES.

Columbia's students have responded to this team. The alumni will come along slowly.

But once again, for the reading-comprehension challenged...

It's not about Columbia. It's about the six schools that don't care, versus the two that do. How do we (as league partners) keep Brown/Harvard/Dartmouth/Cornell fans from abandoning basketball for hockey? How do we get Yale fans to care in an off-year?

Leave Columbia out of the discussion for a moment.

 
Chip Bayers 
Professor
Posts: 6997
Chip Bayers
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 06:13 PM - Post#4105    
    In response to columbia92

Quote:

Not trumpeting anything. My point is not about Columbia vs Penn. Never has been. Never will be.

It's about the six schools which don't care about basketball versus the two that do. Just because I have Columbia in my moniker does not make me as partisan as many of those who wear redandblue colored glasses.

If we are to understand how to improve the league as an entity, perhaps we should drop our self-serving interests for a second.

The way the schedule works out, Brown and Yale are almost eliminated before they have even played a majority of their league home games. This will not increase interest on campus, even if one of the two turns it around and finishes 9-5 and in 2nd place.

Why is this such a foreign concept for many to understand. People don't go to sporting events for the aesthetics of competition. They go to cheer, to be part of a community. What's the point of cheering if there's no payoff?

Understanding this is what has made professional and collegiate sports tremendous earners. Our league despises the notion that people want to be active spectators.




You've ignored the point in the post you're responding to.

Despite your rhetorical sleight-of-hand about the "majority of their league home games," Brown certainly wasn't "almost eliminated" before last weekend. They were given the gift of starting their Ivy home schedule with what should have been their two easiest games at Pizzitola. Win both and they're right in the thick of the race.

If anyone "despises the notion that people want to be active spectators," it's the Brown basketball team, which effectively killed fan interest by (for example) missing their first 18 shots in the second half against Dartmouth.


 
columbia92 
goober
Posts: 73
columbia92
Loc: NYC
Reg: 11-22-04
Not talking about competitiveness or success
02-15-05 06:19 PM - Post#4106    
    In response to palestra38

I'm talking about marketing. I'm talking about building community around the basketball programs. Building interest among groups of 18-22 year olds. Why does Starbucks succeed where Chock Full o Nuts failed?

It understood the marketplace.

Our league does not understand the marketplace. Winning is not the only draw for sports teams. Excitement, drama, tension, us vs them... this is what sells tickets. When the "us vs them" component is for 2nd place, it loses lustre.

The league is set up in a fashion that ignores the economic realities of today's college sports consumer. It only suits the old-timers and die-hards. Even Penn doesn't draw as well as it used to...

Why do we want our ivory tower to exist in this public sphere which should be a way to bridge the gaps between town and gown?

 
Anonymous 

Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 07:15 PM - Post#4107    
    In response to columbia92

I apologize to the Brown fans for taking up your board space here. C92 clearly has an agenda/axe to grind.

I think many of my esteemed colleagues have made the case for how these schools can improve much better than I can in this post, so I'll direct you to their many fine and well thought-out posts.

It seems like you'll keep crying wolf on this one until everyone clamors for a postseason tournament. Don't hold your breath.

 
Anonymous 

Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 07:22 PM - Post#4108    
    In response to palestra38

Quote:



If Brown promoted its product in a town like Providence, I think it could be very successful.




P'38, I respectfully disagree. Providence is a relatively small town, PC gets the bulk of the ink and attention, and URI gets most of what's left. Brown tried playing some double headers in the "Dunk" with PC a few years ago and not much happened. I think Penn's larger undergraduate student body helps it's numbers. Brown does a little better in football, alumni come from farther away to attend, less local competition (no PC).

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 07:34 PM - Post#4109    
    In response to

Well, I guess we'll never know....Brown's opportunity to improve its program came when it sold Marvel and rather than build a first class facility, went the high school route. But Providence is not a small town (although I guess it is in comparison to NY and Philly) and Brown is not much different in size than PC. The key is its niche in the city and surrounding area---if Brown had an on-campus arena (say 5000 or so) with comfortable seats, it could seek to draw people from the area who don't want to pay the prices they charge for mediocre PC basketball at the Dunk. With the facility they have, there is no way anyone unaffiliated with the University is going to come to a game. It's also harder to compete with the P's for recruits. So I guess you have to be happy with the amazing job Miller has done under the circumstances. It won't be easy to keep him.

 
Bruno 
PhD Student
Posts: 1414

Loc: Brooklyn, NY
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 08:07 PM - Post#4110    
    In response to palestra38

Again with the "you guys aren't big time enough to keep a good coach." He hasn't left yet, has he?

I'll disagree with you here too. You're placing the egg before the chicken (or is it the chicken before the egg?) when you say that all Brown needed to do was build a 5,000 person arena with cushy seats, and the community would flock. Please. This has nothing to do with the facility. Brown does have challenges marketing itself to Providence, and Brown does not have anywhere near the undergraduate population that Penn does. Urban Providence isn't very big, and Providence and URI do get most of the attention. (This was the first year that the ProJo's website actually included a "Brown" section under "Local Colleges" - until last year, it used to be just Providence and URI.)
LET'S go BRU-no (duh. nuh. nuh-nuh-nuh)


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Whoa! We stink!
02-15-05 08:19 PM - Post#4111    
    In response to Bruno

I agree with most of what you say, but don't put words in my mouth---I said it won't be easy to keep him, not that you can't. You will have to pay real cash money to keep him, just as Penn has done with Dunphy and Princeton apparently did to get Scott.

Brown is significantly smaller than Penn, but the difference in attendance is primarily alumni and unaffiliated people. On the Penn sub-board, there has been much moaning and groaning about the lack of student attendance (nothing like some W's for that). In a town like Providence, I think a nice quality lower mid-level facility would attract the non-students. I just wonder how much more it would have been to build that instead of Pizziola....and whether there is a sincere interest by the Brown administration to compete for an NCAA bid every year(as opposed to Miller and his players, who certainly try their best)?

So don't get me wrong---I have great admiration for what Brown has done with its program since Miller came in, but I attribute that solely to Miller and not to the Brown administration...and I hope they do keep him.

 
Chip Bayers 
Professor
Posts: 6997
Chip Bayers
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Not talking about competitiveness or success
02-15-05 08:44 PM - Post#4112    
    In response to columbia92

I wholeheartedly agree that the league doesn't understand marketing. One look at how they've scheduled the YES games in football and basketball last year and this year indicates this.

But the only way to make games about playing for more than second place is to improve the teams. And I don't see any indication in other mid-major conferences that you improve the teams or attendance or fan interest by giving a 10-18 squad a chance to lose by 50 in the NCAAs, which is the only proposal you've put forward so far in the way of changes.

Brown has taken great strides forward in the last couple of years, and competed for the championship because of it, with rabid crowds turning out for games in '02 and '03 and '04. The fact that they're a very young and therefore uneven squad this season is what's affecting their ability to compete for the league title and (perhaps) crowd interest, not anything having to do with the schedule or the league's unwillingness to foster an "us vs. them" component. What, exactly, is your evidence that this is the league's intent?

Anyway, you don't need to be competing for first place to foster "us vs. them." Yale and Harvard sure have an intensity to their matchups in basketball that goes beyond the place in the standings. There's an obvious "us vs. them" rivalry within the Yale-Brown travel partnership, too, since Yale began challenging the Ps for supremacy in '02, and Brown joined in the next two years. Certainly some of the posts on these boards suggest there's a rivalry that could be milked further.

What time frame are you talking about when you say Penn doesn't draw as well as it used to? Last year vs this year? Posts here by semi-informed fans don't count. Do you have long-term figures to cite that indicate a trend which goes beyond single year fluctuations, which are likely tied to pre-season expectations rather than the marketing failures of Jeff Orleans and his staff?

You offer us cant about "old-timers and die-hards" and the "ivory tower" and "town and gown," and very little in the way of detailed, concrete criticisms of the league's marketing, along with suggestions for addressing any weaknesses you see. So please, enlighten us with specifics.


 
columbia92 
goober
Posts: 73
columbia92
Loc: NYC
Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Not talking about competitiveness or success
02-15-05 09:36 PM - Post#4113    
    In response to Chip Bayers

There have been no attempts, so far as I can see, to create interest in this league nationally, regionally, or locally. We understand why this is so. With the exception of Dartmouth, each team has a Big East competitor in its market. Even Penn can't compete with Villanova for local interest.

The problem is, we can't even get our students interested. Nobody wants to get them interested. We seem to say that it's alright for them to ignore the league, except when their archrivals come to town. The sports marketplace is very fragmented. There are many competing interests for the entertainment dollar and eyeball. When providing a product that offers little in terms of emotional payoff, it is substandard in the marketplace of ideas.

Right now, there is little or no reason for a student at six of the eight schools to be emotionally invested in their basketball team. Most teams are eliminated from any payoff by midseason. Whatever stretch run that exists, is usually between two or three teams at most.

It's a bad product. The players are less talented than they are in the ACC. The students are less interested than they are in the OVC. There's no excitement at any gym, there's little reason for coaches play for the present after half the season is over...

Maybe we should go D-III. At least we can retain our "purity."

 
 Page 2 of 3 ALL<123
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

3652 Views




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.862 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 05:02 AM
Top