Uconn in CR

[upstater]

What the heck are you talking about? I was responding to a comment about fair-weather fans - nothing else. You're the one who expanded the discussion beyond attendance to pull in licensing numbers.

Actually, I was discussing attendance when YOU brought up licensing numbers.

 

[whaler11]

I was there in the mid 1980s when UConn was losing and the Civic Center was packed and fans were loud and out of their minds. The UConn Huskies had the most interest of any team in the nation when it came to beat reporters, and the contingent of media became known as the Horde. It doesn't matter what some jackass from Emory thinks.

Here you go Upstater. See it there? Civic Center. This is what I replied to when I told you, that you were living in the past and things have changed.

So again, you are wrong. Can you at least get your arguments straight?

 

[whaler11]

Things have changed... for the better.

Look at attendance. BETTER.

You're sitting here arguing that fans supported this team more during the Perno years?

Really?

We went through this last week. WOOMBA is totally wrong.

UConn is top 25 in fan support now, used to be top 15 until 2008. When it comes to total fans (i.e. as a road draw) UConn is top 10.

And this is even with the very limited seating at Gampel.

FACTS don't lie.

Last week the B1G fans on this board listed a bunch of B1G teams with rabid fandom, including Lansing, Ann Arbor, Minnestoa, and several others. They said Uconn didn't have the same support. What they didn't realize is that UConn is ranked ahead of them in terms of support. Here we are again arguing the same lame things though the facts show otherwise.

LOL upstater. Here is when you told me things are better.

So now are you going to continue to claim you weren't replying to me? That I've invented your argument?

 

[whaler11]

So are newspapers.

Well no kidding - but it's not as though you can claim you've got a rabid fanbase based on something that doesn't exist. You might want to find actual tangible evidence.

 

[woomba]

I specifically asked how you were defining it - YOU said licensing is part of the mix.

UConn beats those teams on attendance. It beats all those teams on licensing too except for Michigan. You back out TV revenues which are NOT based on the individuals schools, and you measure revenues from there. Put it this way: if UConn were in the B1G, it's revenues would automatically jump ahead of those teams listed because of the conference payout. Licensing is the category into which schools list conference TV payouts.​

​

So you're saying that TV payouts is not a sign of fan support? But you want to keep in non-TV items like radio deals which would still be included in these numbers? You also want to discount ticket revenue too right?​

...yet at the same time you don't want to use the CLC rankings for college merchandise. Ok.​

Fine - If you want to do that analysis then what's the full Big East payout + UConn's tv deals for 2012? You'll also need to break down Big Ten's $24.7 distribution since that also includes NCAA credits and bowl payouts.​

 

[NickyNewark]

The B1G vs ACC battle for NYC begins ...

http://espn.go.com/new-york/college...416791/acc-pinstripe-bowl-6-years-sources-say

The Pinstripe Bowl and the ACC have agreed to a six-year deal in which the ACC will annually play the Big Ten starting in 2014, sources said Monday.
Last month, the bowl announced an eight-year partnership with the Big Ten for the game played at Yankee Stadium.
ACC commissioner John Swofford, Yankees owner Hal Steinbrenner and team president Randy Levine are expected to attend a Tuesday news conference at Yankee Stadium to announce the deal, sources said.
As in the Big Ten's deal, Yankee Stadium will feature an ACC sign for all Yankees home regular-season games starting in 2014, a source said.

@Good ole boy Swoffy,taking one out of SU's gameplan thinking a sign will make what isn't so so!While SU goes running around paying cab company's and public venues to "claim" there NY's team RU and UConn keep going about the business of actually being NYC's team!Keep taking advise from CNY and Boston and the B1G will keep laughing all the way to the bank!btw Swoffy,hows the network coming along?

 

[upstater]

Here you go Upstater. See it there? Civic Center. This is what I replied to when I told you, that you were living in the past and things have changed.

So again, you are wrong. Can you at least get your arguments straight?

I was talking to woomba about college basketball attendance. Plain and simple. And, having looked at UConn's attendance record just last week, I knew a few things. For one, I was disabused from the mistaken belief that UConn attendance had dropped off from the 1990s. Like you, I thought this was true. But when I looked up the facts. It showed that I was wrong. and this is why I responded to woomba that Uconn bball was in fact much better than many presume, that it was better than a list of bball programs listed last week by frankthetank as drawing better than UConn.

 

[upstater]

I specifically asked how you were defining it - YOU said licensing is part of the mix.

​

So you're saying that TV payouts is not a sign of fan support? But you want to keep in non-TV items like radio deals which would still be included in these numbers? You also want to discount ticket revenue too right?​

...yet at the same time you don't want to use the CLC rankings for college merchandise. Ok.​

Fine - If you want to do that analysis then what's the full Big East payout + UConn's tv deals for 2012? You'll also need to break down Big Ten's $24.7 distribution since that also includes NCAA credits and bowl payouts.​

I was CLEARLY discussing attendance. I just quoted the very post that you initially responded to. There was nothing about licensing there. It was all attendance. You brought up licensing first in YOUR post. But like I said, if you want to bring licensing into it (as you did in your post), UConn does well there as well.

Northwestern and BC and wake forest and a whole host of schools get a ton of money in TV payouts that UConn doesn't get. Fan support, though, is better determined by tickets, TV ratings, licensing, etc. The concept is pretty clear here. Compare apples to apples. Put it this way: if UConn had been picked to join the ACC, its licensing revenues would have skyrocketed to the top of the charts. Would that be because UConn was suddenly 2x more popular? Or would it be because they joined a conference with a bigger payout?

 

[upstater]

LOL upstater. Here is when you told me things are better.

So now are you going to continue to claim you weren't replying to me? That I've invented your argument?

ATTENDANCE IS BETTER.

 

[woomba]

I was CLEARLY discussing attendance. I just quoted the very post that you initially responded to. There was nothing about licensing there. It was all attendance. You brought up licensing first in YOUR post. But like I said, if you want to bring licensing into it (as you did in your post), UConn does well there as well.

Northwestern and BC and wake forest and a whole host of schools get a ton of money in TV payouts that UConn doesn't get. Fan support, though, is better determined by tickets, TV ratings, licensing, etc. The concept is pretty clear here. Compare apples to apples. Put it this way: if UConn had been picked to join the ACC, its licensing revenues would have skyrocketed to the top of the charts. Would that be because UConn was suddenly 2x more popular? Or would it be because they joined a conference with a bigger payout?

Here was my question :

How are you ranking this support? If it's by rights licensing UConn isn't ahead of any of these teams.

This was your answer :

They are ahead in attendance.
They are ahead in licensing.

You mentioned initially that :

UConn is top 25 in fan support now, used to be top 15 until 2008. When it comes to total fans (i.e. as a road draw) UConn is top 10.

And this is even with the very limited seating at Gampel.

FACTS don't lie.

Last week the B1G fans on this board listed a bunch of B1G teams with rabid fandom, including Lansing, Ann Arbor, Minnestoa, and several others. They said Uconn didn't have the same support. What they didn't realize is that UConn is ranked ahead of them in terms of support. Here we are again arguing the same lame things though the facts show otherwise.

If you define "fan support" by pure attendance I don't have that much of an issue with your claims (although it sounds like it's not top 25 anymore) but if you're now talking top 10 or top 25 in licensing then I'll need to see the numbers to prove that.

 

[buggsy]

This stuff is similar to a Providence fan crowing about beating UConn in a season where they don't make the NIT.

Agreed. Upper tier teams do sh&t the bed every once in a while and lose against a team they are not supposed to.

Middling teams DO NOT beat the 4th ranked team in a BCS Sugar Bowl....wins 11 games and finish the season ranked #13 in both the AP and the coaches poll.

Middling teams do not start the season off in the top 10....and possibly top 5 as Louisville will.

If you think Louisville is middling...you are clueless. Absolutely clueless.

Most importantly, teams like FSU and Clemson do not think Louisville is middling....but they do think UCONN (and RU) are.

That is why the ACC is more stable with their addition then had they added UCONN.

 

[upstater]

Here was my question :


This was your answer :


You mentioned initially that :



If you define "fan support" by pure attendance I don't have that much of an issue with your claims (although it sounds like it's not top 25 anymore) but if you're now talking top 10 or top 25 in licensing then I'll need to see the numbers to prove that.

I was obviously discussing attendance. BECAUSE I was responding to your post on attendance in the Big East. Which makes this whole conversation bizarre since I was responding to YOU. Licensing had nothing to do with it until you brought it up. But since you did--I linked to UConn's licensing figures. UConn is generating licensing amounts which place it square in the middle of the BCS conferences even though it earns barely ANYTHING from conference payouts. Which should tell you that UConn INSIDE a BCS conference (i.e. apples to apples comparison) is generating lots of revenue.

 

[upstater]

Agreed. Upper tier teams do sh&t the bed every once in a while and lose against a team they are not supposed to.

Middling teams DO NOT beat the 4th ranked team in a BCS Sugar Bowl....wins 11 games and finish the season ranked #13 in both the AP and the coaches poll.

Middling teams do not start the season off in the top 10....and possibly top 5 as Louisville will.

If you think Louisville is middling...you are clueless. Absolutely clueless.

Most importantly, teams like FSU and Clemson do not think Louisville is middling....but they do think UCONN (and RU) are.

That is why the ACC is more stable with their addition then had they added UCONN.

Is Kansas a middling team? Utah? Boise? TCU?

 

[CL82]

Yes, the main thing I'd pick out from my post is the social media aspect. Well done.

Thanks!

 

[woomba]

I was obviously discussing attendance. BECAUSE I was responding to your post on attendance in the Big East. Which makes this whole conversation bizarre since I was responding to YOU. Licensing had nothing to do with it until you brought it up. But since you did--I linked to UConn's licensing figures. UConn is generating licensing amounts which place it square in the middle of the BCS conferences even though it earns barely ANYTHING from conference payouts. Which should tell you that UConn INSIDE a BCS conference (i.e. apples to apples comparison) is generating lots of revenue.

Unngh - fine. Let's just drop it from a misunderstanding of posts. We're now rehashing the same material from another thread.

 

[whaler11]

ATTENDANCE IS BETTER.

You posted numbers all the way back to 1992. The three lowest seasons are 2010, 2011 and you ignored 2013.

2012 coming off an NC is still below the 90s average.

Are you dim? Seriously how can you possibly say that attendance is better when it's clearly lower? You posted the lower numbers yourself and that doesn't even correct for Gampel's capacity being higher.

Your conclusion is demonstrably false by data you provided.

 

[UPitt]

ATTENDANCE IS BETTER.

Not so much. Attendance is strongly influenced by stadium and arena size. Using attendance only, one could argue that Syracuse and Louisville have nearly twice the basketball fan support of Uconn. Do you believe that to be true? Do you really believe that Duke has the 42nd best fan support for basketball, behind schools like Dayton and San Diego State? Or that Creighton really has the 6th most fan support? As for Uconn, do you really think that fan support has decreased throughout the years?

Fan support is very hard to measure and no single metric will define fan support. I agree that licensing dollars are not an exact science either, but a combination of licensing, donations, and TV ratings would provide a more accurate comparison of fan support than that of basketball attendance.

 

[whaler11]

In 1992 Gampel held 8,241. UConn sold out every game at GP. If the capacity was higher then the gap would be even higher in the past.

The smallest crowd in Hartford was for Wake in the ACC challenge which was a separate ticket. It drew 13,169. Every other game in Hartford drew >16,000 even CCSU, Hartford, Furman and Yale.

In 2011 coming of an NC. UConn drew a crowd of 10,726 for Maine. 11,397 for Coppin St.

In 2010 ranked number 4 they drew 11,255 for Harvard and 12,599 for USF. Ranked 14th they got 14,622 for Marquette.

Can you answer a simple question Upstater. Is 16,000>11,000? Maybe that is your issue, you think that is a false statement?

 

[upstater]

Not so much. Attendance is strongly influenced by stadium and arena size. Using attendance only, one could argue that Syracuse and Louisville have nearly twice the basketball fan support of Uconn. Do you believe that to be true? Do you really believe that Duke has the 42nd best fan support for basketball, behind schools like Dayton and San Diego State? Or that Creighton really has the 6th most fan support? As for Uconn, do you really think that fan support has decreased throughout the years?

Fan support is very hard to measure and no single metric will define fan support. I agree that licensing dollars are not an exact science either, but a combination of licensing, donations, and TV ratings would provide a more accurate comparison of fan support than that of basketball attendance.

"Attendance was better." That means the attendance number was higher in previous years. Nothing more to read into it. As for your other question about attendance and support, yes, I do believe your supposition. Yes, Creighton has great support when it comes to fans showing up at the arena. There's no way to argue that it doesn't. And yes, a small venue can hurt Duke, but hey! Duke isn't selling out the arena these days like they used to, so I'm not sure there's an argument there. Of course, UConn can sell out the arena for the big games too, but for the smaller games? It's like Duke. So: great for Pitt, great for Creighton. Of course, there are other factors, like ticket prices, donations for seats, freebies (heck, Rutgers gives 40% of tix in freebies), etc. But as for attendance, the numbers are what they are. Hard to argue against them.

These are not the only factors of support. There's donations, there's TV ratings, licensing, etc. Hey, there are other sports which might be considered to support the ADs revenues--that too counts.

Of course I agree that attendance, revenue, TV ratings, licensing, donations, all of it should be compared.

 

[upstater]

You posted numbers all the way back to 1992. The three lowest seasons are 2010, 2011 and you ignored 2013.

NCAA doesn't list 2013 attendance.

2012 coming off an NC is still below the 90s average.

And?

Are you dim? Seriously how can you possibly say that attendance is better when it's clearly lower? You posted the lower numbers yourself and that doesn't even correct for Gampel's capacity being higher.

Your conclusion is demonstrably false by data you provided.

Here you are changing the whole discussion again because it's not going your way.

I stated: the height of UConn's attendance was at the midpoint of the 2000s, above what it was in the 1990s.

I then stated, after 2008, UConn's attendance dropped precipitously (as it has in many top places).

None of what you wrote contradicts what I've said.

And now you're trying to change the goalposts. YET AGAIN

 

[whaler11]

But as for attendance, the numbers are what they are. Hard to argue against them.

Yet here we are a few hundred posts in when you are doing exactly that. Claiming smaller numbers are better.

 

[whaler11]

Here you are changing the whole discussion again because it's not going your way.

I stated: the height of UConn's attendance was at the midpoint of the 2000s, above what it was in the 1990s.

I then stated, after 2008, UConn's attendance dropped precipitously (as it has in many top places).

None of what you wrote contradicts what I've said.

And now you're trying to change the goalposts. YET AGAIN

You stated that attendance today is better than it was in the 90s. You stated the last 7 years specifically which are actually the lowest 7 year run.

Do I really need to quote those for you?

You also are ignoring that the mid 2000s had 2.000 extra seats at Gampel which could raise the average by 1,000.

But keep yapping you just prove yourself more foolish.

 

[upstater]

In 1992 Gampel held 8,241. UConn sold out every game at GP. If the capacity was higher then the gap would be even higher in the past.

The smallest crowd in Hartford was for Wake in the ACC challenge which was a separate ticket. It drew 13,169. Every other game in Hartford drew >16,000 even CCSU, Hartford, Furman and Yale.

In 2011 coming of an NC. UConn drew a crowd of 10,726 for Maine. 11,397 for Coppin St.

In 2010 ranked number 4 they drew 11,255 for Harvard and 12,599 for USF. Ranked 14th they got 14,622 for Marquette.

Can you answer a simple question Upstater. Is 16,000>11,000? Maybe that is your issue, you think that is a false statement?

I'll start off with the total nonsense first: If UConn averaged 16k in Hartford back then and 11k in Gampel, it's total average would be at least 14k since 2/3rds of the games were at HCC. But it never happened.

Now, without a doubt, increased capacity at Gampel increased attendance. That's obvious. The question is by how much.

Now, let's pretend the 2k gain in seats props the numbers in the early to mid 2000s and makes them look great compared to the 1990s, when more capacity was utilized.

But, when you look at the actual average attendance, it FELL after Gampel was expanded. In 1997 (first season of expanded Gampel), tix dropped from 12,911 to 12,578. They increased seating by 2k, and lost an average of 450 fans.

A year later (with the increased capacity) tix went to 13,007. So, a net gain of almost 100 tix. In the first two years after the expansion of Gampel in the late 1990s, the average attendance number dropped.

I will grant that you're right that the expansion of Gampel contributed to the increased attendance in the early and mid 2000s. I don't think the impact is nearly as pronounced as you assume though. Increased capacity did not lead to increased attendance in 1997 and 1998.

 

[upstater]

Yet here we are a few hundred posts in when you are doing exactly that. Claiming smaller numbers are better.

I stuck to the numbers. A couple of you are arguing that the higher numbers are lower.

 

[whaler11]

YES.

Keep making a fool of yourself.

I will prove to you that you don't know what TF you are talking about.

Please continue this line of inquiry, because I guarantee you that you will come out looking like a ridiculous fool. I dare you. Keep up with this 1980s and 1990s was better than the last 7 years stuff.

Your data all in:

Average of 90s: 12850
Average of 7 seven years with expanded Gampel: 11985

Oh I feel like such a ridiculous fool. Especially since the HCC numbers are even a bigger gap.

Good stuff upstater. Way to fight this one to the death even when you were wrong from word one.