Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Ok, well here goes. Last night got me thinking of just how bad our Men's basketball program is. How can we go over 40 years without making the NCAA Tournament. Somewhere something needs to change and I am sorry but a new venue is not going to give us immediate results. We have not been to the dance since the 1960s, however, every other Div 1 school but 4, have made the post season tournament except us. Do we have a curse. We probably got screwed about 8 years ago but our basketball program is the worst I ever seen.

Give you an example, Oakland U, in the past 10 years went from a doormat to a quality team. They have a former BG player coaching the team. They went from a non-Div 1 school to Div 1 and have made the dance a couple times in the past 10 years and BG has made the NIT twice in that period. How can a nobody, a non Div 1 school build a program when we cannot even turn ours around.

How can a small school named Oakland U make the dance and we can't. Oakland U is only 6-5 this year but should have beaten Purdue, LOST to Michigan State by 1, we lost by over 30 to MSU!!! And now they go down and beat #7 Tennessee last night in Knoxville. They have a challenging schedule year in and out and we struggle against bottom feeders.

Clearly we are not doing something right. 5 athletic directors and numerous coaches later WE STILL STRUGGLE. A new venue isn't going to solve the problem. Has Toledo done anything the past three years since its renovations and upgraded facilities? Ball State? Northern? DePaul, UMass? Numerous programs got new arenas or upgraded its facilities and results remain the same.

gmartin wrote:
How can a small school named Oakland U make the dance and we can't.

Oakland's enrollment is approximately equal to BG's- about 19,000. Not sure how their name would affect their play one way or another.

When did DePaul renovate or upgrade their facilities, they still play at the crappy Allstate Arena that isn't anywhere near their campus. DePaul's problem was they were perfect in CUSA, and were no where near ready to make the jump to the Big East when that change happened

Back in the fall of 2007, three years ago, DePaul built a 33.5 million dollar athletic center. Very similar to the SEBO but three stories for all of its intercollegiate student athletes. It houses all the conditioning, rehab, some practices, etc.

My point being, YES, the new facilities are nice, but even with new facilities as the SEBO and the Stroh, our program still will not go to the next level. Other college and universities have upgraded its facilities and yes many have improved but others have remained the same.

Many people think that the Stroh and Sebo are going to help win us championships and I don't see that as the case. It has been nearly half a century since we were in the NCAA's. Gone through numerous ADs and coaches and still haven't made it. Something is clearly wrong.

Is it the recruiting, the coaches, the AD? Should we cut sports and put more money into getting a higher caliber coach?

If a team like. Oakland, and H20 pointed out, has similar size in student body, can make a couple appearances in the NCAAs in the past 11 years since they joined Div 1, then what is the problem here in BG?

The new facilities aren't going to produce championships overnight. It takes time.

A combination of things have created the NCAA tourney dry spell here at BG, BUT, CLEARLY the Stroh is one giant step in the right direction for our program.

As fans we are sometimes unrealistic on what all goes into evaluating a successful program. As much as we would like wins and losses be the ONLY criteria, that is not reality, especially at a mid-major like BG.

A corollary or something, if you will- the renovation of Savage didn't make us any better and if we kept Cross it wouldn't have made us any better. BUT- it got fans involved again and that has continued- in spite of weak attendance at the coach's tournament we are around 4500 per game and the last few games are higher.

You will see an immediate attendance bounce with Stroh- it'll be a more pleasant place to watch games and students who know nothing and care even less about Anderson's tradition will come just to see the place and have something to do and talk about.

But you better have signs that things will improve in the near term. Toledo is really bad right now but fans are engaged because there is progress every game, sometimes DURING a game. The building will bring fans, better opponents (we've had Alabama and Cinci from BCS conferences at Savage in the last two years and NWestern and Indiana on the women's side) fans will increase excitement and the combo should pay off in better players- but it would be a pity to see the place be a mausoleum in a few years if the program doesn't get better. And that falls on the coaches and AD. Someone other than Howard as the opening act would have been good. We had 7,500 for Massachusetts when Savage re-opened. Not a great opponent but a pretty well known one and but, hey- they had Dr. J, right?

Heck, there will be more fans at the Stroh simply because they will actually be able to park there and walk to the arena fairly comfortably.

gmartin wrote: A new venue isn't going to solve the problem. Has Toledo done anything the past three years since its renovations and upgraded facilities? Ball State? Northern? DePaul, UMass? Numerous programs got new arenas or upgraded its facilities and results remain the same.

The solution is easy. Let's break the trend. Let's go completely against the grain and play in a worse facility. Tear a few seat out of Anderson and ignore the floor for at least 10 more years. Bring in a portable heater to make those bathrooms even hotter. If this is not feasible, set up some lawn chairs and just play in the parking lot. To paraphrase George Costanza, if everything we've been doing is wrong than the opposite must be right.

I think the new arena will attract better talent. My initial reaction about AA when I first saw it in 1973, was that it was not a great looking place to play. Recruits see different venues, and the better recruits want to play at the best places they can.

My co-worker's son will be playing for Columbia University next year. It doesn't matter what the basketball court looks like when you can hang a diploma from Columbia on your wall.

One possible negative about BGSU that can't be changed is that it is in a rural area. On average, the best talent comes from an urban area, and they would look at BG as a place that is lacking in whatever interests them.

Falconian wrote:
One possible negative about BGSU that can't be changed is that it is in a rural area. On average, the best talent comes from an urban area, and they would look at BG as a place that is lacking in whatever interests them.

May be some truth to that but I
came from a rural area and couldn't wait to live in the city. I suspect for a lot of city kids a less frenetic situation might be viewed as a nice break.