Ask the AD - 5/23/2007

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:33 pm

Why not drop men's basketball? The hockey team draws more during most years, has had more success historically, has moved more guys to the next level and plays in a building that, while showing some wear, is in infinitely better condition than the shithole that houses men's basketball.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:35 pm

Ok...we can't drop men's basketball because they'd kick us out of the MAC...but still, it's a point to ponder on a purley philosophical level.

Hockey isn't the problem...as BGFan sorta pointed out, the way it's marketed is

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:43 pm

moneymaker02 wrote:But the number of hockey fans destroys the number of basketball fans.

I will politely disagree with you on this point. Yes, I know you will quote attendance numbers to say there are more hockey fans. But we are in the depths of a horrible stretch for the basketball program. I would venture to say when we are putting a decent product on the floor, basketball attendance would at least double that of hockey.

And there is certainly more casual fans of basketball than hockey. What was the average hockey attendance, about 1,500 per game? I would think that about 1,200 of those are the same, die-hard fans showing up to every game. So actually, maybe you get about 5,000 different people throughout the season. Basketball probably draws about 500-750 of the same people every game and the rest (another 750+ this year, another 3000 in a good year) are people that can make it to a game or two or three a year. So maybe about 20,000 different people attending basketball games. Just my thoughts.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:58 pm

Warthog wrote:I would venture to say when we are putting a decent product on the floor, basketball attendance would at least double that of hockey.

Of course, this scenario says nothing of hockey putting a decent product on the floor. Unfortunately, they don't publish (at quick glance) seasonal attendance stats for hoops in the media guide as they do for hockey, but comparisons from the mid-90s show that when both teams are expected to compete, it's even at best. And looking at the 1996-97 season when AD was coming back as a senior, hoops averaged around 3500 for 13 games. Hockey, coming of a 5th place season and heading into year two post-Holzinger (or at least post-ONE-Holzinger

) averaged 3800+

But that's right, we're not allowed to quote attendance figures.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:58 pm

Warthog wrote:. But we are in the depths of a horrible stretch for the basketball program. I would venture to say when we are putting a decent product on the floor, basketball attendance would at least double that of hockey.

We're in the depths of a pretty horrid stretch for hockey as well. I do remember attending hockey games when I was still in Jr. High & HS that were sellouts.

I think the top end attendance is pretty similar between the two programs, but the bottom end for hockey is a touch higher.

As Flipper stated, basketball is a requirement for the MAC, so we're not going to be dropping it anytime soon. Hockey is a traditional program at BG, so we're not going to be dropping that any time soon either. Personally, I think if you're going to talk dropping sports to save money it does come down to 1A football or Division 1 football. We are one of VERY few schools to have both of those sports and not be part of one of the major BCS conferences (and thus a boatload larger revenue stream).

Ultimately I don't think cutting any sport is the key to our athletic department's financial woes. I wish we could do something to connect our athletic department back with wealthy alums like Daniels & Blake, we could use their support. We also need to commit towards winning. Winning teams bring in revenue, losing teams do not. Riding out mediocre coaches damages the program far more than what money is saved up front by not buying them out.

The failure to commit towards winning is probably the biggest problem of the BG athletic department. What's worse is that the fan base is mostly quite happy to accept less than the best. We seem all to inclined to deal with mediocrity just because somebody is a good guy. I'd much rather have a total douchebag in charge of our athletic teams that won, than vice versa, but I get the distinct feeling I'm in the minority on that issue as well.

If the football, hoops, and hockey teams all got back to winning at the same time I don't think budgetary concerns would be nearly what they are right now.

PGY Tiercel · Post by **PGY Tiercel** » Fri May 25, 2007 3:59 pm

Warthog wrote:
moneymaker02 wrote:But the number of hockey fans destroys the number of basketball fans.
I will politely disagree with you on this point. Yes, I know you will quote attendance numbers to say there are more hockey fans. But we are in the depths of a horrible stretch for the basketball program. I would venture to say when we are putting a decent product on the floor, basketball attendance would at least double that of hockey.

And there is certainly more casual fans of basketball than hockey. What was the average hockey attendance, about 1,500 per game? I would think that about 1,200 of those are the same, die-hard fans showing up to every game. So actually, maybe you get about 5,000 different people throughout the season. Basketball probably draws about 500-750 of the same people every game and the rest (another 750+ this year, another 3000 in a good year) are people that can make it to a game or two or three a year. So maybe about 20,000 different people attending basketball games. Just my thoughts.

Hockey had an average attendance of 2234 this season (16 games) , basketball 1403 (15 games). thats a big difference (35K people to 21K). And both teams are under-performing. Considering the seating capacity is pretty similar at the two venues, I cannot believe that basketball would get double the attendance of hockey with just having a decent product.

To go back to a recent year with some success lets look at the 2004-05 teams
Basketball was 18-11, and drew 36769 (average of ~2451, 15 games)

The hockey team that year was 16-16-4 (less successful statistically) and still out drew basketball with a total attendance of 45412 (average of 2671, 17 games)

Warthog · Post by **Warthog** » Fri May 25, 2007 4:07 pm

Flipper wrote:Ok...we can't drop men's basketball because they'd kick us out of the MAC...but still, it's a point to ponder on a purley philosophical level.

Philosophically, I agree that it is a legitimate question.

Financially, in terms of costs to run the program, I would think that hockey loses much more money than basketball. So if a serious discussion about dropping a program was entered into by the powers that be, I would think that discussion would be based more on a financial decision than on tradition. Therefore, if my logic is correct, I would say that hockey would have to go before basketball.

footballguy51 · Post by **footballguy51** » Fri May 25, 2007 4:44 pm

You know, everybody is all concerned and appauled by the $4 million difference from Kent State's budget. However, (and perhaps this is a question for factman) what percentage of Kent's budget goes to athletics versus what percentage of ours? I'm willing to bet the percentages are a heck of a lot closer together than the actual dollar amounts are.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Fri May 25, 2007 8:30 pm

an obersvation from a long time...hell lets call it near life resident of BG
When football is doing well and drawing crowds, both hockey and basketball are in down times performance, and crowd numbers...well Bball is more affected. Now there is some over lap of the down teams recovery process and the fall of the football program. But they rarly are all good at the same time.
The nature of football draws more people...one would think baseball would...and it would if it were played over the summer Im sure.
BG is far and away more a Hockey and Football town. While the youth program is way down..to about 1/2 the numbers of its prime days, and the absence of any real youth football program and HS program that blows, and becomes les every year. i predict that we will see the football crowd numbers remain about the same as they are now..esp with the toledo game hitting at break and in cold weather, that should be the 4th game of the year for us. We will see hockey numbers stay on level as well as with the bball program being poor they will stay level as well. We will see a rise in the number , a sharp rise int he coming years of fans at soccer games...why becasue the traditional fall sport has morphed sadly into a year round game killing the potential for youth football and growing football fans, killed the traditional spring sport rising in the area of LAX (far better than soccer) and that is wher the UNIV will start shelling cash.
I would venture to bet that in a not so distant future, there will home soccer games in the Doyt...and a bucnh of extra lines and Ay ziggy will be replaced by Olie

ZuluWarrior · Post by **ZuluWarrior** » Fri May 25, 2007 8:59 pm

Excellent debate going on in this thread. BG Fan had a great point. One would think, hope, believe that the NHL Players who came through BG could donate some of their millions, and I'm talking beyond just Rob Blake and make a substantial contribution to get this program running again. Obviously since the loss of Coach York we have been in a tailspin and from Christophers comments I do think the program is in trouble.

I also think hammb's point of view is worth considering and while there would be a hailstorm of trouble for doing it, I don't think we are the type of school that can PROPERLY support football, basketball and hockey at Division 1-A. If one has to go, which would you choose? I know its a lousy question, but we must face reality. Every poster on this great website wants BG to be BiGger than we are and there is nothing wrong with that, but we're not a Big Ten school or Miami for that matter. We just don't have the money.

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Fri May 25, 2007 9:20 pm

Hockey draws a much better economic impact than basketball ever will. You can't just look at the numbers on a spreadsheet for how a sport affects your bottom line. The fact that a hockey team that only won 7 games outdrew basketball is very telling about what sport the residents/fans of the university care about.

BGSU will never cut hockey. Period.

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Sat May 26, 2007 10:59 am

orangeandbrown wrote:I guess the point is, if we were $4m behind Miami, that would be one thing. But we are $4m behind Kent.

Actually, we've already sort of answered our question here.

Kent State has bigger enrollment than some of the other Ohio MAC schools. Bowling Green is on the lower end, along with Miami.

That explains $4 million right there.

The student activity fee is an important part of all MAC athletic budgets. With more kids paying that fee, it shouldn't be a surprise that Kent State has more money to work with.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Sat May 26, 2007 11:17 am

Good points by Schad and Dayon and that other guy wh mentioned enrollment. Being a typical knee jerk liberal, I just reacted to the enormity of that $4 million figure.

Perhaps we need to do a more quantitative analysis that uses facts instead of emotion. Instead of being my usual weepy Liberal self, I should try and think like one of those logical, intelligent conservatives and form a more factual basis for my opinion.

In that vein...should Kent be outspending us by $4 million?

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Sat May 26, 2007 11:19 am

I posted this a year or two ago.

This list includes the season-by-season average attendance for the entire history of the Falcon hockey program. It is followed by men's basketball attendance (in parentheses) where I could find it.

I've bolded those seasons in which hockey attendance exceeded basketball attendance.

As you look at this list, keep in mind that the basketball program had the advantage of a larger building until 1989-90, when the ice arena was finally expanded from 3,313 to 5,000 seats. It is safe to say that the size of BGSU Ice Arena did limit attendance before the expansion.

1969-70 1,530
1970-71 2,354
1971-72 3,158
1972-73 2,940
1973-74 2,681
1974-75 2,846
1975-76 2,986
1976-77 2,506
1977-78 2,630 (2,636)
1978-79 2,958 (2,856)
1979-80 2,883 (3,700)
1980-81 2,464 (3,596)
1981-82 2,625 (3,558)
1982-83 3,218 (3,949)
1983-84 3,287 (3,278)
1984-85 3,186 (3,118)
1985-86 3,079 (2,473)
1986-87 3,116 (3,148)
1987-88 2,923 (2,928)
1988-89 2,840 (2,954)
1989-90 3,969 (3,548)
1990-91 3,775 (3,269)
1991-92 3,580 (2,807)
1992-93 3,489 (2,905)
1993-94 3,129 (2,895)
1994-95 3,515 (2,801)
1995-96 3,433 (2,768)
1996-97 3,817 (3,570)
1997-98 3,150 (2,849)
1998-99 3,066 (2,467)
1999-00 3,007 (3,291)
2000-01 2,251 (2,888)
2001-02 2,345 (3,545)
2002-03 1,838 (2,684)
2003-04 2,207 (2,498)
2004-05 2,671 (2,451)
2005-06 2,358 (1,764)
2006-07 2,234 (1,403)

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Sat May 26, 2007 11:31 am

I was a student at BG in the early to mid 80's...a period of time that shall be referred to as the "time when everyone was good".. Hoops won the MAC regular season in 82/83and were at or near the top in season before that, football won the MAC in 82 and 85 and drew the Doyt record in 1983 and hockey took the whole damn shootin match in 84.

From what I recall...in terms of general on campus interest and who got the really cute girls, football was right up there with hockey and basketnball was a bit behind.

Actually when it came to the really cute girls...English majors who waited tables at Red Lobster more or less ruled the roost.