Fascinating (and shamelessly stolen from the UNCW board):

https://watchstadium.com/news/caa-basket...1-22-2018/

3rd in atmosphere!

(11-25-2018 08:01 AM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  3rd in atmosphere!

Has to be weighed by attendance. That's the only explanation.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Seems as though the survey indicates we do more with less. Not a shock for any of us to hear that. Sure has been a fun last two Thanksgiving weekends.

I think the big areas for improvement are in buy games (absolutely no reason we should be last) and resources.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

(11-25-2018 11:30 AM)Tribal Wrote:  

(11-25-2018 08:01 AM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  3rd in atmosphere!

Has to be weighed by attendance. That's the only explanation.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Speaks more to the lack of atmosphere around the conference IMO. UNCW (small venue but they fill it) and CoC are the only two that, in my experience, can come close to being described as a high quality basketball atmosphere.

(11-25-2018 12:16 PM)zablenoise Wrote:  I think the big areas for improvement are in buy games (absolutely no reason we should be last) and resources.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

I don't know why you think we would be higher in buy games if we're also near the bottom in resources. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think buy games are a big part of our basketball budget.

Buy games may be referring to home games we are buying, not away games we are getting paid for.

Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app

Delaware is the #1 party school in the country?

With the exception of JMU, the football schools are at the bottom, and the non-football schools are at the top.

(11-26-2018 08:14 AM)Tribeheart Wrote:  Buy games may be referring to home games we are buying, not away games we are getting paid for.

Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app

I'm going off of this: "Buy Games – Programs who are bought the fewest number of times will rank first"

and this:
https://www.richmond.com/sports/college/...f017c.html

RTD Article Wrote:That might sound like a questionable endeavor, but “buying” games is standard operating procedure in Division I basketball. Schools in the major conferences “buy” multiple games every season.

They pay teams to come to their arena and probably absorb a defeat.

Check out the schedules of the teams in the Final Four and you’ll see some striking similarities — most of their nonconference games were at home; games on neutral courts were in situations where the risk was moderate and the reward was reasonable to high; and there are no home-and-home agreements with teams outside the top 25 or 30 in the Ratings Percentage Index.

If they're ranking the teams that get bought the fewest at the top, that means the teams that get paid to travel (and hopefully lose) are at the bottom, and we're at the bottom.

The money quote from that article from 2016 is this:

RTD Article Wrote:Home games against such teams as Butler, Pittsburgh or South Carolina are better for VCU than going to Liberty, Radford or William and Mary, which are tough places to play and where winning is expected but is far from guaranteed.

That’s sad. Playing teams in the state should be encouraged, not discouraged. But the system is rigged against strong schools from smaller conferences. The reward for beating William and Mary is not worth the risk of a loss in Williamsburg.

(11-26-2018 09:10 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  The money quote from that article from 2016 is this:

RTD Article Wrote:Home games against such teams as Butler, Pittsburgh or South Carolina are better for VCU than going to Liberty, Radford or William and Mary, which are tough places to play and where winning is expected but is far from guaranteed.

That’s sad. Playing teams in the state should be encouraged, not discouraged. But the system is rigged against strong schools from smaller conferences. The reward for beating William and Mary is not worth the risk of a loss in Williamsburg.

NCAA tournament selection process rewards certain programs for virtual wins in games they were afraid to actually schedule and play. “Have not” programs haven’t found a way to embarrass NCAA leadership into redressing this ethical failure.

Game Day Experience: (there is a good discussion of this also on the St. Joe message thread). There are times when we have a very good game environment; the regular season finale against CofC comes to mind.

We do not match the CofC experience on a game-in, game-out basis. Surprisingly, the issue is not student participation. Every time I go to a game at TD Arena I am stunned at the pitifully small number of students in attendance. TD Arena is small but the crowd noise is more impactful, not dissipating into the rafters. Lights are turned off for pre-game intros (which I hate, but it is amps up the volume). Speakers blare out messages, making noise and inciting the crowd. Chairs are placed along the sideline for the more rabid fans. (Again, I am not a fan of this because I think it will lead to an incident but it works). The last three items can be achieved without a new building and should be implemented sooner rather than later.

Let me finish this rant with a true story. I was at one of the CAA Finals in Richmond in which we played. I was still recovering from my Swenson-Boyages apathy so I only bought tickets for that final, which put me in the cheap seats. I was sitting with 10-20 W&M fans and maybe 3-4 students. The students spent the first half standing and yelling in support of the team. At half time one one the "gentlemen" scolded the students and was very proud that he had driven them off to another section so we could watch while we were sitting (and perhaps listening to classical music?).

Forget cup holders and wide seats and any other inducements that will put our fans to sleep. We need to build a game day atmosphere that is conducive to a winning team!