rant!!!

[mtgrizrule]

I love the basketball forums. It is nice to see calmer heads prevailing as I catch up with this thread. The thread started to get derailed. Unlike too many football threads, it did not turn into a pissing contest and further useless trash talk, put downs, etc. Instead, we have a few fans from different fan bases giving their opinions. Better yet, because of it, we are agreeing more needs to be done by the schools and conference to better the conference.

I for one, would absolutely love if the conference, schools, and fan bases would commit to bettering the conference every way possible. I feel it would be wise for the long term stability of the conference and every school. I hate to see where NCAA athletics is heading, and spearheaded by football. Seriously, it is a matter of time before it is just the "HAVES" for NCAA div 1 football. The "have nots" all need to work together to compete and/or officially separate from the big conferences and schools.

Financially, DIV 1 basketball is much more economical and affordable to compete than Div football is. Basketball teams have fewer players to recruit and coach. The talent is more spread out nationally. Scholarship expenses are much less due to so many fewer players to field a team. To me, it makes sense for non BCS schools and conferences to focus more on building great basketball programs and conferences. The schools that are prepared for the ever changing dynamics of NCAA div 1 athletics have a chance to survive.

In Montana's case, we have part of the equation progressing nicely with the upcoming facility upgrades. However, the focus has been primarily on football. I feel schools need to be building both football and basketball programs to have a chance to be part of the "haves" in Div 1 athletics. Unfortunately, Big Sky officials, universities, and fans are falling well short in preparing and focusing on the respected basketball programs.

Unfortunately the sinking ship analogy seems pretty accurate here. If positive changes are not made by the conference, universities, and fans we will all be on the sinking ship. More has to be done.

 

[UMGriz75]

After that remodel, I know of at least 100 huge donors quit when told they didn't get their seats in the lower level back and had to choose from what was left over. These people had attended since the 70's and were, frankly, shit on. I think the U would do well to go look up those old lists and reach out to those fans. Time may heal wounds, but the U needs to reach out.

I did not know that. It does seem like they lost the ability to "spark" the crowd when they started moving the students around, and lost that continuity of "The Zoo" as well. When Gary Hughes "retired" as Field House Manager, it seemed like the Field House lost much of its institutional memory, and then a series of odd hires followed.

I've had to deal with every single one of them since then, although they are not responsible for event "seating" per se, but it just seems like there's no "process" in place for improving the game atmosphere by restoring what made it a first class experience previously.

 

[UMGriz75]

Montana's attendance over the break has been
3465 (Jan 3) Montana Tech
4915 (Jan 17) Cats
3244 (Jan 22) NAU
3918 (Jan 24) SUU

That's an average of 3,885, and looks in 2015 to be an improving total over the season average of 3,304. The students are now back, and I would expect to see the Griz routinely breaking 4,000 now. Each game has successively offered career highs for various players and the team is getting better as the season progresses in important ways. Some positive PR and the former trends may turn.

 

[TrueGriz]

The level of play in the non-conference this year was awful. And has been in most recent years. Portland State is expected to upgrade its arena in three years, and Sac State has tried but failed to get students to pony up, but nobody has built a new arena in the Big Sky since the 1970s.

UM did a substantial upgrade of its arena in 1996, much better seating, higher quality sight lines, a Skybox and much improved facilities all the way around. Unfortunately, a program that had been averaging 5,000-6,000, and 7,500 for big games just didn't come back when the project was completed.

However, there were 5,000 in attendance just two weeks ago (when students were still out on break) for the Griz Cat game and that was no thanks at all to Cat Fans who stayed home in droves, even at home where the program has simply collapsed.

In contrast, Griz are getting 4,000 plus at games, and there seems to be a renewed interest. With "the kids" back for Spring Semester, I wouldn't be surprised to see 5,000 and 6,000 seat games start to occur.

Your off a bit on the year of upgrade. The fieldhouse was upgraded during the 1998-99 season. but, attendance did decline quite a bit from 1996 to 1998. Attendance dropped by approximately 600 fans in two years prior to the upgrade from 5,290 per game during the 1995-96 season down to 4,455 per game in 1997-98 (season prior to the remodel). the first year in the remodeled arena (1999-2000) the average was 4,372 per game. The remodel didn't exactly cause that big of a drop in attendance. It did cause some donors to get pissed off though, I know some.
I really do not think the attendance would be any better today if the remodel didn't happen and they didn't move the students. It is more that basketball isn't as popular than it was back then. This is a country where football is number 1, and UM basketball attendance started to drop when the um football team started to make the playoffs and go deep into the playoffs at that.
Also, UM doesn't bring that many really good basketball teams to play here. All the good games are on the road. I really could care less about watching them play mt tech and those type of teams. Davidson was the best team to come to Missoula but that is only because of the bracket buster. Bracket buster is over and very likely may not see very many good teams come to Missoula. What a downer. And then you have the Big Sky Conference for most of the season, and there are only about 2 or 3 games that interesting to watch there, the rest are somewhat mediocre teams. Parity was much better when Idaho, Nevada, and Boise State were in this conference. Now Idaho is back but that school is just a shell of what it used to be back in the 80's and early 90's.
But, UM basketball can do better than it is doing now attendance wise, but it does very little marketing and seems to be less marketing of it every year. The Missoulian is even worse with coverage as all you get is some game capsule instead of the game capsule and front page write up of it. But, then, I think the missoulian layed off a few reporters and can't do the complete coverage they used to.

 

[EverettGriz]

but even if you're sitting on the high end of a sinking ship, eventually you're going down too.

Which is precisely why we'd like nothing further than to get the hell off the ship. Look, we all recognize that we're the Griz are not going to be a regular visitor to the Sweet 16 no matter what conference we're in. But because we're well positioned from a facilities standpoint, we at least have the hope of getting into a conference in which we still have a hope for tournament bid if we go 22-8, but don't happen to win the conference title (held in a hotel ballroom) because we got screwed by shitty officiating.

 

[fanofzoo]

O totally disagree....I don't see a lot of college atmosphere on TV coming from Dahlberg...This is a problem nation wide. Many universities (as opposed to "vocational schools" are having to choose between academic infrastructure and athletic facilities. When Cal St. Northridge dropped football ( they were good enough to handle UM in their short BSC career) there was an outrage. Today, the site is a highly successful biological and high tech center that is making money enough to fund itself....I think America has reached a crossroads, sad to say, that such hard choices are going to be more common. Yes, the gym at Sacto sucks, as does PSU, but before any big commitments are made, perhaps, it is best to sit and watch to see how things shake out...

geez, grizla, i thought you'd be the first to agree with me! i don't see this as a matter of choosing between academics and athletics; we already tried that years ago under harry newburn, and "de-emphasizing" athletics proved to be a huge mistake. stanford maintains a fabulous athletic program, and even harvard has upgraded their basketball team over the last few years. both schools see the importance of having a strong athletic program to go with their academics, so i don't see this as being between academics and athletics at all. i see it only as the quality of the stadia, arenas and teams we send our athletes out to compete against. and one last thing: we are not cal state northridge!

as for "shaking out," i think the landscape is becoming quite clear: the mountain west is where we need to be--by quality of programs, by attendance, by facilities. i'd once hoped the big sky would step up, but that just ain't gonna happen. what is, is that some schools within the smaller conferences are going to outgrow their surroundings, and need to advance to a higher grade. like us, the cats and north dakota state. it's just inevitable.

Yeah because I can't wait to play in the "Famous Potato Bowel".

 

[grizzlyjournal]

This has been an excellent thread, with a ton of astute obervations and suggestions. Hope Kent Haslam is reading this...

Regarding fan attendance history:

After that remodel, I know of at least 100 huge donors quit when told they didn't get their seats in the lower level back and had to choose from what was left over. These people had attended since the 70's and were, frankly, shit on. I think the U would do well to go look up those old lists and reach out to those fans. Time may heal wounds, but the U needs to reach out.

#1 -- My wife and I were among the first group of season ticket-holders shat upon. We had been season ticket holders for 13 years, and very, very loyal, as were all others in our section. We all lost our seats (waaay more than 100 of us). This happened far earlier than the area remodel... in 1991, and was done by then UM Athletic Director Bill Moos (1991-95), who issued an ultimatum to the entire group of north level 1 season-ticket holders: purchase GSA tickets (at that time approx. $350) AND buy season tickets, or lose your seats. There was a revolt by the season ticket holders... not because of the change in policy, but because they/we were NOT offered alternative seats. It was "pay up, or bye bye." The huge majority, I believe, quit UM men's basketball at that point. I wrote a letter of appeal/protest to Mr. Moos in 1991. He sent me a brief letter of reply (paraphrase) "UM is moving into the next decade of fan support. Get on board or be left behind." Most of the ticket holders quit, or migrated to Lady Griz hoops. Approx a year later, after poor sales, many of those fans were offered seats in south level two, where many accepted the offer and now still have seats.

A similar ultimatum was issued by the next Griz AD -- Wayne Hogan in about 1998 -- after the arena remodel, with a similar fan revolt. I was not a ticket holder at that point, so I can't speak to that.

The long-term result, however -- despite continued competitive Griz basketball -- was a huge blow to season ticket sales and attendance. No attempt, I believe, has ever been made to "reach out" to that group of fans. Other means of generating fan interest... and there were many attempts to get fans into the seats... did not seem to work. My take was that those campaigns detracted from (loud DJ music, a very prominent attempt at halftime entertainment, etc. etc.) the actual game of basketball... but others disagree with me.

#2 -- Perhaps the most damaging blow of all, however, was the transition, sometime in the mid-to-late nineties, from a quarter to a semester school system by UM. The result? No students in school between December 10 and Jan 20... almost a THIRD of the NCAA Div 1 basketball season. Not only were there no students in the seats, but students lost interest in basketball simply because the weren't here to "get addicted" to Griz basketball. This happened nationwide, of course. But most schools on semester systems have since adjusted school schedules to reconvene classes by the first week in January. Why Montana has not done so I cannot answer.

There are ways to get the "old" fans back that would help. But I believe the only solid way to improve basketball attendance is to get students back into classes the first week in January. That may well take major school infrastructure change... which may well be very difficult and expensive to do.

 

[UMGriz75]

#2 -- Perhaps the most damaging blow of all, however, was the transition from a quarter to a semester school system by UM. The result? No students in school between December 10 and Jan 20... almost a THIRD of the NCAA Div 1 basketball season. Not only were there no students in the seats, but students lost interest in basketball simply because the weren't here to "get addicted" to Griz basketball. This happened nationwide, of course. But most schools on semester systems have since adjusted school schedules to reconvene classes by the first week in January. Why Montana has not done so I cannot answer.

The Semester system has been a disaster, and the effect on Basketball is just one of the created problems. UM's peer schools are generally on the quarter system, the loonnnggg winter break does nothing but aggravate parents, results in student and faculty boredom, and combined with the early start of Fall Semester, interferes with summer jobs and discourages enrollment in some cases because of that. I am always getting firefighters with "late start" privileges which simply underscores the fact that many students are forced to give up their summer jobs ahead of the normal seasonal turnover.

It doesn't work, but basketball may be the most visible victim.

 

[UMGriz75]

"UM is moving into the next decade of fan support. Get on board or be left behind."

Seen in the business world where CEOs who don't have a clue are trying to impress their executive committee with their "strong" commitments to "moving forward." Guys like that ought to be required to have "UM is moving into the next decade of fan support" tatooed on their foreheads with the actual results tatooed on their face. Or something.

 

[grizzlyjournal]

"UM is moving into the next decade of fan support. Get on board or be left behind."

Seen in the business world where CEOs who don't have a clue are trying to impress their executive committee with their "strong" commitments to "moving forward." Guys like that ought to be required to have "UM is moving into the next decade of fan support" tatooed on their foreheads with the actual results tatooed on their face. Or something.

Yup.

 

[citygriz]

well, while i'm trying to remember the nicknames let alone the hometowns of wofford, coastal carolina and texas state, let me tell kaboom, golden eagle, bengal visitor and herky the hornet (herky! ya still out there?)--hey, the big sky is a fun conference in its wacky training-wheels way. no one team will ever completely dominate the conference because you never know when a ben howland is going to turn up at northern arizona, or a tad boyle at northern colorado, or a wayne tinkle at montana. i have no doubt you can soon add to that list jim hayford at eastern and travis decuire at montana, together with bob stitt, beau baldwin and other up-and-coming football coaches. the conference will always have that player or players who fell under the radar, then blossomed in college, like vernon adams, tyler harvey or our own larry kystkowiak. this is what makes the conference fun, and i'm always right there fist-pumping when an eastern takes down an indiana, or portland state beats a usc. i've always said, a rising tide lifts all boats. i think if you look at the overall records in football, and men's and women's basketball over the past two decades, you will see that montana has consistently been the most dominant team, but--win every game? every championship? no way, jose!

my argument is that while the big sky was a great stepping-stone conference for us after the disaster of the old skyline conference, we have now emphatically outgrown it. by any measure--financial support, attendance, facilities, overall quality of teams and coaches--we are ready to move up, to take on bigger challenges, exactly the way great stud high school players move up to college and professional ball. i'm not asking what any other school in this conference wouldn't also be contemplating if they were in our position. the pluses overwhelm the negatives. the conference--the mountain west--is there, the old rivalries in place: nevada and boise state from the big sky, new mexico, colorado state, wyoming, utah state from the skyline conference. (the schools we couldn't really compete against in the old skyline conference, utah and byu, are gone.) our fan base could party in las vegas, honolulu, san diego and san francisco (short drive from san jose.) we'd have way more media attention, better recruiting opportunities, and way more fan interest for basketball once the likes of nevada, unlv, utah state, wyoming, san diego state, et. al. came into dahlberg. basketball attendance would soar.(football? hell, they'd love to see these teams as well.) would we dominate that conference? of course not! would be compete? of course we would! the greater the challenge, the greater the glory.

i can't state my position any more succintly than that--but i welcome the exchange of views.

 

[GrizLA]

O totally disagree....I don't see a lot of college atmosphere on TV coming from Dahlberg...This is a problem nation wide. Many universities (as opposed to "vocational schools" are having to choose between academic infrastructure and athletic facilities. When Cal St. Northridge dropped football ( they were good enough to handle UM in their short BSC career) there was an outrage. Today, the site is a highly successful biological and high tech center that is making money enough to fund itself....I think America has reached a crossroads, sad to say, that such hard choices are going to be more common. Yes, the gym at Sacto sucks, as does PSU, but before any big commitments are made, perhaps, it is best to sit and watch to see how things shake out...

geez, grizla, i thought you'd be the first to agree with me! i don't see this as a matter of choosing between academics and athletics; we already tried that years ago under harry newburn, and "de-emphasizing" athletics proved to be a huge mistake. stanford maintains a fabulous athletic program, and even harvard has upgraded their basketball team over the last few years. both schools see the importance of having a strong athletic program to go with their academics, so i don't see this as being between academics and athletics at all. i see it only as the quality of the stadia, arenas and teams we send our athletes out to compete against. and one last thing: we are not cal state northridge!

as for "shaking out," i think the landscape is becoming quite clear: the mountain west is where we need to be--by quality of programs, by attendance, by facilities. i'd once hoped the big sky would step up, but that just ain't gonna happen. what is, is that some schools within the smaller conferences are going to outgrow their surroundings, and need to advance to a higher grade. like us, the cats and north dakota state. it's just inevitable.

It is not that I necessarily don't agree as I think the timing is not so good. Too much going on in with the NCAA and television markets. Waiting to see what happens within the next couple years is better than making a move now. Imagine if UM had jumped to the WAC....
Yes, I know UM is not Northridge. My point is that they made an unpopular decision that has increased the value of a degree there immeasurably for more students with what was once a football field. Their basketball gym is little better than Sac State's....they draw almost no one .USC built a beautiful new gym ON CAMPUS and has yet to turn out a good team or have the place filled. When I can, with great difficulty, get a b'cast of a Griz game over Big Sky TV I am reminded how much fun it was to go to a UM game when the students were on the sidelines. I personally have seen Dahlberg after the remodel and I doubt I would choose to go there if I had anything else to do. To be very Southern California, it simply has bad Feng shui...put the students back where they belong, bring some life to the place. Encourage the band, organize an alumni band like Cal...do something, anything! But, don't do what Sac State and SUU do with the non stop "contests" for one thing or another during the time outs...that is hokum...As for the Big Sky Conf. the quality of the opposition in non conference games has improved steadily. The problem as I see it is that it is too unwieldy and poor scheduling like UM playing ONE game at Sac State with no return game is not a good idea. Now, the BSC is probably going to be humiliated once again by showing a gym that is not even high school level, or worse....and a 16 seed.....Someone mentioned UM could choose another conf.for ball and stay FCS in football. That is one way to go. To move the entire men and women's programs to a "higher" level is going to take a lot of $$...Stanford and Harvard might be your examples but but both have over 20 billion in endowments!

 

[EverettGriz]

Perhaps part of the poor attendance could be blamed on our opponents. PSU, Sac, ISU, etc just don't scream, "Come watch us!". Undoubtedly home games with Boise, Nevada, UNLV, Colo State, etc will draw better.

And what's more, being in a better conference would allow the Griz to schedule and get better home nonconference games.

 

[GrizLA]

Perhaps part of the poor attendance could be blamed on our opponents. PSU, Sac, ISU, etc just don't scream, "Come watch us!". Undoubtedly home games with Boise, Nevada, UNLV, Colo State, etc will draw better.

And what's more, being in a better conference would allow the Griz to schedule and get better home nonconference games.

Maybe. but Montana had a terrific non conference schedule. And, I suspect, with this new coach, and the talent he is developing, next year will be even more challenging. As for teams showing up in Missoula, don't count on that. Not sure what the pay guarantee is for Dahlberg but, like Football, it is a challenge to meet the demands of larger programs. Also, with students gone, the excitement, such as it is, is null. In addition to that, during winter, most AD's know that Missoula might be hard to get into and out of due to fog or weather. Gonzaga also has problems scheduling bigger programs but they don't have football to worry about and can afford it.

 

[EverettGriz]

but Montana had a terrific non conference schedule.

Yes. But not in Missoula. The only marquee game at home was Davidson, and they only got that because Davidson had to come here as a Bracket Buster return.

And you're correct; teams will definitely NOT come to Missoula to play the Griz as a BSC school. But they would if we were MWC. Again, it's all about whom you associate with. And we're associating with guys like this:

 

[GrizPony]

Nice selfie. Jk

 

['68griz]

but Montana had a terrific non conference schedule.

Yes. But not in Missoula. The only marquee game at home was Davidson, and they only got that because Davidson had to come here as a Bracket Buster return.

And you're correct; teams will definitely NOT come to Missoula to play the Griz as a BSC school. But they would if we were MWC. Again, it's all about whom you associate with. And we're associating with guys like this:

Okay, so how does that change? I recognize that you want UM out of the Big Sky Conference, but how could/would that happen? And when? I'm not asking this theoretically, but realistically... Honestly, how do you think this could happen?

 

[EverettGriz]

Nice selfie. Jk

:thumb: :lol:

 

[EverettGriz]

but Montana had a terrific non conference schedule.

Yes. But not in Missoula. The only marquee game at home was Davidson, and they only got that because Davidson had to come here as a Bracket Buster return.

And you're correct; teams will definitely NOT come to Missoula to play the Griz as a BSC school. But they would if we were MWC. Again, it's all about whom you associate with. And we're associating with guys like this:

Okay, so how does that change? I recognize that you want UM out of the Big Sky Conference, but how could/would that happen? And when?

It happens as soon as the Big 5 split. My best guess? January 2017.

 

['68griz]

but Montana had a terrific non conference schedule.

Yes. But not in Missoula. The only marquee game at home was Davidson, and they only got that because Davidson had to come here as a Bracket Buster return.

And you're correct; teams will definitely NOT come to Missoula to play the Griz as a BSC school. But they would if we were MWC. Again, it's all about whom you associate with. And we're associating with guys like this:

Okay, so how does that change? I recognize that you want UM out of the Big Sky Conference, but how could/would that happen? And when?

It happens as soon as the Big 5 split. My best guess? January 2017.

So, is the Mountain West going to come begging? I honestly don't see that happening. It would be nice, but why would they want UM?