Dave in Green

OK, so to prove your point, all you have to do is show that OU's home basketball games have produced a dramatic increase in student attendance since their NCAA tournament run vs. prior to that. If the Bobkitties drew more than 4,000 students to watch freaking Northern Illinois Wednesday, how many students did they draw to a similar home game before they made their NCAA tournament run? You think it was even close to the 720 students the Zips drew for the Ball State game? @jupitertoo can referee the OU attendance discussion, and I promise I won't question the reffing if he rules against me.

Arghh, those scores bring back memories of Charlie Coles.

@jupitertoo, thanks for the OU estimate. That's an impressive student turnout. @zen, it's a fact and not an excuse that rural areas have fewer entertainment options than urban areas and that college basketball competes with other entertainment options, so that's one advantage that a rural college has over an urban college in attracting students to home basketball games. No one believes that's the only attendance factor.

Illinois is starting to crumble, getting blown out of its own arena by Northwestern, 68-54. Groce started going ballistic on the refs and got a technical. But the refs haven't had a lot to do with the Illini hitting only 23% of their 3s and allowing their Big Ten opponents to hit 43% of their 3s. The OU blueprint may not translate well to Big Ten play. The Bobkitties, on the other hand, are starting to roll under Christian, performing in their last few games a lot like they did last season under Groce.

Good point about not much else to do in Athens. Teams in rural areas have that advantage. But the Zips also trailed Toledo, Ball State and Can't in average home attendance last season. The Zips only need to improve home attendance by about 350 per game to move up into second behind OU, and that should be the minimum attendance goal.

Hilltopper and I are good to go now that we've gotten our innoculations to ward off the virulent strain of cooties known to inhabit that campus.

I was wrong to say that student attendance of 700 is "beyond sad." After having done a little research on college basketball attendance, I've seen enough to convince me that 700 is not a bad number for UA playing against a 20-point underdog. The thing that really changed my mind was seeing that Duke has had problems filling its 1,200-seat student section over the past five seasons. If Duke can't attract 1,200 students for some of its home games, then UA drawing 700+ students to see Ball State is actually pretty decent. I do wonder what percentage of OU's average home attendance of 6,000+ are students. At the very least, UA should try to be the best in the MAC.

Just did a little research for some perspective on college basketball attendance: 5,190 = the average attendance for all NCAA DI games (including tournaments) last season (2011-2012). 5,641 = the peak average attendance, which occurred in the 1994-1995 season. 4,759 = the earliest average attendance available from the NCAA (1975-1976 season). So although last season's average attendance was up over the one 36 years ago, the trend over the last 15 years has been slowly downward. Speculation is that in recent years this is at least partially the result of the increasing availability of TV broadcasts and webcasts of games. A general conclusion that could be drawn from the above is that the average team considering a new arena should not oversize the capacity based on expectations of a steadily increasing attendance. Odds are that live attendance at college basketball games is likely to increase only for those teams that have a dramatic improvement in performance and a higher level of name opponents. In other words, UA needs to realistically analyze where the basketball program is at present and where it's going in the future based on the university's level of commitment in order to make the smartest investment in sizing a new basketball arena.

@GP1, sorry, I left out a word in my last post. I meant to say that Deadspin is now part of the mainstream discussion. They haven't been there before. It will make a difference. Those who've already been tuned in to Deadspin may not notice the difference, but it will be there.

@ZachTheZip, I think you're looking at it from a different perspective than I am. I'm looking at it from the POV that 700 students represents less than 3% of UA's student body. I know that we had way more than 3% of the student body at basketball games when I went to college. But maybe I'm being unrealistic in a world that's changed a lot since the "good old days."

@GP1, what I meant about watching what happens with Deadspin over the next few months is that they are now part of the mainstream and not just recognized by a small number of savvy sports fans. You were on the leading edge with your appreciation of Deadspin.

Heck, yes. You can easily find the following on Wikipedia: Cameron was designed by Julian Abele, who had studied at the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris, France. Abele contributed to the design of more than 400 buildings, including Harvard University’s Widener Memorial Library (1915), Monmouth University's Shadow Lawn Mansion (1927), the Central Branch of the Free Library of Philadelphia (1927), and the Philadelphia Museum of Art (1914-28); and was the primary designer for the campus of Duke University (1924-54). The JAR was designed by the lowest bidder.

Right, they actually made an announcement at the game that it was the biggest turnout of students at any home game in the Dambrot era except for Can't and OU games. I believe the number was less than 720 out of 25,000+ students. We were pretty shocked to hear that. It's beyond sad.

No question that Deadspin is the big winner in this. They performed the old-fashioned, shoe leather journalism that is so sadly missing from the current crop of pseudo news outlets that are cutting costs by reducing investigative reporting to maximize profits. Watch what happens with Deadspin over the coming months.

I've seen references here and heard references outside this forum that suggest that Duke's basketball facility is nothing more than a little high school gym. Cameron Indoor Stadium was designed in 1935 and construction was completed in 1940. While it may be gym-like in design, the original seating capacity was 8,800, with enough standing room for another 700 and a total capacity of 9,500. So while it's not fancy in comparison to modern arenas, it was no small gym when it was built. But it's certainly a good point to note that a good, winning basketball team like Duke does not necessarily require a state-of-the-art arena to draw big crowds.

I know for a fact that Hilltopper has good sources. I also know that some of the sources are second or third hand. When things get passed along, even by reliable people, details get inadvertently changed. Some of those who pass it on use different words with slightly different meanings. Considering that, I would suggest that all of this be taken with a grain of salt. While it makes perfectly logical sense to get three very preliminary bids on three different size facilities, I'm not sure that I buy into the concept that a version that's smaller than the JAR is the leading candidate with the committee studying the project. It's going to require some vision to properly estimate what kind of crowds the Zips will be drawing several years from now, which is the earliest a new arena could be constructed. How many students are projected at UA several years from now? How much priority will be put on growing the basketball program? Is there a plan to join a stronger conference where larger facilities would be a requirement? If it's a multi-use facility, does it make sense to have a seating capacity so close in size to E.J. Thomas Hall (seating capacity 3,000)? Any new arena has to fit with UA's master plan and not just be plucked out of thin air.

I would have to agree that if you only look at last night's performance, this Zips team doesn't appear to be that great. You could say the same about nearly any team if you only judged them by one of their least inspired performances of the season. You could also say that a mediocre team looked pretty good if you only considered their best game of the season. Last night didn't change my opinion one bit. This Zips team has more potential than any previous Zips' team I've seen. But we won't know until the end of the season how much of that potential will be realized.

@Kep, OK, I get your position now. You believe that Zeke may have the physical tools to make it in the NBA but lacks the mental toughness and has little chance of developing it. That's a fair position. Many would agree that he's not a slam dunk to succeed. He has to really want it badly and continue developing his skills, strength and toughness as he has already done throughout his career at UA. He still has a way to go and there are no guarantees. Personally, I wouldn't bet against him as long as he keeps progressing. If his development curve flattens out, then I'd also begin doubting his odds.

It only took 3 rounds of conference play for UA and OU to separate themselves from the rest of the MAC as the only undefeated (3-0) teams.

Let's try to look at this logically. The committee looked at three options -- $69 million for a 7,000+ seat design at the top and $44 million for a 3,800 seat design at the bottom, so the middle design would probably be about 5,500 (close to the JAR) for about $57 million. They currently do not have any funding, so they'd obviously have to lean toward the cheapest option. But since they have no funding, they're not going to be building anything anyway. In other words, this is way too premature for realistic consideration.

Think Bigger + smaller arena = does not compute.

Uh, I guess there is one other thing for the Zips to fear -- playing one of your worst games of the season when your opponent is playing their best game of the season. Looking for a bright spot, earlier this season we were complaining about the Zips' free throw shooting. Tonight the Zips were outrebounded and outshot from the field, and won the game by going 23-27 from the free throw line. Every team has off games like this, but the best teams find ways to win. Ball State came in with an effective game plan and executed it about as well as they're capable of executing, and the Zips found a way to win. With this little stinker out of the way, it's time for the Zips to bounce back with a dominating performance against Can't. It was nice seeing Chauncey in the warmup with a bounce in his step. It was obvious from his brief minutes in the game that he could move quicker and elevate higher than when he was struggling with his knee problem. The Zips are going to need him to be back at full strength for the OU game.

Before leaving for the JAR, I just wanted to say that the only thing the Zips have to fear is fear itself. The MAC season is all about avoiding upsets.

@Kep, I catch some heat around here for trying to evaluate players by considering stats in addition to what I see at all the games. Sometimes the stats align with what I think I saw and sometimes they don't. But I'd consider it a major challenge to try to analyze Zeke's performance almost exclusively based on studying box scores in Bangkok. Zeke's most ardent admirers consider him an NBA lottery pick while his biggest detractors say he'll never get a whiff of pro ball. Reality usually lies somewhere between the extremes. Right now I'm inclined to go along with Jeff Goodman at CBS Sports, who spends a lot of time talking with NBA scouts. Goodman projects Zeke as a mid-second round NBA draft pick (#46 overall) with the following comment: Still a work in progress, but there's plenty to work with.

The stats do not dispute the observation that Zeke tends to get energized for big games, though he does appear to focus more on defense than offense. That's especially true when he's matched up against a quality big. Zeke always did well against Justin Greene when he was at Can't, and one of his best games last season was shutting down Mississippi State's Arnett Moultrie. Zeke had 5 blocks in that game and intimidated Moultrie into shooting 2-13 from the field. The 6-11 Moultrie was drafted in the NBA's first round after being the only SEC player other than #1 draft choice Anthony Davis to average a double-double (points and rebounds) for the season.