Downtown Arena!

[GP1]

Proponents speak on merits of tax increase - http://www.akron.com/akron-ohio-community-news.asp?aID=23126

Ms. Hakim writes a real good article.

An interesting thing to watch in the campaign will be whether the proponents of the tax can present these needed public service improvements in a way that makes people ignore the want of the arena. There are needs and there are wants. From this article, it looks like the public service upgrades are needed. An arena is something people want and not necessarily need. Can the proponents dupe the electorate into believing a new arena is a necessity?

[skip-zip]

Ms. Hakim writes a real good article.

An interesting thing to watch in the campaign will be whether the proponents of the tax can present these needed public service improvements in a way that makes people ignore the want of the arena. There are needs and there are wants. From this article, it looks like the public service upgrades are needed. An arena is something people want and not necessarily need. Can the proponents dupe the electorate into believing a new arena is a necessity?

I've been saying this for awhile. But, as weak as it may seem, I do think the arena is the more compelling selling point.

I don't think they will sell it as "public service", but more like "public safety". So, be prepared for the scare tactics in the campaign. But again, this is NOT a property tax issue. This affects people all the way to the bottom of the totem pole. That's the obstacle.

[taxpayer]

A new university President is at the controls, summer sessions are ongoing, the BBall staff are working with the 2014-2015 edition of the Zips and planning their recruiting schedules and the football boys are prepping for what we all hope will be an over .500 season and this board is quiet. That means it's summer. I'm a little starved for some basketball conversation so can anyone inform us what the UA brain trust is doing to upgrade the JAR this off season? I've seen the other thread with the new arena talk but that's years away right now. The Zips have stability with KD, an enviable recent history in the MAC and the desire to do better. This isn't the time to not improve the programs' weakest selling point the JAR. Any news?

[GoZips]

See my post for June 26th in Summer Session(s).

[ZippyRulz]

I'm a little starved for some basketball conversation so can anyone inform us what the UA brain trust is doing to upgrade the JAR this off season? I've seen the other thread with the new arena talk but that's years away right now. The Zips have stability with KD, an enviable recent history in the MAC and the desire to do better. This isn't the time to not improve the programs' weakest selling point the JAR. Any news?

This seems to me like a good time to *not* spend money upgrading the JAR with the county sales tax vote coming up in 4 months. If it passes, I would think the JAR should actually be "downgraded", i.e. some seats removed and those areas re-purposed since it will then be used for practices, volleyball, etc.

[zippy5]

Didn't they just announce some upgrades? I'll see if I can find the article. I think it was weight room/training related

[taxpayer]

Zippyrulz - I disagree, if the voters approve the new arena project at the ballot box KD and the Zips are probably 4 years away from actually playing a game in the new facility. KD has laid a good foundation and despite last years disappointing results, has some momentum built up. Akron can't afford to sit still with the status quo....there are several improvments that need to be made whether a new facility is approved and especially if it fails at the ballot box.

I'm not sure why you'd even consider "downgrading" the JAR when a new facility is still so far away. KD and the Zips last 4 of 5 years have given them some regional and national visibility and UA has to continue with some JAR upgrades as this process moves forward. To stop improving is to begin declining. I'm pretty sure the JAR won't be torn down and the improvements that should and could be made won't break the bank and I'm referring primarily to seating and the unfortunate track.

[Balsy]

@Taxpayer, great point. I didn't think of that, even though hat was directed at Zippyrulz. Perhaps one of the upgrades can be better camera equipment/streaming tech, that can be either moved to the new facility once it is built, or to Infocision. We need better filming equipment because what they've got now is TERRIBLE.

[taxpayer]

Balsy - not sure why UA doesn't have an intern program designed to handle such duties. I'd think creating a full time GA position so this effort is one of quality for bball, soccer, etc.

The improvements I believe necessary, new arena or not is addressing the lousy student attendance and even worse seating. The UA student spirit leaves a lot to be desired, it's as big a problem as the "track" and bleachers. I'm not sure what UA's master plan has in the future for the JAR if a new arena is built but making changes to provide more floor seating (move media/table to track corner) for boosters (2 or 3 rows)opposite the team benches is where I would start. Students in both end zones with the band (at least 20-25 members) back down near the opponents bench is step two. Step three is investigating why students aren't attending games in larger numbers; besides crappy seating (location and bleachers).

[ZachTheZip]

Student attendence won't be improving so long as we continue the current scheduling philosophy of a million cupcake home games. Not only are the opponents unexciting, the games are boring, and there are too many of them to the whole experience gets cheapened. And the excuse of trying to protect a young team is crap. This team is not young. We're returning all but two players and many of them have multiple years of post-season experience.

[Dave in Green]

The Zips' scheduling philosophy over the past decade has helped move the team from a consistent top 200 team to a consistent top 100 team. But over the past few years the improvement curve has flattened out and the Zips can't seem to take the next step up. All the former mid-major teams such as Gonzaga, VCU, Butler, etc., that moved up to regularly challenge high majors did so on the road, not at home. It's the only reliable path upwards. High majors will not schedule games at the JAR. So the only reasonable upward path for the Zips is to schedule more tough road games at the expense of fewer weak home games. Everyone just has to accept the reality that a loss to a name team on the road can be better for the Zips' growth both now and in the future than a home win over a cream puff. Zips fans have to get behind this strategy to the point that the Coach and AD get the message. If not now, when?

[skip-zip]

The Zips' scheduling philosophy over the past decade has helped move the team from a consistent top 200 team to a consistent top 100 team. But over the past few years the improvement curve has flattened out and the Zips can't seem to take the next step up. All the former mid-major teams such as Gonzaga, VCU, Butler, etc., that moved up to regularly challenge high majors did so on the road, not at home. It's the only reliable path upwards. High majors will not schedule games at the JAR. So the only reasonable upward path for the Zips is to schedule more tough road games at the expense of fewer weak home games. Everyone just has to accept the reality that a loss to a name team on the road can be better for the Zips' growth both now and in the future than a home win over a cream puff. Zips fans have to get behind this strategy to the point that the Coach and AD get the message. If not now, when?

Dave. I love almost the entire post here. Great stuff. Totally agree.

But I have to question that first sentence. How do we know that piling up victories with home OOC cupcakes got us from a top 200 to a top 100 team? With the poor SOS of most of those teams, it's hard to make the point that it helped at all. I'd attribute our conference performance to that climb. And even if we found that it did help, would we have possibly moved to that Top-100 level much faster if the "tough road game" strategy had been put into place much sooner?

[Dave in Green]

Skip, the Zips couldn't have moved any faster from a top 200 to a top 100 team under Coach Dambrot. They finished #205 the season before he took over and #60 in his first season as head coach. But you're right that there's no proof that the OOC schedule helped that. It would have been more accurate for me to have said that his OOC scheduling philosophy didn't hurt the immediate climb from a consistent top 200 team to a consistent top 100 team. The main point that you and I agree on is that the decade-old philosophy of few tough OOC road games and many soft home games has produced fairly flat results during Coach Dambrot's tenure. I think it might help raise the Zips' stature to trade 2-3 easy home games for 2-3 more tough road games per season.

[skip-zip]

Skip, the Zips couldn't have moved any faster from a top 200 to a top 100 team under Coach Dambrot. They finished #205 the season before he took over and #60 in his first season as head coach. But you're right that there's no proof that the OOC schedule helped that. It would have been more accurate for me to have said that his OOC scheduling philosophy didn't hurt the immediate climb from a consistent top 200 team to a consistent top 100 team. The main point that you and I agree on is that the decade-old philosophy of few tough OOC road games and many soft home games has produced fairly flat results during Coach Dambrot's tenure. I think it might help raise the Zips' stature to trade 2-3 easy home games for 2-3 more tough road games per season.

Absolutely. Like you said...If not now, when? It couldn't happen soon enough for me. It'll generate more fan interest, help recruiting, increase exposure, and there's far more benefit than risk, both short-term and long-term. It's a no-brainer for me.

[GP1]

I think it might help raise the Zips' stature to trade 2-3 easy home games for 2-3 more tough road games per season.

I think you are correct. The Zips need to increase their stature while maintaining 20 win seasons. Scheduling could be one of those ways. Another would be winning an NCAA Tournament game. On the surface, we they well over 20 games so even if they go 1-2 in these games, they should still have 20 win seasons. If they do this, there are some things I wouldn't do. First, schedule three difficult games in a row because the risk of confidence and momentum loss could be too great. Second, schedule big names and not good programs...I'd love to see the Zips play a school like UNCC because it would be quality basketball and a school some would associate with having good basketball teams while not always having good teams.

2-3 games a year may not seem like a big risk, but it would be. These games could produce a lot of up side or a lot of down side and must be entered into carefully. It is the most risky of options for improving stature it would seem to me. However, the down side of the risk is mitigated because the MAC is such a poor conference, they could move forward with this strategy, stumble early with the strategy, make changes to it along the way and still be one of the best teams in the league. If the hit on the upside, look out!

[taxpayer]

GP1 - maintain 20 wins per year but schedule more difficult and highly regarded opponents; that is the challenge in a nut shell. I believe this years team will be populated by a couple freshman and sophmores earning some significant minutes but that's another topic/thread. I do see the wisdom in scheduling an exhibition game and then an easier d1 opponent to begin the season but I'd be all for a roadie against a top 25 team as the Zips 3rd game of the season. Yes, we will be inexperienced (pg & 2,3) and KD will be experimenting with lineups but so will our opponent. I think trading a home win over an overwhelmed opponent and a small crowd is trumped by getting a roadie against a tradional top 25 program with some money thrown in to cover the Zips travel, lodging and loss of a home game revenue. I believe some top 20 teams would be interested in such an arrangement. Add a preseason made for TV tournament and the Zips will have 3 or 4 quality opponents.

To be honest, I do not see a top 25 program coming to the JAR. Why would they? They might get beat, the payday would be small (5000 attendance) and they can stay home, play some patsy and sellout their arena due to season tickets. Not much incentive there. Unfortunately, the JAR will only see the MTSU and Detroit's of the hoop world. I would love to see the Zips begin playing some A10 teams like St. Joe's, Xavier, St. Bonnie, Dayton, or Duquesne. The travel would be much easier than heading out west and all those teams have higher profiles than the Zips with the exception of St. Bonaventure and I believe the Zips can hold their own against them.

I guess it comes down to this.....is a 20 win season preferable to a 19 win season but one with a victory or two over top programs. The MAC isn't going to be a two bid league consistently which I think is obvious. So I would be willing to sacrifice the 20 wins as long as I was confident that the Zips will play in the MAC championship game almost every year; which thanks to KD's efforts, is occuring.

[Dave in Green]

If I'm Dan Gilbert, part of my pitch for luring LeBron back is the promise of major Quickens Loans sponsorship of the new Akron area with naming rights to call it the LeBron James Arena by Quicken Loans. Add in hosting youth basketball programs and moving the Cavs D-League team there. Make the package so sweet for the City of Akron that voters would be more inclined to vote yes on the sales tax increase.

[Captain Kangaroo]

If I'm Dan Gilbert, part of my pitch for luring LeBron back is the promise of major Quickens Loans sponsorship of the new Akron area with naming rights to call it the LeBron James Arena by Quicken Loans.

I can see the marquee now:

LeBron James Arena by Quicken Loans

(Comic Sans font)

[GP1]

The NE Ohio belief in a savior saving everything strikes again.

[Dave in Green]

Savior? Nah, just a kid from Akron, Ohio.

[Spin]

We knew this was coming...

"Two groups oppose Summit County sales tax increase" http://www.ohio.com/news/local/two-groups-oppose-summit-county-sales-tax-increase-1.504138

The Coalition Against the Sales Tax Increase and Defeat the Arena Tax have formed to campaign against the proposed 0.25 percent increase, which will appear on the November ballot.

Their main beef? County taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be funneled to build a new 8,500-seat downtown arena.

“We feel a new $161 million taxpayer-funded basketball arena for the University of Akron is not an appropriate allocation of funds when so many people in our county/surrounding communities are struggling financially, especially in Akron, where almost 30 percent of the residents live under the poverty level,” said Adam Miller, who formed the Coalition Against the Sales Tax Increase.

[Spin]

https://www.facebook.com/nonewtaxes2014

http://www.the-news-leader.com/opinion/2014/07/16/letter-opposes-summit-county-sales-tax-increase

http://www.twinsburgbulletin.com/opinion/2014/06/26/letter-author-opposes-summit-county-sales-tax-hike

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2014/04/24/7190/akron-proposes-spending-7m-on-college-arena-getting-less-than-nothing-in-return/

[Dave in Green]

Someone is going to have to come up with a credible and convincing explanation that the proposed arena is not primarily for the benefit of UA. It must be sold as a community arena with UA accounting for only a fraction of its use. Benefits to residents of the city and county must be described in detail. Failure to do this in a timely manner will make it difficult to pass the proposed sales tax.

[Spin]

The anti-gym groups have a hell of a head start. I haven't heard anything pro- outside of this forum.

[Balsy]

All you have to bring up is that UA is responsible for covering operating costs if the arena doesn't turn a profit...that pretty much nulls all the arguments against it.