VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:39:26 02/16/03 Sun
Author: Reindeer Fan
Subject: Alumni Hall versus the Arena - why is it an all or nothing discussion?

I don't know why all of these discussions regarding Alumni Hall versus the Arena need to be "All or nothing." Its obvious to me we can't play Duke and St. Johns at Alumni hall, but it is equally obvious we should not be playing Loyola at the Arena. In years to come Fairfield should look to do what most large schools do, play the majority of their games in their arenas and schedule the remainder of games that won't draw at the on campus facility. The last time I went to see FU play UConn it wasn't at the civic center it was at Gampel pavilon. We should look at scheduling St. Peters, Loyola, and cansius on campus during the week. Better and more local schools should be scheduled on weekends in the arena (Iona, Siena, Manhatten come to mind). Until we regularly draw more than 3000 per game, Alumni hall can offer a real home court advantage for some selective game, and can save the university the expense associated with not putting the 3500 people in the seats necessary to break even on the arena contract.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: Alumni Hall versus the Arena - why is it an all or nothing discussion? -- STAGAL, 16:04:04 02/16/03 Sun

I believe we're locked in for a total of 5 years, so as far as I know, it is a moot point now. As far as men are concerned, there's no turning back now. It however may be an excellent point as far as women are concerned.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: Alumni Hall versus the Arena - why is it an all or nothing discussion? -- jenningsbeach, 17:27:31 02/16/03 Sun

I'm also under the impression that all Fairfield men's and women's basketball games through the 2005-2006 season will be played in Bridgeport.

If the Stags keep winning and muster some postseason success, I think the average attendance could fall in 3,500-4,000 range at the end of the five-year run. Going beyond those numbers, however, will be difficult as long as we're in the MAAC. Games versus St. Peter's, Loyola, Rider, Marist and the Buffalo schools are never going to draw much interest, even if we're a consistent winner.

In my opinion, the university should revive plans to build a 3,500-seat on-campus arena—preferably a new facility and not an overhaul of Alumni Hall. I understand there are zoning issues with the town (not to mention the price of this thing), but it's still the best way to go, especially if we remain in the MAAC. We would still play four or five games a year in Bridgeport, maybe more.

If an on-campus arena is an impossibility, let's make Bridgeport work. Maybe the eastern-college-basketball shakeup will happen, and we'll find ourselves in a brave new world, playing against teams that will draw 5,000+. But if the MAAC is our future, let's figure out ways to at least break even or make a little money at Harbor Yards.

A return to the "old" Alumni Hall would be a mistake. Recruiting would be negatively affected, and quite frankly, it's not like we've had a home-court advantage there in the past 15 years. The students haven't been going to the games for a long time.

Alumni Hall—as we know it—is a wonderful memory, a nostalgic piece of school sports history. But that marvelous old gym is not the future of Fairfield men's basketball.

There's no turning back.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> This is the time to make our run at the Big Time -- JoeStag, 17:46:42 02/16/03 Sun

Fairfield should do everything possible to make the Bridgeport Arena a success. Its our opportunity to do what Xavier did in the 80's. Give it 5-10 years. If we are still in the MAAC in the year 2013, then use that money to hire the best Lawyers possible, change the Town Zoning laws, and build a 5,000 seat on campus arena. And be happy in the MAAC.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Theorical Discussion -- Reindeer Fan, 20:32:26 02/16/03 Sun

I realize this is very much a theorical discussion, because who knows if 1) we'll still be in the MAAC in 4 years when our contract runs out, 2) the program will have been raised to a new level and we will have adequent fans and interest that the financials of the arena will not be an issue. But I don't feel playing some game at a renovated alumni hall when most games are played in the Bridgeport arena will be a real recruiting issue. I also think it would be nice for the students to have a few games on campus.

I don't propose things could ever, or should ever go back to the way they were. But a renovated Alumni Hall, or a new on campus facility that seats 3500 comfortable could give FU a real home court advantage. It could be a cosy, nice place to play some games against the smaller draws in the Maac. And from an economic standpoint, it could save the university from the losses associated with not reaching 3500 at the arena, and could actually improve attendence as tickets for game on campus could certainly sell for less than games do in the arena.

I don't think playing a handful of games in Gampel Pavilon hurt UConn's recruiting. And playing 5 games a year at Alumni Hall might be a net positive financially. We have three more years to see what transpires with the program and to determine whether we have reached the point of no return with attendence or reached a place where we should once again consider alumni hall


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Xavier history -- SonofDoc, 14:59:14 02/17/03 Mon

1. In mid 80's, got a good young Fairfield grad coach (Pete Gillen) and started winning some games.

2. Gillen brought in some talented players, while playing in off campus arena.

3. Started dominating the league (Mid Western Athletic Conf.), brought some more talent in and cracked the top 25. NCAA apperances became an every year event.

4. Gillen went on to bigger things in Big East, his assistant Skip Prosser (now at Wake Forest) continued the winning ways. Xavier moves to Atlantic 10.

5. Now Xavier has an on campus facility that seats 13,000, one the best programs in the mid west, rule college basketball in a city that includes Cincinnati, and is a consistent top 25 team.

Sounds good to me. Ask yourselves - why not ?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: Alumni Hall versus the Arena - why is it an all or nothing discussion? -- JoeStag, 17:38:59 02/16/03 Sun

The 5-year Contract that we signed gave us some bene's like getting prefferred scheduling dates, logos.... in a sense, we are almost like business partners with them. Fairfield Basketball, by name, is now associated with the Bridgeport Arena.... unlike the relationship that Rider has with the SBA. I am sure that the contract can be modified a bit. I would

- play all Weekday Womens games at Alumni Hall
- If we wanted to play 2-3 Men's games at Alumni Hall that would be OK, but hopefully the purpose of that decision would be to benefit students, not just a cost cutting measure. I think the breakeven point is 2,500 and 3,000 fans

The bottom line is that if we had this type of winnng season last year, we would already be averaging 3,000-3,500, and not even having this type of discussion. The disappointment of last season, cut into season ticket sales which is the foundation of good attendance. Now with a successfull season, and a bright future for this progam, we really have something to sell as far as Season Tickets.

The vision of playing in the Arena was to attract good recruits and schedule top opponents which will raise the level of the program..... which has definitely happened. The ultimate long term goal is to be prepared to be in a conference with all Top Quality Hoop programs.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Re: Alumni Hall versus the Arena - why is it an all or nothing discussion? -- Stagman, 08:23:45 02/17/03 Mon

It has often been said that the move to the arena allows us to 1) attract better OOC opposition. Better OOC opposition allows us to 2) attract better players. Better players allow us to consistently 3) be one of the top teams in the MAAC. Being one of the top teams in the MAAC will 4) drive up attendance as word gets out that Fairfield is good.

#1 and #2 have been accomplished. #3 is in its infancy, but as we can see, the Stags are now competing for the MAAC championship. #4 will take a little while.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> What about the women's team??? -- STAGAL, 08:30:29 02/17/03 Mon

While the men's team will IMO most likely never return to Alumni Hall after the contract is up in 3 years, should the women's team play league games at home instead. They never really had much following at Alumni Hall, and to see a couple of hundred fans at most of their Arena games in not only sad, but is costing the school tons of money. Maybe that's why they had to drop football and hockey, to pay their cost.


[ Edit | View ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.