todays TU article on playing 2 games with Siena

[bob87]

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story...sdate=12/1/2006

 

 

Interesting article. We will see how the terms of the series continues. The article mentions there is one more year in the current contract. But it is obvious that the current contract is grossly unfair in that it appears that UA only receives the sale of 1500 tickets each year compared to Siena getting to keep the extra money from what 5300 tickets(11,800 - our 1500 tixs- a typical Siena crowd of 5000) Not to mention that our game is the only game that it appears that people are willing to pay the new higher Siena prices for without much complaining. BTW, I am being conservative with Saturdays crowd estimate and kind to Siena with the 5000 estimate as 10 of their last 13 home games not involving us drew less than that.

Not the first time I said this, but to me there are only 2 possible solutions.

1 ) Split the Knick down in half each year like a bowl game or

2 ) Alternate home games

[GreatDanes06]

unreal...coach mc doesnt like the idea of playing two games...BUT IS ALL BUT WILLING TO TAKE ON NJIT 2x...sad

[reeder]

While these points may be obvious, the contract is currently very one sided.

 

1. They have a guaranteed home game every year that will sell about 10k tickets for them. That's 5K above their average attendance - at $17 per seat is $85k. No need to count the Albany allocation because that will be above and beyond the 10K mentioned. Even with arena expenses, that will throw off enough money to pay for 2 or 3 Siena scholarships per year.

2. The only other way they will get that kind of attendance is by bringing in BCS schools where they have minimal chance to win - Syracuse a few years back, Stanford next year...

3. Where MAAC and other mid major teams have a tough time with home games (including Siena as they agreed to a home and home with NJIT this year), Siena is guaranteed a home game every year.

4. With all of this said, UAlbany clearly gets a lot of local attention with the game and will continue to attract fans to SEFCU.

 

 

If Siena is opposed to playing at SEFCU, the answer is to say that the game is important to the community and it needs to play in the largest arena. Given that, split the proceeds of the incremental revenue. If $85k is the number, UAlbany should get $42k. That would be a win - win. Siena gets a home game, with incremental revenue, UAlbany gets local attention with revenue approximately the same as if the game was played at SEFCU.

[UAalum72]

Although Albany and Siena often played twice a year in D-III days, when the Capital District Tournament with usually RPI and Union was held at Xmas or as a tip-off, I have to think a proposal to play twice is just a negotiating tactic.

 

And if we play at the CU, we can give some 400 of their fans the benefit of seeing the game for only, say, nine dollars.

[ALBANY ALUM '94]

Although Albany and Siena often played twice a year in D-III days, when the Capital District Tournament with usually RPI and Union was held at Xmas or as a tip-off, I have to think a proposal to play twice is just a negotiating tactic.

 

And if we play at the CU, we can give some 400 of their fans the benefit of seeing the game for only, say, nine dollars.

18054[/snapback]

all about the $$. Soon albany will dictate to Siena when we will let them play us.

[Clickclack]

Personally I'm against it. I like the idea of playing for all the marbles once a year. If this game is played twice and we split that doesn't settle anything. I'm also totally opposed to playing the game at the Q, simply for the reason that the facility wouldn't even be able to house half of the people that are coming to the game at the Pepsi. For mid majors like us and LCC it would be a huge loss of revenue. I would simply restructure the deal to allow UA to keep more of the ticket sales, for instance giving us like 7000 tickets to sell and LCC can keep their 8000 tickets.

[UAalum72]

In today's Gazette College Basketball Notes, D'Argenio says playing twice 'is not preposterous'.

 

For a change, the column isn't focused on Siena and the MAAC; half is a story about UA Hall-of-Famer Scott Price ('69) who hit game-winning free throws and then blocked a last-second shot vs. the Indians.

 

Jamar Wilson recalls the jitters before the 2002 game at the Pepsi.

 

The column twice mentions that the two teams played each other twice a year in the '60s and '70s.

[soup]

In today's Gazette College Basketball Notes, D'Argenio says playing twice 'is not preposterous'.

 

 

18059[/snapback]

 

 

 

Trust me, D'Argenio is simply saying the right thing in the media - but behind the scenes he's laughing. Siena will never allow two games and will never step foot on SEFCU's court - NEVER. Siena can not afford the perception that the two programs are on equal ground - and they won't chance it. D'Argenio will kill the series before they play two games - or even a single game at SEFCU.

 

I agree only one game should be played - and the arena should be split in two and the schools should split the gate - but that won't happen either. God forbid the Siena season ticketholders have to go looking for a different seat - it's taken them 10 years to figure out where their seat is now.

[Clickclack]

The more I think about it the more it looks like UA trying to gain leverage in the ensuing negotiations. I can't imagine coach Brown actually wanting to play two. But he is selling it real good. I think he is just trying to make the point that currently Siena gets all the benefit from UA coming to play in their building and even though we are a huge draw for them we only get money from 1500 tickets. The amount of tickets we get has to be a minimum of 5000 (a good part of them in the lower bowl) or we are getting the green shaft! I think the deal will be a little more equatable but it might take one more contract for it to be truly fair.

[statefan]

I'm under the assumption that Coach knows this will never fly, but took a page out of Bill Parcells' (OK MTS, substitute Joe Torre) playbook and made a statement that he knew would generate buzz for 24 hours to take the pressure off the players. He really doesn't need every reporter sticking a microphone in the face of his 18 year old center and asking how tough it will be to defend Siena's star.

 

This and closing practice, says to me that at least everyone acknowledges that this is a special game.

[B9j2j6s]

Does anyone know if Siena has closed off practice as well?

[Clickclack]

Also of note Gifford will be starting! With Covington coming of the bench.

[GODANESGO]

Also of note Gifford will be starting!  With Covington coming of the bench.

18071[/snapback]

 

Where'd you hear from? Either way, I think it's a good move.

[Clickclack]

Coach Brown was on Wyland's show this morning. He said something to the effect of ....we'll start with Gifford draped all over Haddix. Or something similar to that, so yes he didn't just come out and say "Gifford is starting" but thats what I read into it. Good move in my opinion.

[B9j2j6s]

My only concern with having Gifford starting is that Haddix is more physical and will look to draw fouls and take Brett out early. IMO I would perfer to have Covington start and have Jim and Brent double team Haddix early and make it difficult on him to get going. If we contain Haddix it will go along way to winning the game tomorrow.