2018/2019 Schedule

[UA_MA_2000]

Siena's AD opined that the game should be at the TUC because it is a community game and that the TUC would allow more fans to see the game. This rationale or explanation would be furthered if the schools played the game twice in one season (once at the TUC and once at SEFCU) or if the game were played once a year with the game being treated as a neutral game for Siena and not in either schools' season-ticket package. Indeed, were the game treated as a neutral game, even more community members would have access to seats because it would not be included in Siena's season ticket package.

What Siena's AD is really saying is that this is a community game for Siena season ticket holders. 

The position taken by the Siena athletic director is offensive, one-sided, and selfish. I want nothing to do with their basketball program or school.

Benson has represented our interests well, but I am not so sure Siena's AD has done the same for his school.

Edited August 10, 2018 by UA_MA_2000

[alumni '92']

no blame on our side! ... proud that our Athletic Director dug in/stood his ground ... those who criticize Mark and UAlbany can 'go pound salt' ... unfortunately, UA played lap dog for way too many years in these contracts ... lcc faithful (including a few Albany Co. politicos) felt empowered, and now the withdrawal is a bit painful/awkward for them 

[Clickclack]

2 hours ago, statefan said:

Benson may be popular today with the outspoken message boarders, but, what I have heard from virtually everyone in the business community and the non-UA non-Siena sports community is that Benson has not only lost the most anticipated game of the year, but, even worse has gotten destroyed in the public relations war.

They will get over... This is the right move long term. Everyone knows it... As for losing pr war... I don't see it. 

[bob87]

Wow.

I am not originally from here so I don't understand the treatment of sienna like they are something special. That attitude even comes thru by some here. I didn't understand that attitude 20 years ago. I understand it less today. 

As far as business support. I see more support over the years  . Key Bank berms at the football stadium. City line with lacrosse just to name a couple. Besides times Union and Dunkin donuts who always has stacks of $5 LCC tickets in their store all winter, I don't know or care who sponsors LCC. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by bob87

[Clickclack]

39 minutes ago, alumni '92' said:

no blame on our side! ... proud that our Athletic Director dug in/stood his ground ... those who criticize Mark and UAlbany can 'go pound salt' ... unfortunately, UA played lap dog for way too many years in these contracts ... lcc faithful (including a few Albany Co. politicos) felt empowered, and now the withdrawal is a bit painful/awkward for them 

Will send Benson a thank you note in the morning. He went up a few notches on the respect meter with me. 

[godanesgo99]

4 hours ago, statefan said:

Benson may be popular today with the outspoken message boarders, but, what I have heard from virtually everyone in the business community and the non-UA non-Siena sports community is that Benson has not only lost the most anticipated game of the year, but, even worse has gotten destroyed in the public relations war.

UAlbany alumni mostly leave the capital district when they graduate and travel the world. Most came from downstate and head back there when they are done.

LCC historically has had more local kids and a large majority of those stayed in the area. With the cost of Siena, those kids were also from more "well-off" or "advantaged" families.

Because of these factors, this area has a much higher percentage of alumni in leadership positions in the local business community being $iena alum. These are the donors and long time fans. These are the people that want the game downtown to add value to their advertising dollars spent in the TUC. They don't care about fairness from a basketball perspective. 

The game at TUC every year is better for the city and downtown. It is not at all better for uptown, UA, or their interests.

The question then comes to where your loyalty lies, and what is actually better for everyone: the game, LCC, or the community.

A. Do you want an event that brings 10k people downtown once a year, every year (4-5k more than when Siena brings a different low-mid major opponent in) adding value to the downtown businesses along with the $iena donors and sponsors.

or

B. Do you want to do that every other year, and during the other year bring an extra 2000 people to the SUNY campus (over bringing in a different low/mid major opponent) helping uptown business and adding value to the UAlbany sponsors and donors.

or

C. End the series

 

In my mind, choice B is actually the best for the "community". It really only adds 2000 extra people to the paid attendance with choice A., while ignoring uptown businesses and the UA sponsor companies. The game at SEFCU also advertises the football and LAX programs and could entice LCC corporate sponsors to invest in advertising at Casey Stadium and SEFCU, improving the value of those events for the community. It also fixes the equity problem for the actual basketball teams.

Choice C., is obviously the worst option for the "community" but if it forces the move to choice B then it is a great short term solution for the long term best overall "community" solution.

As far as the "public relations" war, I don't see it. The only public relations war I see losing is potentially in the Times Useless, but remember where that paper wants the game to be played. (Hint: it's in the arena that has their name on it)

Edited August 10, 2018 by godanesgo99

[godanesgo99]

My message above really should be what Benson shares with the media.

In years that Siena gets the game they gain 4k in attendance

In years that UA gets the game they gain 2k in attendance. Over a 2 year period that's only an average of 1000 extra tickets sold per year with it downtown both times vs. home and home at the expense of the uptown economy, future growth of UA athletics, it's sponsors, and fairness in basketball.

The community solution is actually home and home, not pandering to the LCC community.

Want to win the media war? Go on offense.

[jimbo]

I heard negotiations broke down when Benson demanded the name be changed to the UAlbany Cup....probably fake news. ;-)

Very pleased LCC does not get their way. Way to go MB!

[UA_MA_2000]

6 hours ago, godanesgo99 said:

UAlbany alumni mostly leave the capital district when they graduate and travel the world. Most came from downstate and head back there when they are done.

LCC historically has had more local kids and a large majority of those stayed in the area. With the cost of Siena, those kids were also from more "well-off" or "advantaged" families.

Because of these factors, this area has a much higher percentage of alumni in leadership positions in the local business community being $iena alum. These are the donors and long time fans. These are the people that want the game downtown to add value to their advertising dollars spent in the TUC. They don't care about fairness from a basketball perspective. 

The game at TUC every year is better for the city and downtown. It is not at all better for uptown, UA, or their interests.

The question then comes to where your loyalty lies, and what is actually better for everyone: the game, LCC, or the community.

A. Do you want an event that brings 10k people downtown once a year, every year (4-5k more than when Siena brings a different low-mid major opponent in) adding value to the downtown businesses along with the $iena donors and sponsors.

or

B. Do you want to do that every other year, and during the other year bring an extra 2000 people to the SUNY campus (over bringing in a different low/mid major opponent) helping uptown business and adding value to the UAlbany sponsors and donors.

or

C. End the series

 

In my mind, choice B is actually the best for the "community". It really only adds 2000 extra people to the paid attendance with choice A., while ignoring uptown businesses and the UA sponsor companies. The game at SEFCU also advertises the football and LAX programs and could entice LCC corporate sponsors to invest in advertising at Casey Stadium and SEFCU, improving the value of those events for the community. It also fixes the equity problem for the actual basketball teams.

Choice C., is obviously the worst option for the "community" but if it forces the move to choice B then it is a great short term solution for the long term best overall "community" solution.

As far as the "public relations" war, I don't see it. The only public relations war I see losing is potentially in the Times Useless, but remember where that paper wants the game to be played. (Hint: it's in the arena that has their name on it)

How about choice D. Play a home and home (two games) each year? Solves all problems in my view, and there is zero downside. 

[UA'08]

All this talk about the Siena game that no one is mentioning anything about us playing 6 possible MAAC schools. 

[dslyank]

UA WINS. There is no down side to dumping LCD; other than I would have preferred a money game or two. Bensen did his job. He works for UA  not the Albany chamber of commerce. As for alumni in the area; UA has something like 140000 over all & plenty live in the area; and MANY in the area & out are pretty PROUD today. 

[TheLoudestTrumpet]

16 hours ago, bob87 said:

That is in Belfast

 

Agghhhhh

[godanesgo99]

1 hour ago, UA_MA_2000 said:

How about choice D. Play a home and home (two games) each year? Solves all problems in my view, and there is zero downside. 

I'm fine with 2 games a year with home and home, that works mostly great. It ends the "Albany Cup" though. What if there is a split?

Do we really want to play them twice and have twice the affect on RPI and SOS playing that junk?

Does twice a year reduce the hype?

[KingDane]

The only downside to no game is that I really enjoy the game, especially winning it. That said - we should never play it again until the setting is equitable. 

[Clickclack]

Spoke to someone in the athletic dep this morning... Asked what the reaction has been. 

 

Said overwhelmingly positive with people understanding and supporting the stance the school took.