Jason Rann
Well-Known Member
Hmmm, 60% huh? A number like that has to be legit.
Hawkeye Fans: You SUCK!!
- Thread starter 1hawkeye1
- Start date
Hmmm, 60% huh? A number like that has to be legit.
Yep. Unfortunately this is pretty true.
Basketball and football games used to be events when I was growing up. I still vividly remember not being able to sleep the night before my first Hawkeye football game (MSU 1985) because I was so excited.
Shit the last Hawkeye football game I went to in Kinnick I saw several kids on iPads and phones rather than watching the game. A lot more options for kids now than when I was growing up.
sioux34
Well-Known Member
I have heard that Sharms 1961 game against Ohio State that decided the Big Ten Championship that year was one of the best games ever played at the field house. I'm sure the students were rocking that day.
Iowa has a unique situation where we were really good for an entire generation (creating life long fans) then we were average/poor for a couple generations (creating bandwagon fans at best). What that leaves us with is an arena half full of really old people who will be there regardless. Those fans make it miserable for people like me who whenever I'm deciding whether or not to go to a game, lame atmosphere is a huge deciding factor. The good news is, that generation will eventually die off and it will create a lot of empty seats for the better. Then guys like me will start going again.
According to Wikipedia, there are 351 D1 bball schools. Let's be real, where does Carver Hawkeye Arena rank? I would say very much middle of the pack. That's not something we're used to as Iowa fans (when comparing it to Kinnick or to CHA for wrestling).
I think there is so much to be optimistic about with Iowa basketball right now. But CHA is a weak venue. I grewa up hearing about games at the old field house from older generations, it sounded like a loud and awesome venue.
Aside from the classic complaint about old people who attend CHA basketball games, as if they were in a movie theater... I have two qualms with CHA:
1) The fans are REALLY far away from the court, especially in the bowl ends / baselines. So regardless of where we put the student section, it's not going to be loud enough. The current students section is about 30 yards from the baseline. The best venues put the students and fans right on the court. Look at how close the first row of the baseline seats are to the court at Hilton. Carver's layout is too spacious.
2) The wide aisles extend from the very top, to the very bottom. Because of the bowl design (which I think is really cool), the lower sections are probably 40% aisle. They should redesign those sections and aisles so that there are more seats lower to the court. At the last row (top of the bowl), how many seats between each aisle, 30? At the bottom of the bowl, there are like 5 seats between each aisle. This is dumb.
At what point would Iowa consider building a new venue that would strategically encourage a better basketball environment?
I think there is so much to be optimistic about with Iowa basketball right now. But CHA is a weak venue. I grewa up hearing about games at the old field house from older generations, it sounded like a loud and awesome venue.
Aside from the classic complaint about old people who attend CHA basketball games, as if they were in a movie theater... I have two qualms with CHA:
1) The fans are REALLY far away from the court, especially in the bowl ends / baselines. So regardless of where we put the student section, it's not going to be loud enough. The current students section is about 30 yards from the baseline. The best venues put the students and fans right on the court. Look at how close the first row of the baseline seats are to the court at Hilton. Carver's layout is too spacious.
2) The wide aisles extend from the very top, to the very bottom. Because of the bowl design (which I think is really cool), the lower sections are probably 40% aisle. They should redesign those sections and aisles so that there are more seats lower to the court. At the last row (top of the bowl), how many seats between each aisle, 30? At the bottom of the bowl, there are like 5 seats between each aisle. This is dumb.
At what point would Iowa consider building a new venue that would strategically encourage a better basketball environment?
First, today's students are a different breed. Many of them get more excited about something like the Wave than the game. If the 12-0 run didn't bring them back, then something is seriously wrong.
Second, why not put seats in every-other aisle for the first few rows? They don't need that much aisle access to the floor. And there would still be plenty of access to aisles for everyone to exit. It would certainly look a lot better on TV.
Second, why not put seats in every-other aisle for the first few rows? They don't need that much aisle access to the floor. And there would still be plenty of access to aisles for everyone to exit. It would certainly look a lot better on TV.
I've often wondered the same thing. Wouldn't a simple quick fix to be add seats in every-other aisle at the very lowest rows (the ones that are constantly on TV!)?
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
iowa didn't play badly, they shot poorly. there is a huge difference. we had a lot of open shots that rimmed out and missed a ton of chippies right at the rim. our 1st half defense was as good as it has ever been and had a 1st half lead, even though, we were missing shots. that is something to consider. we out hustled msu the 1st 20 minutes. then, we missed shots in the 2nd half and they were on fire. msu is a final 4 team, but with what i saw in the 1st half, defensively, if we play that way the rest of the season we should finish with 12 wins, make the NCAA and be a team that makes the sweet 16.
Fryowa
Administrator
Waiting for @hawkdrummer1 to get here. He had some good info a couple years ago about the current design and how it came to be. If I remember correctly they actually had a logical design ready to go (sort of) and they scrapped that for CHA as we know it.
Fryowa
Administrator
Look at the rebounding and FT stats. Last night went beyond shooting poorly.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
I'll see if I can dig up the original fundraising piece my Dad got. I think I still have it in my archives.
Would love to see this. I always thought it was designed as a true 50/50 multi-usage venue for hoops and wrestling. For wrestling, I think it's one of the coolest venues around. The bowl design (while a bit sleepy for hoops), has a really cool coliseum kind of feel. For wrestling, I think it's awesome. Kind of a gladiator viewing arena.
But I think we can all agree that the best sports venues are single purpose designs. These are often the oldest. and have very simple design elements. But modern stadiums that are meant for NBA + Hockey + Tier 1 concerts... never have the raucous atmosphere and charm that you'll find in an old school basketball arena.
What if... Iowa committed carver Hawkeye arena to just wrestling (and started taking back championships from the blue and white team out east) and built a new basketball specific venue? Screw fiscal responsibility. Build build build !
Robowe
Well-Known Member
Both teams made 27 FGs. Iowa took 19 more shots (27-70 for 38.6% compared to 27-51 for 52.9%). Three point shooting (8-19 for 42.1 % for MSU vs 5-24 for 20.8% for Iowa) was big.
The rebounding (42-26 advantage for MSU) was offset by the turnover difference (19-7 advantage for Iowa). FT difference (20-21 for MSU compared to 8-8 for Iowa) figured in as well. Yes, there was more to the story than shooting poorly, but it explains a lot.
Box score --> http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/boxscore?gameId=401082408
if you find it, please start a new thread. It would be something I would want to come back to (and I sure wouldn't be looking in this thread for it).
Fryowa
Administrator
I wouldn't say the TO difference offsets it but I get what you're saying. You have to look at rebounds in context. The huge disparity was in defensive rebounds. We allowed them to get the ball back after most of their misses which equals tons of points. Turnovers don't really translate like that.
Bottom line for me is that they need to start shooting more midrange shots, period. You can't take wing-and-a-prayer shots all game long because if you get cold you're done. Garza can't convert under the hoop most of the time, and if your 3 isn't working, what else is there?
Now if someone is going to say, "Well, we can't hit midrange shots..." they wouldn't necessarily be wrong, but then what the F are we even showing up to the game for? The whole conversation is moot at that point
In the rare time that the three is working, or against total shit teams like Illinois or Penn State everyone looks like the '95 Bulls and I think that clouded fans' vision a little bit with the Hawks. I'm not saying we suck, but we sure as shit should have kept it within 6 or 8 last night.
Shooting tons of 3 point shots is easier BB, designed for a softer roster.
Working for shots down low, setting picks, posting up, mid range in traffic shots is physical and wears you out.
3 point shooting is like Oxycontin, it really feels good, and you want more, but it doesn't take long and you are heading the wrong direction.
Teams that jog back on defense are playing poorly. It is called quitting.
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
I knew I liked you, go big or go home!
