Where Would You Build a New Arena?

[Robowe]

Don't they show up for wrestling in Carver? And isn't the crowd load? Two!

 

[BGOLD]

Ok, explain last season - 3/4's of it in the top 25, an NCAA appearance and win - it was empty last year. This year, the team is off to a good start. It's empty. If it's the product on the floor, the last season and 10 games seem to disprove that theory. If it's the product excuse, why hasn't it gotten better with a better team? Do they need to sustain it longer? Do they need to be top 10 ? I don't remember the teams in the 80's and 90's really sustaining top 10 rankings or deep tournament runs? The ones that did were outliers.

I kind of forgot we were ranked in the top 25 so much of the season last year, maybe because of how we faded at the end of the year that's how I remember the team. People definitely lost interest during the Lick years and have just never really come back around to the degree that they were. I'm not sure how many fans this would truly impact in terms of attendance but I don't think Fran is very likable either. I've never thought he's been that good of a coach, he was the right coach to hire at the time but I think we've reached Fran's ceiling. But on top of that, he's not exactly a great ambassador for the University like Kirk is.

 

[InGoodCo]

Yeah I agree, and that's what I suspect. I agree with Sioux - It'll take some time to really bring back the fan base, because it didn't disappear overnight, either. Fran has had some success, yes, but just am not sure it's been sustained enough and/or at a high enough level.

Speaking for myself, I also am gun shy from some of the late season meltdowns. I count 3 times on Fran's watch where things were looking great, and then the calendar turned to February. I think it was 2013-14 and 2015-16 where the team was Top 5-10 nationally in January, then totally imploded. Last year honestly wasn't a whole lot better, but at least they made a decent NCAA showing.

Yeah, but every team does that to an extent... more teams fade then flourish in the regular season. Why is that? Well, it's a long year, legs are getting tired, it's your 2nd round of games against the same opponents and you are playing tougher opponents in the 2nd half of the season as opposed to the first half when you have your OOC. Most teams start out great and fade that's not really exclusive to Fran's bunch. Davis's teams often did the same thing. Feast up on an easy OOC and then hold on as the year went....when you get to post season, it's a new lease on life. You are playing teams that AREN'T familiar and scouting you every week. I think that's more a bi-product of how the college game works then just a Fran deal. Some teams go the opposite, but most slide the longer they play.

 

[sioux34]

The attendance drop off began during the Fraud years and was accelerated by Lick.

 

[homes]

My final say on this is that they must figure out a way to get the students closer to the floor, maybe not all of them, but the first 1000 or so get sideline seats, right of the floor, first come first serve. Create some incentive. And then they need to reward them for awhile until they get in the habit of coming back. They need to create a reason for students to want to come to the game. Good basketball is a big part of it, for sure, but they need to sell some sizzle right now.

 

[sioux34]

Too many people have the cause and effect backwards when it comes to a raucous student section. Schools have one because they win games. They don't win games because they have one.

 

[BGOLD]

My final say on this is that they must figure out a way to get the students closer to the floor, maybe not all of them, but the first 1000 or so get sideline seats, right of the floor, first come first serve. Create some incentive. And then they need to reward them for awhile until they get in the habit of coming back. They need to create a reason for students to want to come to the game. Good basketball is a big part of it, for sure, but they need to sell some sizzle right now.

This would be one way https://fanbuzz.com/college-football/sec/alabama/alabama-tide-loyalty-points/

 

[DDThompson]

Build it on Hwy 21 and I80. Right between two biggest population points.

 

[InGoodCo]

I kind of forgot we were ranked in the top 25 so much of the season last year, maybe because of how we faded at the end of the year that's how I remember the team. People definitely lost interest during the Lick years and have just never really come back around to the degree that they were. I'm not sure how many fans this would truly impact in terms of attendance but I don't think Fran is very likable either. I've never thought he's been that good of a coach, he was the right coach to hire at the time but I think we've reached Fran's ceiling. But on top of that, he's not exactly a great ambassador for the University like Kirk is.

You must only remember the last 4 games of the regular season? Cause Iowa was in the top 25 all year until then. They went 12-10 from January on. They went 5-5 over their last 10. Some call that fade, I call it the conference schedule. That's just my opinion. I obviously know they got knocked down a few seed lines the last couple of weeks of the schedule, but 9 out 10 teams are going to "fade" as the season progresses in CBB. That's when all teams are playing the toughest part of their schedule.... ie their conference.


The ones who don't are rewarded with good seeding. Iowa has NOT played well enough tho for some time down the stretch, but I would say that's not the norm - most teams fade down the stretch, the good ones get top 5 seeds. Iowa has NOT been that for some time.

Just look at Iowa's last sweet 16 team? What were they their last 10? 5-5 .... did they fade? Or were they just playing better competition down the stretch? That's ALWAYS going to be case in CBB for most teams and I imagine most teams "fade" down the stretch.... cause they are playing better teams the closer they get to the end.

I sometimes think "fade" has a lot to do with schedule and timing. Again, just my opinion.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Yeah, but every team does that to an extent... more teams fade then flourish in the regular season. Why is that? Well, it's a long year, legs are getting tired, it's your 2nd round of games against the same opponents and you are playing tougher opponents in the 2nd half of the season as opposed to the first half when you have your OOC. Most teams start out great and fade that's not really exclusive to Fran's bunch. Davis's teams often did the same thing. Feast up on an easy OOC and then hold on as the year went....when you get to post season, it's a new lease on life. You are playing teams that AREN'T familiar and scouting you every week. I think that's more a bi-product of how the college game works then just a Fran deal. Some teams go the opposite, but most slide the longer they play.

Whoa... I'm gonna have to strongly disagree with you on this.

I'm not talking about losing a few games once you hit the tougher part of your schedule. I'm talking about absolutely REELING - like losing 5 or 6 out of 7.

All of what you said about tired legs, scouting reports, etc, goes both ways. Why can't we beat opponents that have tired legs late in the season, or beat an opponent the second time around because we've scouted them? Why does this always seem to work AGAINST us? Seems it should work in our favor sometimes, too, yes? But it doesn't seem to.

Sure, a lot of teams have good non-con due to weak schedules and then lose more in conference, but that's not what I'm talking about. I disagree that every team does this. Losing a couple games here and there, sure. But absolutely REELING? No.

I disagree that every team does this, and I don't recall meltdowns being a pattern with Davis teams. If you had said Alford, I'd be more inclined to agree.

 

[BGOLD]

You must only remember the last 4 games of the regular season? Cause Iowa was in the top 25 all year until then. They went 12-10 from January on. They went 5-5 over their last 10. Some call that fade, I call it the conference schedule. That's just my opinion. I obviously know they got knocked down a few seed lines the last couple of weeks of the schedule, but 9 out 10 teams are going to "fade" as the season progresses in CBB. That's when all teams are playing the toughest part of their schedule.... ie their conference.


The ones who don't are rewarded with good seeding. Iowa has NOT played well enough tho for some time down the stretch, but I would say that's not the norm - most teams fade down the stretch, the good ones get top 5 seeds. Iowa has NOT been that for some time.

Just look at Iowa's last sweet 16 team? What were they their last 10? 5-5 .... did they fade? Or were they just playing better competition down the stretch? That's ALWAYS going to be case in CBB for most teams and I imagine most teams "fade" down the stretch.... cause they are playing better teams the closer they get to the end.

I sometimes think "fade" has a lot to do with schedule and timing. Again, just my opinion.

Their last 4 games involved losing twice by 20 points and then losing to a 6-14 Rutgers team at home and a 7-13 Nebraska team, so not exactly good competition, I'd call that a fade.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

You must only remember the last 4 games of the regular season? Cause Iowa was in the top 25 all year until then. They went 12-10 from January on. They went 5-5 over their last 10. Some call that fade, I call it the conference schedule. That's just my opinion. I obviously know they got knocked down a few seed lines the last couple of weeks of the schedule, but 9 out 10 teams are going to "fade" as the season progresses in CBB. That's when all teams are playing the toughest part of their schedule.... ie their conference.


The ones who don't are rewarded with good seeding. Iowa has NOT played well enough tho for some time down the stretch, but I would say that's not the norm - most teams fade down the stretch, the good ones get top 5 seeds. Iowa has NOT been that for some time.

Just look at Iowa's last sweet 16 team? What were they their last 10? 5-5 .... did they fade? Or were they just playing better competition down the stretch? That's ALWAYS going to be case in CBB for most teams and I imagine most teams "fade" down the stretch.... cause they are playing better teams the closer they get to the end.

I sometimes think "fade" has a lot to do with schedule and timing. Again, just my opinion.

They lost 5 of 6 to end the season, and only a miracle buzzer beater from the corner against Rutgers kept that from being 6 of 7.

You could say Iowa finished last year 23-12 because technically it's true. Just depends on how you slice and dice the data, but I don't think anyone can argue that Iowa had anything but a very poor finish to the regular season during the last 3-4 weeks.

Again, I'm not talking about losing some games against tougher competition. I'm talking about totally falling apart. Big difference. "Fade" isn't the word I would use so much as "Crumble".

 

[Ree4]

When I was a kid in the 80s and 90s I remember Carver being a lot louder. If that's what we're looking for, building a new arena won't change fan apathy. Reducing prices and giving people something to cheer about would be money better spent than a new arena IMO

 

[judzeehawk]

It's not just a Carver and Kinnick thing that the students don't show up it's happening everywhere. These small arenas some of these basketball teams play in are roaring because they only hold like 70000. Times have changed. It's hard to keep any bodies attention anymore. Just look around at the game and watch what people are doing. It's ridiculous. Seems people want to have everything plushy and cushy. That's why they stay home. I guess I'm to old school because I don't ask for much. I want to watch my Hawks play I'll be there come hell or high water. If I remember correctly a ton of Hawk fans complain about Fran and his recruiting. I still think that has more to do with it than anything.

 

[sioux34]

I obviously know they got knocked down a few seed lines the last couple of weeks of the schedule, but 9 out 10 teams are going to "fade" as the season progresses in CBB. That's when all teams are playing the toughest part of their schedule.... ie their conference.

Sorry, the math does not work out for this theory. There is no way 9 out of 10 teams gets worse towards the end of the season. Somebody has to win those games, and it cant be your one mythical rising team.

 

[InGoodCo]

Ok, they did fade last year, you guys are right..... it was at the very end. I can only think of the the 13-14 team that did something similar. 2 seasons ago they were bad all year. 3 years ago when they made the NIT they actually won their last 4 - point still stands, most teams lose more to end the season cause it's harder to sustain winning against better competition.

 

[InGoodCo]

Sorry, the math does not work out for this theory. There is no way 9 out of 10 teams gets worse towards the end of the season. Somebody has to win those games, and it cant be your one mythical rising team.

probably a stretch and I probably should have said it differently. Bubble teams or teams in Iowa's current tier tend lose more games in the 2nd half of their season. The cream typically rises, every season. It doesn't shock me that Iowa struggles the more the year goes on....cause they haven't been able to take the next step forward. I just meant that fades are way more the norm then teams that go on a tear against better competition...ie the end of the season. It still happens both ways for teams, I really meant to say "that's not exclusive to Iowa". Bottom line - we haven't had enough success to bring fans back to Carver. It's just crazy to me just how empty it is even with fielding a pretty decent, fun to watch and cheer for team.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Ok, they did fade last year, you guys are right..... it was at the very end. I can only think of the the 13-14 team that did something similar. 2 seasons ago they were bad all year. 3 years ago when they made the NIT they actually won their last 4 - point still stands, most teams lose more to end the season cause it's harder to sustain winning against better competition.

The 2015-16 team lost 6 of 8 to lose the season, too. That includes the game against Illinois in the BTT. 5 of 7 in the regular season. That was after reaching #3 in the country. That's the one that stings most for me. Yes you're right, 3 years ago was a stronger finish, so it hasn't been EVERY year.

I don't disagree with your last sentence though. We always joked that Mr. Davis's teams always seemed to start 11-1 and then finish 20-10, lol. Obviously the difference in non-con vs. conference schedules.

I went back and looked, and other than 1989-90 and 1993-94 (both were just bad teams anyway), his teams usually seemed to have a solid finish to the season.

I'm trusting this is accurate, if you're curious:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/iowa/1999-schedule.html

 

[InGoodCo]

The 2015-16 team lost 6 of 8 to lose the season, too. That includes the game against Illinois in the BTT. 5 of 7 in the regular season. That was after reaching #3 in the country. That's the one that stings most for me. Yes you're right, 3 years ago was a stronger finish, so it hasn't been EVERY year.

I don't disagree with your main po. We always joked that Mr. Davis's teams always seemed to start 11-1 and then finish 20-10, lol. Obviously the difference in non-con vs. conference schedules.

I went back and looked, and other than 1989-90 and 1993-94 (both were just bad teams anyway), his teams usually seemed to have a solid finish to the season.

I'm trusting this is accurate, if you're curious:
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/iowa/1999-schedule.html

I hear ya - but the 15-16 team finished 5-5 in their last 10 of the regular season - they also WON at Crisler arena by double digits to end the year against a quality opponent. That didn't feel like a fade to me... I mean, it was ...because at one point that team was ranked #3 in the country... but it just feels like that's how the schedule laid out and the law of averages catching up to the team. I just always expect to lose more games the longer the regular season goes cause seemingly, that's how it goes for a lot of teams. I would love to see that trend end.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

I hear ya - but the 15-16 team finished 5-5 in their last 10 of the regular season - they also WON at Crisler arena by double digits to end the year against a quality opponent. That didn't feel like a fade to me... I mean, it was ...because at one point that team was ranked #3 in the country... but it just feels like that's how the schedule laid out and the law of averages catching up to the team. I just always expect to lose more games the longer the regular season goes cause seemingly, that's how it goes for a lot of teams. I would love to see that trend end.

It sure felt like a fade to me. They beat Michigan, true.. But also lost to Penn State and a bad Illinois team during that stretch. It didn't feel like a fade because we were #3 at one point, but because we lost of 6 of 8 and there were definitely a couple bad losses in there. Take those two losses out and I'm sure it doesn't feel half as bad.

A team that was good enough to beat MSU (they were Top 5 both times we played them) and Purdue (ranked both times) twice apiece and get to #3.. No, I never bought into the "1 seed" hype, but I certainly expected them to stay in the 3-4 seed range or better, not drop all the way to a 7.

It's all water under the bridge, though. One thing we definitely agree on is that I too want to see that trend end!