A couple easy trivia questions

[That Guy]

Bradley's number of home games includes the large number of extra home games they have gotten from the CBI and CIT the last 2 years. They did not schedule those games.
I am pointing that out, because it clearly is a different situation to those schools that schedule excessive home games just to pile up preconference wins, and sell them as part of the season ticket package. Such excessive home-game scheduling, and including them in a season -ticket package will inflate that team's home attendance.

Which is exactly why average attendance and the percent of capacity that they fill their arena can be a more telling stat than overall total attendance. Without those extra home games, Bradley would be in the middle of the pack of these teams in terms of total attendance. And actually, our average attendance numbers and % of capacity numbers would actually rise.

Also, why were some of our posts deleted on this thread?

[Double D]

I would disagree, and I am speaking off the top of my head (no research).

Postseason tourney games like CBI, NIT, etc. have a much lower attendance percentage, because of the handling of the tickets over the course of like 2 days. My guess is our average, and percent of capacity would improve without those games factored in.

[That Guy]

Agreed Double!

[Da Coach]

There is no question that attendance will be higher if a game is part of the season-ticket package.
BCS schools know this, and that's partly why they schedule extra, easily winnable games early. They know that season-ticket buyers will gladly pony up for the early games (even if many are actually no-shows when the game is played) just to get tickets for the conference games, and better non-conference games in the package.
The only criticism I would have is against power conference schools that schedule a lot of easy home wins early, because they know that when they get into conference play, their RPI will rise enough to be considered for at-large bids. IMO, the NCAA should look at non-conference RPI separately when they consider their at-large bids.

The CIT and CBI games did amazingly well for games that were not scheduled until a matter of a couple days before they were to be played. Bradley had the highest attendance of any CBI or CIT host. But only a couple of the games approached the attendance of the regular season games.

[tornado]

BU regular season home average attendance was better last year (and the year before) than the numbers indicate, because the final stat is lowered by the extra games in the post season...
It's really great that we got those extra games and I know nobody would want it otherwise, but they do lower the per-game attendance stats.
But if you point to the lowered average attendance because of the post-season games it's like taking a baseball player who had two walks,
two sac flies, and a sac bunt with 3 RBI's, and ragging about how the guy didn't get a hit that day!

so if there are people who discount the total attendance figures because of the extra games, then let's GO BACK to what BU's average attendance is without them..

2007-2008: average attendance goes from 9600 to 10115
2008-2009: average attendance goes from 9110 to 10019
that suddenly pushes BU's home attendance almost into the Top 40 among all 1000 NCAA schools!

but why can't people just accept that Bradley draws very, very well, and why find some bizarre and ridiculous stat to try to claim otherwise?

I have given the figures and the links where you can look it all up yourself.
Remember- there are about 270 non-BCS programs.....and among those 270, Bradley ranks inside the TOP TEN in home attendance - PERIOD.
Among midmajor schools who do NOT have football to draw in extra income to help the program, then BU ranks 5th!!
FIFTH in the entire nation...that's a compliment to the program, the epople, and the fans..........and I am proud the be a Bradley fan, and won't back down from those who want to squelch the enthusiasm.

[That Guy]

I have given the figures and the links where you can look it all up yourself.
Remember- there are about 270 non-BCS programs.....and among those 270, Bradley ranks inside the TOP TEN in home attendance - PERIOD.
Among midmajor schools who do NOT have football to draw in extra income to help the program, then BU ranks 5th!!
FIFTH in the entire nation...that's a compliment to the program, the epople, and the fans..........and I am proud the be a Bradley fan, and won't back down from those who want to squelch the enthusiasm.

This is all well and good, but if you want to come back to how we're top five in attendance among non-BCS schools, then maybe you shouldn't include the attendance numbers that compare us against mainly BCS schools. This would've made a very strong point.

We're still top 60 in attendance, among all NCAA schools. This is a testament to our great fans and our legacy here on the hilltop. Our whole conference draws well, as the MVC drew a record amount of fans through the gates last season.

If you think I'm trying "squelch the enthusiasm, then you're sorely mistaken. Please don't imply that by bringing separate factual numbers to the table means that I am any less of a fan than you...

[Nacho]

but why can't people just accept that Bradley draws very, very well, and why find some bizarre and ridiculous stat to try to claim otherwise?

It doesn't appear ANYONE is arguing that BU doesn't draw well...

And why are these stats "bizarre and ridiculous? They are simply looking at the attendence figures a different way. % of capacity makes a HUGE difference. Duke would probably average 25,000 fans a game if they had a stadium big enough for it...

That does not downgrade BU's good numbers at all...

It is still FACTS... you just don't appear to like them because they don't show BU in as good of a light as your FACTS did... it's not a knock on BU at all... just a different way to analyze the FACTS

[ph]

I'm not sold on the idea of Duke selling out 25000, if the built it. (If 25,ooo were guaranteed, year after year, they'd be dumb not to build it) Yes, there certainly would be some sell-outs

There is a theory in pro sports in which larger stadiums can draw less than smaller stadiums (many larger baseball stadiums have been torn down and sucessfully replaced with smaller ones). Larger stadiums usually mean better last-minute availability, so some fans put off making advance plans, then never come. With a smaller, sold-out stadium, you must advance plan to make a game, so more come.

[SFP]

Duke does not have to worry about making money from their home games! They make a ton from endorsements and winning! There is also a bit of a brand around Cameron. I like it that they play in such a cozy facility. I also agree with PH's view on smaller venues. BTW Anyone saying anything negative about BU's draw in attendance just has to be totally anti-BU. BU has an amazing fan base which the majority of BCS schools wish they had! I give the the program a lot of credit and just as much the citizens of Peoria for following and supporting them generation after generation. A very very special realtionship which not to many places have. The only other place that has that relationship with their host town would be Gonzaga.

[Braves4Life]

BU has an amazing fan base which the majority of BCS schools wish they had! I give the the program a lot of credit and just as much the citizens of Peoria for following and supporting them generation after generation. A very very special realtionship which not to many places have. The only other place that has that relationship with their host town would be Gonzaga.

I'm not sure I can agree with this SFP. I think there are several communities that support their home team as much as Peoria supports BU..... and that have that "special" relationship with their team. I know Winston-Salem has a similar relationship with Wake Forest, and I'm sure it could be argued that Omaha and Wichita have a similar relationship with their Blue Jays and Shockers. Here are just a few more that might also "fit the bill" -- Louisville, Lexington (and the whole State of KY), Chapel Hill (and the whole State of NC), and Albuquerque. Just to name a few. Thoughts?

[Da Coach]

Those examples you mentioned are in communities that are much larger than Peoria, except Chapel Hill, but they are just a few miles from large cities like Greensboro, and Raleigh, and not far from Charlotte. And major state schools have a tremendous advantage in that people from all over the state identify with them and they receive much greater coverage by media all over the state.
And wouldn't you agree it's a little unfair to compare the fan interest at Kentucky and North Carolina with that for Bradley? Those are 2 of the 3 preeminent programs in the history of college basketball.

I doubt there are more than a couple examples anywhere of communites the size of Peoria that support a team that is not a major state school as well as Peoria supports Bradley.

[dogsrus]

[QUOTE=tornado;143017]
but why can't people just accept that Bradley draws very, very well, and why find some bizarre and ridiculous stat to try to claim otherwise?

What did I miss....I read this thread 5 times and can't find anyone that is stating or implying BU doesn't draw well.

[Braves4Life]

I doubt there are more than a couple examples anywhere of communites the size of Peoria that support a team that is not a major state school as well as Peoria supports Bradley.

You make some good points regarding the state schools DC. I would probably say Wake Forest and the W-S community most resemble BU & Peoria. And I would definately agree that Peoria and BU Basketball have a very special relationship that take a back seat to few (if any) around the country.

[SFP]

B4L I was more on Da_Coaches thought process. Non-state funded, non-BCS school.