Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sioux Falls Arena Problem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

    I don't think this thing will ever get stale in Sioux Falls. I think people showed up to watch mediocre Jacks men's teams in the past and the future is certainly brighter. And as for the women, I only see the Jacks being top-3 forever in the Summit, so there will always be the possibility of rooting them on to the NCAA's and attendance will always be strong.

    USD:
    Sure, USD is "only" 4 hours to Fargo, but it's only 1 hour to SF and the alum base in both towns is not even close. If and when SDSU or USD challenge for the title.....look out. Attendance for both would be 50% less in Fargo in the same case. And when USD is added the Summit has 4 teams within 5 hours of SF. Even w/ best case scenario I can't see 12,000 ppl wanting tix for any Summit game anytime soon. If it sells out, Midcontinent is happy. They broadcast the game locally and easily sell ad slots. Bars are thrilled as well. As Michael Scott would say "win-win-win".

    History:
    SF has passed with flying colors. Quite possibly the best low-major tourney in the country. If the next two years go like the first two did (and given the state of both SDSU bball programs, they will both be, at least, top 4) then SF will continue to be very successful. So what would you do as commish? Roll the dice a w/ Fargo or go safe, the record setting SF?

    Facility:
    In two years, when the bid is up, I expect ground to be broke on a new SF facility. So let's say SF wins another 2-3 year bid. That would mean the next time the bid came up SF is boasting a brand new facility that will help even MORE in bringing out the fans.

    Coorporate sponsorship:
    We've seen it w/ the Force, Storm, Stampede and Canaries (among others like Augie and USF). The coorporate sponsorship in this city is very committed and very impressive. If anyone in this league can beat them then I'll eat my hat. Not to mention that Mike Sullivan is the real deal (assist to Brad Coleman).

    Brrrr:
    Fargo is another 4 hours north. If Summit fans are already nervous or unexcitied or scared to get stuck in a blizzard to come to SF then what will they think about going another 4 hours north to Fargo?

    2nd place is first loser:
    I think Fargo would do a fine job. I think SDSU and USD ppl would travel pretty well, rest of the league not as well. I know the local ppl will support it. I think cooperate would be alright. I think the women's side would suffer. If SF were not able to host it I think Fargo is a solid 2nd choice (only show in town vs. alot of other potential destinations). I just feel the bar has been set so high that it's gonna take everything falling into place (the right seedings, local teams doing well, etc) for Fargo to be in the same ballpark. Douple was at the USD-SDSU women's game....with mouth wide open and brain racing. He's no dummy. At this point I think Fargo would need to hit a hole-in-one in the biding process.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

      I think the failure of the events center tax measure is, in some ways, a blessing in disguise.

      Since there is a need for a HS football facility, and the events task force has no intentions of razing the Arena, it's time for the city & school board to invest in these facilities.

      Sitting around and letting these facilities go to seed because of a pie-in-the-sky events center plan is irresponsible, seeings how the events center plan doesn't anticipate tearing down the Arena, and can accommodate Howard Wood in its present location.

      The arena should be replaced with something at least twice its size, but that's not going to happen for a while. In the meantime, money can be found to fix up the Arena, including better concourses, locker rooms, etc.

      The city has deferred investment in the Arena for what? ten years? because a huge new arena was always over the next hill. They've now missed their window to bond it, need to take out a regular loan for it, and can't afford that. Not to mention the scattered shot-gun blast of a 'plan' on the drawing board, the unfavorable environment for funding it with the means available, etc.

      Therefore, the city's got the option of investing in the Arena, and continuing to be an outstanding host for the Summit, or continuing to have such quaint 'features' as the scoreboard from Hoosiers (complete with the incredibly stuck horn), beer sold from folding tables, and hopelessly inadequate restroom facilities.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

        Anyone that thinks that Sioux Falls has a lock on the Summit for years to come is just delusional. The other teams are not going to put up with the home court advantage that it gives to the SD teams indefinetly. They all get to vote and eventually they will block vote to move it around. The SF arena is a pit. The best thing that could happen for Sioux Falls is for the tournament to be moved after this contract as a way to get the need for a new facility on the front burner.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

          Originally posted by HoboD View Post
          Anyone that thinks that Sioux Falls has a lock on the Summit for years to come is just delusional. The other teams are not going to put up with the home court advantage that it gives to the SD teams indefinetly. They all get to vote and eventually they will block vote to move it around. The SF arena is a pit. The best thing that could happen for Sioux Falls is for the tournament to be moved after this contract as a way to get the need for a new facility on the front burner.
          I agree, although I think the best thing would be for Sioux Falls to get a new event center under construction BEFORE the contract expires.

          You can't teach an old dog new tricks, but you can never teach a stupid dog anything.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

            Originally posted by HoboD View Post
            Anyone that thinks that Sioux Falls has a lock on the Summit for years to come is just delusional. The other teams are not going to put up with the home court advantage that it gives to the SD teams indefinetly. They all get to vote and eventually they will block vote to move it around. The SF arena is a pit. The best thing that could happen for Sioux Falls is for the tournament to be moved after this contract as a way to get the need for a new facility on the front burner.

            Absolutely agree. I would go so far as to say that if SF was awarded the Summit indefinitely, not only would the push for a new events center go stale, teams like ORU and Oakland would be Conference USA and Horizon bound in a second.

            One of the attendees at SF Stater's asked Justin Sell what he thought it would take for SF to get the 1st round of the NCAA Women's Tourney and he pretty much said "a new arena". I thought it was a perfect answer, especially since Mike Heuther(sf mayor canidate) was in attendence.

            Go Jacks!!
            SDSU...Passionate, Relentless, Champions.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

              Originally posted by HoboD View Post
              Anyone that thinks that Sioux Falls has a lock on the Summit for years to come is just delusional. The other teams are not going to put up with the home court advantage that it gives to the SD teams indefinetly. They all get to vote and eventually they will block vote to move it around. The SF arena is a pit. The best thing that could happen for Sioux Falls is for the tournament to be moved after this contract as a way to get the need for a new facility on the front burner.
              Who has the final say? Douple or the schools? I agree that the schools do not want to see the Dakota schools get the homecourt advantage (I remember the Big XII schools freaking out a few years ago when the tourney was always held in KC), but then they need to step up and put a similar bid on the table and offer a similar or better experience. Can anyone, outside of maybe Fargo, do that? Very, very doubtful. Do we move this to Detroit or Indy only to see it not get half the attendance or half the excitment just so 2-3 Dakota schools don't have an advantage? Is that in the best interest of the league? I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this in SF at least 75% of the time. Heck, we'll host the thing our first 4 years of NCAA tourney eligibility. Who would have thought that was possible 5 years ago?

              The SF Arena isn't exactly the Staples Center but it's not a "dump".

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                Originally posted by propar80 View Post
                Absolutely agree. I would go so far as to say that if SF was awarded the Summit indefinitely, not only would the push for a new events center go stale, teams like ORU and Oakland would be Conference USA and Horizon bound in a second.
                Are you saying that OU and ORU can just jump to those conferences if and when they choose? If that were the case they would be gone already. Heck, ORU would jump to the Sun Belt in a heartbeat.

                C-USA isn't taking anyone without a football program...same goes for the Sun Belt. ORU also dreams of playing in the Valley, but I think that is even more of a pipe dream. ORU isn't going anywhere.

                I know nothing about Oakland to the Horizon or Horizon expansion, but I could see that. They are sitting at 10 right now. Oakland would pair w/ Detroit-Mercy quite well and then the Horizon would probably look for a 12th, preferably an Ohio school.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                  And no way is giving anyone the tourney indefinitely a good idea. We'll see what the interest is here in year four. But I'll predict year four might just be the best year yet. The SDSU men should be top 3, NDSU should be good as well and it's the first year for USD.

                  Again, what's in the best interest? Fairness or making dollars? I know which I think D1 is all about.

                  I don't think IUPUI, UMKC, SUU, IPFW or WIU will ever offer up much support attendance-wise unless it's played in their backyard and their team is a top seed.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                    Originally posted by TeaJackrabbit View Post
                    Are you saying that OU and ORU can just jump to those conferences if and when they choose? If that were the case they would be gone already. Heck, ORU would jump to the Sun Belt in a heartbeat.

                    C-USA isn't taking anyone without a football program...same goes for the Sun Belt. ORU also dreams of playing in the Valley, but I think that is even more of a pipe dream. ORU isn't going anywhere.

                    I know nothing about Oakland to the Horizon or Horizon expansion, but I could see that. They are sitting at 10 right now. Oakland would pair w/ Detroit-Mercy quite well and then the Horizon would probably look for a 12th, preferably an Ohio school.

                    No...what I'm saying is the more-"Dakota Centric" the Summit gets the less interested the "high-end" teams are going to be in keeping their membership when they get the chance to leave, IMHO of course.
                    I could be totally off...maybe teams like Oakland and ORU enjoy traveling to Sioux Falls, SD for 5 days and playing in front of their families, band and cheerleaders if they're not playing SDSU. And if they are, they get to play against a HUGE homecourt advantage if they are playing SDSU or in the future, USD.
                    The upside is that they actually get to play in front of fans that do care, in a city that obviously cares about the Summit League Tournament. This could be enough to offset my previous point, I don't know.

                    It's a double-edge sword that SDSU/USD fans don't have to worry about if the Tournament is always in SF/Fargo, but IMO it is a problem if another conference has an opening for one of these "high-end" conference mates and they take it. Then all of a sudden the Summit is faced with replacing them with...who?????

                    But alas, why do I worry about this stuff...I'm sure Augie will eventually come to their senses and drop football and move up, and the Minnesota Legislature will allow UMD, SCSU and Mankato to move up. Then it will be one big happy family again.

                    Go Jacks!!
                    SDSU...Passionate, Relentless, Champions.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                      Originally posted by TeaJackrabbit View Post
                      And no way is giving anyone the tourney indefinitely a good idea. We'll see what the interest is here in year four. But I'll predict year four might just be the best year yet. The SDSU men should be top 3, NDSU should be good as well and it's the first year for USD.

                      Again, what's in the best interest? Fairness or making dollars? I know which I think D1 is all about.

                      I don't think IUPUI, UMKC, SUU, IPFW or WIU will ever offer up much support attendance-wise unless it's played in their backyard and their team is a top seed.

                      It is my understanding that USD is not tournament eligible the first year. They won't play at the Arena under the existing Summit League contract (2011 & 2012). They are eligible for League play for the 2011-2012 season however.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                        Originally posted by propar80 View Post
                        maybe teams like Oakland and ORU enjoy traveling to Sioux Falls, SD for 5 days and playing in front of their families, band and cheerleaders if they're not playing SDSU.
                        Know who votes on tournament location?

                        Players? No.
                        Coaches? No.
                        ADs? No.

                        Presidents? Yes.

                        If Oakland doesn't like it, if IUPUI doesn't like it, if ORU doesn't like it, then the onus is on THEM to figure out how to get the tournament away from Sioux Falls.

                        2800 tickets distributed for the game OU/IPUPI game in Rochester, 1200 tickets distributed for the game in Indianapolis, 3100 IN ATTENDANCE at the game in Sioux Falls.

                        If that doesn't explain why the tournament is in Sioux Falls instead of Oakland, I have no earthly idea what will.

                        The basketball tournament is put up for BID because the Summit expects to make money off it.

                        ----

                        This carping about 'Dakota-centric' this and 'bolting for the Horizon' that is nonsense.

                        The tournament is HERE because THERE IS FAN SUPPORT HERE.

                        Look at those numbers again. 2800 for -the- premier OU matchup (OU/IUPUI).

                        2800

                        And that's NOT butts in the seats.

                        --

                        That's pathetic.

                        Can you imagine a tournament put on at the PALACE, hosted by a school that can't even fill its own venue for the biggest game of its season?

                        --

                        If ORU & OU were such magnificent schools, SDSU & NDSU would have never gotten a sniff at Summit League membership.

                        Rather, SDSU & NDSU brought something to the table that the Summit hadn't hardly seen in years. FANS.

                        Not surprisingly, then, the BB tournament is located in close proximity to the schools with the best FAN SUPPORT, not necessarily the basketball powers.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                          The final decision maker is who comes up with the bucks. Until someone can top what Sioux Falls is doing which is essentially guaranteeing the conference makes a nice profit than it will remain there. Sioux Falls needs to make the new event center a reality, but the need for a new facilty goes far beyond a 5 day basketball tournament. I'm still under the opinion that it would be a waste to try and put more lipstick on a pig. A state of the art new center scoreboard that can me moved eventually to a new facilty should happen as soon as possible. I think the capacity of the current arena is fine and while it does not have the nice new amenities it is a classic basketball arena with great site lines. Weren't they playing the tournament in Tulsa in a High School Basketball facility? I'm disappointed the legislature did not give the cities the automony to decide if they want to increase taxes by a penny after it's agreed to by a public vote/referendum. I'm not disappointed that the current plan seems to be dead. Let the school board and city fix up Howard Wood with the dollars they have allocated and put the new arena downtown where there is the greatest economic impact. SDSU Men do not have a homecourt advantage until they have a team with the talent that is capable of taking advantage of it. I don't think Sioux Falls will lose the tournament because of the condition of the arena, but I hope that perception is out there so the city leaders take action soon.
                          Last edited by JACKGUYII; 03-17-2010, 11:37 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                            Originally posted by zooropa View Post
                            Know who votes on tournament location?

                            Players? No.
                            Coaches? No.
                            ADs? No.

                            Presidents? Yes.

                            If Oakland doesn't like it, if IUPUI doesn't like it, if ORU doesn't like it, then the onus is on THEM to figure out how to get the tournament away from Sioux Falls.

                            2800 tickets distributed for the game OU/IPUPI game in Rochester, 1200 tickets distributed for the game in Indianapolis, 3100 IN ATTENDANCE at the game in Sioux Falls.

                            If that doesn't explain why the tournament is in Sioux Falls instead of Oakland, I have no earthly idea what will.

                            The basketball tournament is put up for BID because the Summit expects to make money off it.

                            ----

                            This carping about 'Dakota-centric' this and 'bolting for the Horizon' that is nonsense.

                            The tournament is HERE because THERE IS FAN SUPPORT HERE.

                            Look at those numbers again. 2800 for -the- premier OU matchup (OU/IUPUI).

                            2800

                            And that's NOT butts in the seats.

                            --

                            That's pathetic.

                            Can you imagine a tournament put on at the PALACE, hosted by a school that can't even fill its own venue for the biggest game of its season?

                            --

                            If ORU & OU were such magnificent schools, SDSU & NDSU would have never gotten a sniff at Summit League membership.

                            Rather, SDSU & NDSU brought something to the table that the Summit hadn't hardly seen in years. FANS.

                            Not surprisingly, then, the BB tournament is located in close proximity to the schools with the best FAN SUPPORT, not necessarily the basketball powers.

                            I absolutely agree with you that it is up to the other institutions to put in a comparible bid if they don't want to have to travel to SF every March.

                            But if you don't think that the potential of losing good team in the "current" Summit League isn't a bad thing for SDSU/NDSU and USD because they feel like the Summit League is becoming too "Dakota-Centric", then I can't help you there.

                            Like I said in the previous post, which you conveniently decided to leave out. Maybe teams like ORU and Oakland don't mine coming to the Dakota's every year, because they enjoy the atmosphere, which they might not get at their chosen venue...I guess we'll see. I'm just trying to see things from their perspective...I know that's tough for us around here sometimes.

                            Go Jacks!!
                            SDSU...Passionate, Relentless, Champions.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                              Originally posted by propar80 View Post
                              But if you don't think that the potential of losing good team in the "current" Summit League isn't a bad thing for SDSU/NDSU and USD because they feel like the Summit League is becoming too "Dakota-Centric", then I can't help you there.
                              Let me ask you this, then:

                              Would hosting the Summit tournament every year keep Oakland from bolting to the Horizon if it were invited?

                              ---

                              I understand your concerns, but I don't think they're well-founded. Oakland would leap at the chance to join the Horizon, regardless of whether they host the tournament or not--that's what I see from their perspective.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Sioux Falls Arena Problem

                                Originally posted by propar80 View Post
                                I absolutely agree with you that it is up to the other institutions to put in a comparible bid if they don't want to have to travel to SF every March.

                                But if you don't think that the potential of losing good team in the "current" Summit League isn't a bad thing for SDSU/NDSU and USD because they feel like the Summit League is becoming too "Dakota-Centric", then I can't help you there.

                                Like I said in the previous post, which you conveniently decided to leave out. Maybe teams like ORU and Oakland don't mine coming to the Dakota's every year, because they enjoy the atmosphere, which they might not get at their chosen venue...I guess we'll see. I'm just trying to see things from their perspective...I know that's tough for us around here sometimes.

                                Go Jacks!!
                                I highly doubt the location of the conference basketball tournament is going to influence whether a team decides to remain in the league. Maybe they think this league gives them the best chance to get to the big dance?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X