[Game Discussion] New Hampshire

  • 157 replies
  • 18611 views

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #140 on: November 13, 2019, 01:42:55 PM »
If you truly want to be objective you would be comparing this years attendance with Mullins first year, not his fourth.

Absurd. Mullin had nothing year one. Anderson starts with two preseason All-Big East Second Team selections and a host of talented sophomores recruited by Mullin and staff.

Do you think it gets better next year losing Heron, LJ, Rutherford, and likely a few transfers? I think that is unlikely.

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #141 on: November 13, 2019, 01:55:49 PM »
So Carmine you are intimating by your post that the better attendance of last year was because Mullin was the coach. Guess people came out to see him sit on the scorers table, tie his shoes and curse out the refs for the hole game. Has nothing to do with season tickets price increase along with requiring a financial contribution, and Mullin adding 4 more years of futility to a once proud program. You may also want to change from referring to our new head coach as CTC and start referring to him as CFC as during the early season telecasts the announcers have claimed that we offered the job to 3 other coaches before turning to MA.

I’d love to see some of you sleuths struggle in an escape room.

What is so hard to understand about Mullin helping with attendance? He is the face of the program...a family program at that. He connected the great times people had in the 80s to present day. He drew big names like McEnroe and past alumni. It’s not rocket science. We averaged like 17,000 fans a game at MSG. Season tix shot up the week after he was hired.

How different is this on court product? I’d argue we will finish +/- two games from last year. We have two of the top ten talents in the conference. We have an exciting style of play. We are a deeper and bigger team. I expect our attendance to be down by 1/3 all year. It’s not a mystery.


QuanMan

  • *****
  • 1744
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #142 on: November 13, 2019, 02:41:32 PM »
I've been to all 3 games in Queens. Attendance has been as expected. We have a established brand that is marketable but the Mullin crowd is completely gone and isn't coming back. What's left is the diehard fans who are few and far between, there is no buzz. Until we start winning and prove to the city that this is a winning brand no one will show. I do like the prospects of a good crowd on Saturday though. Very agreeable start time for most.

One thing's for sure, we've all come to appreciate and realize how good of a man and coach IMA is in a very short amount of time. His strict yet gentlemanly ways are going to be well received when the rest of the tristate finds out we found a diamond in the rough last Spring.
Section 3
Section 116

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #143 on: November 13, 2019, 02:46:31 PM »
He seems very happy with Mike Anderson.
Then that is something we have in common.
Quote
You enjoy your fantasy.
My fantasy involves 18 year old twins; peanut butter; leather and a donkey.  It has nothing to do with St. John's basketball.

Foad

  • *****
  • 6065
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #144 on: November 13, 2019, 02:49:37 PM »
His strict yet gentlemanly ways are going to be well received when the rest of the tristate finds out we found a diamond in the rough last Spring.

A diamond in the rough is a "person who is generally of good character but lacking manners, education, or style." Which of those do you think CTC lacks?

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #145 on: November 13, 2019, 02:59:36 PM »
I've been to all 3 games in Queens. Attendance has been as expected. 
This was my first game and I was shocked. Not even 1500? It obviously wasn't like this for legend or Hollywood and if my foggy memory is correct - we drew better under Norm.

CFC is probably used to packed houses at Arkansas and Mizzou. He must be like "What the f**k?  These Yankees are crazy."

QuanMan

  • *****
  • 1744
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #146 on: November 13, 2019, 03:10:48 PM »
A diamond in the rough is a "person who is generally of good character but lacking manners, education, or style." Which of those do you think CTC lacks?

Referring to the coaching search last Spring Foader.
Section 3
Section 116

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #147 on: November 13, 2019, 03:37:44 PM »
Nah he's a pro that knows the deal and has Macon and Demeo both NY guys if he didn't.  I knew attendance would take a hit post Mullin.  If the team gets off to a solid start this year it will catch on and if they get even remotely close to good we know it will pick up substantially. 


This was my first game and I was shocked. Not even 1500? It obviously wasn't like this for legend or Hollywood and if my foggy memory is correct - we drew better under Norm.

CFC is probably used to packed houses at Arkansas and Mizzou. He must be like "What the f**k?  These Yankees are crazy."

SJUFAN

  • *****
  • 2280
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #148 on: November 13, 2019, 04:22:05 PM »
Absurd. Mullin had nothing year one. Anderson starts with two preseason All-Big East Second Team selections and a host of talented sophomores recruited by Mullin

Coaches picked us to finish last, I guess they don’t agree with your “host of talented” remarks.

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #149 on: November 13, 2019, 04:53:29 PM »
Coaches picked us to finish last, 
That's a lie.  Coaches picked us to finish second to last.

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #150 on: November 13, 2019, 05:51:32 PM »
I've never been a season ticket holder but attend many games a year including last night. Others so inclined could have done the same without the season ticket package and associated financial contribution.

I too thought the Razorback was our 4th choice, not the third. We had a back and forth about this on the board and the consensus was that Cluess wasn't offered hence CTC. Personally,  I had figured that his agent never had a contract delivered to his office, trying to spare us the embarrassment of being turned down by yet another coach, but that an informal offer must have been floated his way.

CFC it is.
Four guy wasn't Cluess it was the guy down south from a mid major who I believe had a big tournament win.

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #151 on: November 14, 2019, 10:10:09 AM »
That's a lie.  Coaches picked us to finish second to last.

Second to last and it’s because we have a new coach are the only mystery in the conference.

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #152 on: November 14, 2019, 10:11:29 AM »
Then that is something we have in common.My fantasy involves 18 year old twins; peanut butter; leather and a donkey.  It has nothing to do with St. John's basketball.

I hope the 18 year old twins aren’t the Champagnies.

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #153 on: November 14, 2019, 02:14:54 PM »
I hope the 18 year old twins aren’t the Champagnies.
Nah, so far I've been markedly heterosexual.

TONYD3

  • *****
  • 5578
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #154 on: November 14, 2019, 04:39:52 PM »
Nah, so far I've been markedly heterosexual.
What about the donkey?

Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #155 on: November 14, 2019, 07:14:51 PM »
What about the donkey?
Heterosexual with just a hint of bestiality.

ras

  • *****
  • 2091
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #156 on: November 14, 2019, 07:49:53 PM »
The fantasy sounds like a FOAD fantasy, but without the bongLOL

TONYD3

  • *****
  • 5578
Re: [Game Discussion] New Hampshire
« Reply #157 on: November 14, 2019, 08:10:53 PM »
Heterosexual with just a hint of bestiality.
Makes sense