The blame for poor attendance falls on....

who or what combination of things?

I know the easiest thing is to blame the teams poor product on the floor but I think there is more to it.

Poor scheduling, weaker opponents, high ticket price, poor marketing, poor alumni relations.

I think the weak opponents aren't helpful but I'd still go watch the team play but who wants to pay $30+ to go see weaker teams. Then by the time Big East schedule fans are so lathargic and can watch the games on TV why bother showing up to see the team lose. Is that not the general attitude?

There are no distinct advantages to being a season ticket holder besides BE tourney which you can easily get tickets to day of game in the street by some nova, uconn, marquette etc. fan who has a book and isn't staying to watch St. John's.

Invite alumni back to the games give out tickets to each class. Send out vouchers to the class of '72, '82, whatever and if they mail it back they'll get tickets and make an announcement during the game to recognize them.

Let students come to games for free. Pack the house.

I could go on and on with ideas but lets hear what you think about the situation.

Its a sad state of affairs. Who wants to see st francis, bethune cookman and oters. And who wants to spend 20$ for a train to msg to watch us get spanked by uconn cuse louisville all of whom have more fans than us. I rather go to a packed CA and watch us play nova, ucon and others in a crazy enviornment.

who or what combination of things?

I know the easiest thing is to blame the teams poor product on the floor but I think there is more to it.

Poor scheduling, weaker opponents, high ticket price, poor marketing, poor alumni relations.

I think the weak opponents aren't helpful but I'd still go watch the team play but who wants to pay $30+ to go see weaker teams. Then by the time Big East schedule fans are so lathargic and can watch the games on TV why bother showing up to see the team lose. Is that not the general attitude?

There are no distinct advantages to being a season ticket holder besides BE tourney which you can easily get tickets to day of game in the street by some nova, uconn, marquette etc. fan who has a book and isn't staying to watch St. John's.

Invite alumni back to the games give out tickets to each class. Send out vouchers to the class of '72, '82, whatever and if they mail it back they'll get tickets and make an announcement during the game to recognize them.

Let students come to games for free. Pack the house.

I could go on and on with ideas but lets hear what you think about the situation.

The cheapest students, alumni and fan base in the nation. Period.

The administration is to blame for hiring Norm and especially for keeping him employed.  Norm has to be held accountable for any success or failure...it is his program (at least for the next six weeks).

I can't wait until March.  One way or another we'll know.

there's too much to do in new york to ask people to pay to watch garbage.

The administration is to blame for hiring Norm and especially for keeping him employed.  Norm has to be held accountable for any success or failure...it is his program (at least for the next six weeks).

I can't wait until March.  One way or another we'll know.

Can you please be more intelligent than just post Norm drivel. Attendance is a serious issue and there are a number of things that contribute towards it. Perhaps we can come up with some solutions or at least find out some of the problems. Everyone knows you don't want Norm as coach lets focus on some other things.

I blame the attendance problem on posters like Marillac an choz. The constant bashing of the program,players and coaches has obviously taken its toll on the situation. Recruits and their handlers read message boards, as do current players and the constant pissing and moaning does not help. What kid would want to come play for this school, whose fans might be the worst in college basketball as of late? If we get better players, the fans will come to games. Very simple. Very few come to games to watch the coach
IM sure you guys loved the Jarvis teams, knowing damn well of the thuggery that was going on but yet I bet you cheered your a s s off. Why not cheer for Norms kids?

we may have the worst fan base in the country.  But I think Lance could put some buts in the seats.

I blame the attendance problem on posters like Marillac an choz. The constant bashing of the program,players and coaches has obviously taken its toll on the situation. Recruits and their handlers read message boards, as do current players and the constant pissing and moaning does not help. What kid would want to come play for this school, whose fans might be the worst in college basketball as of late? If we get better players, the fans will come to games. Very simple. Very few come to games to watch the coach
IM sure you guys loved the Jarvis teams, knowing damn well of the thuggery that was going on but yet I bet you cheered your a s s off. Why not cheer for Norms kids?

is someone trying to stir the pot to get a raise out of some folks? I do not think this has any bearing on the situation in terms of attendance however recruits, aau and hs coaches, current players do read this and other boards. Boards do create a tone of a program and do effect its public image to a certain degree.

I think the answer is "all of the above".

But, as I've said on here before, $33 to see ANY team play the NJIT's of the world is just ludicrous. It's a ripoff. Even if I lived in the area, no way would I be able to afford to consistently attend games at CA.

I would be willing to bet that our average ticket prices are the highest in the nation.

But the fan base doesn't help either. It just seems like there is no real school spirit. The day after a big win (granted, I wasn't around during good times), there is really no buzz around campus.

I'm not sure scheduling hurts much at this point. If we can't draw more than 7,500 (with a lot of help from opposing fans) for a conference rival/#4 team in the nation, I don't think it matters who they're playing.

Quote from: Marillac on January 19, 2009, 09:01:38 PM

The administration is to blame for hiring Norm and especially for keeping him employed.  Norm has to be held accountable for any success or failure...it is his program (at least for the next six weeks).

I can't wait until March.  One way or another we'll know.

Can you please be more intelligent than just post Norm drivel. Attendance is a serious issue and there are a number of things that contribute towards it. Perhaps we can come up with some solutions or at least find out some of the problems. Everyone knows you don't want Norm as coach lets focus on some other things.

I don't understand what you want.  Do you want us to pretend like Norm doesn't suck?  Do you want us to just dance around that issue when EVERYTHING comes back to it.  You start these threads, but knock people who give you the only reasonable answer. 

It's like starting a post asking who is to blame when a dog dies of starvation while under the care of a pet sitter.  Is it the parents fault for hiring the sitter or is it the fault of the pet siitter for not feeding the dog for two weeks...only we aren't allowed to mention the pet sitter.  So we have to come up with a collection of factors like the pet sitter losing the key to the house, the pet sitter already having a history of bad sitting experiences that the parents were aware of, the sitter's gf telling him go to Atlantic City, etc. 

You are acting like our attendance drop is due to a collection of factors.  The reality is that it is due to a horrible team and a lousy way to spend an afternoon or evening.  The product sucks.  The only person responsible for that is Norman Roberts.  He brings in the (lack of) talent and he teaches them how to play the game.   

If Coach K left Duke and they replaced him with David Faustino from Married with Children they would lose.  After five years of losing, the attendance would fall and it wouldn't be on Unsolved Mysteries. 

Dave, Marillac - no need for beef.  Marrilac makes a good point, but dave also has a point - it's not just Norm.  The atmosphere at St. John's games is kind of strange.  While other places have howling students, St. John's games have had the feel of Knicks games.  And in '99, that was kind of fun, though not a young crowd and perhaps too professional... and now it's morgue-like.  Personally, I think I've been to funner places to see a basketball game than the Garden (but I prefer small, loud venues).

I think it's crap that the school seems to not cultivate the best built-in home crowd advantage - young rowdy students looking for something cheap to do. 

What Big East schools do it better, and on what factors?  Pricing?  Population?  Opponents (because the rest of the Big East has their share of patsies)?  Local interest games (like the Big 5 in Philly)? 

The coaching and the beatings are undoubtedly a reason.  They're a tough, inconsistent team to watch, and they don't take down big-time opponents.  But hasn't the attendance problem been an issue from the Jarvis era?  I don't know, I didn't look at attendance stats then, but the Garden rocked a little less for those games than I remember as a kid or a younger adult...

And please don't bring up Norm.

There are plenty of teams with worse product on the floor who see much better attendance results. The coach doesn't make the ticket prices, the coach doesn't market to sell tickets, the coach doesn't make the in game promotions, the coach doesn't sell the tickets, the coach doesn't do seating charts, and the coach doesn't hire all the people in the athletic department who are responsible for this.

To go back to your analogy of the pet sitter. Would you blame the pet sitter for the plants in the house dying? For the house getting dusty? For not doing the laundry? For not taking in the newspaper? For not cutting the lawn?

So to put the blame solely or most responsibly on the coach for attendance is just misplaced.

There are plenty of teams with worse product on the floor who see much better attendance results. The coach doesn't make the ticket prices, the coach doesn't market to sell tickets, the coach doesn't make the in game promotions, the coach doesn't sell the tickets, the coach doesn't do seating charts, and the coach doesn't hire all the people in the athletic department who are responsible for this.

To go back to your analogy of the pet sitter. Would you blame the pet sitter for the plants in the house dying? For the house getting dusty? For not doing the laundry? For not taking in the newspaper? For not cutting the lawn?

So to put the blame solely or most responsibly on the coach for attendance is just misplaced.

HAHAHA you crack me up.  What do any of those thing have to do with the dog or the expectations any reasonably prudent person would have either hiring or being hired to feed a dog? 

People are not coming to St. John's basketball games because it is a proor product and it has been that way for six seasons.  When we were winning, we were drawing.  I think you will see a direct correlation between wins and attendance if created a graph of St. John's basketball over the last 25 years. 

If we had an awesome team and were winning and entertaining our fans, we could raise the ticket prices, market less, etc.  You are wililng to blame in-game promotions--which by the way are universally horrible in college basketball--over the coach.  He has more control of the program than anyone else. I just don't get it. 

Is there one guy on any of these sites that doesn't attend games because the marketing is bad?  Or because they charge a few extra dollars?  Personally, I'd rather use my time to do something more useful than watching my favorite team in sports get whalloped again.  I also want to send a message to the administration. 

And please don't bring up Norm.

Father Harrington.

To go back to your analogy of the pet sitter. Would you blame the pet sitter for the plants in the house dying? For the house getting dusty? For not doing the laundry? For not taking in the newspaper? For not cutting the lawn?

I have gone back to this a few times and I just can't understand where you are going with this.  We think so differently.  What do any of the factors you mention have to do with the dog starving?  If the sitter was hired to feed the dog, what does not doing the launry or dusting have ANYTHING to do with it?  They are not contibuting factors to tthe dogs death.  Get it?

There are plenty of teams with worse product on the floor who see much better attendance results. The coach doesn't make the ticket prices, the coach doesn't market to sell tickets, the coach doesn't make the in game promotions, the coach doesn't sell the tickets, the coach doesn't do seating charts, and the coach doesn't hire all the people in the athletic department who are responsible for this.

To go back to your analogy of the pet sitter. Would you blame the pet sitter for the plants in the house dying? For the house getting dusty? For not doing the laundry? For not taking in the newspaper? For not cutting the lawn?

So to put the blame solely or most responsibly on the coach for attendance is just misplaced.

Are you REALLY blaming marketing and seating charts for decline in ticket sales?  What world do you live in?  This is one of the winningest college basketball teams of all time.  ITS THE COACH!

Quote from: Dave on January 20, 2009, 11:50:10 AM

To go back to your analogy of the pet sitter. Would you blame the pet sitter for the plants in the house dying? For the house getting dusty? For not doing the laundry? For not taking in the newspaper? For not cutting the lawn?

I have gone back to this a few times and I just can't understand where you are going with this.  We think so differently.  What do any of the factors you mention have to do with the dog starving?  If the sitter was hired to feed the dog, what does not doing the launry or dusting have ANYTHING to do with it?  They are not contibuting factors to tthe dogs death.  Get it?

I think you inadvertently saw my point. What does coaching have to do with selling tickets? Get it?

Quote from: Marillac on January 20, 2009, 12:10:43 PM

Quote from: Dave on January 20, 2009, 11:50:10 AM

To go back to your analogy of the pet sitter. Would you blame the pet sitter for the plants in the house dying? For the house getting dusty? For not doing the laundry? For not taking in the newspaper? For not cutting the lawn?

I have gone back to this a few times and I just can't understand where you are going with this.  We think so differently.  What do any of the factors you mention have to do with the dog starving?  If the sitter was hired to feed the dog, what does not doing the launry or dusting have ANYTHING to do with it?  They are not contibuting factors to tthe dogs death.  Get it?

I think you inadvertently saw my point. What does coaching have to do with selling tickets? Get it?

Dave you are WAY smarter than to believe that.  Why do you need to defend Norm when it just isn't worth it?

Norm is reponsible for the product on the floor.  People are NOT buying tickets because the product on the floor is subpar.  Therefore, HE is responsible for the drop in ticket sales.  Get it?