Facilities

[oklahomamick]

Would you rather have a nice renovated ARC and a .500 record for the past decade in the HL?  Or have the current ARC and win the HL half the time?  I think most would answer they would rather have the championships.  After all, thats what got us the HL and then the MVC.  It's people not the house.....

I think we make too much our sun par ARC

[VU2014]

The Delta House argument. "He can't say that about our facilities only we can say that about our facilities."

Classic. I think Flounder just passed away the other day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Dy2fo6E_pI

Would you rather have a nice renovated ARC and a .500 record for the past decade in the HL?  Or have the current ARC and win the HL half the time?  I think most would answer they would rather have the championships.  After all, thats what got us the HL and then the MVC.  It's people not the house.....

I think we make too much our sun par ARC

Agreed.

Great People > Facilities

[vuny98]

Would you rather have a nice renovated ARC and a .500 record for the past decade in the HL?  Or have the current ARC and win the HL half the time?  I think most would answer they would rather have the championships.  After all, thats what got us the HL and then the MVC.  It's people not the house..... I think we make too much our sun par ARC

I'd rather have both. No reason we should not have an above average facility with a winning record. They are not mutually exclusive. While a good facility does not equal good record, one can argue that a sub par facility can hinder on court performance. We have been able to overcome that up to this point and I have no doubt we can continue to do so, but at some point our facility needs to catch up. We are not the same team that we were in the 80's and early 90's by any stretch of the imagination. We are far better and more recognized as an athletics program. Our university has grown and become more prestigious as an academic institution in that time as well. New buildings pop up every year on campus. Yet the ARC has largely remained the same in that time period except for very minor updates along the way.

I am not advocating a new arena, but we should be past the point where new lights, a new floor and a scoreboard keep us complacent. There are some easy fixes that could be put in place to make the ARC a more modern facility (bowl seating in lower half with chairbacks all around, Updated concessions, utilize the space on the track around the upper half more effectively [i.e. suites]). A major renovation knocking out walls and such would be nice, but that's not happening any time soon. So do what is feasible today. This "my car sucks but I cant afford a BMW so I need to stick with what I have" mentality is not productive. Start making headway in things we can afford today.

[VU2014]

I'd rather have both. No reason we should not have an above average facility with a winning record. They are not mutually exclusive. While a good facility does not equal good record, one can argue that a sub par facility can hinder on court performance. We have been able to overcome that up to this point and I have no doubt we can continue to do so, but at some point our facility needs to catch up. We are not the same team that we were in the 80's and early 90's by any stretch of the imagination. We are far better and more recognized as an athletics program. Our university has grown and become more prestigious as an academic institution in that time as well. New buildings pop up every year on campus. Yet the ARC has largely remained the same in that time period except for very minor updates along the way.

I am not advocating a new arena, but we should be past the point where new lights, a new floor and a scoreboard keep us complacent. There are some easy fixes that could be put in place to make the ARC a more modern facility (bowl seating in lower half with chairbacks all around, Updated concessions, utilize the space on the track around the upper half more effectively [i.e. suites]). A major renovation knocking out walls and such would be nice, but that's not happening any time soon. So do what is feasible today. This "my car sucks but I cant afford a BMW so I need to stick with what I have" mentality is not productive. Start making headway in things we can afford today.

CC: Mark Heckler, Valparaiso University Board of Directors, Mark LaBarbera

[VULB#62]

Question. 

Now that we are in the premier mid-major league in the mid-west, would a 6,000 seat ARC (expanded, renovated and sponsored  -- e.g., Thrivent Arena) induce P-5 teams to possibly schedule a 2 for 1 with us?

If that would be the case, the crowds would, IMO, greatly improve.  Basketball crazy NW Indiana would love to see Northwestern, Purdue, and others (maybe including Butler, DePaul, as well as, maybe ND and the Michigan state schools)' yes? And then there are the biggies outside of the 300 mile radius (2 for 1 with Stanford?).

Just wondering.

If it works out, it could put tiny, little Valpo on the national map for more reasons an just basketball.

[VULB#62]

I am a Lambeau Field  tour guide.

In 1997 the Green Bay Packers faced bankruptcy and expulsion from the NFL by 2005 despite being the best  W-L team of the 90s decade. President and CEO Bob Harlan faced a crossroads. How do we change the way we do business to remain competitive despite being the smallest city in the NFL?  His vision was to expand Lambeau Field to attract visitors more than just 10 days a year.

The Packers found funds to expand Lambeau in 2003 and rocketed from 27th of 31 franchises to #7 of 32.  Harlan's vision was similar to the field of dreams :  if you build it it, they will come. He built it and they have come. We have had 1.5 million visitors on tours since 2003, and there are even more events and activities I am unable to list in this format . BTW, the Packers have competed off the field for the last decade in the top 10 since.

My point is not to invest $295 million, but to have a realistic vision and act on it. And, if we build to that vision, " they will come. "

[vu84v2]

Build it and they will come, in most cases, is a horrible strategy. Would you follow that strategy if your own money was involved and you were personally bankrupt if it failed?

Lambeau Field is a unique stadium akin to Wrigley Field or Fenway Park. Having an event there (concert, Wisconsin football game, etc.,) is special. Furthermore, even if the Packers were in a dire financial situation, they had a long list of people ready to buy season tickets if they became available. That was an unrealized asset that was ready to be exploited. Thus, adding seating made perfect sense.

I am in favor of renovating the ARC, but it has to have a realistic business model associated with it.

[VULB#62]

I am a Lambeau Field  tour guide.

In 1997 the Green Bay Packers faced bankruptcy and expulsion from the NFL by 2005 despite being the best  W-L team of the 90s decade. President and CEO Bob Harlan faced a crossroads. How do we change the way we do business to remain competitive despite being the smallest city in the NFL?  His vision was to expand Lambeau Field to attract visitors more than just 10 days a year.

The Packers found funds to expand Lambeau in 2003 and rocketed from 27th of 31 franchises to #7 of 32.  Harlan's vision was similar to the field of dreams :  if you build it it, they will come. He built it and they have come. We have had 1.5 million visitors on tours since 2003, and there are even more events and activities I am unable to list in this format . BTW, the Packers have competed off the field for the last decade in the top 10 since.

My point is not to invest $295 million, but to have a realistic vision and act on it. And, if we build to that vision, " they will come. "

Build it and they will come, in most cases, is a horrible strategy. Would you follow that strategy if your own money was involved and you were personally bankrupt if it failed?

Lambeau Field is a unique stadium akin to Wrigley Field or Fenway Park. Having an event there (concert, Wisconsin football game, etc.,) is special. Furthermore, even if the Packers were in a dire financial situation, they had a long list of people ready to buy season tickets if they became available. That was an unrealized asset that was ready to be exploited. Thus, adding seating made perfect sense.

I am in favor of renovating the ARC, but it has to have a realistic business model associated with it.

Exactly what I am saying 84. Any investment has an element of risk. But by rationally scoping and properly implementing investment, the risk can be greatly minimized. At Lambeau, it is ALL about the fan experience. I see that every day.  Valpo, and the ARC, to some extent, actually is a microcosm of the Green Bay experience.  Lambeau was an out-of-date venue with little in the way of fan amenities just like the ARC  But it had a good team that held people's interest and allegiance (just like VU MBB), but GB was still going bankrupt despite a season ticket waiting list at that time that was close to six figures (it is now 130,000).  Maybe the time has come for incremental improvements at a rate somewhat faster than we have seen in the past.  Maybe such improvements could entice a couple of P5 teams into 2 for 1's that are not possible now in the ARC's current state.  Maybe the improved venue, properly presented and publicized could attract an increased local following.  Yes, there are risks in committing to physical improvements, but properly managed, those risks could turn into welcomed benefits at many levels for Valpo and Valpo basketball.  Over time what we are talking about will eventually come to pass.  My position is why not speed that process up a bit.

[elephtheria47]

"Now that we are in the premier mid-major league in the mid-west, would a 6,000 seat ARC (expanded, renovated and sponsored  -- e.g., Thrivent Arena) induce P-5 teams to possibly schedule a 2 for 1 with us?" [/size]


I don't really think the teams who do 2 for 1's really look too much at a facility when they schedule the games. They usually do it for some other reason i.e. they want to get into the area for recruiting, they have a player(s) on the team from a certain area and want to try to get them a game close to home, want to get a game in a certain facility (United Center, Bankers Life Fieldhouse) in preparation of NCAA game, etc. There are a slew of reasons to upgrade the ARC, but trying to induce 2 for 1's is not one of them.


I've been on the Lambeau Field tour twice! It's fantastic. I like the Bears and so naturally I hated the Packers. The tours were impressive and I now have to at least respect the Packers.

[VULB#62]

There is a close, positive tie between the Packers and George Halas and Bears fans are always welcome at Lambeau.

The Harlan expansion years were necessary to increase the non-football income that every team can keep 100% in order to remain competitive financially with the likes of Chicago, NY, etc.  That is not at issue at Valpo, but assuring great crowds at games and increasing the season ticket base has got to be a major priority. It is here where a speeded up series of renovations and a bit of expansion comes into play. I know I would have a harder time upping for season tickets only to sit on a wooden bleacher than if I was offered a modern chairback. And if our attendance profile increases so that a P5 makes a few more bucks for coming into a consistently packed house, the upward spiral continues for Valpo.

No doubt that this is a complicated chicken or egg situation. Everybody has a position. Mine happens to be build the chicken, dont wait for the egg to hatch.

[VU2014]

P5s & Big East schools don't particularly care about the other teams facilities. They only care about getting home games and making $. They know they can just buy home games and greatly reduce their risk of losing games and increasing their odds of making the tourney. They know there is a higher risk involved with playing at another schools arena. Also they want as a many home games as possible to generate revenue.

I love the sport of College Basketball but its so screwed up. Its the equivalent of the big market teams like the New York Knicks & LA Lakers paying the Memphis Grizzlies to get their home games because they want the competitive advantage of playing at home instead of the road (& while your at it get rid of the 'Salary Cap' and get rid of the revenue sharing in the sport so the small market teams have a great incentive to take those buy games).

The Scheduling in NCAA Men's Basketball F#$&ed up. Not only that is working against mid-majors but you also have a completely corrupt and biased NCAA Selection Committee that favors mediocre P5/BE teams over great Mid-Major Teams. The Selection Committee doesn't even strictly follow the criteria and guidelines that they set for themselves.

I don't expect P5 or BE schools to share their revenue with Mid-Majors BUT I do expect & think the NCAA SHOULD force them to play on the road more (NOT just Neutral Site Tourneys). It is healthy for the sport for when schools from other conferences play each other on the road in each others buildings!

[VUGrad1314]

There is a close, positive tie between the Packers and George Halas and Bears fans are always welcome at Lambeau. The Harlan expansion years were necessary to increase the non-football income that every team can keep 100% in order to remain competitive financially with the likes of Chicago, NY, etc.  That is not at issue at Valpo, but assuring great crowds at games and increasing the season ticket base has got to be a major priority. It is here where a speeded up series of renovations and a bit of expansion comes into play. I know I would have a harder time upping for season tickets only to sit on a wooden bleacher than if I was offered a modern chairback. And if our attendance profile increases so that a P5 makes a few more bucks for coming into a consistently packed house, the upward spiral continues for Valpo. No doubt that this is a complicated chicken or egg situation. Everybody has a position. Mine happens to be build the chicken, dont wait for the egg to hatch.

I think the higher profile of our new home conference and the teams therein as well as shifting to a schedule with more Saturday home games is a very positive first step toward driving attendance upward then add the presence of Hazen McMillan and Fazekas as local recruits from the area and that should further drive people to come to games. Let's also remember that the MVC as a brand should lead us to opportunities for better home games in subsequent years as well as better MTEs\Tournaments to give the program more broadcast time  Valpo seems to be making the right moves to strengthen their athletic profile and lay the foundation for expansion and upgrade of facilities. It goes without saying that Valpo needs to continue to win and  recruit well, locally if possible but of course priority #1 is getting the best possible players. I firmly believe that the University will hold up its end of the bargain in these areas. It's up to us as a community and a fanbase to show up and lend our support both vocally and financially to these plans and help bring them to fruition.

[vu84v2]

There is a close, positive tie between the Packers and George Halas and Bears fans are always welcome at Lambeau.

The Harlan expansion years were necessary to increase the non-football income that every team can keep 100% in order to remain competitive financially with the likes of Chicago, NY, etc.  That is not at issue at Valpo, but assuring great crowds at games and increasing the season ticket base has got to be a major priority. It is here where a speeded up series of renovations and a bit of expansion comes into play. I know I would have a harder time upping for season tickets only to sit on a wooden bleacher than if I was offered a modern chairback. And if our attendance profile increases so that a P5 makes a few more bucks for coming into a consistently packed house, the upward spiral continues for Valpo.

No doubt that this is a complicated chicken or egg situation. Everybody has a position. Mine happens to be build the chicken, dont wait for the egg to hatch.

I would propose an alternative idea, though I do think that such an idea should be advanced quickly. This is based on what a similar school (Miami of Ohio) did in regards to basketball attendance. I cannot find the study online, but I think I remember it pretty well.

Miami surveyed regular attendees, occasional attendees and non-attendees and focused on two groups (students/college age and older). They asked questions regarding what was important to them for attendance: quality of opponent, quality of team, promotions, type and loudness of music, etc. While there were differences between the age groups, the main driver was quality of the team and quality of the opponents. Students valued promotions more, while older people wanted piped in music lessened or eliminated - but these issues were secondary.

Valparaiso might be different, so I would recommend doing a similar study using a statistically valid mix of regular attendees, occasional attendees and non-attendees from the university and within 25 miles of Valparaiso. Take some money and partner with the marketing department in the business school to have a student lead project (for credit) overseen by a faculty member and the athletic department. Use the results to help guide investment decisions. My guess is that the quality of the opponent coupled with the quality of the Valpo team is what drives occasional attendees and potential new attendees to go to a game and that the quality of the seating and arena is secondary. But I might be wrong. Use sound analysis to help make good investment decisions. Someone might say "oh geez, not another study - this is paralysis by analysis...let's just do it". But the cost of getting it wrong and wasting investment is too high. A study like this, if prioritized, could be done in six months.

[VULB#62]

Obviously, a study of this nature would be very helpful.  Part of the rationale for it is that most of us are arguing from a lack-of-hard-facts perspective and, like me, bring their own prejudices.  Any study of this type needs to seek the answers to, in my opinion, two main themes: (1) How do we increase student attendance at all games so that the Valparaizone is always filled; and (2) How do we increase season ticket sales so that the base attendance for all games increases as well.

Well-constructed surveys and the subsequent analyses and conclusions would be invaluable and would put a lot of conjecture to rest

[NativeCheesehead]

Has Valpo ever considered some kind of reward system for student attendance? I know this is done at other schools. For example, students scan their ID, use an app to check in, etc to any on campus event, earning points. At the end of the year, or semester, the points can be used for a variety of things (Book store gift certificates, prizes, whatever). Or in some cases I've seen points used at entries to raffle off a full or partial semester scholarship. While I'm sure this could lead to some students just checking in and leaving, I could see this drawing attention to all the sports that play on campus.

I'm sure all of us who attended Vu have stories about dragging an unwitting friend to see a basketball game who then became a fan later on.

[VULB#62]

I think I remember Valpo doing something like that a few years ago.

[bigmosmithfan1]

Expanding to 6,000-ish would absolutely help get better opponents. Yes, midmajors struggle to get good games no matter what, but there is also a financial component involved that having 1,000 fewer seats (most of them being bleacher seats that limit your price ceiling) undoubtedly hinders.

Expansion and better amenities could also help fill the void opened up by the closure of the Star Plaza for the ARC to become the top concert/event venue for NWI (which in addition to financially boosting the university and athletic dept., would benefit the east Lincolnway corridor as well).

[VU2014]

Has Valpo ever considered some kind of reward system for student attendance? I know this is done at other schools. For example, students scan their ID, use an app to check in, etc to any on campus event, earning points. At the end of the year, or semester, the points can be used for a variety of things (Book store gift certificates, prizes, whatever). Or in some cases I've seen points used at entries to raffle off a full or partial semester scholarship. While I'm sure this could lead to some students just checking in and leaving, I could see this drawing attention to all the sports that play on campus.

I'm sure all of us who attended Vu have stories about dragging an unwitting friend to see a basketball game who then became a fan later on.

I don't think we need a larger facility that has more capacity, but we could use a facility with 21st century amenities with a much more fan friendly parking situation.

If I were in charge of the marketing/advertising department I would try to be pushing the "Northwest Indiana's College Basketball Team". Put it on the court and in the advertising. The challenge is that our name is "Valparaiso" which other region towns may look and say well thats not my town (team). They need market the Team as "The Regions" Team.

High School Basketball is huge in Indiana. Have the University work with the High Schools Teams and start hosting a "Game of the Week" at the ARC between two High School teams to get fans that don't come to the ARC into the doors. Or even host the Conference Title game or Sectionals or something. Then offer a deal to the parents like half off to family's to get them to come back to one of the College games. But if they were to do any of that they'd NEED to address the parking situation and it would be a nice way to show off the ARC if they ever did renovate.

I'd just like to see some sort of plan or fundraising goal from the University and make it public, even if the goal is for 5-10 years down the line.

[VUGrad1314]

Absolutely fantastic proposal VU2014. I think this coupled with a seating expansion would be a great move if it's feasible.

[VULB#62]

I believe the NCAA rules prohibit that. Someone check me on that.

[bbtds]

I believe the NCAA rules prohibit that. Someone check me on that.

You are correct. It's the reason the Region Roundball Rumble is no longer held at VU.

Matt Kenney's Mooresville Pioneers played at the ARC in the RRR in 2009 against Munster.

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/basketball-fans-teams-travel-for-region-roundball-rumble/article_3abeb9b7-b9a5-53a1-a7b6-5cedf3a0214f.html

[VU2014]

I believe the NCAA rules prohibit that. Someone check me on that.

In the State of Illinois they host the State Championships down in Champaign for Football and for basketball they host the games at the Bradley's Arena Peoria Civic Center. I'm not sure if they get away with it because the Civic Center may be leased by Bradley from the City.

If its not against the rules then I don't think it would be a bad idea to just get familiarity and foot-track. It would be great for the High School Athletes to play a game in a Colligate Arena.

[VULB#62]

And for that reason the NCAA prohibits it --- unfair recruiting advantage for the host college.

[VUGrad1314]

But I remember the ARC has hosted professional wrestling. Maybe turning it into a performance space like VU2014 suggested could still work and help bring in money to fund renovations and upgrades and add significantly to the Athletic Department coffers.

The fact that U of I is able to do that is based on a technicality like that if true downright shady. Those kids know where their playing and the team logo is everywhere. I don't understand why we couldn't make it so coaches from interested schools could come in and watch the event and maybe even speak to prospective recruits. Seems like more inconsistency and hypocrisy from the NCAA. Imagine my surprise.

[FieldGoodie05]

Expanding to 6,000-ish would absolutely help get better opponents. Yes, midmajors struggle to get good games no matter what, but there is also a financial component involved that having 1,000 fewer seats (most of them being bleacher seats that limit your price ceiling) undoubtedly hinders.

Expansion and better amenities could also help fill the void opened up by the closure of the Star Plaza for the ARC to become the top concert/event venue for NWI (which in addition to financially boosting the university and athletic dept., would benefit the east Lincolnway corridor as well).

Chicken or the egg argument regarding seat expansion.  We don't even sell out now? 

Flat out, do we really think 1,000 more seats means anything to P6 teams looking for a road game?  I firmly believe there is nothing in it for the P6 to EVER travel to a low RPI conference teams court.  This is what makes the MVC enticing if we can poach a few more RPI 100s to fill out the league.

P6 schedule far in advance of knowing how the season will play out, just as we do.  It's a significantly better risk/reward scenario if the road game they schedule is in a quality MVC where member schools don't have RPI pot holes to avoid.

There is a tiny chance of ever getting a Butler level RPI into the Arc on a regular basis, fact.  But if we can get Rhode Island level games at the Arc 1x per our recruits 4-years at VU....slam dunk!

That's more of my short term goal for the team.  Homer Drew used to like scheduling Top 10 teams enough such that each class had a moment in the sun against a national powerhouse.  If we can only transition that to a Top 30 team @ the Arc once every 3-4 years....I count that as a solid step forward.  Thoughts?