DeCourcy: St. Joe's Renovations

[LutherRackleyRulez]

Per Mike DeCourcy/SportingNews.com



http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=545794

[Muskie]

I'm glad St. Joe's stepped up their commitment to basketball.

[JAPER]

Saint Joseph's deserves this upgrade and more. By far, my 2nd favorite team in the league.

[Strange Brew]

Saint Joseph's deserves this upgrade and more. By far, my 2nd favorite team in the league.

Agree, love Phil and his dry joke about Stan a few years ago. They run a good program and they definately take years of my life when we play them. Especially during the Pat Colathes years. Come to think of it, I still loathe the day Delonte(sp?) West shot like Prince on Chappelle's Show against us.

[xufan02]

I really like St. Joes too, but I hate that damn mascot.

[muskienick]

The Hawks now have the most luxurious high school sized gym among D-1 college programs in the nation.

Only in the A-10!

[DC Muskie]

I think it's great. SJU knows it's supporters better then anyone else. These renovations are a great improvement to their program.

Congrats!

[Muskie1000]

I really like St. Joes too, but I hate that damn mascot.

What garbage bag mascots don't do it for you?

[bleedXblue]

whats the capacity of the gym ?

did they add any seats ?

[xsteve1]

whats the capacity of the gym ?

did they add any seats ?

I think the capacity is between 4,000-4,500. Still way too small. I guess it's like putting lipstick on a pig.

[DC Muskie]

I think the capacity is between 4,000-4,500. Still way too small. I guess it's like putting lipstick on a pig.

Way too small for what?

You really don't understand that SJU is not going to build a 10,000 seat arena and not fill it. Instead they will fill this one out, it wil continue to be one of the loudest places we play in. Let's say for fun that they could build a 10,000 seat arena. Where exactly do they put it?

I still don't understand the equation that 10,000 seats somehow means you have a great basketball program.

[xsteve1]

Way too small for what?

You really don't understand that SJU is not going to build a 10,000 seat arena and not fill it. Instead they will fill this one out, it wil continue to be one of the loudest places we play in. Let's say for fun that they could build a 10,000 seat arena. Where exactly do they put it?

I still don't understand the equation that 10,000 seats somehow means you have a great basketball program.

I don't think top recruits want to play in a gym thats seats 4,000 people. It may be great for SJU but they still won't be able to recruit the kind of kids Xavier or even Dayton get.

[dc_x]

I don't think top recruits want to play in a gym thats seats 4,000 people. It may be great for SJU but they still won't be able to recruit the kind of kids Xavier or even Dayton get.

They have the advantage of being in Philly. And they now have arguably the nicest arena of any of the Philly schools.

No private university located in a major east coast city is ever going to build a 10,000 seat, on-campus, state-of-the art arena...it's too expensive.

[DC Muskie]

I don't think top recruits want to play in a gym thats seats 4,000 people. It may be great for SJU but they still won't be able to recruit the kind of kids Xavier or even Dayton get.

They have two guys that play in the NBA and one was an All Star this year. That's more players in the NBA then Dayton...that's the same amount of NBA All stars as Xavier.

They had the A-10 player of the year this season.

All of that happened with an arena that seats fewer then 4,000.

Like I said, I really don't understand how 10,000 seat arenas eqautes to a successful basketball program.

[muskienick]

I think it's great. SJU knows it's supporters better then anyone else. These renovations are a great improvement to their program.

Congrats!

And yet when they have games scheduled elsewhere in Philly, they average over 6,000 per game. From what I've read, their renovated Alumni will still hold only 4,000 fans. I don't think that's knowing "its supporters better than anyone else." I think it's........well, as someone else so aptly put it, "putting lipstick on a pig."

[DC Muskie]

And yet when they have games scheduled elsewhere in Philly, they average over 6,000 per game. From what I've read, their renovated Alumni will still hold only 4,000 fans. I don't think that's knowing "its supporters better than anyone else." I think it's........well, as someone else so aptly put it, "putting lipstick on a pig."

Those games were played at the Palestra where they shared seating revenue with Penn.

If they could build a 10,000 seat arena, where would they put it?

If they could build a 6,000 seat arena, where would they put it?

I really find it funny that a successful program, one that makes trips to the dance, and sends players to the NBA is considered a "pig" simply because they renovated their historic arena.

[xu95]

DC, Nick has always been under the impression that the larger your arena the better you are. He has posted ad nausem about how small the arenas in the A10 are. St. Louis has a nice huge facility and they are still shitty, so I don't really understand the correlation.

xu95

[Muskie]

Those games were played at the Palestra where they shared seating revenue with Penn.

If they could build a 10,000 seat arena, where would they put it?

If they could build a 6,000 seat arena, where would they put it?

I really find it funny that a successful program, one that makes trips to the dance, and sends players to the NBA is considered a "pig" simply because they renovated their historic arena.

Concur. This addition makes St. Joe's a player in the Philly recruiting game. Sometimes we get so pretentious. Why can't we be happy that someone stepped up and INVESTED in their program (which is investing in the A-10).

[DC Muskie]

I was at the last game at Hawk Hill. I'm going to try to go to the first game at Hagan Arena. I do know this...both of those games will be rocking.

[Juice]

Concur. This addition makes St. Joe's a player in the Philly recruiting game. Sometimes we get so pretentious. Why can't we be happy that someone stepped up and INVESTED in their program (which is investing in the A-10).

Agreed. A strong St. Joes = a strong A-10. Dayton and Umass cannot be relied on, and therefore I think St. Joes is the best hope of challenging X year in year out. Add Temple into that equation. St. Joes is also one of my favorite teams, when X isn't playing them of course.

[muskienick]

The point that seems to have been missed by some here is that St. Joe's has proven that it has the ability to consistently draw 6,000 to 7,000 at games played elsewhere in Philly. If the Hawk brass were going to invest $30+ million, why not try to make it possible for their rabid fan base to see their games on your own home court? If they can draw those numbers at the Palestra, why would anybody think they can't draw them at an expanded (6,000 - 7,000) version of Alumni Gym, sell seat licenses, and not have to share ticket proceeds with Penn?

If somebody like DC Muskie or xu95 can find any post that I have ever written that bemoaned the fact that St. Joe's hasn't built, and doesn't plan to build, a 10,000 seat arena, please feel free to give us all a link to it.

Furthermore, xu95 has once again attempted to put words into another poster's mouth. I have never claimed that the size (seating capacity) of a D-1 men's basketball program has a direct affect on that team's on-court success. What I have always felt and said is that the Xavier way of doing things is not a pattern to disregard. If a school commits time, money, and energy to its men's basketball program as Xavier did in the late 70's, then continue to build on that progress in a reasonable fashion. It's not like the Muskies broke ground on the Cintas in 1979. We continued in Schmidt until our arses were being squeezed tightly together by the growing crowds. We then spent roughly 18-20 years at the Cincinnati Gardens getting better and better. Only then was Cintas possible and weve had two Elite Eights and a Sweet Sixteen during the short Cintas Era.

St. Louis, although not enjoying the same on-court success as Xavier, has taken a similar road. With the hiring of Rick Majerus a few years ago, there is little doubt that the Bills will be a significant player in the A-10 for the foreseeable future. But it is not just because of their beautiful, new, on-campus Chaifetz Arena. It's the overall commitment of the University to its men's basketball program.

Probably xu95 or DC Muskie can point out a myriad of D-1 programs that have been consistently ultra successful while playing their games in a glorified high school gym. The fact is that I can't think of even one. And the reason they are what they are isn't because of their gym. That is just an overt symptom of the problem. The reason is the overall mediocre commitment to their D-1 men's basketball programs by the Administrations of those universities. Recruiting budgets, travel amenities, coaching salaries (both head and assistants), support staff, practice facilities, weight room and training programs, etc., etc., etc. are every bit as important as the facility in which the programs play their home schedule.

I applaud St. Joe's for this improvement. Perhaps it will be better able to compete with the likes of Villanova for recruits, TV and radio contracts, and the sports entertainment dollar in Philly. If so, that would be good for them, Xavier, and the A-10 in general.

[Masterofreality]

They have the advantage of being in Philly. And they now have arguably the nicest arena of any of the Philly schools.


You have obviously forgotten about Temple.

Nicest arena on campus in Philly. They just can't fill it, though.

St. Joes has the disadvantage of being in a predominately residential neighborhood around Bala Cynwyd with very little land to work with. I'm sure that the neighbors around would have protested big time if the Hawks tried to do something bigger. There is no place to park, other than on the street, around Hawk Hill now.

St. Joes did the best they could do with the availability they had. At least they made an investment and didn't settle for playing in Stonehenge, like Fordham, or in Tom Gola's Garage, like Lossalle.

[dc_x]

The point that seems to have been missed by some here is that St. Joe's has proven that it has the ability to consistently draw 6,000 to 7,000 at games played elsewhere in Philly. If the Hawk brass were going to invest $30+ million, why not try to make it possible for their rabid fan base to see their games on your own home court? If they can draw those numbers at the Palestra, why would anybody think they can't draw them at an expanded (6,000 - 7,000) version of Alumni Gym, sell seat licenses, and not have to share ticket proceeds with Penn?

Because adding 2-3k seats can't be done for $30m. You are talking about a $100m+ project.


Probably xu95 or DC Muskie can point out a myriad of D-1 programs that have been consistently ultra successful while playing their games in a glorified high school gym. The fact is that I can't think of even one.

Villanova

[DC Muskie]

Nick-

You seem to want to paint a broad brush with everyone. The Palestra is a storied arena that seats more people, is easily accessible by the train system, but has about 100 times less atmosphere then Hawk Hill. There is a Big Five round robin play with the schools in Philly, something neither Cincinnati or St. Louis has. As MOR stated, there is absolutley no place to build a arena that doubles the size of their current basketball home while trying to improve everything you mentioned for a program to be successful.

I tend to think the people who are running SJU have a little more hand on the pulse of their porgram and what it takes to be successful, then someone, and correct me if I'm wrong here, has never even been to Hawk Hill.

I can give you a ton of schools that play in amazing buildings and never produce squat. St. John's comes to mind. They play in the most famous arena in the world and they are awful. The schools of MVC have solid programs, but none of them have had the overall success that SJU has had in the last ten to 15 years. There are plenty of schools in the bigger conferences who wish they had SJU success.

Basically it comes down to this. Xavier is an overacheiver. No one has it like we do. And to expect another school to at least double the size of their arena because they played at the Palestra is a little too much.

GW is another example. People just expect them to build something better and they are working on renovating that place. But GW is a glorified boarding school, to use high school analogies.

[muskienick]

Because adding 2-3k seats can't be done for $30m. You are talking about a $100m+ project.



Villanova

Villanova's Pavilion has a seating capacity for basketball of 6,500 and does not look anything like a high school gym. The last time I sat down with my calculator, I noticed that 6,500 was smack dab in the middle of 6,000 and 7,000 (the number of fans that St. Joe's typically averages when it plays its home games away from Alumni).

Considering the Cintas Center cost a grand total of $46 million to build just 9-10 years ago (and the construction industry isn't exactly charging all-time high rates now), it is difficult to imagine that something couldn't have been done with the $30+ million they spent to increase Alumni by another 2-3,000 seats while still creating some of the amenities they now have. Of course, if you multiply the price of a single ticket (~$25) by about 3,300 (the difference between the old capacity, 3,200, and 6,500) and then multiply that times the number of home games each year, that comes out to over $1,250,000 extra in annual revenue. That's without seat licenses figured in! And they wouldn't feel like they had to schedule some of their games at the Palestra any more like they did in years prior to last season (when Alumni was under renovation). That would save even more money.

[DC Muskie]

Nick they play Big Five games in the Palestra. And Villanova's gym could easily be seen as a glorified high school gym. Have you ever been inside the place?

Ten years ago in Cincinnati Ohio where you have a lot of land and have the support you could build a 10,000 seat arena.

Ten years later in Philadelphia where you have no land, less support, you renovate what you have and keep winning.

I'm not sure why that is so hard to understand.

[muskienick]

DC Muskie,

It's not about the ability to understand. It's about people having differences in opinions. Each of us believe ours are always the right opinions. I will never convince you that obstacles could be overcome to make what I believe on this topic to be possible and you will have no more success convincing me that you know it all on this issue.

I guess that's what makes the world (and this chatboard) so interesting.

[DC Muskie]

Nick-

Please explain to me what obstacles SJU has and how do you propose them solving it.

I'm looking for details here, not just a general response of "they should spend $30 million and double the seating capacity for the arena."

Thanks.

[muskienick]

Obstacles such as the claim that people living in the surrounding area would object to the increased traffic and parking. There are 11 general parking areas in easy walking distance to Alumni and that doesn't include on-street parking that might exist in the area.

Obstacles such as the claim that space is limited (assuming that objectors to my opinion consider only a replacement of Alumni Gym using a larger footprint as the only possibility rather than the concept of building up and out from the current structure).

Obstacles such as the claim that it would cost $100,000,000 to bring the capacity of Alumni Gym to 6,500 just doesn't ring true to me.

We are talking about Jesuits being in the mix here. They are problem solvers and expert at wheedling money from our pockets and bank accounts. Many of them (at least the Xavier wing of the Jebbies) are also adept at seeing the long term financial benefits of investing in the main money-making sport at their institutions as an enhancement to the entire University Community.

What St. Joe's has done is a definite improvement. I just wish the powers that be could have found a way to do more for their loyal fan base of over 2x the capacity of the pre-renovated Alumni Gym!

[DC Muskie]

Obstacles such as the claim that people living in the surrounding area would object to the increased traffic and parking. There are 11 general parking areas in easy walking distance to Alumni and that doesn't include on-street parking that might exist in the area.

The area that SJU is in is actually pretty upscale. I think objections to increase traffic and parking would be a great concern. They ran the only bar in that area out. On-street parking is already crowded, and I'm not sure where you came up with 11 parking areas.


Obstacles such as the claim that space is limited (assuming that objectors to my opinion consider only a replacement of Alumni Gym using a larger footprint as the only possibility rather than the concept of building up and out from the current structure)

Alumni sits on the corner of their campus. The only logical place for them to put an expanded area would be in the center where the current field sits. I'm sure SJU officials decided that the only open green space on campus was too important to sacrifice.


Obstacles such as the claim that it would cost $100,000,000 to bring the capacity of Alumni Gym to 6,500 just doesn't ring true to me.

I'm not in the commerical development business, but I do know changing the entire set up to double the seating capacity would be a heck of a lot more then $30 million in that city at this time.


We are talking about Jesuits being in the mix here. They are problem solvers and expert at wheedling money from our pockets and bank accounts. Many of them (at least the Xavier wing of the Jebbies) are also adept at seeing the long term financial benefits of investing in the main money-making sport at their institutions as an enhancement to the entire University Community.

I can tell you not all Jesuits are created equal. I worked at Loyola in Baltimore for a year and it amazed me how in that city they didn't put more money or commitment into their basketball program. Then I understood having worked in the development office. Georgetown and Boston College fundraise completely different then SJU and Xavier, or even Creighton and SLU. They are just different schools, and the people who are in charge have different motivations.

[xudash]

There is something to be said for critical mass when it comes to attendance.

Can a program accomplish a solid fan base and following with its facilities strategy? That answer does seem to be more complicated for eastern teams, given the pro-sports orientation of big city populations, a general lack of space/land, and construction costs.

Did St. Joe's "get it right"? I can see why some of us are disenchanted with their renovation. But it is true that they don't have the land, community support, or the money to go bigger on campus.

So Villanova augments its crappy on campus metal tent with the pro arena downtown and, thanks to a well run program, solid coach, its BE affilition, etc., blends itself up some nice attendance figures annually.

St. Joe's simply does that on a lessor scale, using the Palestra.

Can a program accomplish what it wants to accomplish with its facilities strategy? The answer is unique to every program. St. Joe's probably got it right for St. Joe's, if you believe many of its fans comments about what the Fieldhouse is about and the other obstacles they encountered as described above.

Yet Nick still makes a fundamentally sound point. My first cut at this stuff is the business side of it, because it has become a business, period, end of story. You have to get it right in that vein or you'll not be capable of putting a product on the floor that will get you the fans and atmosphere you need, regardless of what the building looks like.

The Cintas Center was built with an eye towards revenue streams. By the time the vision was fully fleshed out and sold to those that made it happen, it is obvious that it had grown to something resembling a mini-NBA arena; it was not about putting up a swank, cozy place. Forbes has us at 17, up from 20 in their program valuation rankings for good reason.

So I could care less if the St. Joe's faithful are ecstatic that they have a renovated house of horrors with 4k screaming lunatics helping to bring home victories on Hawk Hill. What I care about is Martelli's ability to recruit at a level that keeps them competitive and relevant. If the renovation, school, coach, recruiting area, et al lead to Phil's ability to continue to recruit at a high level, so be it. I just sense that they are at a financial disadvantage as compared to Xavier. They'll have less margin for error. They haven't configured themselves with sufficient critical mass in fan base to generate the financial impact that Xavier generates.

[X-band '01]

I went to the Palestra when Xavier played the Hawks during the last season - it appears that 6-7K would be their optimal range as far as a fanbase goes, but I can understand why logistics would limit them to the 4000-5000 range instead.

I just hope they're not eventually headed in the same direction as the recent La Salle teams.

[Emp]

What I care about is Martelli's ability to recruit at a level that keeps them competitive and relevant. If the renovation, school, coach, recruiting area, et al lead to Phil's ability to continue to recruit at a high level, so be it. I just sense that they are at a financial disadvantage as compared to Xavier. They'll have less margin for error. They haven't configured themselves with sufficient critical mass in fan base to generate the financial impact that Xavier generates.

Business models aside, St Joe has one configuration in place that we don't: a coach that will be there for the full ride. No player who goes to St Joe is going to be worried about him leaving.

Cannot be said about Xavier at this point, and I doubt if it ever will. Mack will be the closest thing to us ever having a coach in that long term categorie, but unless he is one hell of a better floor coach than Matta or Miller and can do more with less (its clear for now he does not have 3star recruiting chops). Mack won't get ten years here with expectations so high, unless we get another Elite 8 in the next four years.

10,250 crowds will be a thing of the past as early as Feb 2010 if we aren't winning next season and the economy continues to sap discretionary income. Then what advantage Xavier? Bringing a recruit into a half empty arena is not an advantage over bringing a recruit into a hotbed full of manic Hawks.

[Cheesehead]

It seems like a lot of money when one considers the Cintas Center was built for approx. 46 million. The before and after look almost the same to me. I'm glad they are doing it but I'm not hiring their contractor.

[PMI]

Business models aside, St Joe has one configuration in place that we don't: a coach that will be there for the full ride. No player who goes to St Joe is going to be worried about him leaving.

Cannot be said about Xavier at this point, and I doubt if it ever will. Mack will be the closest thing to us ever having a coach in that long term categorie, but unless he is one hell of a better floor coach than Matta or Miller and can do more with less (its clear for now he does not have 3star recruiting chops). Mack won't get ten years here with expectations so high, unless we get another Elite 8 in the next four years.

10,250 crowds will be a thing of the past as early as Feb 2010 if we aren't winning next season and the economy continues to sap discretionary income. Then what advantage Xavier? Bringing a recruit into a half empty arena is not an advantage over bringing a recruit into a hotbed full of manic Hawks.

Easy Chicken Little. Let Mack coach a game before we start worrying about the length of his tenure. How did you feel about Prosser's chances of succeeding Gillen? Matta for Prosser? Miller for Matta (especially?) I don't think one half a year of "not winning" (which I assume you mean is a rocky OOC and early conference start up to Feb at worst?) will lead to a significant reduction in attendance and I certainly don't see us reaching the point by February of next season to where we can't compete with St. Joes for recruits. Plus, there are plenty of coaches who are clearly in for the long-haul. That doesn't really mean a thing compared to program prestige and tournament appearances/success to most kids, at least not the kind we want to recruit. This is an unreasonably overboard fear.

[Emp]

Ive been (labeled) a "pollyanna" enough to find the chicken little sobriquet a refreshing change of pace, VMI.

I'm not predicting that outcome, but it's a scenario that one cannot ignore, being .500 in early Feb. The economic scenario is even more likely, whatever our record.

I felt very confident that Miller was going to succeed at taking us to another level. It's intangible, I admit, and very personal, but Miller gave me a sense of high intelligence, focus, and coaching ability. I had no idea he was going to be able to recruit better athletes, I admit that. Since you asked, I did not have that confidence in Skip or in Thad as they took the reins. So much for my reads.

Here is the downside to Miller's recruiting success: expectations are very very high now for us to make a Final Four, and be contending on a regular basis. And not in some generational future, but NOW, with these players, or the immediate next round of recruits. Not just on this board, among the intensely interested, but among the more casual fans who purchase tickets at Cintas.

My opinion aside, the fact is that Mack has lost all three highly ranked recruits. They all came in and saw the Tas rockin. We must assume that they were impressed. They also got to meet Mack as the Assistant Head Coach, and at some level must have sensed that he would be the new coach if Miller left. The arena remains, yet they de-committed. I'm not sure that the Cintas is as important a recruiting tool as we want to give it credit for.

[xsteve1]

Does anybody have pics of what the renovated fieldhouse looks like? I cant find any on their SJU website.