Arena project has begun!

[bonwich]

As reported on this board earlier this week, it is in fact true that the demolition of the Waring School is in progress.

I thought you all might like to know that, because it's ABUNDANTLY clear that many of you are not "in the know." Unfortunately, it's also ABUNDANTLY clear that the University continues to be unable to communicate even the most basic facts. (For example -- go to the arena website and look at the "timeline of progress" for the following "TBD: Groundbreaking ceremony.")

The very fact that the members of this board, representing at least a large subset of the most passionate of Billiken fans, aren't "in the know" is illustrative of continuing fundamental flaws at the University. The athletic dept. certainly knows about this board -- how hard would it be for someone to pop on every now and then and provide updates?

But that's just our little gang. That arena website was a major project, and yet the U. -- the athletic dept., the main campus p.r. people, the development folks, whoever -- can't even manage to ensure that it works or that it's current. There's no accountability. We know for a fact that Doug Woolard knows that there's a development contact point listed for Don Whelan that isn't being attended to. If there were a commitment to excellence, that would have been changed by now -- no finger pointing, no "it's not my job" -- it would just be fixed.

And then we have a few on this board who appear to pose at least as semi-"insiders" and defend such poor performance with the "you don't know the details" or "they're working so hard" or other excuses. And while it's true that I'm no longer an "insider," I did work out of the SID's office for two years that I was at the U., and I did have a daily relationship with someone who was on the athletic council for several years during the Yow administration. And from this background I say: SSDD. We can harp all we want about need for additional funding and it'll be better with the new arena and all that, but the fact remains that lots of the problems we're bringing up can be solved simply by eliminating the cross-departmental political horsepoop that allows no accountability for the problems, and by demanding a standard of performance that we've yet to see.

Take the Savvis situation, for example. The good Father Larry proved himself quite capable of exercising moral suasion upon the Savvis Center owners when he went public several years ago about his perception that SLU was being shafted on dates. I don't know which entrance he comes in, but I'd bet he's seen the same appalling service at the turnstyles that Bart cited (and which ticks me off every time I see it). Step 1 would be politely but firmly approaching Savvis management about the problem; step 2 would be issuing a public statement demanding better (and a private invitation to, say, Cusumano to have a camera peeking through the window to document the crappy service). But the attitude "It's Savvis' fault" is yet another instance of passing the buck and not fixing the problem.

Finally, we can certainly wait to rely on "winning" to put butts in seats. Or we could also, for example, raid the athletic department up in Peoria, where Bradley somehow is managing to average 9,154 for a team with a 10-14 record. Hey, maybe we have -- I'm not "in the know."

[AlumniFan]

Do you want to know why the Athletic Department doesn't post on this web site? Look at your own post.

[bonwich]

Oooh, oooh, oooh, I pointed out flaws, so I'm a "jerk." Don't rock the boat, babe. Don't question authority. I have to guess from your handle that you graduated from our fine institution, as well. You have learned well, grasshopper.

And, by the way, don't address any of the substantive issues I raised. Just call me a name, from behind the convenience of your anonymous handle.

[kshoe]

mean a ground breaking has happenend. If SLU doesn't raise an additional dollar for the arena and the arena is scrapped that school was coming down regardless.

You clearly have a vendetta against the current athletic department and your posts are boorish.

[Billikan]

I have known for months a lot of the details about the arena but I learned them in private meetings so I did not feel comfortable giving out the details. Suffice it to say that the project is moving forward.

Your post makes you look lika a disgruntled former employee of the athletic dept. You may have legitimate issues regarding your service there but I think the people on this board are more interested in talking basketball and not your personal travails.

[kshoe]

what bringing up Biondi from 5 years ago and the Savvis? Thats substance? Or saying Bradley has decent attendance? Thats substance?

You strike me as one of those people that blames everyone else but himself when things go wrong. You blamed the athletic department a while back because you didn't know there was a bus to SMS. Yet, they made an announcement at the game, it was posted on this board and mentioned at Billiken Club meetings. Did you want Woolard to personally call and invite you? Take some personal responsibility.

[bonwich]

I misinterpreted the "announcement" ceremony for "groundbreaking." For this, I apologize. I'll address the other stuff above.

[bonwich]

Yeah, quite a bit. For example: Bart complained about the poor service we get at Savvis. I suggested a way to improve it. It wasn't a slam on anybody specific -- and, in fact, it could be interpreted as a compliment to the Rev. Biondi's abilities at getting things done when he needs to.

Do you, kshoe, believe that the event management at Savvis -- whether it be the part SLU is responsible for or the part Savvis is responsible for -- is, or has been in the past five years, "good"? I don't.

Then there's the whole NYBill raising awareness/funds issue. Again, I didn't say that any one person was specifically wrong. But again -- do you, kshoe, believe that posting a person as an e-mail contact point for such events, and then not getting a response from such a query, reflects a high standard? Again, I don't.

As for the SMS bus, the point was made on this board that attendance was minimal. My return point was that I hadn't heard about the bus trip, and I made that point because I do tend to pay attention to the mailings and other communications I get from the Athletic Department. Do you think that such trips should be publicized to all season-ticket holders, since they create the most likely pool of attendees for such a trip? Do you think it was adequately publicized? (I can't tell you for sure whether it was announced at a game. If you say so, I believe you. but I also believe that the athletic department relied to heavily on the "Billiken Club" connection, whereas the Billiken Club represents only a fraction of the potential audience.

Finally, let me clarify the bit about working in the SID's office. That was when I was a *student*, and it was all volunteer, because a group of us concerned about the dismal attendance at that time approached Dick O'Connor and tried to formulate some ideas on what to do about it. The only other contact I've had regarding athletics was when my company did the institutional advertising for SLU right after the Rev. Biondi took over -- and subsequently, I approached the head of U communications with a spec idea for a billboard campaign during the Highmark/Claggett heyday. But that's a long time ago -- before Doug Woolard, I believe, but I never had any contact with him anyway, nor have I since, nor with anyone else in the department.

If asking for better (and, I believe, submitting specific suggestions) is a "vendetta," then you may say I have a vendetta. (Where the heck is B-Roy today, anyway?) And if the athletic department doesn't post out here because there are frequent criticisms of its work, I'd point to the example of someone else I've never met -- my colleague Stu Durando, who endured any number of scathing criticisms before gaining the respect of the board through the improved coverage of the team.

"Boorish"? I bet lots of our "fans" would describe the way board posters behave at games with the same word.

[jjray]

Bonwich, I have no problems with your post. SLU as an institution (as headed by Don Rev. Biondi) can have vision and make all the right decision on the large issues facing its athletic program (i.e., whether to seek admission to the A10 / whether to build an on-campus arena, etc.); however, the details can eat you alive. You have made some valid points about dropped balls by the development office / athletic department. The athletic people sound like they at least listen to the complaints of the faithful. The gaffs by the development office are troubling and persistent. As SLU continues to raise large amounts of $$$s for building projects, I can only surmise that they are focused upon the big dollar people who don't need email to get in touch with little attention upon the modest wallet guys like those of us who write on this board. That's a mistake.

[willie]

I think Bonwich makes a lot of good points. Our game management is not good. Where are our game promotions? Where is the Cingular billiken bobblehead doll? Where are the free tee shirts? Where are the $10 off pasta house coupons? Where are the buy 1 get 1 free game tickets? Where are the Brad S hair doo contests? You get a good promotion like the Big Shark promo and they can't find a ball? Everybody on this board goes crazy over Guy Philips{who I like} but ignores everything else. Enduring a malfunctioning clock for more than 1 game is ridiculous. What happened to tourning off the lights trying to generate some excitement. I like Woolard but I think he has gone stale. I think a new AD, and a new SID would probably be a good thing. As far as the developement office I believe there has been a lot of changes since McGannon died,but there is no excuse for ignoring an inquiry.

[bonwich]

a beer at an upcoming game, or would he find me too boorish?

I want to reiterate something I said in an earlier post, regarding the development office. I interviewed with Don Whelan last year (well, maybe two years ago). He's a terrific guy. And the development office is certainly on the hot seat right now, not just for the Arena project, but also for the several hundred other million dollars they're expected to raise.

All the more reason that the lack of response to an e-mail query is so baffling. Sure, it's more than likely that Don's inbox is jam-packed every morning, so he might miss something like NYBill's inquiry. In that case, as I suggested before, they ought to set up an alias -- how 'bout "arenagiving @slu.edu"? -- such that they assure that the inbox gets swept on a regular basis.

[AlumniFan]

My name is Brett Rufkahr. I graduated from the business school in 1986 and returned to get my MBA, graduating in 1992. I have lived in St. Louis all of my life BY CHOICE and I happen to love it here. I also am very proud of Saint Louis University, have been a season ticket holder for about 12 years, and have been an active volunteer at the University. There, you have outed me.

With regard to your response to my original "in the know" comments, perhaps I am a little more "in the know" because I want to be. For example, for four nights this week I was volunteering my time at the University, primarily for events/meetings regarding the business school. Many of the posters on this board make comments that I know to be inaccurate. They are usually innocent comments and generally well intended, but they are inaccurate just the same. Most of the time I ignore them.

You said that, "Unfortunately, it's also ABUNDANTLY clear that the University continues to be unable to communicate even the most basic facts." I don't think it is the University's responsibility to make sure that Mr. Bonwich is up on every detail. Just my opinion.

You also said, "The very fact that the members of this board, representing at least a large subset of the most passionate of Billiken fans, aren't "in the know" is illustrative of continuing fundamental flaws at the University." Again, I respectfully disagree. I think it is more illustrative of the fact that most posters probably have chosen not to get highly involved so as to be in a position to know more. I honestly don't understand why anyone would think that the University has some kind of responsibility to keep everyone updated all the time. Not much is happening with the Arena project outside of fund raising. If you are interested in watching the Waring School be demolished, I'm sure no one will stop you.

I called you a jerk because of the sarcastic tone you took in your post above regarding my comments from an earlier post. I have tried to communicate with you on this board in a polite manner, but it is difficult because of the way you behave.

As for me, I chose not to rock the boat on this web site despite how easy that may be. Instead, I chose to volunteer my time, get involved, and be a part of the solution as opposed to being a part of the crabby, belly-aching, jaded, crowd. If that is a sin, then I am guilty.

You have every right to your opinion and every right to express it as cynically and sarcastically as you want, which, incidentally, you excel at. However, don't pretend that your diatribes are evidence of wanting better things for the University. Instead, get involved. Help out. THEN, let's sit down, have a beer, and discuss how we can make things at SLU better.

P.S. Thank you for the compliment about having learned well. Given the Jesuit tradition of service and academic excellence taught at SLU, I am flattered that you have recognized my accomplishments.

[willie]

In spite of his mother Kshoe doesn't always see things in their proper light.

[davidnark]

Joe,

I thought you raised a lot of valid points. If nothing else, eight plus straight years of Jesuit education teaches one to question the status quo and identify and analyze areas for improvement. In reviewing your posts, I have found two consistent themes/issues: (i) poor communications and (ii) poor marketing.

Roy and I, among others, have been long-time critics of the current athletic administration's policy of withholding information and almost mocking the public and media with a "we know more than you do" attitude. This week, I had an opportunity to go out to lunch with a well-known member of the local radio media. Like most of us on this board, he knew very little regarding the status of the SLU arena project. This is perplexing. Rather than embrace the local media and use them as a resource, why does the administration view them as an adversary?

I have been thinking about SLU's poor marketing since the DePaul game. Our marketing has been so bad for so long, that I began to wonder whether it has ever been good. Then I remembered the "spoonball" marketing and promotions that were EVERYWHERE during the early to mid nineties. During the Yow tenure, the brilliant marketing of the program helped created an entire new category of local sports fan, i.e., fans of "Spoonball." Who didn't want a foam spoon ten years ago? In addition to foam spoons, I remember billiken basketball antenna balls, spoonball T-Shirts, spoon posters, etc. Spoon was everywhere. The local media and sports fans loved the program! We even had a professionally produced TV contract on Fox Sports Midwest that allowed every bar and cable/satellite subscriber in the area to watch our games.

I raise these points because Bonwich is correct; our current public relations and marketing is terrible. The good news is that it hasn't always been this way. Good marketing at SLU is not impossible. I am just not convinced the current AD and SID are the right people to fix the problem.

[kshoe]

nm

[kshoe]

I don't know about Bonwich but I know Willie hasn't attended a road game in a while. Things aren't all that different at other places. Stupid promotions were rampant at the Memphis game and Marquette may move smoothly but it was a pro atmoshpere with loud speaker music instead of the band most times. Not what I would consider a "college" atmosphere. The quality of our band is unbeatable and whether the AD is directly responsible for that or not I don't know but I'm sure if our band sucked you guys would be blaming the AD.

No, the details are not always perfect with the SLU administration but I contend they aren't perfect anywhere and the fact that they have made the committment to build an on campus arena is proof enough for me that in the big scheme of things it is moving in the right direction at SLU.

[davidnark]

share one thing with the rest of us: has the required money been raised?

[willie]

I did go to the University of Louisville game last year and their game presentation was light years better than ours. Do I think we're moveing in the right direction? Yes.But I do agree with Bonwich that we don't pay enough attention to the small details. We have had 3 or 4 marketing directors in the last couple of years. Maybe it's the nature of the beast that we lose the Valerie Kotas's{sp} to people like the Cardinals, but it would be nice to have some continuity. Is Woolard hard to work for? Are we cheap? I just believe we have too much tournover.

[cheeseman]

This topic is not about how it is elsewhere or being critical is not positive - it is about what and how the university does business. I am sorry but we are missing a golden opportunity by not ramping up our efforts. The Blues are struggling, the Cards - who knows what to expect with them but clearly people are very unsure of their future, the Rams - the whole quarterback issue and cap issue is clouding their picture, Mizzou is struggling in BB - what a great time to be attacking the breach sport fans are finding with the other teams. The arena efforts is another perfect project to rev up interest. If Woolard can not provide the vision then get somebody who can or find somebody who can help - whatever but do something!

[Billikan]

The entire amount has not been raised but there have been and continue to be a series of private meetings with potential big donors. As is often the case with this type of fundraising, much of the early big ticket donations are solicited in private meetings behind closed doors. A big "public" push will come soon!

[bonwich]

MBA? You probably had a few great marketing profs along the line.

And since you've now shown me yours, I'll show you mine. I'm a faculty brat, so I've been going to games since 1967. Can't tell you how long we've had season tickets, because faculty members had some sort of alternative that they didn't count as "season tickets," but suffice it to say that I've been to more than 75% of the games that have been held when I've lived in town. Graduated in '78 or '79 (I'm still not sure, because I've seen my diploma attribution cited differently in different official documents). Thus I lived through the fabled B-Roy years, when the regular student attendance could sometimes be counted on one hand, and I continued to go to games in the years after I graduated and sit in the student section just so someone would be sitting there.

And, as noted, did some marketing consulting for the U. somewhere about '87-8 or so. A couple of paid gigs, lots more volunteer.

I worked in some form of marketing or public relations for about 18 years before going to work for the P-D. National clients, regional clients, itty-bitty clients. And since you were so kind as to respectfully disagree with me this time, I'll respectfully disagree right back.

This is a university of more than 10,000 students and several hundred thousand alumni, and they shouldn't have to "get involved" to know what's going on. It could also be argued that the very act of going to a basketball game is "getting involved," and I suggest that the University has done a poor job of marketing to the dwindling number of souls who show up for games. See also willie's post about promotional activities; over and above that, I suggest that the game experience is just plain poorly managed.

We've noted the cases of poor management of the promotions that they do have, and the inability to have a working shot clock, etc. In addition to that, one very simple thing: Most people have a commute to the games, and the 7:10 start time in general means that people are pressed for time in getting to the games. Yet there have been numerous games this year that have started three to five minutes early. Why? All that does is ensure that a larger number of fans than have to are going to miss several minutes of play. Couple that with the inability to ensure that more than one turnstile is open at the 14th Street side entrance, and you're not giving the ticketholders the most basic thing that they've paid for.

I'd also point out that I took that sarcastic tone because your own post -- "There is a lot going on at the University right now with respect to development and it is ABUNDANTLY clear that most people on this board are clearly not 'in the know.'" -- itself sounded to me a bit supercilious, as in "I'm in the know and you aren't." In turn, it danced around the main issue from a couple of days ago -- that the University has a contact point for fund- and image-raising, and that said contact point didn't respond to a query.

Finally, I would respectfully suggest that your idea, "Not much is happening with the Arena project outside of fund raising. If you are interested in watching the Waring School be demolished, I'm sure no one will stop you," ignores the reality of the situation. One thing the U. has said publicly is "Another advantage of the arena location is its visibility from Interstate 64-40. With 50 million motorists driving past the arena location every year, the arena’s visibility offers an excellent opportunity for benefactors and corporate sponsors." So that means, roughly, that a million motorists a week are driving by that location and seeing that Waring is being demolished. The most probable perception, given what's been published and broadcast about the location, is that the arena is moving forward. Yet the only official word is that "a site has been announced."

I applaud you for your involvement. No sarcasm at all. Perhaps you have a family and kids, perhaps not. I do. Five kids that don't drive yet. (One of 'em comes to all the games with me, God bless her.) My ability to "get involved" is currently limited to occasional phone calls and e-mails to the few U. highers-up that I still know, and, for example, to wandering around the newsroom forum-shopping for someone who agreed with me that the brand-new arena web site was worth reporting as news, even though the U. hadn't issued a press release on it. (It worked, for once.) But again, we are fairly far apart on whether the U. is doing an adequate job of marketing, publicity, etc. with the arena and the athletic program as a whole. "Mr. Bonwich" is just one reasonably interested member of the target audience, and he can only judge what the audience as a whole is receiving by the quality of the information he receives. And thus far, he doesn't think that the quality is anywhere near what it could be.

By the way, the offer of the beer continues to stand. Sometimes jerks are actually pretty interesting, and if nothing else, my professional standing virtually guarantees that it will be a good beer.

[bonwich]

Not to give too much away, but I'm of the perception that you guys sit in the front row. Is this correct? (Gotta know where to show that I'm good for my word, if nothing else.)

[willie]

Thats us. The ones yelling at the refs.

[kshoe]

would we be having this discussion if we were winning? Lets say we had won at Charlotte, Memphis and agaisnt Depaul. The city would be excited and the crowds would be much bigger. I think everyone on this board is pissed off about how this season has developed but instead of blaming Brad (recruitng a juco that never showed up, skipping over Ahearn) people feel the need to lash out at Woolard and the athletic department. I could almost argue that to get 9,000 a game to watch a slow it down team that may finish .500 or so is a testimate to our athletic department.

No amount of marketing can make up for winning. EVER. Mizzou has been marketed to the extremes yet only 9,500 showed up against Colorado. why, because they aren't winning. Winning, winning, winning is all that matters.

[bonwich]

Conversely, you could say that 9,500 still showed up for Mizzou despite the fact that the thought-to-be-top-10 team is taking more gas than virtually any D1 team this season.

You may recall that my original post brought up Bradley. Hey, maybe they're a total anomaly -- but they still get close to 10,000 fans, game in and game out, with a 10-14 record, in Peoria.

But to respond directly -- I hope we would still be having this discussion, because we would be having the benefit of the 1-2-3K or more incremental fans who would be showing up because we were winning, and we wouldn't be showing them that SLU basketball games are a terrific overall experience. Winning is certainly the optimum marketing tool. But it's unreasonable to expect it to be the only one.