G ESPN Podcast

[explorer88]

G Podcast

Interesting stuff on the schedule and how it all developed. G also explains why it is better to play Stony brook instead of someone like Clemson.

[theneumann64]

Thanks for posting. Will listen to it now.

[stlexplorer]

I've listened to that pod since it started and I'm glad G finally got on there. Was getting tired of podcast after podcast with big name coaches from teams that aren't relevant right now. Should be noted the podcast before this one they interviewed Boise St's coach and he said about us that his team wasn't ready to play a team as good as ours and apparently a few more teams weren't either.

[coqui900]

"We have Ty Garland, who you're familiar with." -- The awkward line from Dr. G. to Seth Greenberg, former VA Tech coach.

[explorerman]

Haha yeah...

Can the damn season start yet???

[SICguy84]

Seeking scheduling advice from SJU (PA) puppet Joe Lunardi.

[broderickpresident]

Hilarious listening to Greenberg talk about who majors are willing to schedule. No major conference coach in modern history shot himself in the foot with horrible scheduling practices more than Greenberg at Va Tech. Ironic he said he'd never go to Gola since Virginia Tech was our first opponent ever at Gola after the reopening (granted, VT was in the A-10 under a different coach at the time).

[luhoopsfan]

Hilarious to hear those two openly trash Gola right in front of the coach. I'm glad they didn't sugarcoat it at all - it stings a little to hear it, but in my opinion, the more people that draw attention to the obvious poor facility the better chance the BOT pulls their head from their ... Butt

[theneumann64]

The big takeaway from all the Gola Arena mentions since we appeared on the national radar last year after beating Butler is that we know now its not people on this message board overrating the problem, and Temple, St. Joe's fans etc. just twisting the knife. These are people with no dog in the fight, so to speak, just stating the facts.

Honestly though, if we played in a gorgeous,state of the art arena, it would likely make very little difference with regards to scheduling the top half of the Big East, ACC, etc. How many true non-conference road games does a team like Duke,or Virginia Tech play a year? Two?

[durenduren]

Good point. And on one hand, that place can be pretty intimidating considering how loud and cozy it can be. If we continue to win big there, I'm happy with it for the time. It might be a crappy arena , but it's our crappy arena.

[alwayslasalle1]

Oct 7, 2013 23:49:12 GMT -5 durenduren said:

Good point. And on one hand, that place can be pretty intimidating considering how loud and cozy it can be. If we continue to win big there, I'm happy with it for the time. It might be a crappy arena , but it's our crappy arena.

Best observation of the year!

[explorer88]

Sorry but I don't see Gola as intimidating at all. It just isn't.

We win there because we have a good team and the arena does very little to foster anything above that. When we sucked we lost there quite often.

La Salle needs a new arena no matter how you slice it. It will be hard for G to keep this rolling without one. We need to hope the administration sees it that way when the new President arrives.

[ck]

John McCain advises: "Just build the dang arena!"

[coqui900]

When they were ragging on Gola, I wish G said, "I wish we had an arena like VA Tech's where I could waste Ty Garland's eligibility, too."

Gola's intimidating in its way. You don't have a good record at home without a good home court advantage. Also, let's give the athletic department/promotions some credit -- the gym is what it is right now, but they're doing their best to make the atmosphere better.

[MisterD]

35 degree temperatures and dimmed lights would give a team a tremendous home court advantage too.

[explorer88]

Oct 8, 2013 12:01:20 GMT -5 coqui900 said:

When they were ragging on Gola, I wish G said, "I wish we had an arena like VA Tech's where I could waste Ty Garland's eligibility, too."

Gola's intimidating in its way. You don't have a good record at home without a good home court advantage. Also, let's give the athletic department/promotions some credit -- the gym is what it is right now, but they're doing their best to make the atmosphere better.

I am not sure what you are trying to say 900. Of course it is what it is. It doesn't make the building sufficient.

The good home court advantage happpens because the team is good, not the other way around as you seem to infer. We had no home court avantage at Gola when we sucked.

To stay good we need to give G the tools to compete for long periods of time. It is much easier and likley to happen when he can attract the better players to come to La Salle. That job is much more difficult when you show a recruit Gola instead of some of the other venues the kid can choose to play at.

[durenduren]

We had no advantage there when we sucked because we had 100 fans in the seats. Tough to compare those days to a Nova game in the last few years, or Butler or something. I think the place has been a different, more improved craphole since we started putting butts in the seats.

I'm not saying we don't need a new arena, or that we should ride Gola into the unforseeable future, because at the end of the day you can only polish a turd so much. I just think Gola's gained a little character and edge for being 'up close and personal'.

[calidelphia]

The intimidation comes more from the fans and location than the size of the arena. teams cannot feel comfortable driving in and getting off the bus into a questionable locker room and into a small auditorium full of screamers echoing that the hawk is dead? The main issue with the size, layout and facilities is perception from outsiders that this is not a top tier program in the A10 because they play in a glorified gym. None of that has to do with home court advantage though. Gola is intimidating at home now, compared to when I attended, the student body is charged up there and butts in the seats. Not because of a preconceived notion from opponents that our team is good. That didn't exist at this time last year and butler felt the advantage of playing at our location (especially in the final seconds)(Brad stevens freak out/ court storm).

Gola also doesn't stop major teams from playing us at home, we would just schedule the palestra like G mentioned will happen with Miami at home next year.

As far as size, in good years maybe we could sell another 1,500-2,000 seats at our biggest games and it would be nice to have the chance to rattle opposing teams on free throws with seats behind the basket, but if we aren't selling those tickets, then they are going to opponents fans and making it even more comfortable for them to play here.

The reason everyone wants a better facility seems to be an embarrassed looking glass perception of self, recruiting and to get more rear ends in seats. There isn't a bad seat in the house though. Most teams that have been at the top of the A10 like Butler, VCU, Umass, Richmond, St Louis, Dayton, Xavier etc are used to playing in front of big crowds of 10k +. Intimidation/ home court advantage comes from the level of crowd involvement, and getting other teams out of their element. That has definitely improved from Rasual's days as the team and then fanbase improved with no change to the building. arguably craphole, but doesn't take away from the home court advantage.

If we sell out for 3+ years in a row the BOT will be on board. G has us on that path. But to expect a new arena to improve our team, increase the fan base, sell more tickets, improve recruiting or increase home court advantage is not realistic. Continued winning will do that and the program is slowly earning that new arena starting with the past 2 years.

I go to alot of SDSU games at Viejas arena now. They didn't have any of those things until Steve Fisher came on in 99' and starting recruiting. Now that they have made the tourney 4 years straight and 8 years straight in ncaa or NIT, the advantage from "the show" is undeniable. When they had the arena built they went 22-60 the first few years then made a coaching change. Thats when the real improvements to home court and attendance starting happening.

I think we are putting the wagon before the horse in this discussion. A new arena will come around but we need to fix the program first, then get a strong fan base back and then we will have a reason for it. Unfortunately it is not a field of dreams situation on 20th and olney.

[explorer88]

Oct 8, 2013 16:13:48 GMT -5 calidelphia said:

The intimidation comes more from the fans and location than the size of the arena. teams cannot feel comfortable driving in and getting off the bus into a questionable locker room and into a small auditorium full of screamers echoing that the hawk is dead? The main issue with the size, layout and facilities is perception from outsiders that this is not a top tier program in the A10 because they play in a glorified gym. None of that has to do with home court advantage though. Gola is intimidating at home now, compared to when I attended, the student body is charged up there and butts in the seats. Not because of a preconceived notion from opponents that our team is good. That didn't exist at this time last year and butler felt the advantage of playing at our location (especially in the final seconds)(Brad stevens freak out/ court storm).

Gola also doesn't stop major teams from playing us at home, we would just schedule the palestra like G mentioned will happen with Miami at home next year.

As far as size, in good years maybe we could sell another 1,500-2,000 seats at our biggest games and it would be nice to have the chance to rattle opposing teams on free throws with seats behind the basket, but if we aren't selling those tickets, then they are going to opponents fans and making it even more comfortable for them to play here.

The reason everyone wants a better facility seems to be an embarrassed looking glass perception of self, recruiting and to get more rear ends in seats. There isn't a bad seat in the house though. Most teams that have been at the top of the A10 like Butler, VCU, Umass, Richmond, St Louis, Dayton, Xavier etc are used to playing in front of big crowds of 10k +. Intimidation/ home court advantage comes from the level of crowd involvement, and getting other teams out of their element. That has definitely improved from Rasual's days as the team and then fanbase improved with no change to the building. arguably craphole, but doesn't take away from the home court advantage.

If we sell out for 3+ years in a row the BOT will be on board. G has us on that path. But to expect a new arena to improve our team, increase the fan base, sell more tickets, improve recruiting or increase home court advantage is not realistic. Continued winning will do that and the program is slowly earning that new arena starting with the past 2 years.

I go to alot of SDSU games at Viejas arena now. They didn't have any of those things until Steve Fisher came on in 99' and starting recruiting. Now that they have made the tourney 4 years straight and 8 years straight in ncaa or NIT, the advantage from "the show" is undeniable. When they had the arena built they went 22-60 the first few years then made a coaching change. Thats when the real improvements to home court and attendance starting happening.

I think we are putting the wagon before the horse in this discussion. A new arena will come around but we need to fix the program first, then get a strong fan base back and then we will have a reason for it. Unfortunately it is not a field of dreams situation on 20th and olney.

I am sorry but I disagree. I respect everyone's opinion and the right to have one but quite frankly what you have here doesn't make much sense to me.

Winning is tied to facilities and big budgets. La Salle will never be what the BCS schools are but quite frankly smaller schools are building what La Salle isn't and to expect G to keep this level and consistency with the program is unfair. I hope I am wrong but history is on my side with that. Schools like Qunipiac, Monmouth, Stony Brook and Towson are building new facilties and have won less than La Salle and are considered lower programs. When the have nots get close to your program the ability to beat them becomes less and less.

Only time will tell if G can really keep this going. I would hope we are not sitting here in 5 years and wondering what went wrong to keep this great feeling we have now alive in the future.

[durenduren]

Dang, all I was trying to say is that despite Gola forever sucking, I think athletics/the team/and the fans are making the best of a crappy situation, and really making it our own. Winning obviously helps, and I think we all are tired of being ripped for Gola in every media piece, but I just think it's great that we're giving that place more of an name and identity than a high school gym. It took way too long.

[calidelphia]

Oct 8, 2013 16:29:20 GMT -5 explorer88 said:

Winning is tied to facilities and big budgets.

I totally agree with both you and Duren.  winning is the horse and the facilities and big budgets are the wagon though.  the smart investment was G and recruiting.  With losing seasons and no sell outs, the board of trustees had no reason to look into an arena. 

The Mighty Quinn is a hockey school with a dual use arena ($52 million!) with the same capacity for BBall as Gola though. Stony Brook is doing it a different way but their facilities were less than half the size that Gola is and will not be much bigger than gola when finished ($21 mil).

Duren I totally agree that it is a much more intimidating craphole nowadays and that the better Fanbase is the reason for that. 

I am literally just saying that our fan base is more important than where we play for home court advantage, we didn't earn a new arena yet and there are 70+ D1 schools with smaller arena's (bigger crapholes).  We are on our way and I thought G handled that question nicely by saying Seth could have played them at the palestra like Larranaga (coach of the year) decided to.

[durenduren]

Oct 8, 2013 18:06:34 GMT -5 calidelphia said:

I thought G handled that question nicely by saying Seth could have played them at the palestra like Larranaga (coach of the year) decided to.

As it has been said before, it's a tough sell for these BCS schools to play a true road or neutral site game against a mid-major team that doesn't offer too much of a reward if they win, while running a more than real risk of being upset. It's a great problem to have, I'm thrilled we played ourselves into this conundrum, and I'm glad we have the option of the Palestra available, but even the Palestra doesn't mean much to St Joe's anymore when compared to the home court advantage. Looking at the schedule this way, I'm content with it.