Yeah I am of the mind that the University did itself a disservice by not planning better. They forwent a lot of possible good in revenue and exposure for some certainty in planning a luncheon.
That this happens so often in the NIT tells me that 1) there must be more to facilities management than I am aware and 2) the opportunity cost is l…
Yeah I am of the mind that the University did itself a disservice by not planning better. They forwent a lot of possible good in revenue and exposure for some certainty in planning a luncheon.
That this happens so often in the NIT tells me that 1) there must be more to facilities management than I am aware and 2) the opportunity cost is low.
I know that hosting NIT games isn’t as lucrative for the host institution as regular season games because the revenue is split with the tournament. The costs of hosting are also solely borne by the host institution.
It was sort of like the CBI where we had a couple of home games in the finals but the program didn’t make much money.
The real exposure and stuff comes in the final four though, which is again why I don’t think this specific instance is a Huge deal but merely a missed opportunity. So to be clear, I don’t like that it happened but I don’t know that we need to be calling for anyone’s job.
Adam, I would agree the benefit is not financial but merely a "home court" advantage but the publicity of having your court as the backdrop (win or lose) on a nationally televised game during prime time, can expose the school to so many more eyes, that the benefit "could" outweigh the cost.....
Yeah I am of the mind that the University did itself a disservice by not planning better. They forwent a lot of possible good in revenue and exposure for some certainty in planning a luncheon.
That this happens so often in the NIT tells me that 1) there must be more to facilities management than I am aware and 2) the opportunity cost is low.
I know that hosting NIT games isn’t as lucrative for the host institution as regular season games because the revenue is split with the tournament. The costs of hosting are also solely borne by the host institution.
It was sort of like the CBI where we had a couple of home games in the finals but the program didn’t make much money.
The real exposure and stuff comes in the final four though, which is again why I don’t think this specific instance is a Huge deal but merely a missed opportunity. So to be clear, I don’t like that it happened but I don’t know that we need to be calling for anyone’s job.
Adam, I would agree the benefit is not financial but merely a "home court" advantage but the publicity of having your court as the backdrop (win or lose) on a nationally televised game during prime time, can expose the school to so many more eyes, that the benefit "could" outweigh the cost.....