Coach Mike Anderson is producing an exciting University of Missouri basketball program, yet attendance at Mizzou Arena is among the worst in the Big 12.

Athletic officials explain that weather has been a problem this season and early games against lower-quality teams naturally will not draw as many fans. They never mention problems with the arena itself.

Anderson & Co. might produce an exciting enough program to fill the place, but rather than an advantage, the home court is a hurdle to be surmounted.

Gripes and complaints abound. Far too many seats in the "state-of-the-art" facility are marginal or poor. Sight lines are bad. Access and egress are inadequate. Modern high-tech glitz is not enough to offset inconvenience for much of the audience.

A vote among fans probably would favor good old Hearnes over Mizzou. Mizzou Arena is beautiful but dysfunctional, at least for all but the relatively few fans with the most advantageous seating.

Coach Anderson bravely promotes the extra excitement for fans of being there compared with watching games on television, an important factor for the team, but the sad fact is being there was more exciting in Hearnes.

I love the Tigers, but I don’t love Mizzou Arena. From the buzz I regularly hear I’m not alone, but, of course, I can’t pose as a fair representative of the entire basketball fan base. The best survey of that contingent will be attendance in the arena. I suppose it’s possible for packed houses to become routine, but that happy circumstance will have to occur despite the arena, not because of it.

At least that’s the way I see it from my arena seat, which looks fine on the chart but would be better in actual use if I could see the floor.

Am I being too churlish? Maybe most of you think I’m all wet.

Many people hate any change unless it jingles in their pocket.

Advertisement