(10-31-2013 08:48 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  See, this is something I don't understand. What difference does it make who we play? I don't sit there and decide to go to see Rice play because of who they are playing. I go to see Rice and cheer for them to win. Would it help if we were playing some bigger names? Sure. But, I don't see how that should be the overriding factor to choose whether to go or not.

I agree -- I get tired of that excuse/complaint/rationalization. The opponent should affect how many opposing fans atttend, and perhaps how many unaffiliated fans attend, but it should not have a material effect on people who actually live at Rice.

Nola and D1 are on the right track with this. First of all, it isn't the job of the coaches and players to recruit students to football games. They do enough of that already with the annual football clinic and Bailiff delivering pizzas to the colleges.

Secondly, I agree that many students at Rice are so academically focused that they have little interest in athletics as a whole.

It doesn't matter who we play. Rice students should want to come out to the stadium to support Rice and show their school spirit, period.

I was at the game Saturday and I too felt badly for the players. It was a pathetic display of support for a team that had just won three road games and sits in first place in the division. Something must be done to show students how much fun they could be having with their fellow students at athletics events. If we beat North Texas, I better see, at least, 400 students at the next game. There's no excuse for them not to get behind this team.

What percentage of students attend Stanford games? What percentage of current students are international vs 1975? What percentage of current students are from Texas (and from a public school) vs 1975? What percentage of current students are female vs 1975?

I think one small problem is the ever changing game time. Through about 1980 games through October started at 7:30 or 8:00. Games after October started at 2:00. Most of us have to check multiple times ourselves as to what time this weeks game is.

Since 1980 or so the only time student attendance was substantial was during Thompson's final two seasons. It might be useful to look at why it was so high then.

Advertising by athletes and more well-known opponents and all of that will help, sure. But the biggest thing we need is for there to be a game-day EXPERIENCE* and for it to be FUN.

* The pattern for the games I went to in the mid 2000s was simple: you walk over, you sit in the seat, you watch mediocre on-field product, you leave. Few if any friends came along, there was no fanfare before or after the game, the colleges organized nothing, etc.

I still think that going to games is great stress relief and should be marketed to students as such. Yell, raise hell, etc.

(10-31-2013 09:48 AM)ChicagoOwl (BS 07) Wrote:  Advertising by athletes and more well-known opponents and all of that will help, sure. But the biggest thing we need is for there to be a game-day EXPERIENCE* and for it to be FUN.

* The pattern for the games I went to in the mid 2000s was simple: you walk over, you sit in the seat, you watch mediocre on-field product, you leave. Few if any friends came along, there was no fanfare before or after the game, the colleges organized nothing, etc.

Again, I don't think athlete "advertising" per se is the answer; rather, I think the student-athletes need to establish a greater connection with their designated residential college. IMO, this is key. Back in the day when most of the athletes lived on campus, they may not have associated much with the non-athletes, BUT they were visible in college life and we knew who they were. This connection is critical.

Today, most scholarship athletes live off-campus, which is understandable (especially with the current on-campus housing shortage). However, they can be forced to spend at least a little time each week at their residential college to establish that all-important connection with the student body. What's the burden of having football players eat lunch once or twice a week at their residential college?

(10-31-2013 08:48 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 07:18 AM)Riceman2004 Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 05:11 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  What I don't understand is why student attendance for some sports (soccer and volleyball are two examples) is so strong while it's so weak in others (football and basketball). It certainly can't be results-oriented. Our volleyball and soccer teams have been horrible this fall in regards to preseason expectations.

It's actually pretty simple. I don't know if it's changed, though I doubt it has, but my view is that both Football and Basketball players feel in particular that it's the role of the Athletic Department to market to students and get them to come out to games. In the time I was at Rice, I saw the Soccer team in particular be really active in getting on the tables at their colleges at lunch with signs and enthusiasm to get fellow students to come to their games at it worked (it didn't hurt that many of them were pretty attractive). The stadium was jammed for some of their games. I was across a suite from two starters on the Basketball team and they were great guys, but kept their heads down and never even so much sent an email to our college listserv asking people to come to their games.

The fact is, to a Rice student, a football game is no different than a concert, or play or anything else. It's not like a typically Texas HS where going to the game is an act of civic duty. Unless either the football team starts not only winning, but playing teams that students have heard of and have a following, the situation won't change.

Forget prizes, bribery and contests. Student-athletes need to make the effort and ask people, the same way any other club would market their events. Guarantee if a concerted effort was made by the players, it would get better.

See, this is something I don't understand. What difference does it make who we play? I don't sit there and decide to go to see Rice play because of who they are playing. I go to see Rice and cheer for them to win. Would it help if we were playing some bigger names? Sure. But, I don't see how that should be the overriding factor to choose whether to go or not.

In my time at Rice (2004-08), I thought the athletic department did a decent enough job advertising on campus with flyers and signs. Now, they have used twitter and facebook as a way to get the word out. Would it help if the athletes did more? Yeah, probably. But, I don't expect it from them. They are trying to balance the athletic work with school work and it can't be easy. If some can do it, that's great. But, as I said, I don't think that is a fair expectation.

The reason I wrote the letter is that this was one of the weakest turnouts I'd seen since I'd graduated. Even in some of the lean years, we'd see more students than were there last Saturday. Hell, we had more students show up to heckle Todd Graham in 2007 in a 40 degree (if that warm) rainstorm. Yeah, the FAU game was horrific, but we won the damn thing. Then, the team goes on the road and wins 3 straight and puts itself in position to do something special this year and they come back to that turnout. It annoyed me, so I decided to say something. I was actually surprised they published it. Look, I'm not under some delusion that 2000 students are going to show up every week. But, it has to be better than last Saturday. At least make that one section look pretty full.

Who Rice plays matters to me. Other than for Rice Baseball, the other team is one of the factors in my decision to attend the game, or not. Sorry if that bothers you, but it is the truth.

(10-31-2013 10:11 AM)13thOwl Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 08:48 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 07:18 AM)Riceman2004 Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 05:11 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  What I don't understand is why student attendance for some sports (soccer and volleyball are two examples) is so strong while it's so weak in others (football and basketball). It certainly can't be results-oriented. Our volleyball and soccer teams have been horrible this fall in regards to preseason expectations.

It's actually pretty simple. I don't know if it's changed, though I doubt it has, but my view is that both Football and Basketball players feel in particular that it's the role of the Athletic Department to market to students and get them to come out to games. In the time I was at Rice, I saw the Soccer team in particular be really active in getting on the tables at their colleges at lunch with signs and enthusiasm to get fellow students to come to their games at it worked (it didn't hurt that many of them were pretty attractive). The stadium was jammed for some of their games. I was across a suite from two starters on the Basketball team and they were great guys, but kept their heads down and never even so much sent an email to our college listserv asking people to come to their games.

The fact is, to a Rice student, a football game is no different than a concert, or play or anything else. It's not like a typically Texas HS where going to the game is an act of civic duty. Unless either the football team starts not only winning, but playing teams that students have heard of and have a following, the situation won't change.

Forget prizes, bribery and contests. Student-athletes need to make the effort and ask people, the same way any other club would market their events. Guarantee if a concerted effort was made by the players, it would get better.

See, this is something I don't understand. What difference does it make who we play? I don't sit there and decide to go to see Rice play because of who they are playing. I go to see Rice and cheer for them to win. Would it help if we were playing some bigger names? Sure. But, I don't see how that should be the overriding factor to choose whether to go or not.

In my time at Rice (2004-08), I thought the athletic department did a decent enough job advertising on campus with flyers and signs. Now, they have used twitter and facebook as a way to get the word out. Would it help if the athletes did more? Yeah, probably. But, I don't expect it from them. They are trying to balance the athletic work with school work and it can't be easy. If some can do it, that's great. But, as I said, I don't think that is a fair expectation.

The reason I wrote the letter is that this was one of the weakest turnouts I'd seen since I'd graduated. Even in some of the lean years, we'd see more students than were there last Saturday. Hell, we had more students show up to heckle Todd Graham in 2007 in a 40 degree (if that warm) rainstorm. Yeah, the FAU game was horrific, but we won the damn thing. Then, the team goes on the road and wins 3 straight and puts itself in position to do something special this year and they come back to that turnout. It annoyed me, so I decided to say something. I was actually surprised they published it. Look, I'm not under some delusion that 2000 students are going to show up every week. But, it has to be better than last Saturday. At least make that one section look pretty full.

Who Rice plays matters to me. Other than for Rice Baseball, the other team is one of the factors in my decision to attend the game, or not. Sorry if that bothers you, but it is the truth.

Yes, 13th, but as loyal a Rice fan as you are, you are not a current student (or alum, for that matter). I agree with those who argue that the opponent should not matter for those currently in the student body.

There is an easy solution: offer free alcohol to students before the games at school sponsored tailgates.

(10-31-2013 10:20 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I agree with those who argue that the opponent should not matter for those currently in the student body.

Which is largely disconnected from reality, but maybe you guys can provide a follow-up letter detailing what priorities Rice students and fans should have and how many events they should be required to make.

(10-31-2013 05:11 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  What I don't understand is why student attendance for some sports (soccer and volleyball are two examples) is so strong while it's so weak in others (football and basketball). It certainly can't be results-oriented. Our volleyball and soccer teams have been horrible this fall in regards to preseason expectations.

I wonder if soccer and women's volleyball enjoy this because they chose not to create sham twitter accounts to demean other Rice students?

(10-31-2013 10:24 AM)Hou_Hater Wrote:  There is an easy solution: offer free alcohol to students before the games at school sponsored tailgates.

Which is precisely what occurred back in the pre-tailgate days when each residential college sponsored it's own pre-game BBQ (with kegs, of course).

(10-31-2013 10:27 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 10:20 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I agree with those who argue that the opponent should not matter for those currently in the student body.

Which is largely disconnected from reality, but maybe you guys can provide a follow-up letter detailing what priorities Rice students and fans should have and how many events they should be required to make.

Exactly - Rice students are apathetic, in general, and even more so when it comes to athletics. Different year, same story.

(10-31-2013 10:29 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 10:24 AM)Hou_Hater Wrote:  There is an easy solution: offer free alcohol to students before the games at school sponsored tailgates.

Which is precisely what occurred back in the pre-tailgate days when each residential college sponsored it's own pre-game BBQ (with kegs, of course).

I wonder if the athletic dept. would consider funneling money to the colleges for these types of events on game days. As we all know, the colleges already have budgets for these sorts of things so it's not like this would be some far-fetched idea.

(10-31-2013 10:11 AM)13thOwl Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 08:48 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  See, this is something I don't understand. What difference does it make who we play? I don't sit there and decide to go to see Rice play because of who they are playing. I go to see Rice and cheer for them to win. Would it help if we were playing some bigger names? Sure. But, I don't see how that should be the overriding factor to choose whether to go or not.

In my time at Rice (2004-08), I thought the athletic department did a decent enough job advertising on campus with flyers and signs. Now, they have used twitter and facebook as a way to get the word out. Would it help if the athletes did more? Yeah, probably. But, I don't expect it from them. They are trying to balance the athletic work with school work and it can't be easy. If some can do it, that's great. But, as I said, I don't think that is a fair expectation.

The reason I wrote the letter is that this was one of the weakest turnouts I'd seen since I'd graduated. Even in some of the lean years, we'd see more students than were there last Saturday. Hell, we had more students show up to heckle Todd Graham in 2007 in a 40 degree (if that warm) rainstorm. Yeah, the FAU game was horrific, but we won the damn thing. Then, the team goes on the road and wins 3 straight and puts itself in position to do something special this year and they come back to that turnout. It annoyed me, so I decided to say something. I was actually surprised they published it. Look, I'm not under some delusion that 2000 students are going to show up every week. But, it has to be better than last Saturday. At least make that one section look pretty full.

Who Rice plays matters to me. Other than for Rice Baseball, the other team is one of the factors in my decision to attend the game, or not. Sorry if that bothers you, but it is the truth.

Always room for disagreement. Just my honest opinion and I'll respect yours.

(10-31-2013 09:55 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 09:48 AM)ChicagoOwl (BS 07) Wrote:  Advertising by athletes and more well-known opponents and all of that will help, sure. But the biggest thing we need is for there to be a game-day EXPERIENCE* and for it to be FUN.

* The pattern for the games I went to in the mid 2000s was simple: you walk over, you sit in the seat, you watch mediocre on-field product, you leave. Few if any friends came along, there was no fanfare before or after the game, the colleges organized nothing, etc.

Again, I don't think athlete "advertising" per se is the answer; rather, I think the student-athletes need to establish a greater connection with their designated residential college. IMO, this is key. Back in the day when most of the athletes lived on campus, they may not have associated much with the non-athletes, BUT they were visible in college life and we knew who they were. This connection is critical.

Today, most scholarship athletes live off-campus, which is understandable (especially with the current on-campus housing shortage). However, they can be forced to spend at least a little time each week at their residential college to establish that all-important connection with the student body. What's the burden of having football players eat lunch once or twice a week at their residential college?

Agree with Walt on this. Several Jones College mid-80s types, went to the games primarily to see our friends play. Certainly wasn't the W-L record! Too bad if correct that most scholarship athletes now live off campus. A number of us, self included, learned to truly respect those who were DI athletes on top of the academic load. Tearing down the goal posts (and the ensuing drama) after beating Lamar was high excitement for a freshman and that didn't hurt either. We were conditioned to expect that anything, including a riot, could break out at a football game.

Very good point about making the pre-game/tailgate "fun." Perhaps the athletics department could host a huge BBQ before the games for all of the students. Just leaving the library and walking directly into the stadium by yourself or with one or two others isn't "fun." Students need to mingle, drink and get rowdy before games. That's what's so fun about it.

(10-31-2013 11:29 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  Very good point about making the pre-game/tailgate "fun." Perhaps the athletics department could host a huge BBQ before the games for all of the students. Just leaving the library and walking directly into the stadium by yourself or with one or two others isn't "fun." Students need to mingle, drink and get rowdy before games. That's what's so fun about it.

Well, they have tried to get the students involved in tailgating with college row, which is essentially what Walt is talking about except at the stadium.

(10-31-2013 10:32 AM)Hou_Hater Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 10:29 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(10-31-2013 10:24 AM)Hou_Hater Wrote:  There is an easy solution: offer free alcohol to students before the games at school sponsored tailgates.

Which is precisely what occurred back in the pre-tailgate days when each residential college sponsored it's own pre-game BBQ (with kegs, of course).

I wonder if the athletic dept. would consider funneling money to the colleges for these types of events on game days. As we all know, the colleges already have budgets for these sorts of things so it's not like this would be some far-fetched idea.

This makes me chuckle because this actually occurred for two years under CDC. Basically, the athletic department created a group called the Varsity Student Liasons (VSLs) and we met on a regular basis to try to figure out how to increase student turnout. A major part of our role was to organize tailgates before football games, and money was provided to furnish what was needed at those tailgates. We saw a decent turnout because, if anything, our friends came to support us.

The thing that is most noticeable wth out game attendance is that it dwindles as the year goes on (and work piles up whole opponents get crappy) and the night games always have better turnout. Few students want to sit through 4 hours of nearly unbearable heat to watch us play.

The one thing that cures this all is consistent winning, and until that happens we can try to plug all of the holes in the boat, but it will be hard.

(10-31-2013 11:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Few students want to sit through 4 hours of nearly unbearable heat to watch us play.

"Nearly unbearable" is quite an overstatement.

It's certainly not unbearable for the many thousands of fans who are NOT students.