Feel free to add to rules that have had unforeseen consequences .



The thirty thousand seat stadium rule led to some poorly designed stadiums .The rule was rescinded and some MAC schools have reduced capacity for a better game day atmosphere

The twelve members for a championship game has caused some bad realignment decisions. That rule is may change if the B12 gets its way.

Having seven all sports members for conference and the FCS invitation only rule.Those rules may have killed the WAC and forced some realignment decisions.

The Sun Belt would have never added Idaho and NMSU if not for these rules .The WAC may have been able to have been saved.A future rules change may be needed to allow for a new Western MAC level FBS conference.Having four current FBS schools allowed to invite three or four FCS schools to form a conference for example.Why would such a rule be implemented ? Because it would be beneficial to some Western flagship schools and the Sun Belt tightening its footprint.That is just one example of how and why a new rule could come about and change things.

Ten team conferences being allowed to have a championship game. Could lead to tighter conferences. ODU,JMU,Charlotte,APP ST,GA ST ,GA SOU,WKU and EKU would be a nice tight geographic conference. All the Texas non P5 or AAC schools along with the three Louisiana and a couple more close schools.

This thread could have to many topics or be to random . I may have needed to finish drinking my coffee before starting it .

IMO the 30,000 seat stadium rule should be reinstated. If a school can't fill a 30,000 seat stadium, they don't deserve to play at the highest level.

And if they design a poor stadium, that's their problem. Stupidity should be a punishable offense.

I'm in-between Bit and MJG on the stadium thing.

The rule as it was written was bad.

Some schools built the added seats which takes some capital outlay, being able to undertake such a capital outlay is a good thing. It indicates at least institutional buy-in if not community buy-in.

What was bad about the rule was once you had the seats and had qualified for I-A, attendance became a once in four year concern if that because of the home/away attendance rule.

Under the current rules, having to play five home games (which should be 5.5 average on a two year rolling average to preserve the ratio at the time adopted) forces schools to focus more attendance.

I would be comfortable with the 30,000 seat rule returning as a carrot as it was under the old rule where a smaller stadium meant the combined average over four years had to be 17k (remember Troy moved based on four year attendance rather than one-in-four because they didn't expand until after starting the move). Maybe give a school with a larger stadium one additional grace year over 10 years but I think it is more important to adjust the number of home games rule to take into account the extra game each year.

Another rule with unintended consequences was the NCAA rule that said no I-AA games could be counted toward bowl eligibility. The lack of money games with I-A schools pressured some I-AA to reclassify because those games were important not just for the check but for fan interest. The one in four change helped some.

It could be argued though that the greatest transitions from FCS/I-AA to FBS/I-A have happened first when no games counted and when one counted every year but I think we can agree that the second mass transition was driven by realignment forcing leagues to become interested in FCS schools, and it is interesting to note that while there has been a land rush there has been no school in the Mountain Time Zone or further west move to FBS since 1997 even though there are four or five plausible schools.

(02-23-2014 10:40 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  IMO the 30,000 seat stadium rule should be reinstated. If a school can't fill a 30,000 seat stadium, they don't deserve to play at the highest level.

And if they design a poor stadium, that's their problem. Stupidity should be a punishable offense.

I always thought the best way to handle this rule would have been to make it 50,000 in capacity with a minimum requirement of 40,000 in ticket sales and actual attendance. That way if someone was upgrading facilities they had an attendance goal to shoot for as well. It also means they stand a better chance of attracting a home and home with a better brand. Truly if a school can't attract a home and home with a P5 school they likely don't belong in the P5. Very few P5 schools would fail to meet the 50,000/40,000 requirement and it would force some others not to be so glib as to try for something too unrealistic for them to obtain.

I think one of the reasons the P5 is pushing for a degree of separation is that the bar was set too low to begin with.

I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

I agree that eventually it will be all P5 games. How soon is the question. As far as the ACC is concerned a 50,000/40,000 rule would help the apathy of those schools that don't currently meet that requirement. The very idea that failure to meet that standard might one day exclude them would tweak that pride and boost their numbers. It's not like they can't do it, they just choose not to. A rule might make those choices different.

Also, Bit, eventually the only leverage left for negotiating contract raises will be content. So in addition to the competition and SOS issues will be the need to get the networks to pony up more. Without realignment which will be over, the games themselves will be the ticket and that will eventually preclude G5 competition. Again the question will be when. I look for a proposal that Dabo made a year ago to come into play at that time. Spring games will be moved to mid August as a preseason game, will be scheduled against G5 competition and will represent the 7th home game in all P5 schedules and the ticket for that game will be included in the season books. I expect it to be against teams of local interest to the fans of both the G5 and P5 schools. Auburn vs Troy, West Virginia vs Marshall, Alabama vs U.A.B., Georgia vs Georgia Southern, etc.

The bar was set that low back then to avoid fragging their own members.

(02-23-2014 11:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 10:40 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  IMO the 30,000 seat stadium rule should be reinstated. If a school can't fill a 30,000 seat stadium, they don't deserve to play at the highest level.

And if they design a poor stadium, that's their problem. Stupidity should be a punishable offense.

I always thought the best way to handle this rule would have been to make it 50,000 in capacity with a minimum requirement of 40,000 in ticket sales and actual attendance. That way if someone was upgrading facilities they had an attendance goal to shoot for as well. It also means they stand a better chance of attracting a home and home with a better brand. Truly if a school can't attract a home and home with a P5 school they likely don't belong in the P5. Very few P5 schools would fail to meet the 50,000/40,000 requirement and it would force some others not to be so glib as to try for something too unrealistic for them to obtain.

I think one of the reasons the P5 is pushing for a degree of separation is that the bar was set too low to begin with.

Actually, several P5 schools would fail a 40k attendance requirement. For example, only 5 ACC schools average 50k+, which 2 of such 5 narrowly making that mark (UNC and NCS). Of course the other three are Clemson, FSU and VT.

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

I'm for a 40K stadium with a firm 30k attendance requirement averaged over three years ending with year 2016. If you currently average less than 15k as presently required you are immediately placed on probation and will be relegated down if your attendance over three years ending after the 2014 season does not average 15k.

(02-23-2014 12:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^

About half (or more) of the P5 will be far more concerned with qualifying for a bowl than fine tuning their SOS for the playoff. G5 games will continue to be a big part of the scheduling strategy for these schools. Another smaller slice of P5 schools know they will get the benefit of the doubt from the committee and can afford a couple of easy G5 wins in order to get seven home games (Alabama, LSU, etc). If Albama wins the SEC and has two G5 wins, they are not getting eliminated from the playoff.

(02-23-2014 12:28 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 11:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 10:40 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  IMO the 30,000 seat stadium rule should be reinstated. If a school can't fill a 30,000 seat stadium, they don't deserve to play at the highest level.

And if they design a poor stadium, that's their problem. Stupidity should be a punishable offense.

I always thought the best way to handle this rule would have been to make it 50,000 in capacity with a minimum requirement of 40,000 in ticket sales and actual attendance. That way if someone was upgrading facilities they had an attendance goal to shoot for as well. It also means they stand a better chance of attracting a home and home with a better brand. Truly if a school can't attract a home and home with a P5 school they likely don't belong in the P5. Very few P5 schools would fail to meet the 50,000/40,000 requirement and it would force some others not to be so glib as to try for something too unrealistic for them to obtain.

I think one of the reasons the P5 is pushing for a degree of separation is that the bar was set too low to begin with.

Actually, several P5 schools would fail a 40k attendance requirement. For example, only 5 ACC schools average 50k+, which 2 of such 5 narrowly making that mark (UNC and NCS). Of course the other three are Clemson, FSU and VT.

That's always been an under appreciated point Lurker. It also clearly indicates a part of the reason ESPN has had to do work to hang onto the options of the best properties and markets. Texas and Kansas as properties and the Northern half of the ACC for markets. Without that assistance we would already be looking at a P3, or perhaps a reconstructed P4. It is also why things as they are presently paused will still face tremendous pressures in the future. The only conceivable reason for ESPN to pay what they have is in the hopes of future marriages between the best markets and some of the best products. But we'll see.

(02-23-2014 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.


FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^

About half (or more) of the P5 will be far more concerned with qualifying for a bowl than fine tuning their SOS for the playoff. G5 games will continue to be a big part of the scheduling strategy for these schools. Another smaller slice of P5 schools know they will get the benefit of the doubt from the committee and can afford a couple of easy G5 wins in order to get seven home games (Alabama, LSU, etc). If Albama wins the SEC and has two G5 wins, they are not getting eliminated from the playoff.

G5? Yes. FCS? No

And to remain at G5 there needs to be a new higher standard so the casual fans will know who the teams are and so they will be competitive.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

(02-23-2014 12:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

I would bet the ranch that the P5 will continue to play G5 schools - at least two a year for most P5 schools. If you don't you won't get 6 home games every year unless some of the giants who now are getting 7 agree to give one or two up. That's not going to happen. And P5 schools aren't going to be willing to give up 15-20 bowl bids a year, which is what happens when they don't get to count wins against G5 and FCS schools.

If you limit P5 to 40K attendance and 50K capacity, you would be down to 56 schools (counting Notre Dame and BYU. That will only allow for 12 bowls a year not counting the playoffs. Ain't gonna happen.

(02-23-2014 12:51 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

I would bet the ranch that the P5 will continue to play G5 schools - at least two a year for most P5 schools. If you don't you won't get 6 home games every year unless some of the giants who now are getting 7 agree to give one or two up. That's not going to happen. And P5 schools aren't going to be willing to give up 15-20 bowl bids a year, which is what happens when they don't get to count wins against G5 and FCS schools.

If you limit P5 to 40K attendance and 50K capacity, you would be down to 56 schools (counting Notre Dame and BYU. That will only allow for 12 bowls a year not counting the playoffs. Ain't gonna happen.

That problem is easily avoided and is included in one of my posts above. The suggestion as to how to do it came from Dabo a year ago and would pose no problem as it would not officially threaten a regular season of 12 games only and would simply move the Spring game until to August and designate it as a preseason game and it would be against a G5 school of local interest. Content is the only thing we will have left after realignment to spur raises and we will dance to that tune then they way we have danced to market additions in this round. That will spell the doom of G5 games eventually.

(02-23-2014 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:51 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

I would bet the ranch that the P5 will continue to play G5 schools - at least two a year for most P5 schools. If you don't you won't get 6 home games every year unless some of the giants who now are getting 7 agree to give one or two up. That's not going to happen. And P5 schools aren't going to be willing to give up 15-20 bowl bids a year, which is what happens when they don't get to count wins against G5 and FCS schools.

If you limit P5 to 40K attendance and 50K capacity, you would be down to 56 schools (counting Notre Dame and BYU. That will only allow for 12 bowls a year not counting the playoffs. Ain't gonna happen.

That problem is easily avoided and is included in one of my posts above. The suggestion as to how to do it came from Dabo a year ago and would pose no problem as it would not officially threaten a regular season of 12 games only and would simply move the Spring game until to August and designate it as a preseason game and it would be against a G5 school of local interest. Content is the only thing we will have left after realignment to spur raises and we will dance to that tune then they way we have danced to market additions in this round. That will spell the doom of G5 games eventually.

And if it spells the doom of G5-P5 games, it will spell the doom of college football as we know it. You will be left with NFL-lite, at least played as semi-pro, and losing all political support for the favorable tax benefits it now enjoys. When that day comes, I'll probably be one of the lucky ones. I'll already be dead.

I am skeptical of a higher attendance standard because first, with student attendance being weak across much of the P5, replacing the people filling the monster stadiums is going to be harder.

I tend to think you are going to see a school build a new stadium or renovate their stadium into something smaller than what they have today.

You will see a 40K to 55k palace that puts the students in one end zone, has cheaper family oriented pricing in the opposite end zone. The west side (typically opposite press box) will be premium seating with suites above it. The east side lower tier will be super premium seats with people delivering food and drink to you, that will include access to a club area with food and drink included for your pre and post-game party. One end zone will feature another club behind the seats. Fans holding certain tickets will be admitted pre-game and you pay for what you consume while the various TVs show the other action around the country and is open to all post-game. Providing high capacity internet access to 40k is far easier than doing it for 60k or 80k.

Most will have a partial roof like Autzen or a soccer stadium to deflect sound back in and create a more intimate feel. The lower capacity will drive prices higher even though you will maintain some lower priced options, there just won't be as many of the cheaper seats and those cheaper seats will be better for those lucky few than what they have now.

I've seen the model. Sporting Park in KC. I asked a top official there when they would expand the stadium (which is designed to expand). If we get 10 years of sellouts we will start looking at it but even then we will never build beyond existing demand and lower the value of our seats.

Someone will do it.

It will be a massive financial success and others will follow. The snugger capacity and intimate feel will make great TV. A crowd of 40k in a 40k stadium just looks better than 65k in an 80k. Schools will be able to divert resources from trying to fill massive stadiums. The worst thing in college football is an unsold seat. Unsold seats take pressure off people to buy season tickets or donate to get in to the game.

If you can generate the same or more revenue with 50% of the capacity or even 75% of the capacity you currently have you spend less dealing with traffic, concessions, and bathroom facilities and you spend less selling and marketing.

(02-23-2014 01:07 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:51 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:34 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:06 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I like your thinking, JR. That would suit me just fine. Although I'm sure some ACC fans would be against it, since it would relegate them to the sidelines.

Games against FCS schools will go by the wayside, whether there's a rule against the games counting or not. With the upcoming playoff taking SOS into account, any schools playing games against FCS schools will be at a disadvantage when being considered for the playoff by the committee. So they will end soon enough. WVU has none scheduled after 2015, and no more will be scheduled.

I can see a time coming when the majority of Go5 schools get relegated to playing each other, as P5 schools compete against each other exclusively, in the effort to make the playoff.

FCS games will go due to the fans. They aren't showing up. TV is helping that along by encouraging better matchups. Instead of only about a dozen not playing them, very few of the P5 will play them.

I still doubt the P5 will play only P5. They will still all have 1 or 2 G5 schools to help get wins and more home games.

I would bet the ranch that the P5 will continue to play G5 schools - at least two a year for most P5 schools. If you don't you won't get 6 home games every year unless some of the giants who now are getting 7 agree to give one or two up. That's not going to happen. And P5 schools aren't going to be willing to give up 15-20 bowl bids a year, which is what happens when they don't get to count wins against G5 and FCS schools.

If you limit P5 to 40K attendance and 50K capacity, you would be down to 56 schools (counting Notre Dame and BYU. That will only allow for 12 bowls a year not counting the playoffs. Ain't gonna happen.

That problem is easily avoided and is included in one of my posts above. The suggestion as to how to do it came from Dabo a year ago and would pose no problem as it would not officially threaten a regular season of 12 games only and would simply move the Spring game until to August and designate it as a preseason game and it would be against a G5 school of local interest. Content is the only thing we will have left after realignment to spur raises and we will dance to that tune then they way we have danced to market additions in this round. That will spell the doom of G5 games eventually.

And if it spells the doom of G5-P5 games, it will spell the doom of college football as we know it. You will be left with NFL-lite, at least played as semi-pro, and losing all political support for the favorable tax benefits it now enjoys. When that day comes, I'll probably be one of the lucky ones. I'll already be dead.

Frequently cited red herrings. The G5 will continue after the best move up. It will not spell the end of favorable tax benefits as they are still state owned not for profit institutions that turn out the majority of attorneys who then fill the ranks of state houses and eventually from there the U.S. House and Senate. Besides the government will never turn on its favorite indoctrination centers for the corporate way of life. I've never been for any of this, but I have consistently pointed out where it is headed next. Realignment got rolling because 100 year old institutions were scrambling to find new revenue streams after 2008. Prior to that it was about revenue as well, but the crash put it on steroids and the cutting of state and federal funding put the spurs to some university presidents who quit napping when they figured out that with the death of the WWII generation they were losing the majority of private funding as well. Boomer's give 1/4 of the charitable gifts of their parents. Hello corporate influence! I described college football two years ago as an undervalued product whose owners (the schools) were facing a financial crisis and which was undergoing a hostile takeover by the networks who saw a huge upside with low overhead. Nothing has changed and the content carrot will be the next one dangled to continue the product positioning to optimize advertising revenue. It really is as simple as that.

We deregulated and corporate chains got tax breaks that equaled in many states a 13 point advantage over private business. Private businesses as a result are dying. Tax bases are rising on citizens to make up for the breaks given to the corporations (property and sales tax concessions mostly). NAFTA opened the trade doors allowing multinationals to move jobs to the cheapest locations. Bye bye middle class to lower middle class jobs. Less taxable income made states raise taxes again and boosted the Federal Government's need to squeeze deductions and lean on usage and connectivity taxes and others. All of this pressured the schools which were then supplied with more exchange students than ever which helped to continue the inflation of education somewhat. Now with higher costs for education, defaulting student loans at an epidemic, and fewer employment opportunities for recent graduates it's all coming to a head. But Ken D none of that aroused the public which sat passively by and just accepted it as fate. The irony is that now that it is affecting football we finally have some screaming bloody murder and announcing the end of the world. Well it's almost too late now. It's not just the one issue it is the assemblage of issues that build upon one another that are killing our way of life. And, they all need to be dealt with and neither democrats nor republicans, both of which are in the corporate pockets, will help you. Remember that next time we have an election. Realignment didn't happen in a vacuum and its social consequences are merely a reflection of our loss of individual and regional identity and the means to pursue individual dreams for ourselves and for our children's future.

(02-23-2014 01:18 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I am skeptical of a higher attendance standard because first, with student attendance being weak across much of the P5, replacing the people filling the monster stadiums is going to be harder.

I tend to think you are going to see a school build a new stadium or renovate their stadium into something smaller than what they have today.

You will see a 40K to 55k palace that puts the students in one end zone, has cheaper family oriented pricing in the opposite end zone. The west side (typically opposite press box) will be premium seating with suites above it. The east side lower tier will be super premium seats with people delivering food and drink to you, that will include access to a club area with food and drink included for your pre and post-game party. One end zone will feature another club behind the seats. Fans holding certain tickets will be admitted pre-game and you pay for what you consume while the various TVs show the other action around the country and is open to all post-game. Providing high capacity internet access to 40k is far easier than doing it for 60k or 80k.

Most will have a partial roof like Autzen or a soccer stadium to deflect sound back in and create a more intimate feel. The lower capacity will drive prices higher even though you will maintain some lower priced options, there just won't be as many of the cheaper seats and those cheaper seats will be better for those lucky few than what they have now.

I've seen the model. Sporting Park in KC. I asked a top official there when they would expand the stadium (which is designed to expand). If we get 10 years of sellouts we will start looking at it but even then we will never build beyond existing demand and lower the value of our seats.

Someone will do it.

It will be a massive financial success and others will follow. The snugger capacity and intimate feel will make great TV. A crowd of 40k in a 40k stadium just looks better than 65k in an 80k. Schools will be able to divert resources from trying to fill massive stadiums. The worst thing in college football is an unsold seat. Unsold seats take pressure off people to buy season tickets or donate to get in to the game.

If you can generate the same or more revenue with 50% of the capacity or even 75% of the capacity you currently have you spend less dealing with traffic, concessions, and bathroom facilities and you spend less selling and marketing.

That sounds reasonable except that none of it deals with the real underlying issue of less and less disposable income for the middle class which supports the sports. The wealthy would rather do other things and just buy high dollar tickets for high visibility social outings like the Super Bowl. In the end any strategy that is not contingent upon raising the the standard of living of the highest percentage of the public is a fail and money thrown away.