(05-09-2014 02:40 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 02:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:32 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:30 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  Those numbers simply are not right. I went to every single home game. Michigan was 42,000 (extra seats), Maryland was around 38/39 and Louisville was decent (36 or so). So in order to get to 22,000 we would have had to have 0 people show up for the second half of the season, which didn't happen. Though, Memphis was sparse, about 21,000.

And we had 28,000 season ticket holders - no way 6,000 on average didn't show up (not counting multi-game packages sold due to Michigan and individuals).

Season ticket holders don't show up in poor years. USF also had about 22K or so season ticket holders and not all of them showed up every game...many stayed home.

PS. I'm not trying to slam UConn. I love UConn as a program. My only point is that no one counts only butts in seats (despite cries on internet boards that thier team counts butts in seats). Simply not true. Every team fudges the numbers. Some more than others, but no one counts every single body that comes through a turnstile and goes exactly at that number. Most programs make an educated guess at many of the numbers. This is well documented.

I am about 90% sure we count butts in the seats. It's not hard, every ticket is scanned when you come in. And, like I said, I was at every game...there is no way that number is remotely right...1/4 of season tickets holders staying home EVERY GAME, on average, when we had Mich/Maryland/L'Ville/Rut just didn't happen.

You're right, they count scanned tickets, but that is only one portion of announced attendance. Support staff, players, media, bands, students, and many other groups and various people that did not go the scanned process, which at many stadiums are estimated or should I say very generously guesstimated. You would be very surprised to find out how much guesstimating goes on in announced attendance. Also counted is season tickets whether or not they showed up. Every school does this to a certain extent. That is why you get discrepancies in actual attendance (if you can even get that from your school) and announced. THIS IS COMMON PRACTICE BY EVERYONE.

You are saying season tickets are counted, when I can prove to you that we don't count them unless they show up (e.g. 22,000 announced attendance against Memphis with 28,000 season tickets holders). I know most schools totally fudge numbers, I WISH WE DID - it is much better for P.R.

I have no idea, but I am guessing your "season ticket holders" is actually "season tickets distributed/accounted for", which in many cases is fudged in the upward direction by a lot. I am dead serious. Many, many schools do this. Do a FOIA request and ask how many actual tickets were scanned at your stadium like the Kentucky blogger did and found out that the announced in many cases was like twice or more the "scanned" numbers. Ticket counting and announced attendance is a very hazy process with a lot of guesstimating and attendance wags going on. The point is this. Virtually no one just counts exactly how many people scanned a ticket on game day or went through a turnstile as the exact number for their announced attendance. I know this for a fact. That is my only point. I enjoy watching UConn football/basketball by the way...great program.

(05-09-2014 02:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 02:40 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 02:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:32 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Season ticket holders don't show up in poor years. USF also had about 22K or so season ticket holders and not all of them showed up every game...many stayed home.

PS. I'm not trying to slam UConn. I love UConn as a program. My only point is that no one counts only butts in seats (despite cries on internet boards that thier team counts butts in seats). Simply not true. Every team fudges the numbers. Some more than others, but no one counts every single body that comes through a turnstile and goes exactly at that number. Most programs make an educated guess at many of the numbers. This is well documented.

I am about 90% sure we count butts in the seats. It's not hard, every ticket is scanned when you come in. And, like I said, I was at every game...there is no way that number is remotely right...1/4 of season tickets holders staying home EVERY GAME, on average, when we had Mich/Maryland/L'Ville/Rut just didn't happen.

You're right, they count scanned tickets, but that is only one portion of announced attendance. Support staff, players, media, bands, students, and many other groups and various people that did not go the scanned process, which at many stadiums are estimated or should I say very generously guesstimated. You would be very surprised to find out how much guesstimating goes on in announced attendance. Also counted is season tickets whether or not they showed up. Every school does this to a certain extent. That is why you get discrepancies in actual attendance (if you can even get that from your school) and announced. THIS IS COMMON PRACTICE BY EVERYONE.

You are saying season tickets are counted, when I can prove to you that we don't count them unless they show up (e.g. 22,000 announced attendance against Memphis with 28,000 season tickets holders). I know most schools totally fudge numbers, I WISH WE DID - it is much better for P.R.

I have no idea, but I am guessing your "season ticket holders" is actually "season tickets distributed/accounted for", which in many cases is fudged in the upward direction by a lot. I am dead serious. Many, many schools do this. Do a FOIA request and ask how many actual tickets were scanned at your stadium like the Kentucky blogger did and found out that the announced in many cases was like twice or more the "scanned" numbers. Ticket counting and announced attendance is a very hazy process with a lot of guesstimating and attendance wags going on. The point is this. Virtually no one just counts exactly how many people scanned a ticket on game day or went through a turnstile as the exact number for their announced attendance. I know this for a fact. That is my only point. I enjoy watching UConn football/basketball by the way...great program.

I've been attending Cincinnati football games for years and have a pretty good grasp of how different attendance levels look. My observations have led me to believe they count butts in the seats.

Unnecessary bashing is unnecessary. Keep the smack in the smack thread.

AAC <3

(05-09-2014 02:54 PM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 02:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 02:40 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 02:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  I am about 90% sure we count butts in the seats. It's not hard, every ticket is scanned when you come in. And, like I said, I was at every game...there is no way that number is remotely right...1/4 of season tickets holders staying home EVERY GAME, on average, when we had Mich/Maryland/L'Ville/Rut just didn't happen.

You're right, they count scanned tickets, but that is only one portion of announced attendance. Support staff, players, media, bands, students, and many other groups and various people that did not go the scanned process, which at many stadiums are estimated or should I say very generously guesstimated. You would be very surprised to find out how much guesstimating goes on in announced attendance. Also counted is season tickets whether or not they showed up. Every school does this to a certain extent. That is why you get discrepancies in actual attendance (if you can even get that from your school) and announced. THIS IS COMMON PRACTICE BY EVERYONE.

You are saying season tickets are counted, when I can prove to you that we don't count them unless they show up (e.g. 22,000 announced attendance against Memphis with 28,000 season tickets holders). I know most schools totally fudge numbers, I WISH WE DID - it is much better for P.R.

I have no idea, but I am guessing your "season ticket holders" is actually "season tickets distributed/accounted for", which in many cases is fudged in the upward direction by a lot. I am dead serious. Many, many schools do this. Do a FOIA request and ask how many actual tickets were scanned at your stadium like the Kentucky blogger did and found out that the announced in many cases was like twice or more the "scanned" numbers. Ticket counting and announced attendance is a very hazy process with a lot of guesstimating and attendance wags going on. The point is this. Virtually no one just counts exactly how many people scanned a ticket on game day or went through a turnstile as the exact number for their announced attendance. I know this for a fact. That is my only point. I enjoy watching UConn football/basketball by the way...great program.

I've been attending Cincinnati football games for years and have a pretty good grasp of how different attendance levels look. My observations have led me to believe they count butts in the seats.

There was a great article recently on how schools come up with announced attendance and the amount of estimating/fudging going on by most schools. Unfortunately, I can't find it. That would shed a light on what I am talking about that goes on at 99% of schools. But, I'll leave it at that, no sense hashing a topic that has been beat to death already.

As long as each school commits to try to be outstanding in either football or basketball (or both), the league will be fine and will have several nationally competitive programs in each sport.

Clearly, we have bell cows in basketball (Memphis, UConn, Cincy, Temple) and football (East Carolina, UCF, Houston, Cincy). But SMU is really trying to be good in both. Houston is trying to be good in basketball with investments in facilities and coach. Tulsa spent a bunch of money on replacing Manning. Tulane built a football stadium. The list goes on.

One of the biggest problems I see is USF's lack of a campus stadium. They won't reach their full potential as a program until they follow Houston's lead and build a $100M+ 40K seat+ campus stadium.

(05-09-2014 03:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  As long as each school commits to try to be outstanding in either football or basketball (or both), the league will be fine and will have several nationally competitive programs in each sport.

Clearly, we have bell cows in basketball (Memphis, UConn, Cincy, Temple) and football (East Carolina, UCF, Houston, Cincy). But SMU is really trying to be good in both. Houston is trying to be good in basketball with investments in facilities and coach. Tulsa spent a bunch of money on replacing Manning. Tulane built a football stadium. The list goes on.

One of the biggest problems I see is USF's lack of a campus stadium. They won't reach their full potential as a program until they follow Houston's lead and build a $100M+ 40K seat+ campus stadium.

SMU is trying to be good in both?

(05-09-2014 03:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  As long as each school commits to try to be outstanding in either football or basketball (or both), the league will be fine and will have several nationally competitive programs in each sport.

Clearly, we have bell cows in basketball (Memphis, UConn, Cincy, Temple) and football (East Carolina, UCF, Houston, Cincy). But SMU is really trying to be good in both. Houston is trying to be good in basketball with investments in facilities and coach. Tulsa spent a bunch of money on replacing Manning. Tulane built a football stadium. The list goes on.

One of the biggest problems I see is USF's lack of a campus stadium. They won't reach their full potential as a program until they follow Houston's lead and build a $100M+ 40K seat+ campus stadium.

I know USF was bad in football last year, but I am going to add them to your football bellcow list, provided they can get back to Leavitt levels, and Taggart can continue to haul in one of the best G5 recruiting class (this part should actually be fairly easy).

(05-09-2014 03:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  As long as each school commits to try to be outstanding in either football or basketball (or both), the league will be fine and will have several nationally competitive programs in each sport.

Clearly, we have bell cows in basketball (Memphis, UConn, Cincy, Temple) and football (East Carolina, UCF, Houston, Cincy). But SMU is really trying to be good in both. Houston is trying to be good in basketball with investments in facilities and coach. Tulsa spent a bunch of money on replacing Manning. Tulane built a football stadium. The list goes on.

One of the biggest problems I see is USF's lack of a campus stadium. They won't reach their full potential as a program until they follow Houston's lead and build a $100M+ 40K seat+ campus stadium.

While I agree with you about an OCS, when USF is rolling, it has shown the ability to put up big crowds in RJS. Hopefully, this will be the case going forward when Taggart turns it around. RJS can be a positive in certain curcumstances.

Houston drew well at times at the Astrodome. Long term, we would have been much better off not paying rent, and building our campus traditions.

(05-09-2014 03:57 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  SMU is trying to be good in both?

I think that was more of a shot at your FB program than BB.

(05-09-2014 03:57 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  SMU is trying to be good in both?

Clearly. You have spent money on facilities. And coaches.

You are very close to being outstanding in basketball. The NIT bid was the first NIT bid since the Mike Dement era, no? The recruiting is going well. The crowds are good. I think you will finish in the Top 25 next year.

You are further away from being good in football despite the investment. The luster seems to have worn on June Jones' star. And the crowds leave a lot to be desired.

SMU is a class act and one of the few teams in the AAC I am happy to see at home

(05-09-2014 09:04 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 09:53 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I'm amazed with some of the guff we're taking from the likes of cincy fans... We've been playing Cincy at least semi-regularly since the 50's. If we can get the football team back on the right track we'll be one of the best additions that came into the AAC (besides maybe UCF & Memphis)

ive been positive towards tulsa but let's not get carried away, id firmly have houston and navy above tulsa even if tulsa gets better in football

Navy is good because they have a built in fan base of people that never had to go to college, but they have no basketball and they're basically perennial floormat due the difficulty they will always have recruiting. Houston is good, but the basketball hasn't shown much life in recent years (barring the one NCAA run).

The key to the success in the AAC is winning football games against quality ranked opponents, particularly in the top 5 conferences. As we all know TV league football contracts are where the money is. Please do not knock Tulane and Tulsa. Tulane football after many down years had a winning season last year and bowl appearance under HC Curtis Johnson who has been making excellent recruiting inroads in Louisiana and elsewhere. Add to that our new 73m football stadium on campus opening this fall with our first game against Georgia Tech. A lot for Tulane fans to look forward too.

(05-10-2014 08:30 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:04 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 09:53 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I'm amazed with some of the guff we're taking from the likes of cincy fans... We've been playing Cincy at least semi-regularly since the 50's. If we can get the football team back on the right track we'll be one of the best additions that came into the AAC (besides maybe UCF & Memphis)

ive been positive towards tulsa but let's not get carried away, id firmly have houston and navy above tulsa even if tulsa gets better in football

Navy is good because they have a built in fan base of people that never had to go to college, but they have no basketball and they're basically perennial floormat due the difficulty they will always have recruiting. Houston is good, but the basketball hasn't shown much life in recent years (barring the one NCAA run).

navy doesn't bring basketball but still averages 35-40k a game and plays 3 games a year that average 3-6 million viewers , no offense to tulsa but they don't bring anything that valuable in the league. and have you watched navy football EVER they regularly make bowls and took ND to the wire last year. their qb is set to potentially break the career rushing td record as a junior next year (34 shy, had 31 last year) and could finish with 20 more rushing tds than anyone who has ever played the game ..perennial doormat?

tulsa has been as mediocre as houston in basketball, im not sure what point you were trying to make here

This thread could have just been called "Generic Thread." Do posters here really need a thread to "air their dirty laundry" and speak openly about their thoughts on other schools in the league? I mean, isn't that what happens in every other thread?

Strange.

(05-11-2014 10:49 AM)Savacool Wrote:  The key to the success in the AAC is winning football games against quality ranked opponents, particularly in the top 5 conferences. As we all know TV league football contracts are where the money is. Please do not knock Tulane and Tulsa. Tulane football after many down years had a winning season last year and bowl appearance under HC Curtis Johnson who has been making excellent recruiting inroads in Louisiana and elsewhere. Add to that our new 73m football stadium on campus opening this fall with our first game against Georgia Tech. A lot for Tulane fans to look forward too.

Will Yulman actually open in time? I will try to fly over it tomorrow or Wednesday and take a few pictures of it.