Interesting article from the Feb. 2 Thresher: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2016...attendance

There's some discussion about it on this Rice-fan Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/290930017721/

(02-04-2016 09:54 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Interesting article from the Feb. 2 Thresher: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2016...attendance

There's some discussion about it on this Rice-fan Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/290930017721/

No wonder you never see anything around town. $80k for the entire marketing budget doesn't buy much exposure. As we've rehashed a thousand times, lip stick on a losing pig won't do enough, but we should probably be doing a better job with the lip stick, anyway. This quickly loops back to the question of where that money will come from. I don't have that answer.

Reason for no football uptick- fans want to see a winning product on the field.

Unfortunately, sporting events are no longer social events for the Rice undergrad? Discuss...

(02-05-2016 06:16 AM)seniorowl Wrote:  Reason for no football uptick- fans want to see a winning product on the field.

It's a combo of that, an exciting product, and something less tangible. Even in '08 we didn't have impressive student support, outside of the SMU game to start the season. And look at basketball, we are far from having a winning product on the court, but the games are exciting to watch and it has that intangible something. But then look at baseball, we have been winning consistently for 20+ years, yet it appears like out student section support has been dwindling since ~2008.

(02-04-2016 09:54 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Interesting article from the Feb. 2 Thresher: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2016...attendance

There's some discussion about it on this Rice-fan Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/290930017721/

Sad story. Anyone have an estimate on what the actual number is for the 105% increase in basketball? Seems like doubling from 10 to 20 isn't actually that big of deal given the intense focus on it from this administration.

(02-05-2016 09:02 AM)BufflOwl Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:54 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Interesting article from the Feb. 2 Thresher: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2016...attendance

There's some discussion about it on this Rice-fan Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/290930017721/

Sad story. Anyone have an estimate on what the actual number is for the 105% increase in basketball? Seems like doubling from 10 to 20 isn't actually that big of deal given the intense focus on it from this administration.

Very rough numbers, but probably from ~1000 to a bit over 2000, though student attendance has increased by even more than that.

I was struck by this comment in the article:

Quote:While it may seem unfair to compare the fan bases of an athletic powerhouse like Stanford and a smaller Division I school like Rice...

I think we all remember when people thought of Stanford and Rice as more alike than different

$80,000 for marketing???? That is ridiculous.

(02-05-2016 03:45 PM)Mademen Wrote:  $80,000 for marketing???? That is ridiculous.

It's bad.

(02-05-2016 03:45 PM)Mademen Wrote:  $80,000 for marketing???? That is ridiculous.

That's $80k for marketing to students, not the entire marketing budget. That's about $20 per undergraduate.

(02-05-2016 06:26 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 03:45 PM)Mademen Wrote:  $80,000 for marketing???? That is ridiculous.

That's $80k for marketing to students, not the entire marketing budget. That's about $20 per undergraduate.

No $80k appears to be the full amount and they elected $20k of it on students.

(02-05-2016 06:26 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 03:45 PM)Mademen Wrote:  $80,000 for marketing???? That is ridiculous.

That's $80k for marketing to students, not the entire marketing budget. That's about $20 per undergraduate.

This is not clear writing...

Quote:Woodson and Gardner synthesized the information gained from meetings and surveys to plot different strategies to increase student attendance. The marketing staff increased advertisements and incentives, and, in total, spent $20,000 of their $80,000 annual marketing budget on students.

Did they spend $20K of the total marketing budget on students? Or did they have an $80K student marketing budget, out of which they spent $20K on this exercise? It's gotta be the latter, as Tomball points out, but notable that even though it's an absurdly small number, it's a number that some could believe is real for us.

Every time I read this paragraph from the article, I come away with a different understanding. I'll try to remember to ask Tanner to clarify this the next time I see him.

(02-05-2016 09:17 AM)owl95 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:02 AM)BufflOwl Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:54 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Interesting article from the Feb. 2 Thresher: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2016...attendance

There's some discussion about it on this Rice-fan Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/290930017721/

Sad story. Anyone have an estimate on what the actual number is for the 105% increase in basketball? Seems like doubling from 10 to 20 isn't actually that big of deal given the intense focus on it from this administration.

Very rough numbers, but probably from ~1000 to a bit over 2000, though student attendance has increased by even more than that.

I read that as student attendance is up 105%...is all attendance up double? That would seem counter to some of the gamethread posts.

(02-05-2016 07:01 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Did they spend $20K of the total marketing budget on students? Or did they have an $80K student marketing budget, out of which they spent $20K on this exercise? It's gotta be the latter, as Tomball points out, but notable that even though it's an absurdly small number, it's a number that some could believe is real for us.

IMO, the fact that MBB is making a difference and football is not, is a clear indicator that the dollar amount isn't the problem here.

Whether it is 20k, 80k or 200k, the product on the field coupled with the energy and direction of the program along with the money make a difference.

(02-05-2016 10:03 PM)BufflOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:17 AM)owl95 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:02 AM)BufflOwl Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 09:54 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Interesting article from the Feb. 2 Thresher: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2016...attendance

There's some discussion about it on this Rice-fan Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/290930017721/

Sad story. Anyone have an estimate on what the actual number is for the 105% increase in basketball? Seems like doubling from 10 to 20 isn't actually that big of deal given the intense focus on it from this administration.

Very rough numbers, but probably from ~1000 to a bit over 2000, though student attendance has increased by even more than that.

I read that as student attendance is up 105%...is all attendance up double? That would seem counter to some of the gamethread posts.

Well, I posted that last night's crowd at tipoff was sparse, and it was compared to other crowds this year and especially to several years ago. Still, it was a horde compared to a typical game a year or two ago.