(10-02-2016 10:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 09:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  That social disconnect could be seen two decades ago at High School events. In my lifetime I've watched attendance at High School events go from packed with standing room whether for football or basketball, to virtually just the parents of the players and cheerleaders. There are many factors but it goes hand in hand with the breakdown in the cohesion of the towns and cities.

Mobility and relocation are also big factors in this -- IMO more important factors than electronic devices. At the time when whole communities went to high school football games, those communities were mostly composed of people who had lived in the area for most of their lifetime. How many people live, today, within 20 miles of their old high school? If you asked that question 40 years ago of people in their 50s, the answer would have been "most"; ask the question today of people in their 50s and the answer would be "very few".

That carries over to college football as well. How many alums of large, public universities with major college football live within a reasonable drive of their school's campus? With only a few exceptions, the answer is: A much smaller percentage than 40 years ago.

And that's before we've taken into account the alluring high-tech conveniences of HDTV, wifi, a well-stocked refrigerator, 10 other games to watch at the same time, and not having to build your entire day around a game time that is only announced 12 or 6 days in advance.

It's also before we've considered the allegiances of those who are not alums or parents of alums or someone with a strong connection to the school. The NFL has been draining more and more of those people away from CFB fandom every year since 1970 or so. The NFL is also the primary force in conditioning fans to believe that you can be a true diehard fan of any team even if you live your whole life without ever going near the stadium, and the universal availability of games on TV reinforces that.

Wedge I agree with all of this as another contributing factor, but would point out that even the NFL is in the beginning of a downward trend.

NFL games are even more expensive to attend. They're losing some of their attendance but they'll be able to keep up revenues for many years with TV money, merchandise sales, and charging more for the most "premium" game experiences. They are less dependent on ticket revenue than CFB.

Well that wasn't the locus of the discussion. However since you bring it up, that is applicable among several of the P conferences, but not the SEC or Big 10 which like the NFL have managed to cover the one with the other. The question is "For how long?"

It is applicable for SEC and Big Ten schools as well. Those that sell 80,000 or more tickets at relatively high prices, and also make big money on donations tied to season tickets, have more to lose from a potential attendance drop. And for those schools, any vacancy in the stadium creates less urgency for fans to secure their seats, and more opportunities to trade down to less expensive seats or even buy only single-game tickets because they'll always be available.

There are a few in the SEC and at least half of the Big Ten where attendance is spotty, and they have less to lose in total dollars on the one hand, but on the other hand, when you win only as often as Purdue, you're not giving fans much reason to leave home, buy tickets, and build their entire Saturday around 4-5 hours at the stadium, so your percentage rate of attendance decline will likely be greater than that of Ohio State.

(10-02-2016 10:11 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  There are 10 P5 schools drawing under 40,000.

P5 Schools Below 40K - 10
Maryland = 38,340
Purdue = 35,583
Northwestern = 34,033
Syracuse = 31,936
Wash St = 31,460
Vanderbilt = 30,165
Kansas = 27,666
Duke = 27,109
Wake Forest = 25,185
Boston College = 23,466

These schools have become buried behind 10 other programs in their own conferences.

The college football fan watches games from around the country, top match ups. Smaller power programs are pushed to the margins and always in rebuilding mode.

The margin of error has become so small in football if there are any cracks you might as well forget about the season. Having a roster full of 3 star recruits doesn't guarantee you W's like it could 20 years ago.

Aren't 6 of those schools private?

(10-02-2016 11:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 09:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Mobility and relocation are also big factors in this -- IMO more important factors than electronic devices. At the time when whole communities went to high school football games, those communities were mostly composed of people who had lived in the area for most of their lifetime. How many people live, today, within 20 miles of their old high school? If you asked that question 40 years ago of people in their 50s, the answer would have been "most"; ask the question today of people in their 50s and the answer would be "very few".

That carries over to college football as well. How many alums of large, public universities with major college football live within a reasonable drive of their school's campus? With only a few exceptions, the answer is: A much smaller percentage than 40 years ago.

And that's before we've taken into account the alluring high-tech conveniences of HDTV, wifi, a well-stocked refrigerator, 10 other games to watch at the same time, and not having to build your entire day around a game time that is only announced 12 or 6 days in advance.

It's also before we've considered the allegiances of those who are not alums or parents of alums or someone with a strong connection to the school. The NFL has been draining more and more of those people away from CFB fandom every year since 1970 or so. The NFL is also the primary force in conditioning fans to believe that you can be a true diehard fan of any team even if you live your whole life without ever going near the stadium, and the universal availability of games on TV reinforces that.

Wedge I agree with all of this as another contributing factor, but would point out that even the NFL is in the beginning of a downward trend.

NFL games are even more expensive to attend. They're losing some of their attendance but they'll be able to keep up revenues for many years with TV money, merchandise sales, and charging more for the most "premium" game experiences. They are less dependent on ticket revenue than CFB.

Well that wasn't the locus of the discussion. However since you bring it up, that is applicable among several of the P conferences, but not the SEC or Big 10 which like the NFL have managed to cover the one with the other. The question is "For how long?"

It is applicable for SEC and Big Ten schools as well. Those that sell 80,000 or more tickets at relatively high prices, and also make big money on donations tied to season tickets, have more to lose from a potential attendance drop. And for those schools, any vacancy in the stadium creates less urgency for fans to secure their seats, and more opportunities to trade down to less expensive seats or even buy only single-game tickets because they'll always be available.

There are a few in the SEC and at least half of the Big Ten where attendance is spotty, and they have less to lose in total dollars on the one hand, but on the other hand, when you win only as often as Purdue, you're not giving fans much reason to leave home, buy tickets, and build their entire Saturday around 4-5 hours at the stadium, so your percentage rate of attendance decline will likely be greater than that of Ohio State.

To which schools are you referring? The attendance swing at Auburn from a bad year to a good one is less than 4,000. And that's from a starting point of 85,000. The SEC as a whole has increased in each of the last 3 years. No doubt college football is peaking as the Boomers get ready to check out. But it also goes hand in hand with the corporate takeover of the product, the declining purchasing power of a dollar, the ever burgeoning personal debt levels, the declining of state revenue, and an electronic generation who simply doesn't follow sports they never played. Luxuries will recede from millions of personal budgets in the years ahead. There are more people every day and less resources for them.

As solid as professional sports seem, they will die before college sports. Both will rely upon TV revenue to survive, but the pro teams will eventually lose out to a need for more regional advertising and the low overhead for the networks of college sports.

But before that happens there will be a falling away from major sports by many mid-sized and smaller universities. The networks are carving out the ones they want to prop up now. The rest will once again concentrate on education. I wouldn't even be surprised if the so called "P" schools don't eventually separate from their athletics for similar reasons of mission. They might wind up selling the brand of what becomes a semi professional league. Anyway that's how I see it playing out in a few decades from now.

(10-02-2016 11:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 11:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 10:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Wedge I agree with all of this as another contributing factor, but would point out that even the NFL is in the beginning of a downward trend.

NFL games are even more expensive to attend. They're losing some of their attendance but they'll be able to keep up revenues for many years with TV money, merchandise sales, and charging more for the most "premium" game experiences. They are less dependent on ticket revenue than CFB.

Well that wasn't the locus of the discussion. However since you bring it up, that is applicable among several of the P conferences, but not the SEC or Big 10 which like the NFL have managed to cover the one with the other. The question is "For how long?"

It is applicable for SEC and Big Ten schools as well. Those that sell 80,000 or more tickets at relatively high prices, and also make big money on donations tied to season tickets, have more to lose from a potential attendance drop. And for those schools, any vacancy in the stadium creates less urgency for fans to secure their seats, and more opportunities to trade down to less expensive seats or even buy only single-game tickets because they'll always be available.

There are a few in the SEC and at least half of the Big Ten where attendance is spotty, and they have less to lose in total dollars on the one hand, but on the other hand, when you win only as often as Purdue, you're not giving fans much reason to leave home, buy tickets, and build their entire Saturday around 4-5 hours at the stadium, so your percentage rate of attendance decline will likely be greater than that of Ohio State.

To which schools are you referring? The attendance swing at Auburn from a bad year to a good one is less than 4,000. And that's from a starting point of 85,000. The SEC as a whole has increased in each of the last 3 years. No doubt college football is peaking as the Boomers get ready to check out. But it also goes hand in hand with the corporate takeover of the product, the declining purchasing power of a dollar, the ever burgeoning personal debt levels, the declining of state revenue, and an electronic generation who simply doesn't follow sports they never played. Luxuries will recede from millions of personal budgets in the years ahead. There are more people every day and less resources for them.

As solid as professional sports seem, they will die before college sports. Both will rely upon TV revenue to survive, but the pro teams will eventually lose out to a need for more regional advertising and the low overhead for the networks of college sports.

But before that happens there will be a falling away from major sports by many mid-sized and smaller universities. The networks are carving out the ones they want to prop up now. The rest will once again concentrate on education. I wouldn't even be surprised if the so called "P" schools don't eventually separate from their athletics for similar reasons of mission. They might wind up selling the brand of what becomes a semi professional league. Anyway that's how I see it playing out in a few decades from now.

"Name" athletic programs could definitely move away from their schools, keeping the branding, and operating as stand-alone businesses with the same name but
separate operations. An example is the many hospitals and medical clinics that are branded with a university medical school's name but have only a loose affiliation with the university.

College football has a lot to do with chemistry.

For Louisville, they moved into CUSA which at the time is like today's AAC in exposure. The metro names and Thursday night games gave it a great atmosphere. The continue it into the Big East which improves recruiting and then on into the ACC. Louisville is a good sized city with a lot of pride and ready made to handle a big time atmosphere.

I though the old Big East football conference had a lot of chemistry to it. For Virginia Tech to be aligned with WVU and Pitt in a football conference was much preferable to a docile alignment with Maryland and Virginia. VT was at its peak when it entered the ACC and it carried over for a while but now they are lost in a sea of programs.

Ohio built a season ticket base around a supply issue. Put in limited premium sections to fetch top dollar and constrict the availability of tickets. Raised prices of game tickets and forced fans to by season if they wanted to lock in tickets for homecoming or parents weekend. Supply issue has carried over to hotels and parking.

Some P5's may want to consider switching conferences to achieve better chemistry.

-Kentucky. Imagine Kentucky BB in the B1G. Now imagine Kentucky football winning a few games in B1G football. Kansas could use a move to B1G along the same lines.

-South Carolina. They could be be a power in the ACC while the SEC is too tough.

For others like Purdue what they need is a stadium reduction down to 40,000 seats with modern amenities.

1. Apathy - student sections are empty most of the game. Students that do show up come late and leave early.

2. Price of tickets. I go to a cheap game or two, usually non conference in the nose bleed section. Home games for SEC and B-10 games like Georgia, Clemson, Florida, Alabama, Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan are too expensive at $100+ a pop or more, for me to take my family of 5 to the game. Those prices are equivalent to pro games in the PA, NY, NJ, DC / Maryland area so I save some of my football expense money for one pro game a year too.

3. Parking on top at $45 a pop doesn't help either.

4. Electronics - I can sit home with 8 TVs in the room watching up to 13 games at a time like a sports bar with cheap food and beer.

5. Early in the season up to the third week of the season I can watch the games from my pool with a few TVs on the sun porch hook ups, with the cheap beer and food at home and avoid the obnoxious drunks in the parking lots and in the stadium.

6. Re-cap - Electronics of today, college football is out pricing itself for a family affair, student apathy and alumni disconnect, cheaper and more convenient to watch the games at home with family and friends.

(10-02-2016 07:51 PM)Artifice Wrote:  Besides the multitude of other distractions, viewing options, and the expense to already pinched middle class wallets, the networks have ruined things by telling everyone over and over that only a few leagues and teams matter. Its not like this is new for them either. ESPN decided that MLB didn't exist outside of Boston and NY for about a decade and it ruined the sport for a lot of fans. ESPN = worst thing that ever happened to college football.

Conferences are also spread too far out than what they used to be. Minnesota, Nebraska and Iowa are different culture than the midwest schools because they are mainly plains states. Fans are not too thrill to travel from Oklahoma to West Virginia. It costs too much, and when the conferences were regionally? Fans do come out in droves. UTEP had a large amount of fans when Oklahoma came to town. They may not be too thrill to see a Marshall or Old Dominion every year. The conferences need to stop being snobs, and start getting into regional conferences. Southland is Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas area. They could add a Missouri, Oklahoma and a Delta State and still be regional. GAC of D2 is made up of Arkansas and Oklahoma schools. Lone Star is made up of Texas and New Mexico schools. Used to have Oklahoma and Arkansas schools. RMAC have Colorado, Montana, and a Dakota school or 2, plus they added some Utah schools.They used to have Kansas, Nebraska and New Mexico schools. They do have some associates from Oklahoma Baptist, Rockhurst and Lindenwood for LAX.

(10-02-2016 09:26 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Games are taking too long. The increasing number of TV timeouts and the length of them is turning people off who are attending the game.

At TCU and other schools in our area, games in September or even October which were always night games in the past because of the heat, are now being scheduled at 11 AM or 2 PM for television. In the past 5 years we have had two games in particular that were 97 and 96 degrees. People sitting on metal seats in concrete stands cannot handle the heat during a day game. It is dangerously hot, but the TV people don't care.

Obnoxious fans are turning people off. They drink to excess before entering the game and make it uncomfortable for everyone sitting around them.

The scoreboards are now infomercials selling who knows what to the fans. It has become irritating.

So many other games on TV. If your team is playing a so so team, people are staying home or at the tailgate to watch the marquee match up.

Costs of tickets and concessions continue to get out of hand.

Yeah, it used to be that the televised experience was to represent some fraction of the true, real-time experience at the stadium. Now, it's like the television cameras call the shots. But, despite that, it's not on ESPN, CBS, NBC, or Fox. The schools should be saying "no, this doesn't work for us." The people coming out to support these events probably are former students and other associated fans who came to know these games by a certain style or theme. It boils my blood when schools, rather than take their due criticism for making far too many significant requests/demands from its supporters, hang it on their students and fans for not showing up. Like the world revolves around a program who thinks it's okay for "tbd" to be on tickets and for people to plan around. Bull. ****. No, we don't have lives. We live for you. Hubris.

Honestly, in TCU's case, not only does it make TCU look weak for rolling over to make concessions to get a better pay day, it makes the Big XII look weak for picking a school who, when it comes down to it, aren't that willing or supportive to come out for the school. When that infamous Kansas-TCU stadium shot raised some eyebrows, you had a lot of theories out there about the matter: weather, heat, kick-off time, opponent, and the real kicker - fans opting for UT-OU instead. The school FINALLY rejoins the ranks of the majors, but it looks like nobody gave a rip.

I don't mean to single out TCU. This was/is happening at Penn State, too. Even before the Paterno-Sandusky stuff. It used to be that schools set their kick-off times and the networks selected the content they wanted. For many at Penn State, that meant you had these early games (usually noon kick-off's), maybe a 3:30 game midway through the season against a big foe (Michigan or Ohio State), and maybe ONE night game early on against a major team you'd host. Easy for all to expect and plan. Now, nope. The games start when the networks and conference want them to. And you know what? PSU's gates dropped. It's tough on students to give up an entire Saturday to stand in line and then stand in the bleachers while the day rolls on, and then wait for a "meh" game to start at a secondary time slot, potentially delayed if another game runs over its time (and this is happening A LOT), then to have to endure a 3.5-4hr game with canned content and television breaks. Oh, you have demands on you as a student? Oops.

But, again, TV didn't ruin this. The schools did. Passing the buck onto "bad fans" is lazy and potentially toxic to its stakeholders. If a school representative went public and threw me under the bus, like they've done elsewhere (including PSU, well, its hoops anyway) my wallet won't be opening up for the school anytime soon. It's laughable to think fans like me would think "oh, maybe you're right, and I am lazy...OMG HERESMYWALLETGOTTAGOTOTHEGAMEGOSTATEGO!!!!" after such an insult.

(10-02-2016 07:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Games are expensive.

A lot easier to watch on TV.

Younger generation also is used to living in a virtual world. For them TV is as real as in person.

Is that attendance list for this season??

I'm surprised at Maryland, if so, because they've been a surprise winner so far. Easy schedule, but interested to see what they can do at Penn State. Minnesota shoulda, coulda. Maybe they can take that game plan and improve it.

No matter what Espin says about only a couple of games made up from so called elite conference match ups mattering, remember that
All College Football is Local.
Cheers!

The biggest thing I notice is people leaving games early

On Saturday a below average to mediocre South Carolina hosted number 9 Texas A&M. There were probably about 75k fans in an 80k seat stadium for a 4pm kickoff. Great start.

Then, at halftime of a 7-7 game against a top ten team, a large number, maybe 5-10k, fans left. After A&M made it 14-7 a larger number left.

I'm at a loss as to what this is about. Is it the heat? Do people just not like being outside. Has tailgating become so sophisticated that fans would rather go back to their tailgate spot and watch the game there on a giant TV under a tent?

(10-02-2016 10:47 PM)insomniaisevil Wrote:  There is no real championship...even though there is now a "playoff". That's the problem. The fans of the majority of schools have zero hope of anything before the season even starts. Why have any excitement? Go to a a playoff where the conference champ of EVERY conference gets in, along with a few at large, at this totally changes everything. The short-sighted nature of people who are in favor of killing the G5 blows my mind.

College football was always hard to follow anyway, as so few teams had a chance and there wasn't a real "champion", but going to a 4 team "playoff" almost makes it worse. What reason does anyone who follows say, a MAC school, have to have a shred of hope. Their team could win every game by 3 touchdowns...and still not have a chance. It's infuriating.

Go to a real playoff and most of these problems solve themselves.

Not necessarily. All but four teams have conference championships to play four. Personally I would cut my hand off to see South Carolina win the SEC

(10-02-2016 11:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  To which schools are you referring? The attendance swing at Auburn from a bad year to a good one is less than 4,000. And that's from a starting point of 85,000. The SEC as a whole has increased in each of the last 3 years. No doubt college football is peaking as the Boomers get ready to check out. But it also goes hand in hand with the corporate takeover of the product, the declining purchasing power of a dollar, the ever burgeoning personal debt levels, the declining of state revenue, and an electronic generation who simply doesn't follow sports they never played. Luxuries will recede from millions of personal budgets in the years ahead. There are more people every day and less resources for them.

As solid as professional sports seem, they will die before college sports. Both will rely upon TV revenue to survive, but the pro teams will eventually lose out to a need for more regional advertising and the low overhead for the networks of college sports.

But before that happens there will be a falling away from major sports by many mid-sized and smaller universities. The networks are carving out the ones they want to prop up now. The rest will once again concentrate on education. I wouldn't even be surprised if the so called "P" schools don't eventually separate from their athletics for similar reasons of mission. They might wind up selling the brand of what becomes a semi professional league. Anyway that's how I see it playing out in a few decades from now.

One thing that will continue to help attendance is growing enrollments. Not sure about Auburn's situation, but South Carolina's enrollment has gone from 15k to over 30k in just the last 15 years or so with plans to increase it even further.

With a growing alumni base that is potential for more season ticket holders, which will help lessen the impact of the other factors you mentioned.

(10-03-2016 06:52 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Games are expensive.

A lot easier to watch on TV.

Younger generation also is used to living in a virtual world. For them TV is as real as in person.

SAD but TRUE.

(10-03-2016 08:00 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  No matter what Espin says about only a couple of games made up from so called elite conference match ups mattering, remember that
All College Football is Local.
Cheers!

I think this is as much schools and conferences trying to roll on the networks to launder the politics between bickering/competitive sides to make it look like good business.

It's not working.

Like, trying to watch the nonsense in the Big Ten saying Rutgers matters more business-wise than Pitt, Missouri, Cincinnati, or Iowa State, when we can basically all see Penn State, Illinois, Iowa, Ohio State and others giving death-stares to those schools for so long. Ok then. So now it's business? And when the stands don't fill up on game day when Rutgers or Maryland comes to your town, we who did show up should think "gee, at least the school is making a mint from television putting this in front of me more than this other school I'd rather see, as would my friends and family since we all went to these schools...oh well, who cares what I think?"

At this point, I don't know what college sports are for. I asked this on another thread about these select fans/donors, but are these real people? If it isn't for the students, and isn't for stakeholders in the state who might like to see some intrastate or regionally-aligned content to better the local economies, who is this stuff serving? It's not exactly getting much regard on television, either, so scapegoating us "youngins" isn't exactly fair or logical either...

(10-03-2016 08:47 AM)IHAVETRIED Wrote:  

(10-03-2016 06:52 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:40 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Games are expensive.

A lot easier to watch on TV.

Younger generation also is used to living in a virtual world. For them TV is as real as in person.

SAD but TRUE.

Eh, that's not really true. Actually, younger people *aren't* watching as much TV, which is what ought to worry both pro and college sports league much more than attendance. Statistically, the older you are, the much more likely you are to watch TV. That's why it costs so much more to advertise to young viewers - the handful of programs that draw a large number of them are very rare compared to a whole lot of options to reach older viewers. (You can effectively predict how much a show will make on advertising based on its age 18-34 rating.)

At the same time, I think we look at the attendance numbers of the past with some rose-colored glasses. I'll need to research the data for college football more, but take a look at the attendance numbers of Major League Baseball. For all of the concerns about the current demographics of MLB fans and attendance, the fact is that attendance is MUCH higher today than when MLB's "Golden Age" from the 1950s through 1970s when MLB was still more popular than the NFL. There might have been a bit of an attendance peak in the late-1990s/early-2000s that was more driven by the fact that so many new stadiums were built, but it's as if though people forgot just how empty many stadiums were in the Mickey Mantle era when baseball supposedly ruled the nation's consciousness.

The upshot is that stadiums were not nearly as filled in the past as we like to remember. At the same time, there are multitudes and multitudes of more options to watch college football and all other sports on TV and online compared to the even 10 years ago. With a basic DirecTV account anywhere in the country (not even needing a sports tier package), you have the ability to watch EVERY single Big Ten and SEC football game (and every conference basketball game) plus the vast majority of games from the other P5 leagues... and you get online access to them, too.

Now, I'll just provide my personal anecdote. I were still single or double income no kids (DINK), I'd probably be going to a lot more sporting events than I do now. However, as a dad with twin elementary school kids, the scarcest resource for me right now is time (even more so than money, although the kids vacuum that up, too). I can't pop over to a Bulls/Blackhawks/White Sox/Cubs game after work on a whim like I did when I lived in the city compared to now where I live in the suburbs. Virtually every day (including weekends) has some type of sports, music or dance activity for the kids, so an athletic outing needs a whole lot more planning.

Granted, since my time is so scarce, I'm also pickier about the seats that I'm getting compared to the past (where I used to just worry about getting in the door). Essentially, I can't justify spending a whole day or an entire weekend going to a game where I'm not getting an experience that is clearly superior to watching it on TV. It doesn't necessarily mean that I need to be front row at the 50-yard line, but I need to at least be close enough to pick up the sights and sounds that otherwise wouldn't come across on a TV broadcast. Plus, it's one thing for just me and one of my buddies to get a couple of cheap seats, but another to schlep my wife and kids to the top of the stadium on a windy November day.

So, I'm going to fewer games than I did in the past, but I'd also say that I'm willing to spend a bit more on each of those games in order to get a better experience.

People move on to other things.

From Tennesee and Georgia football to Appalachian State and Georgia Southern football.

If cost was doing it you would see more fans be content with G5 tickets. Now alumni of ASU and GSU are like why pay P5 prices when they have solid programs to watch.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G530AZ using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-03-2016 08:15 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  The biggest thing I notice is people leaving games early

Some of us are old enough to remember going to 3-hour CFB games. If game time was 4 pm, the game ended by 7 pm.

Now we see a lot of games that, if they start at 4, the 3rd quarter kickoff is after 6 pm.

If the game starts even later due to TV, that makes it even more fan-unfriendly. When ESPN sets your game for a 7:30 pm start, and holds kickoff until 7:43 because their previous game is running late... you might be sitting in your seat, you look at the time, it's 10 pm, and they've just started the 3rd quarter.

Frank,

RE: your first paragraph --- OK, *if* you strictly define "watching TV" as "sitting down on a coach, grabbing a remote, and turning on a passive box that displays a passive stream of video that you otherwise can't interact with". In that case, yes, I agree.

But to simple claim that kids aren't consuming video entertainment?? Absurd.