I'm noticing that at ALL levels below top 10-15 matchups... ...that there are tons of empty seats in nearly every game.

Of course some teams are better than others - and my Tulane aren't doing so well in this regard thanks to gross mismanagement under the previous administration - but I'm seeing teams that I KNOW can turn out fans showing 40-60% capacity, and it makes me a little sad as a college FB fan.

I live thousands of miles away from my school, but I know that can't be the case everywhere. Have ADs priced out their young alumns and neighborhood fans for good?

I love multi-tasking on Saturdays, but nothing beats a good CFB game that you care about.

I'm starting to believe that there is a social disconnection between fans and their schools - and it's the fabric of what makes CFB better than the NFL in my eyes.

(10-02-2016 06:58 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm noticing that at ALL levels below top 10-15 matchups... ...that there are tons of empty seats in nearly every game.

Of course some teams are better than others - and my Tulane aren't doing so well in this regard thanks to gross mismanagement under the previous administration - but I'm seeing teams that I KNOW can turn out fans showing 40-60% capacity, and it makes me a little sad as a college FB fan.

I live thousands of miles away from my school, but I know that can't be the case everywhere. Have ADs priced out their young alumns and neighborhood fans for good?

I love multi-tasking on Saturdays, but nothing beats a good CFB game that you care about.

I'm starting to believe that there is a social disconnection between fans and their schools - and it's the fabric of what makes CFB better than the NFL in my eyes.

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. People no longer attend to support their neighbors. I think the isolationism of electronics has played a large role in this along with the shift from a single paycheck household to a double paycheck household. Many young parents find themselves too tired to even consider getting out for the evening to go to a sporting event where they have to control their children and where many times now they find themselves to strapped for sitters or tickets. So supporting the local school is no longer a civic priority.

The spillover of a couple of generations of that added to the ever higher investment required to attend big time college sports events are taking their toll. The venues are no longer conducive to community either. I quit going when I could not talk to people I had been sitting with for 40 years. The artificial noise added for TV excitement drowns out everything including conversation with the person seated immediately next to you. Add the higher numbers of the inebriated and obnoxious, or the children really too young to attend a 4 hour event crawling all over you, knocking over your drinks and concessions, or in the case of baseball games drawing on your seats with chalk which then gets all over your clothes, and whose parents just don't give a damn, and it's simply not worth going.

Now if we want to see the folks we sat with for decades we'll invite them over.

We are no longer anything but a perceived community. We don't really know our neighbors. We don't really want to maintain contact with people who are suffering. They may be the object of our trite tweets to pray for them (a notion that makes us look more holy, but provides precious little support for those in crisis) but we won't go do for them. We don't even want to go to family reunions. They are full of old people we don't know who ask us lots of questions so having people actually speaking to you instead of reading a tweet becomes too stressful to make the outing enjoyable.

We have lost our sense of family. We avoid our obligations to them whenever possible. We've lost our need to see them unless we want wedding presents or need people to attend a funeral. And we don't really want to know the people at church now either. Because of that remote preachers speaking to us from a large video screen with music we like and little demand upon our time is replacing what we've traditionally known as church. I would argue that neither version was what was intended for Christian participation because neither actually encourages, or requires us, to be in mission with the widows, orphans, sick, prisoners, or the strangers within our community, but it is still a further breakdown of human to human connection.

So there is no need to obsess about empty football venues. It is merely another symptom of a dying society. The yearnings for protectionism (another symptom) are already with as are multiple indications of the breakdown of our language, its meanings, nuances, and precision (although English has never been the most precise it has been very versatile). Social disintegration is usually followed by a form of anarchy in the last stages.

Remember that when we quit caring about our families, quit keeping up with our friends (except electronically), avoid those who place needs upon our time, and quit supporting our institutions and traditions, we've already adopted an every man for himself mentality. No cohesion, unless it is forced, means no viable civilization.

Olive and Blue, we are so under stress from a lack of cohesion in our practice of life, in our social institutions, and in our practice of law, that we are more severely in trouble than all of our isolated individuals can even comprehend.

So enjoy your family. Get to know them better. Draw your friends closer. Discuss the loss of civility and equal protection of the law both in property and body. Discuss the things that are interrupting community. And formulate strategies for rebuilding it and you will have carried out and modeled what we all need to be doing. That's our way out of this mess.

Good luck!

(10-02-2016 07:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 06:58 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm noticing that at ALL levels below top 10-15 matchups... ...that there are tons of empty seats in nearly every game.

Of course some teams are better than others - and my Tulane aren't doing so well in this regard thanks to gross mismanagement under the previous administration - but I'm seeing teams that I KNOW can turn out fans showing 40-60% capacity, and it makes me a little sad as a college FB fan.

I live thousands of miles away from my school, but I know that can't be the case everywhere. Have ADs priced out their young alumns and neighborhood fans for good?

I love multi-tasking on Saturdays, but nothing beats a good CFB game that you care about.

I'm starting to believe that there is a social disconnection between fans and their schools - and it's the fabric of what makes CFB better than the NFL in my eyes.

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. People no longer attend to support their neighbors. I think the isolationism of electronics has played a large role in this along with the shift from a single paycheck household to a double paycheck household. Many young parents find themselves too tired to even consider getting out for the evening to go to a sporting event where they have to control their children and where many times now they find themselves to strapped for sitters or tickets. So supporting the local school is no longer a civic priority.

"Civic priority" - we stopped teaching (and caring) about civics around 20 or so years ago. That's probably the beginning of it all.

However, electronics are actually becoming more engaging in a way. People are still making connections, but they're making different ones - communication networks are no longer localized, but rather based on shared interests. (It is important to realize that shared interests =/= charity.) Ideas and kinship is being shared from people in remote locations - and the concept of community is being reconstructed in front of our very own eyes. The problem could be that the electronic community is more powerful and interesting than the local one - and that explains why everyone stays home.

Games are expensive.

A lot easier to watch on TV.

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

A lot easier to watch on TV.

In the first-hand market, yes.

Second-hand CFB tickets can be bought for cheap a few days before the game - unless it's an elite matchup.

My local school - Maryland - is a B1G school, but look at these prices: http://www.stubhub.com/maryland-football...rmer/6343/

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.

(10-02-2016 07:36 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 06:58 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm noticing that at ALL levels below top 10-15 matchups... ...that there are tons of empty seats in nearly every game.

Of course some teams are better than others - and my Tulane aren't doing so well in this regard thanks to gross mismanagement under the previous administration - but I'm seeing teams that I KNOW can turn out fans showing 40-60% capacity, and it makes me a little sad as a college FB fan.

I live thousands of miles away from my school, but I know that can't be the case everywhere. Have ADs priced out their young alumns and neighborhood fans for good?

I love multi-tasking on Saturdays, but nothing beats a good CFB game that you care about.

I'm starting to believe that there is a social disconnection between fans and their schools - and it's the fabric of what makes CFB better than the NFL in my eyes.

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. People no longer attend to support their neighbors. I think the isolationism of electronics has played a large role in this along with the shift from a single paycheck household to a double paycheck household. Many young parents find themselves too tired to even consider getting out for the evening to go to a sporting event where they have to control their children and where many times now they find themselves to strapped for sitters or tickets. So supporting the local school is no longer a civic priority.

"Civic priority" - we stopped teaching (and caring) about civics around 20 or so years ago. That's probably the beginning of it all.

However, electronics are actually becoming more engaging in a way. People are still making connections, but they're making different ones - communication networks are no longer localized, but rather based on shared interests. (It is important to realize that shared interests =/= charity.) Ideas and kinship is being shared from people in remote locations - and the concept of community is being reconstructed in front of our very own eyes. The problem could be that the electronic community is more powerful and interesting than the local one - and that explains why everyone stays home.

And I would argue that the need for human intervention and contact will always remain local. If you cannot be involved locally you aren't really involved. A tweet, email, or post hardly carries the weight of open discussion at the City Council. A visit to the hospital room of a neighbor is much more effective than an electronic conveyance. And if you found yourself at home in a crisis situation I doubt remote electronic acquaintances will be able to assist you. But good luck to you counting on your E-support. Just take this board for instance. All too often posters just disappear. Sometimes that's a choice and that's fine. But sometimes they've passed and unless a family member (like that of Grey Avenger) let's us know there's no connection, sense of loss, or remembrance. As with all "real" relationships we need to know when to say "goodbye" as readily as say "hello". But the inability to confront death in this electronic age of simply disappearing from the internet has led to more and more funerals without a service, or with just a picture of the deceased, or just an e-site registry. It is a form of denial of the inevitable and its permanent consequences. It is also expedient and easier to handle because our time and presence is not really required. We can just electronically transfer $10 to their favorite charity and get standard form electronic thank you. That way we can call ourselves human, consider ourselves to be connected, spend $10 bucks, and not have to do anything.

Well I guess that is what taxes and government have become. We send our cash and hope the government leaves us alone. Somehow I just don't think in the end that is the tie that binds.

(10-02-2016 07:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:36 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 06:58 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm noticing that at ALL levels below top 10-15 matchups... ...that there are tons of empty seats in nearly every game.

Of course some teams are better than others - and my Tulane aren't doing so well in this regard thanks to gross mismanagement under the previous administration - but I'm seeing teams that I KNOW can turn out fans showing 40-60% capacity, and it makes me a little sad as a college FB fan.

I live thousands of miles away from my school, but I know that can't be the case everywhere. Have ADs priced out their young alumns and neighborhood fans for good?

I love multi-tasking on Saturdays, but nothing beats a good CFB game that you care about.

I'm starting to believe that there is a social disconnection between fans and their schools - and it's the fabric of what makes CFB better than the NFL in my eyes.

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. People no longer attend to support their neighbors. I think the isolationism of electronics has played a large role in this along with the shift from a single paycheck household to a double paycheck household. Many young parents find themselves too tired to even consider getting out for the evening to go to a sporting event where they have to control their children and where many times now they find themselves to strapped for sitters or tickets. So supporting the local school is no longer a civic priority.

"Civic priority" - we stopped teaching (and caring) about civics around 20 or so years ago. That's probably the beginning of it all.

However, electronics are actually becoming more engaging in a way. People are still making connections, but they're making different ones - communication networks are no longer localized, but rather based on shared interests. (It is important to realize that shared interests =/= charity.) Ideas and kinship is being shared from people in remote locations - and the concept of community is being reconstructed in front of our very own eyes. The problem could be that the electronic community is more powerful and interesting than the local one - and that explains why everyone stays home.

And I would argue that the need for human intervention and contact will always remain local. If you cannot be involved locally you aren't really involved. A tweet, email, or post hardly carries the weight of open discussion at the City Council. A visit to the hospital room of a neighbor is much more effective than an electronic conveyance. And if you found yourself at home in a crisis situation I doubt remote electronic acquaintances will be able to assist you. But good luck to you counting on your E-support. Just take this board for instance. All too often posters just disappear. Sometimes that's a choice and that's fine. But sometimes they've passed and unless a family member (like that of Grey Avenger) let's us know there's no connection, sense of loss, or remembrance. As with all "real" relationships we need to know when to say "goodbye" as readily as say "hello". But the inability to confront death in this electronic age of simply disappearing from the internet has led to more and more funerals without a service, or with just a picture of the deceased, or just an e-site registry. It is a form of denial of the inevitable and its permanent consequences. It is also expedient and easier to handle because our time and presence is not really required. We can just electronically transfer $10 to their favorite charity and get standard form electronic thank you. That way we can call ourselves human, consider ourselves to be connected, spend $10 bucks, and not have to do anything.

Well I guess that is what taxes and government have become. We send our cash and hope the government leaves us alone. Somehow I just don't think in the end that is the tie that binds.

I didn't say it was better - just different. Also, most of the younger electronic generation are under 35 - as my veteran grandfather once said (and there are BIG exceptions here, he recognized as much) "they've never seen real struggle". They don't know what they're missing because the vast majority of them haven't needed it.

...but if they do, it will be a rude awakening for everyone.

I wonder if this conversation has gone down a dark road (especially when we started on college football attendance), but you're making connections that seem plausible. I don't think the ending will be what you're expecting as human nature will naturally redirect people in a time of need. Hurricanes are a good example of this.

(10-02-2016 08:13 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:36 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 07:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-02-2016 06:58 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  I'm noticing that at ALL levels below top 10-15 matchups... ...that there are tons of empty seats in nearly every game.

Of course some teams are better than others - and my Tulane aren't doing so well in this regard thanks to gross mismanagement under the previous administration - but I'm seeing teams that I KNOW can turn out fans showing 40-60% capacity, and it makes me a little sad as a college FB fan.

I live thousands of miles away from my school, but I know that can't be the case everywhere. Have ADs priced out their young alumns and neighborhood fans for good?

I love multi-tasking on Saturdays, but nothing beats a good CFB game that you care about.

I'm starting to believe that there is a social disconnection between fans and their schools - and it's the fabric of what makes CFB better than the NFL in my eyes.

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. People no longer attend to support their neighbors. I think the isolationism of electronics has played a large role in this along with the shift from a single paycheck household to a double paycheck household. Many young parents find themselves too tired to even consider getting out for the evening to go to a sporting event where they have to control their children and where many times now they find themselves to strapped for sitters or tickets. So supporting the local school is no longer a civic priority.

"Civic priority" - we stopped teaching (and caring) about civics around 20 or so years ago. That's probably the beginning of it all.

However, electronics are actually becoming more engaging in a way. People are still making connections, but they're making different ones - communication networks are no longer localized, but rather based on shared interests. (It is important to realize that shared interests =/= charity.) Ideas and kinship is being shared from people in remote locations - and the concept of community is being reconstructed in front of our very own eyes. The problem could be that the electronic community is more powerful and interesting than the local one - and that explains why everyone stays home.

And I would argue that the need for human intervention and contact will always remain local. If you cannot be involved locally you aren't really involved. A tweet, email, or post hardly carries the weight of open discussion at the City Council. A visit to the hospital room of a neighbor is much more effective than an electronic conveyance. And if you found yourself at home in a crisis situation I doubt remote electronic acquaintances will be able to assist you. But good luck to you counting on your E-support. Just take this board for instance. All too often posters just disappear. Sometimes that's a choice and that's fine. But sometimes they've passed and unless a family member (like that of Grey Avenger) let's us know there's no connection, sense of loss, or remembrance. As with all "real" relationships we need to know when to say "goodbye" as readily as say "hello". But the inability to confront death in this electronic age of simply disappearing from the internet has led to more and more funerals without a service, or with just a picture of the deceased, or just an e-site registry. It is a form of denial of the inevitable and its permanent consequences. It is also expedient and easier to handle because our time and presence is not really required. We can just electronically transfer $10 to their favorite charity and get standard form electronic thank you. That way we can call ourselves human, consider ourselves to be connected, spend $10 bucks, and not have to do anything.

Well I guess that is what taxes and government have become. We send our cash and hope the government leaves us alone. Somehow I just don't think in the end that is the tie that binds.

I didn't say it was better - just different. Also, most of the younger electronic generation are under 35 - as my veteran grandfather once said (and there are BIG exceptions here, he recognized as much) "they've never seen real struggle". They don't know what they're missing because the vast majority of them haven't needed it.

...but if they do, it will be a rude awakening for everyone.

I wonder if this conversation has gone down a dark road (especially when we started on college football attendance), but you're making connections that seem plausible. I don't think the ending will be what you're expecting as human nature will naturally redirect people in a time of need. Hurricanes are a good example of this.

Not at all. As a sociologist I'm merely saying that congregating for activities is dying because of external influences. You are pointing out some of the positive aspects of the electronic world. I'm countering with the need for real human presence in our lives and pointing out the disconnect is massive even in the way our government relates to us. And you are now holding out natural disaster response as evidence that human compassion is still innate.

I'd say this is a discussion that needs to be held because between us is the divide of how two very different generations relate to the world. It should be however, as I initially pointed out, a huge warning or precursor of major shifts which will be upon us before we know it. Both my generation and your generation have experiences and viewpoints that are very much needed in this discussion. We have some inefficient ways which need to be replaced, but we have some very tactile methods of human interaction that need to be sustained instead of bypassed by technology. The less we interact face to face the more accepting we are of violence against, or the marginalization of, those with whom we don't interact. After all if we don't see the real human damage, or have to empathize with it, the more accepting we are of it.

That's why compassion, and humaneness, begin with tactile interaction. We should take great pains to keep as much of it as possible. Relationships after all do help to define our existence and to provide meaning to it.

If anyone can sum you up in a short description and label you as an enemy without ever having to know you, then it is much easier for them to dispose of you remotely without suffering the guilt associated with the taking of another human life, especially if they don't have to watch you die. Electronic relationships are uni-dimensional. There is no eye contact, no body language, no personality with which to identify, empathize with, or contend with. In other words no visceral person to person discernment of the nature of that person. Without that we are all merely the sum of our electronic ideas and subject to someone else's desire to delete us. To me that is a very frightening world in which to live. If we can avoid that and keep the conveniences of the electronic age then I think we should. But we must always be aware of the costs of diminishing a person's existence to a data set.

**********************************************************

Let me bring this full circle now with regard to athletic attendance. First I think fewer young people go because of economics. The events as Bison cited have gotten way too expensive. Second there is a disconnect in that many of the younger people haven't actually played the games so they don't have an inherent appreciation of what they are watching and that means they also lack the emotional touchstone to the experience. But finally for me, the inability to speak with and enjoy the folks around me who had been our event friends for 4 decades plus meant that there was no longer an external reason to the event itself that drew me back to the game. After all when schools have losing records or down years it's the relationships with those you have celebrated with, and commiserated with for decades that bring you back, not the game itself. Those engineering the experience of the game have been extremely neglectful in realizing the importance of conversation time between fans who attend these events. They see times of relatively low crowd eruption as boring. In reality it is in those times that fan attendance is ensured regardless of the outcome of the game.

That disconnect happened because they equated TV ratings numbers with success and those seem to be enhanced by crowd noise. Because they weren't studying the interactions of the fans present they missed the connection that kept those stadiums full of loyal fans. Loyal to the program? Yes. But far more loyal to the relationships they have had with the other fans. So a corporate disconnect has led to less enjoyable and meaningful stadium experiences. The personalities of the fans have been removed from the study and a quantifying number has been assigned. The result is an environment no longer conducive to meaningful fan interaction and because of it they now are dealing with empty seats. The cost and lack of connection to the game are now amplified in their affect upon the event because the stronger factor for participation, the relative one, has been removed from the corporate study.

(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.

Like in so many things ESPN is the symptom not the cause.

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.

The thing with Boston and New York in MLB is that in a period starting in 1996 and running thru 2013, so 18 seasons, the Yankees won 5 titles and the Red Sox won 3 titles. And if you make it from 1996-2009, so 14 years, Yankees won 5 titles and Red Sox 2 titles. With 8 of the 14 years, those teams being in the World Series. And 13 of 18 years having at least 1 of those teams making the LCS. So those teams are dominating MLB, what is ESPN supposed to do, ignore that?

And of course same thing goes with the SEC. The SEC had as dominant of a period as we've EVER seen in college football. A lot of times their 2nd best game that ESPN would get would be a top 10 game, while other leagues didn't have good games at all. So what is ESPN supposed to do? It's not socialism.

(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.

(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.

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.

(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.

I think these are the main factors:

1. With 2 income families and more equality between husband and wife, men today just can't leave for the entire day on Saturday anymore. Similar to why golf is now a dying sport.

2. Folks have so many more entertainment options compared to even 10 years ago, so unless it is a big game, many people will choose to do something else

3. College football used to be very cheap and now it is not. This has priced many people, especially families, out of the market

4. With many more girls playing sports now, families are no longer free on Saturdays due to soccer. Football seems to end early on Saturday, but soccer is scheduled all day long.

5. The NFL is amazing in that the league is designed for every team to be 8-8. This is exciting and give everyone a chance. College football is the opposite - great if you are fan of Ohio State or Alabama, but terrible for almost everyone else. Lose 2 games and the season is over. This means that fans of many teams just give up and root for an NFL team

So, many issues for college football. Be interesting to see what happens over the next 10 years.

(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?"

(10-02-2016 10:22 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  I think these are the main factors:

1. With 2 income families and more equality between husband and wife, men today just can't leave for the entire day on Saturday anymore. Similar to why golf is now a dying sport.

2. Folks have so many more entertainment options compared to even 10 years ago, so unless it is a big game, many people will choose to do something else

3. College football used to be very cheap and now it is not. This has priced many people, especially families, out of the market

4. With many more girls playing sports now, families are no longer free on Saturdays due to soccer. Football seems to end early on Saturday, but soccer is scheduled all day long.

5. The NFL is amazing in that the league is designed for every team to be 8-8. This is exciting and give everyone a chance. College football is the opposite - great if you are fan of Ohio State or Alabama, but terrible for almost everyone else. Lose 2 games and the season is over. This means that fans of many teams just give up and root for an NFL team

So, many issues for college football. Be interesting to see what happens over the next 10 years.

Your last point is why college football needs to move to 4 major conferences with a champs only model. Then the goal of every school is to win their conference. Do that and you are in the final 4. But more importantly the fear of 2 losses becomes irrelevant to winning the conferences as there is no national beauty pageant you have to win as well.

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.