CSNbbs

Pages: 1 2

Missouri at BG
21,969

I was hoping for a bigger crowd for that one. BG has a good team but their fans are not showing up. Better than last year though. I guess it is slowly improving.

Indiana St at Ball State
12,924 <img border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" title="" src="graemlins/banghead.gif" />

Cal Poly at Kent State
8,410 <img border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" title="" src="graemlins/banghead.gif" /> You got to be joking!

SW Missouri St at Eastern Michigan
9,581 <img border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" title="" src="graemlins/banghead.gif" />

CMU at Akron
??? I haven't seen a count!

Things aren't looking good for some of the MAC teams in terms of making the new 15k attendance rules when they go in effect in a couple of years.

Saturday's Games
1.BGSU - 21,969
2.UB - 17,012
3.AKR - 15,629
4.BSU - 12,924
5.EMU - 9,581
6.KSU - 8,410

Averages to Date:
1.MAR - 31,042
2.WMU - 28,268
3.MIA - 25,934
4.TOL - 23,074
5.OH - 21,002
6.NIU - 19,653
7.UB - 19,058
8.BGSU - 18,833
9.CMU - 18,539
10.AKR - 15,629
11.EMU - 13,212
12.BSU - 12,924
13.KSU - 12,242
14.UCF - N/A

<a href="http://home.cfl.rr.com/essency/ucfsport/mac_attn.html" target="_blank">MAC 2002 Attendance</a>

Thanks, Essency! Akron getting 15,000 is pretty good, probably because it's the Zips' home opener. EMU usually has attendance trouble, nothing new there. Kent has long had attendance issues also, and a I-AA opponent may not have helped. Ball State usually draws a bit better, but again, I-AA teams don't generate a great deal of interest.

Thanks Essency!
Look for Marshall's avg. attendance to improve next Friday night...hope to see lots of UCF fans in Huntington...it should be a great game.
Go Herd!

I was at the EMU game...let me tell you, that attendance figure is padded. If there were 4,000 people there I would be shocked. But, what can you expect after that debacle against Toldedo? At least they beat 1AA SEMO St, but it took a last minute fourth quarter comeback to do it.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I was hoping for a bigger crowd for that one. BG has a good team but their fans are not showing up. Better than last year though. I guess it is slowly improving.<hr /></blockquote>The AD predicted 25,000 on Friday. I think the rain drove away the 3,100 extra fans. It rained in buckets on and off from about 4 o'clock on.

It was pleasant and warm, but still wet as could be.

It's progress. Slowly, fans are coming back.

I remember Kent fans saying that with the success last year, this was the year to make or break the program in terms of attendance. Well, it looks broken to me. I guess they're all just waiting for bball to start up. Hello 1-AA! It also appears EMU situation is beyond repair. Buffalo is actually near the top! Great job bulls fans. I think it would be better for the MAC to drop the 2 worst teams anyway. 12 teams is more manageable and we could still have a title game.

I will say it again. KSU needs to develop a more attractive home schedule to get fans. Cal Poly holds no interest for the casual fan. No name value or local/midwest flavor. Plus, the demolition at the hands of OSU does little to help bring people into the building, including the students. Plus, there was no marketing at all outside of Kent.

They will make it to the 15K, but barely and it will take all of the 2 remaining years until the rule is implemented.

You gotta love UCF, we avoid attendence debates by NEVER scheduling home games! What a deal! Somebody posted on our UCF board that only 2 other 1-A teams will have waited as long as UCF to play a home game this year. Ridiculous but it goes with the Mid-major territory.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by The Flash:
I will say it again. KSU needs to develop a more attractive home schedule to get fans. Cal Poly holds no interest for the casual fan. No name value or local/midwest flavor. <hr /></blockquote>I'd agree w/ you completely. If you're going to schedule Div IAA, then YSU makes sense. Of course they'd have to agree, but KSU would make great strides beating up the Penguins, and I think they would w/ Tressel gone. It would put fans in the seats and a W would really get people excited.

Cal Poly? Big whoop.

Actually, I no longer want them to play 1-AA at all. Plus, for YSU, beating KSU is the big game of year prior to the 1-AA playoffs. It is a no win for KSU, except for a small attendance blip.

KSU needs to schedule lower 1-As like themselves, Temple, Rutgers, Tulsa, SMU, Army, Navy and the like. They have names people regonize and make for competitive games. 2-1s, 1-1s who cares, just do it.

As fans, we all like to talk about how we'd like to see certain BCS programs at home in our MAC stadiums, but the fact is that it's difficult to get these guys to come (even with a 2 for 1), and secondly most schedules are made far in advance.

So, in the case Kent and EMU, I doubt you're going to see anything much different betweeen now and 2006 or 2007 than is already listed on your future schedules. So, if your administrations can't find a way to nudge average home attendance above 15K, you're in trouble as a IA entity.

No slam against either program, but I just don't see how you will be able to improve your attendance that much within a year or two. Even though I think Buffalo, NIU and Akron may make it they also have to watch out to insure compliance.

There is also lots of occasional discussion on attendance over at the Miami board, and even though it looks like we'll be OK you can't take it for granted. Our AD pulled out all the stops (within budgetary constraints) to market the Iowa game, and although I don't feel that the 26K crowd was too bad it does indicate about what our top end crowd would be unless the opponents bring lots (>5K) of folks to the game. The Iowa match-up was very attractive, but only about 2K Iowans came (based on their tix sales and from accounts I have heard from those at the game), and the fact is that except on rare (3 or 4) occasions Miami has not not had crowds in excess of 27K._

I wonder how much, if any, a drop to D1-AA football would hurt EMU. The pressure to obtain fannies in the seats would disappear. The opportunity to play in the post-season would become a reality again. They can still schedule markee contest against CMU or WMU or other MAC schools in the OOC.

What's this? EMU is playing SIU for a football conference championship! I bet the town and college would get excited and have to send fans away at the door. <img border="0" alt="[Goldfish]" title="" src="graemlins/goldfish.gif" />

OK, its not 1-A, but who out there seriously thinks the Hurons are better off being a perennial doormat.

What is the MAC's current position on 'all sports'
Certainly they are not going to throw the EMU/KSU basketball baby out with the bathwater.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Grant Street:

What is the MAC's current position on 'all sports'
Certainly they are not going to throw the EMU/KSU basketball baby out with the bathwater.<hr /></blockquote>I would think that since EMU and KSU have done so well in the MAC, besides their recent football problems, that they would keep them for the other sports. After all, we already have the precedent of having a "football only" team -- why couldn't it be the other way around?

Plus, if the schools indicated that they would make every effort to get back to I-A, perhaps the MAC would give them a "grace period."

However, if too many MAC schools dropped down, I would think we would try to keep enough football schools in to guarantee a championship game on national TV.

Going to football games at that stadium in Kent is never ever going to be a hot item in the area. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="cool.gif" /> It's out in the middle of nowhere, feels cold and desolate, not inviting at all. Plus there just is not a culture of college football @ KSU. Hasn't been, won't be. Even in the "Golden Years" of Don James, Jack Lambert, Don Nottingham, Gerald Tinker, national rankings, bowl games etc., it was an easy ticket--and students went free, but it never has been nor will be a football school.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> As for "all-sports," Kent has been consistently in the hunt and has won the MAC all-sports award in recent years--very strong in many sports, dominant in some even besides men's basketball.
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="confused.gif" /> I'm still baffled why we invited a one-sport school into the league?? No offense to UCF, I'm sure it's a fine school etc., but why does the MAC need a Florida school for only one sport? If they come in and win the league, how does that help, and if they are middle of the pack, how does that help? The only good that I can see is if UCF can knock off 2-3 good BCS teams a year and then be the 2nd-3rd best in the MAC. What's the point? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> And it seems obvious from both sides that this is not a long term addition. The oddest thing to me is the location--why a southern school in a midwest conference, unless you want to start to expand like crazy? Baffling to me...

axeme,

KSU wasn't a b-ball school or any sport school up until the last 2-3 years either. Students have always been generally apathetic toward sports. No one goes to Kent or really any MAC school for the "sports culture."

Winning cures a lot of ills. Will KSU ever be a consist 20K/game school, probably not. However, with some marketing, a creative schedule, and a competitive team, there is no reason KSU cannot average 15K.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I'm still baffled why we invited a one-sport school into the league?? ... it seems obvious from both sides that this is not a long term addition. <hr /></blockquote>You answered your own question. This isn't a long term addition. UCF will bolt if it gets another offer from a more powerful conference. For now, the MAC has evened its divisions at seven teams each with the best independent not named Notre Dame.

That's it?!? We added a FLA school just to even our divisions??
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> Seems like a lot of sound and fury signifying not much.

Balancing out the divisions was clearly a secondary motive of the UCF addition. The primary motive was the continued upgrade in MAC Football that UCF represents.

If just one of the MAC schools decide to drop Football, the divisions will need to be rebalanced again. I'd suggest MTSU, for all sports to balance the MAC at 14 all-sport members. They're a strong team, but the main rational would be what they could add to the MAC market wise and recruiting wise.

One of the things that I like about adding a Florida school is that its a state who's mid-major allegance is contestable. Texas and the lower Mississippi valley is CUSA turf. MTSU is on the boarder of CUSA land, where CUSA is weaker.

Another good selection for the MAC, in the event that 3 or more schools drop to 1-AA would be Georgia Southern. They would be the third school in a state with plenty of recruits. Plus, being near South Carolina, GSU can always snag a few players there in a state with no CUSA presence.

KC

Remember that UCF is also on the Sunshine network all the time. That TV presence really helps the MAC.

I also think balancing the divisions was a VERY big deal. As it was, you had teams going 6-5 and winning their division because they'd only lost "cross divisional" games. That (among other things) made the MAC a laughing stock.

I mean, who else were we going to add? UCF has a solid program, a good fan base, a TV contract, a good academic rep., and they are in one of the largest states in the Union. I wouldn't want them in all-sport (nor would the rest of the MAC) because it would cost to much for the other sports to travel down there.

I also think our players will enjoy going down to Orlando to play two times in their college careers.

Pages: 1 2

rocketfootball

Essency

CMichFan

fatmanjim

HuronDave

RochesterFalcon

trerocket

The Flash

Econoknight

DrTorch

The Flash

exCincy Kid

Grant Street

Dodo

axeme

The Flash

RochesterFalcon

axeme

Kit-Cat

Dodo