https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
With profits per game in the $5-8m range for the 100k seat stadium schools, it's reasonable to expect that M2 schools can make $2-4m and even smaller schools $1m+ per game. Getting more butts in seats translates to more parking $$, concessions, a huge boost to the economy of the surrounding community (big for Memphis, perhaps less so for Texas), etc etc etc. With the NFL, it's a pretty limited number of games, but CFB overall is much more comparable to MLB b/c we just have so many total games played per year than, say, the NFL (272). Figuring ~ 130 FBS teams and about 6 home games per year per team, that's 780 total games (MLB is about 2900 but in generally smaller stadiums).
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
MLB lost a whole generation of fans by waiting 30 years too long to implement a pitching clock. Baseball lost me in the 90's when I was screaming at the TV screen for the batter to stay in the batters box and screaming at the pitcher to just throw the damn ball. Keep the action moving.
Football has its own problems. it spends way too much time where players are standing around doing nothing. Commercial timeouts need to go away. 3 timeouts each half can go away too. The amount of time between plays can be shortened too. And they need to make this change before football starts losing fans.
(09-28-2023 07:42 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
....
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
The way MLB 'figured out' to 'reverse that trend' is one million fewer people alive + vaccines for everybody else. The increased ticket sales represent a
post-pandemic rebound—as the article states right at the top. Numbers are back to where they were in 2017.
Innovations in playoff access, ticketing technology, and the total ballpark experience have owners optimistic that they can build on this. We'll see.
(09-28-2023 08:49 PM)Gitanole Wrote: [ -> ] (09-28-2023 07:42 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
....
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
The way MLB 'figured out' to 'reverse that trend' is one million fewer people alive + vaccines for everybody else. The increased ticket sales represent a post-pandemic rebound—as the article states right at the top. Numbers are back to where they were in 2017.
Innovations in playoff access, ticketing technology, and the total ballpark experience have owners optimistic that they can build on this. We'll see.
It's their best numbers since 2017, that's a reversal from 2018 and 2019, too.
I agree that it's one year, I'll be interested to see how they do next year. Will they build on the success of this year? Will the Yankees and Red Sox quit sucking and sell a lot more tickets? It will be interesting to keep an eye on this if nothing else for future years. Maybe some of these innovations won't translate very well to football, but some of them might. Who knows, maybe some FBS ADs are checking out that article and placing calls to their friends at MLB HQ as we speak.
(09-28-2023 08:58 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-28-2023 08:49 PM)Gitanole Wrote: [ -> ] (09-28-2023 07:42 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
....
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
The way MLB 'figured out' to 'reverse that trend' is one million fewer people alive + vaccines for everybody else. The increased ticket sales represent a post-pandemic rebound—as the article states right at the top. Numbers are back to where they were in 2017.
Innovations in playoff access, ticketing technology, and the total ballpark experience have owners optimistic that they can build on this. We'll see.
It's their best numbers since 2017, that's a reversal from 2018 and 2019, too.
I agree that it's one year, I'll be interested to see how they do next year. Will they build on the success of this year? Will the Yankees and Red Sox quit sucking and sell a lot more tickets? It will be interesting to keep an eye on this if nothing else for future years. Maybe some of these innovations won't translate very well to football, but some of them might. Who knows, maybe some FBS ADs are checking out that article and placing calls to their friends at MLB HQ as we speak.
We're seeing ballpark design take a new approach. Designers are aiming to create an all-day experience, with good food and comfortable seats and promenades. Easy ticketing and lodging and access to surrounding events form part of the package.
One good example of where things are going is what Inter Miami CF is setting up.
(09-28-2023 07:42 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
With profits per game in the $5-8m range for the 100k seat stadium schools, it's reasonable to expect that M2 schools can make $2-4m and even smaller schools $1m+ per game. Getting more butts in seats translates to more parking $$, concessions, a huge boost to the economy of the surrounding community (big for Memphis, perhaps less so for Texas), etc etc etc. With the NFL, it's a pretty limited number of games, but CFB overall is much more comparable to MLB b/c we just have so many total games played per year than, say, the NFL (272). Figuring ~ 130 FBS teams and about 6 home games per year per team, that's 780 total games (MLB is about 2900 but in generally smaller stadiums).
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
The B1G shares part of the gate from conference football and bball games amongst the whole conference. Hilariously enough a relic from when the big schools worried that being on TV so much would reduce their own gate. As far as I know, the B1G has yet to repeal this bylaw.
https://www.athleticbusiness.com/home/ne...ring-works
(09-28-2023 09:37 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote: [ -> ] (09-28-2023 07:42 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
With profits per game in the $5-8m range for the 100k seat stadium schools, it's reasonable to expect that M2 schools can make $2-4m and even smaller schools $1m+ per game. Getting more butts in seats translates to more parking $$, concessions, a huge boost to the economy of the surrounding community (big for Memphis, perhaps less so for Texas), etc etc etc. With the NFL, it's a pretty limited number of games, but CFB overall is much more comparable to MLB b/c we just have so many total games played per year than, say, the NFL (272). Figuring ~ 130 FBS teams and about 6 home games per year per team, that's 780 total games (MLB is about 2900 but in generally smaller stadiums).
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
The B1G shares part of the gate from conference football and bball games amongst the whole conference. Hilariously enough a relic from when the big schools worried that being on TV so much would reduce their own gate. As far as I know, the B1G has yet to repeal this bylaw.
https://www.athleticbusiness.com/home/ne...ring-works
tOSU is the one I've heard that makes the most on game days, but there's no reason that they'd make a whole lot more than any of the other 100k seat modern stadiums in the B1G and SEC.
Kristi Dosh wrote a nice article about gate receipt revenue sharing in 2011:
https://businessofcollegesports.com/fina...t-revenue/
It was a pretty small net amount for the big 3, the max you could pay was $1m per game ( so $4m for entire season ), and the amounts paid in were averaged then split back out to everybody. The payout was $2.95m, meaning that the big 3 only lost a total of $1.05m each net for the entire season. As tOSU brought in $251m last year, I bet they didn't even notice that $1.05m. Only Northwestern and Indiana netted out more than $1m from the program.
(09-28-2023 08:09 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]MLB lost a whole generation of fans by waiting 30 years too long to implement a pitching clock. Baseball lost me in the 90's when I was screaming at the TV screen for the batter to stay in the batters box and screaming at the pitcher to just throw the damn ball. Keep the action moving.
Football has its own problems. it spends way too much time where players are standing around doing nothing. Commercial timeouts need to go away. 3 timeouts each half can go away too. The amount of time between plays can be shortened too. And they need to make this change before football starts losing fans.
What will kill pro football is over reliance on replay. There is nothing exciting when a spectacular catch is going to be reviewed to the minutia. They should not do any replays and allow 2 challenges per game for each team - the team can decide when they want a review.
NFL will continue to have problems because of the stoppages and officiating. I don’t think there is any quick fix to this. The game has too many move parts. The game needs to push technology forward. Imagine having sensors in the PPE to detect penalties based on body movement alterations for PI or defensive holding? You just need something so drastic to change it for the better.
Stadiums are moving toward smaller capacities, more comfortable seats, more amenities, and higher average ticket prices.
A key trend—though I don't know how much it will affect campus stadiums—is to make the stadium the defining landmark in a wider park area that has sports-related community activities going on every day. Urban planners are moving away from stadiums becoming high-profile ghost towns between game days.
(09-29-2023 12:07 AM)jgkojak Wrote: [ -> ] (09-28-2023 08:09 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]MLB lost a whole generation of fans by waiting 30 years too long to implement a pitching clock. Baseball lost me in the 90's when I was screaming at the TV screen for the batter to stay in the batters box and screaming at the pitcher to just throw the damn ball. Keep the action moving.
Football has its own problems. it spends way too much time where players are standing around doing nothing. Commercial timeouts need to go away. 3 timeouts each half can go away too. The amount of time between plays can be shortened too. And they need to make this change before football starts losing fans.
What will kill pro football is over reliance on replay. There is nothing exciting when a spectacular catch is going to be reviewed to the minutia. They should not do any replays and allow 2 challenges per game for each team - the team can decide when they want a review.
Pro football is more popular than ever. I just don’t understand this thinking - people would seriously rather go back to the old days of wrong calls being made even though there are cameras showing 360 degree angles of every play? As annoying as replays are (and I get it regarding “What’s a catch or not?”), there’s nothing worse than a team getting screwed on a bad call.
(09-29-2023 04:40 AM)Gitanole Wrote: [ -> ]Stadiums are moving toward smaller capacities, more comfortable seats, more amenities, and higher average ticket prices.
A key trend—though I don't know how much it will affect campus stadiums—is to make the stadium the defining landmark in a wider park area that has sports-related community activities going on every day. Urban planners are moving away from stadiums becoming high-profile ghost towns between game days.
Yes - this is how it should be. To the extent that a stadium provides any broader economic community benefit (which has always been questionable), it needs to be a hub of activity beyond game days. Not every place can be like Wrigleyville (the gold standard for a ballpark integrated into a neighborhood and that was organic from being built over 100 years ago), but a sea of parking lots around of stadium doesn’t generate spur development around a stadium.
I watch and attend a lot of MLB games. The games do feel like they’re moving faster. I went to a Rays-Royals game in June where 15 runs were scored but the game only took 2 hours and 30 minutes.
The new playoff format with a 3rd wild card spot and a first round bye for the the top 2 division winners in each league also helps a lot. There are a lot more teams in contention in September for the wild card while division leaders that may have a playoff spot locked up still have meaningful games because they want the first round bye.
This is exactly how I believe the new 12-team playoff will supercharge college football. There is nothing that drives interest more than *your* team (whoever it might be) being in the playoff *race* and that translates into you both watching your team more and every other playoff race game more. (As I’ve said elsewhere, the NFL does this to near perfection.)
(09-28-2023 08:09 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]MLB lost a whole generation of fans by waiting 30 years too long to implement a pitching clock. Baseball lost me in the 90's when I was screaming at the TV screen for the batter to stay in the batters box and screaming at the pitcher to just throw the damn ball. Keep the action moving.
Football has its own problems. it spends way too much time where players are standing around doing nothing. Commercial timeouts need to go away. 3 timeouts each half can go away too. The amount of time between plays can be shortened too. And they need to make this change before football starts losing fans.
MLB's slow-pace never bothered me. Football's slow pace is out of control. As the other poster said, too many times where players are just standing around & NOTHING is happening. Not even reviewing a play. It's just a timeout for the sake of a timeout. It's really bad.
Commercial after touchdown. Commercial after kickoff. Team goes 3 & out in 30 seconds - that's another commercial.
Back from that commercial, gotta review the play, commercial.
(09-28-2023 07:42 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/3851...dance-2017
With profits per game in the $5-8m range for the 100k seat stadium schools, it's reasonable to expect that M2 schools can make $2-4m and even smaller schools $1m+ per game. Getting more butts in seats translates to more parking $$, concessions, a huge boost to the economy of the surrounding community (big for Memphis, perhaps less so for Texas), etc etc etc. With the NFL, it's a pretty limited number of games, but CFB overall is much more comparable to MLB b/c we just have so many total games played per year than, say, the NFL (272). Figuring ~ 130 FBS teams and about 6 home games per year per team, that's 780 total games (MLB is about 2900 but in generally smaller stadiums).
I know that a whole lot of people downplay attendance numbers and say that it's on an irreversible down slope...well, MLB figured out a way to reverse that trend, and some of the biggest CFB Brands have had success here, too. That's potentially a LOT of money that schools can make if they provide the right game-day experience, independent of Wins and Losses, and unlike media agreement payments, none of it has to be shared with other schools in the Conference.
The numbers are never always as they tell you. David Samson has always said he often inflated the numbers for Marlins games simply by purchasing 5,000 tickets min-game at $1/ticket or they just make up a number to send to MLB.
Winning cures a lot of problems. See the Texas Rangers.
IMO, MLB can get a boost from the new rules that make games shorter because there are a ton of games, and so fans see loooong games as kind of a seasonal problem more than just a single-game problem. There are 81 home game so if you fix something about how games are played, there are large cumulative benefits that IMO attract more fans.
CFB is IMO different in that because there are only 6 or 7 home games, each game is an "event" and thus not as subject to the impact of rule changes. Fans can endure longer games and other negative aspects because there are so few of them. which means IMO improvements in the gameday experience have limited impact in improving attendance.
What hurts CFB attendance IMO is the saturation coverage thanks to all the conference media deals. IIRC, just about every FBS game can be watched anywhere in the country, either on linear TV or streaming, for a minimal price. That makes CFB different I think from all of the other major leagues, where IIRC the price to buy the ability to see all games runs in to the hundreds of dollars each year.
It is just so easy to watch virtually any FBS CFB game now. I love it, but it hurts attendance I think in a way that no other sport faces. This is a new thing, as as recently as 2014, not even all SEC games were televised as part of a conference media deal. E.g., at the time LSU had something called "Tigervision", an in-house PPV service where fans could pay like $25 to watch the games vs FCS teams that the SEC media deal didn't cover. Hard to imagine paying $25 to watch one game vs an FCS team these days.
Marketing or the lack of effort is a promblem
read an article from a consultant that Temple looked at
he told them don't wait for phone to ring,
make calls, pound the sidewalk, come up with a plan
he worked with couple schools & put parties together and 50,000 showed up
not 1 school put him on retainer, he called them bunch of gov workers
This is a great thread. Baseball had become unwatchable before the pitch clock this year. Now it's incredibly entertaining, with the added and unanticipated element of more active offenses.
I love my school. I love college football. Been going to games for almost 30 years now. Been to some of the meccas of our game. But the current product is absolutely miserable to sit through, even when your team is winning. If you are imbibing and in an altered state, that's a little different. Tailgating and seeing friends will always be fun. But the sheer amount of time you spend at college football games while they are on commercial is mind numbing. Combine that with the longer half times and it is borderline unwatchable if you don't have a rooting interest. It seems every other team is running the air raid now, which pushes game times to 4 hours. The way teams play in this day and age creates a ton of blowouts, and we have removed the regional rivalries.
If I was the grand poobah of college football, I would start to pull back some of the rule changes that have benefitted offenses so much. I would find more ways to run the clock. Games on real TV need commercial breaks. We have got to stop prioritizing commercials for games that are streaming only. I know I'll get blasted for this, but I think the UK has the television thing right with soccer. TV is so much more convenient in this day and time, and it's sucking the life out of the in person product.
(09-28-2023 08:09 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]MLB lost a whole generation of fans by waiting 30 years too long to implement a pitching clock. Baseball lost me in the 90's when I was screaming at the TV screen for the batter to stay in the batters box and screaming at the pitcher to just throw the damn ball. Keep the action moving.
Football has its own problems. it spends way too much time where players are standing around doing nothing. Commercial timeouts need to go away. 3 timeouts each half can go away too. The amount of time between plays can be shortened too. And they need to make this change before football starts losing fans.
College football has started to move in that direction. Eliminating the clock stoppage after first downs, except in the last two minutes of each half, was a continuation of that trend from the rule change requiring a ten second clock runoff for injuries late in the game. The potential downside to this change is that it likely will result in reduced scoring, which may turn off some fans.