(05-04-2013 01:15 AM)BirdstheWord Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 09:47 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Maryland - 36,023
Northwestern - 35,697

Suck it, B1G.

I hope you were joking.

1. Your school will be in the Big Ten very soon.

2. Northwestern's numbers are closer to capacity.

3. Northwestern starts school after the football season starts.

4. Northwestern went 10-3 and won a bowl game, Maryland went 4-7.

Yes I was joking. Our attendance is embarrassing.

(05-04-2013 07:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 01:53 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 08:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  The article did not mention Notre Dame, which sold out every one of its home games (actually, since 1973), did not lose any attendance at all and took 35,000 fans to a Navy home game in Dublin, Ireland.

But, I agree with the larger premise that many schools are looking at declining attendance. They may be killing their Golden Goose with higher ticket prices, higher athletic budgets/need to fleece fans and greed driven, TV dollar seeking realignment bull$hit.

So it goes, the market will eventually correct itself.

That was my point in a recent thread. Why do the universities continue charging more and more for tickets, while netting tens of millions of dollars from these lucrative TV contracts? They can't have it both ways, and you are right. It will correct itself.

Of course they can have it both ways, as long as fans keep paying. A university has every incentive to maximize ALL sources of revenue, from local attendance to national media deals.

Pro sports are maximizing revenue (at least in the medium term) by downsizing their stadiums and pricing out many average fans. I hope college sports doesn't head that way.

It's not just about football. It's about money. In that other revenue sport, here are the 2012 attendance figures by conference with conference tournament in parentheses:

1. Big East - 3,133,782 (160,456)
2. Big Ten -- 2,856,785 (107,737)
3. SEC ------ 2,475,188 (86,270)
4. ACC ------ 2,064,113 (117,120)
5. Big XII --- 1,901,846 (94,894)
6. PAC-12 -- 1,578,565 (53,629)

(05-04-2013 10:27 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  It's not just about football. It's about money. In that other revenue sport, here are the 2012 attendance figures by conference with conference tournament in parentheses:

1. Big East - 3,133,782 (160,456)
2. Big Ten -- 2,856,785 (107,737)
3. SEC ------ 2,475,188 (86,270)
4. ACC ------ 2,064,113 (117,120)
5. Big XII --- 1,901,846 (94,894)
6. PAC-12 -- 1,578,565 (53,629)

You have to avg this out by game to make it more real for everyone.

(05-04-2013 07:56 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 02:57 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 10:28 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 09:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Maryland and Rutgers will have a big influx of B1G fans visiting their stadium to see their favorite teams. Every B1G school has a large alumni base near both schools. That will be the biggest factor in those schools rise in attendance, once they start playing B1G schools. And if either school starts to experience any level of success in the B1G, their fanbase will grow exponentially. Bet on it...

I'm skeptical. Long time Big 10 teams aren't selling out..like Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, etc. Then you throw in the fact that both Rutgers and Maryland might suck, people may not show up. Attendance will rise, but I don't think long term it will be the slam dunk you think it will.

Just as I'm skeptical of how a combination involving the 2 worst BCS conferences, plus ND is going to substantially improve the ACC. I don't see how the original ACC, minus Maryland, plus 6 schools from the conference everyone called the Big Least, and a partial membership from ND is going to substantially improve the ACC...

No matter how you slice it, it's still a merger between the 2 worst BCS conferences. So I have trouble buying into all the excitement you guys are pushing. But you guys are happy about it, and that's all that matters, I guess. What I think is of little consequence...

I assume you are just referring to the football side, because basketball and Olympic sports are going to be outstanding.

So football, the ACC took the most valuable properties from the Big East. Yes, the Big East conference as a whole was very weak, but that was mostly because they had a much higher % of football terrible programs. When the ACC first expanded with VT, Miami, BC everyone thought they hit the jackpot. VT continued to be successful, but Miami fell off the map. BC was winning at first but suffered after hiring some terrible coaches. Those three teams were highly successful in the Big East so it made sense. Not to mention, the BE had a pretty decent BCS record. Recent additions of Pitt and Syracuse were more about basketball than football. Pitt can be a good football team if given the right coach. Then Louisville has the potential to be another home run. It has one of the best run athletics department in the country. It's basketball is top notch and they've shown they can win BCS bowls against top competition.

So now the ACC has football teams...FSU, Clemson, Miami, Louisville, Va Tech, Ga Tech...sprinkle in programs that have shown their football can be good..Pitt, UNC, UVA, BC, NC State...heck even Wake Forest and Syracuse have been decent at times. It's not the SEC but no one expects them to be. It is, however, a highly competitive conference, with nationally relevant brands that can compete at the highest level every year. Once FSU is on it's way back. Miami's recruiting has picked back up again and they're on their way back. Clemson is starting to be a force again. Case in point..compare Pitt's home schedule last year vs this year

2012

Youngstown St
Va Tech
Gardner-Webb
Louisville
Temple
Rutgers

2013

FSU
New Mexico
Virginia
Old Dominion
Notre Dame
North Carolina
Miami

Pitt is trading out playing Rutgers, UConn, Temple, Cincy, South Florida to playing Miami, Ga Tech, Va Tech, UNC, UVA..and ocasionally FSU and Clemson.

The Notre Dame deal gives the ACC 5 nationally televised games a year against a tough non-conference opponent. Not only does that help with recruiting, but the fans get more excited, and the players should want to get better. To be the best, you have to beat the best.

Unfortunately, none of the best football teams are in the ACC. The best football teams are in the SEC, and ACC teams aren't beating 'em...

I will agree, ACC basketball has improved their lineup. But basketball isn't driving the bus. If it were, nobody would have left The BEast. That was the best basketball conference at one time...

But the best teams in the ACC can beat the SEC's best. There were times when FSU beat Florida. FSU won 2 years ago and won 2 of the last 3. Miami can beat Florida. Clemson has lost 4 in a row to SC but before that Clemson won 10 out of 12. Clemson can beat SC. GT is struggling against UGA right now, but GT is not one of the ACC's best.

(05-04-2013 05:53 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-02-2013 11:28 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Ran across this interesting web info regarding 2012 conference/individual school attendance.... It is falling folks. Everyone is always arguing about school fan support, so here are the hard facts.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/...seaso.html

Yes it is....very simple it is now better to watch @ home then going to the game. No parking issues, HD and not in the weather. That why the NFL is doing everything possible to better their stadium atomsphere....even they see this coming.

And just wait til the standard household gets all the channels on a 65" screen in HD 3-D... along with a nice 30 pack of Natural Light for $12.97 and all of your favorite Saturday friends around the smoker.. That's a problem for the stadium ticket gates.

(05-04-2013 07:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 01:53 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 08:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  The article did not mention Notre Dame, which sold out every one of its home games (actually, since 1973), did not lose any attendance at all and took 35,000 fans to a Navy home game in Dublin, Ireland.

But, I agree with the larger premise that many schools are looking at declining attendance. They may be killing their Golden Goose with higher ticket prices, higher athletic budgets/need to fleece fans and greed driven, TV dollar seeking realignment bull$hit.

So it goes, the market will eventually correct itself.

That was my point in a recent thread. Why do the universities continue charging more and more for tickets, while netting tens of millions of dollars from these lucrative TV contracts? They can't have it both ways, and you are right. It will correct itself.

Of course they can have it both ways, as long as fans keep paying. A university has every incentive to maximize ALL sources of revenue, from local attendance to national media deals.

Apparently the trend is now working against having it both ways, but we will see. As far as the cadet issue, everyone in the military has gotten the "highly encouraged to attend" briefing, whether its a squadron picnic ot for these FB games. After a week of what these cadets live through, I am reasonably sure they enjoy getting out to a football game. It's all about supporting your fellow soldier, airman, or sailor... on the battlefield or at a football game. That mindset instruction starts here. There is a method to this.

(05-04-2013 11:37 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  But the best teams in the ACC can beat the SEC's best. There were times when FSU beat Florida. FSU won 2 years ago and won 2 of the last 3. Miami can beat Florida. Clemson has lost 4 in a row to SC but before that Clemson won 10 out of 12. Clemson can beat SC. GT is struggling against UGA right now, but GT is not one of the ACC's best.

There were times. That says a lot right there. This ain't one of them times...

(05-04-2013 10:17 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 01:53 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 08:17 AM)TerryD Wrote:  The article did not mention Notre Dame, which sold out every one of its home games (actually, since 1973), did not lose any attendance at all and took 35,000 fans to a Navy home game in Dublin, Ireland.

But, I agree with the larger premise that many schools are looking at declining attendance. They may be killing their Golden Goose with higher ticket prices, higher athletic budgets/need to fleece fans and greed driven, TV dollar seeking realignment bull$hit.

So it goes, the market will eventually correct itself.

That was my point in a recent thread. Why do the universities continue charging more and more for tickets, while netting tens of millions of dollars from these lucrative TV contracts? They can't have it both ways, and you are right. It will correct itself.

Of course they can have it both ways, as long as fans keep paying. A university has every incentive to maximize ALL sources of revenue, from local attendance to national media deals.

Pro sports are maximizing revenue (at least in the medium term) by downsizing their stadiums and pricing out many average fans. I hope college sports doesn't head that way.

I am not seeing much down sizing... these stadiums are into the billion dollar cost range. I don't see them taking any seats out in football. Baseball has just gotten back to where they should have always been, 35000-40000 range. It was ridiculous to go to these cookie cutter round bowl stadiums of the sixties with 55000-60000 seats... 40000 which were empty except on the weekends.

(05-04-2013 05:53 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-02-2013 11:28 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Ran across this interesting web info regarding 2012 conference/individual school attendance.... It is falling folks. Everyone is always arguing about school fan support, so here are the hard facts.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/...seaso.html

Yes it is....very simple it is now better to watch @ home then going to the game. No parking issues, HD and not in the weather. That why the NFL is doing everything possible to better their stadium atomsphere....even they see this coming.

NFL and college football see it coming, but they're playing both sides of the fence. They're also catering to TV, often at the expense of fans who go to the stadium -- including Thursday games and, for college teams, Saturday games where they change the game time less than a week before the game. Not to mention that for the NFL, and for many top college teams, you can buy an excellent large-screen HDTV (or another nice "toy") for less than the price of one season ticket.

The NFL can better afford to favor TV over the ticket-buyers, because their TV revenue is far greater. College teams also depend on donations as a revenue source, and those donations are bound to go down if donors who used to go to the stadium for every game now opt to watch more often on TV. It's more important for college teams to not lose the diehards who buy season tickets and donate to the athletic department.

2012 Attendance

ECU 47013
USF 44130
UConn 34672
UCF 34608
Navy 32363
Cinn 29138
Houston 27247
Temple 26580
Memphis 24371
SMU 21292
Tulsa 20020
Tulane 18085

Average 29960

With an attendance average of 29960 for the new AAC teams for 2012 it is no wonder the current larger AAC/ BE paying bowls like the Pin Stripe, Belk, and Russell bowls are looking else where to other conferences that are interested in them. Outside of the potential play off spot and hopefully the Liberty bowl if they don't look else where too, the new AAC will probably consist of current lower end bowls like the Beef O'Brady and BBVA Compass Bowls, and bowls that have tie ins to Navy and the new Cusa teams joining the AAC in the future. The AAC will have to tie in regionally to bowls like the Military, Beef O'Brady, BBVA, New Orleans, and Texas Bowls going forward and hope that something decent falls to them from the higher paying bowls possibly in secondary agreements when there aren't enough bowl eligible teams available with the conferences that play 9 conferences games eliminating potential body bag games in OOC scheduling helping them to be bowl eligible.

(05-04-2013 11:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:37 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  But the best teams in the ACC can beat the SEC's best. There were times when FSU beat Florida. FSU won 2 years ago and won 2 of the last 3. Miami can beat Florida. Clemson has lost 4 in a row to SC but before that Clemson won 10 out of 12. Clemson can beat SC. GT is struggling against UGA right now, but GT is not one of the ACC's best.

There were times. That says a lot right there. This ain't one of them times...

FSU beat Florida two years ago (Fla won last year). Clemson beat LSU 4 months ago. How more recent do you want it?

(05-04-2013 06:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 11:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-03-2013 10:43 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  They shouldn't be surprised. They spend so much time making sure they have good TV coverage, and then jack up ticket prices? It was just a matter of time.

I think the economy is part of it too though. NIU actually had better attendance in 2003, much better, but has been dropping despite winning a lot of games, and without much change in ticket prices. Scheduling was part of it though, including weeknight games.

It is the "arms race" that is the culprit.

Every school "needs" new practice facilities, an athletic academic center, a new weight room, an expanded stadium, increased coaching salaries, more recruiting staff, etc...

That arms race drives the "need" for more TV dollars, conference realignment and rising ticket prices.

It is starting to price out the average, blue collar "t-shirt" fan that every school relies on to fill their stadiums for our version of the old Roman Republic "bread and circuses" distractions for the mob/populace.

Corporate boxes generate cash from the "fat cats" but the higher ticket prices may mean that more and more average fans sit at home and watch the games on their high definition TV's.

Terry, living in BR, you must remember that these same arguments were made locally 10-12 years ago when Saban arrived at LSU and LSU embarked on stadium expansion with a heavy investment in luxury suites, personal seat licenses, $1000 a season parking passes, and other stuff the average WalMart LSU fan can't afford. The result? LSU fans finally got the big-time football program its fans always fancied it as having (but really didn't), and it hasn't hurt LSU home attendance at all.

Give it time. The prices can't keep going up forever without regular fans finally deciding the price is beyond their family budget.

Also, lack of future success may factor into it. I clearly recall low Tiger Stadium crowds in the late Eighties/early Nineties when LSU had eight losing seasons in eleven years.

(05-04-2013 12:34 PM)panite Wrote:  2012 Attendance

ECU 47013
USF 44130
UConn 34672
UCF 34608
Navy 32363
Cinn 29138
Houston 27247
Temple 26580
Memphis 24371
SMU 21292
Tulsa 20020
Tulane 18085

Average 29960

If they're competing for bowl slots with the 6-6/7-5 SEC and Big Ten teams, then the relevant numbers for comparison are

12 SEC schools average more than 50,000 -- and Kentucky is at 49,691. Which is why the lower-end bowls are happy to sign up for the 10th choice from the SEC.

7 of the "B1G-14" teams are over 50,000, Rutgers was almost there last year, and all but Northwestern are over 40,000. Not as good as the SEC, but still pretty solid if you're a fourth-tier bowl game in the southeast that is looking for a team.

(05-04-2013 01:29 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:37 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  But the best teams in the ACC can beat the SEC's best. There were times when FSU beat Florida. FSU won 2 years ago and won 2 of the last 3. Miami can beat Florida. Clemson has lost 4 in a row to SC but before that Clemson won 10 out of 12. Clemson can beat SC. GT is struggling against UGA right now, but GT is not one of the ACC's best.

There were times. That says a lot right there. This ain't one of them times...

FSU beat Florida two years ago (Fla won last year). Clemson beat LSU 4 months ago. How more recent do you want it?

Neither Florida nor LSU has won the SEC for some time...

BTW, Tavon Austin just scored on Clemson again...

http://michiganradio.org/post/students-a...aving-them

(05-04-2013 01:50 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 01:29 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:37 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  But the best teams in the ACC can beat the SEC's best. There were times when FSU beat Florida. FSU won 2 years ago and won 2 of the last 3. Miami can beat Florida. Clemson has lost 4 in a row to SC but before that Clemson won 10 out of 12. Clemson can beat SC. GT is struggling against UGA right now, but GT is not one of the ACC's best.

There were times. That says a lot right there. This ain't one of them times...

FSU beat Florida two years ago (Fla won last year). Clemson beat LSU 4 months ago. How more recent do you want it?

Neither Florida nor LSU has won the SEC for some time...

BTW, Tavon Austin just scored on Clemson again...

I guess that "some time" can mean whatever you want it to mean.

Both LSU and Florida have won the SEC within the past 5 years - LSU 2 years ago and Florida 5 years ago.

In addition, Florida tied for the SEC East last year but failed to get a shot at the championship due to the vagaries of a tie breaker.

(05-04-2013 04:58 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 01:50 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 01:29 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:37 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  But the best teams in the ACC can beat the SEC's best. There were times when FSU beat Florida. FSU won 2 years ago and won 2 of the last 3. Miami can beat Florida. Clemson has lost 4 in a row to SC but before that Clemson won 10 out of 12. Clemson can beat SC. GT is struggling against UGA right now, but GT is not one of the ACC's best.

There were times. That says a lot right there. This ain't one of them times...

FSU beat Florida two years ago (Fla won last year). Clemson beat LSU 4 months ago. How more recent do you want it?

Neither Florida nor LSU has won the SEC for some time...

BTW, Tavon Austin just scored on Clemson again...

I guess that "some time" can mean whatever you want it to mean.

Both LSU and Florida have won the SEC within the past 5 years - LSU 2 years ago and Florida 5 years ago.

In addition, Florida tied for the SEC East last year but failed to get a shot at the championship due to the vagaries of a tie breaker.

Whatever dude. The ACC still only has 3 BCS bowl wins since the BCS was created. The ACC has lost 5 times as many BCS bowls as they've won...

(05-04-2013 06:43 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:58 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 01:50 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 01:29 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 11:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  There were times. That says a lot right there. This ain't one of them times...

FSU beat Florida two years ago (Fla won last year). Clemson beat LSU 4 months ago. How more recent do you want it?

Neither Florida nor LSU has won the SEC for some time...

BTW, Tavon Austin just scored on Clemson again...

I guess that "some time" can mean whatever you want it to mean.

Both LSU and Florida have won the SEC within the past 5 years - LSU 2 years ago and Florida 5 years ago.

In addition, Florida tied for the SEC East last year but failed to get a shot at the championship due to the vagaries of a tie breaker.

Whatever dude. The ACC still only has 3 BCS bowl wins since the BCS was created. The ACC has lost 5 times as many BCS bowls as they've won...

But that's not what we were talking about. You said the top ACC teams couldn't beat the top SEC teams. Well they can and there's recent data to prove it.