(01-10-2020 01:12 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  Prices, ND has lost their mind with the cost to attend a game.

Really? What's been the increase?

(01-11-2020 12:47 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 01:12 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  Prices, ND has lost their mind with the cost to attend a game.

Really? What's been the increase?

Prices unchanged for the last three seasons.


https://www.onefootdown.com/2019/5/2/185...y-virginia

(01-11-2020 09:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 10:57 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Back in the 70's it was album oriented. Small parties of a few couples playing cards listening to an album. There was no such thing as even a greatest hits album.

I would beg to differ. To my recollection, the 1970s was the decade that pretty much invented the greatest hits album, and they were often released at the artist's peak, when they were still churning out hits. The Stones (1971), The Eagles GH (1975) and Steve Miller's GH (1978) come immediately to mind. Sly and the Family Stone, Al Green, and Marvin Gaye all had GH records in the 1970s as well. Donna Summer and the Bee Gees released GH albums in 1979 when hits from their then-current studio albums were still all over the radio. There are really too many to count.

Heck, some acts released "greatest hits" in the 1970s long before they actually made their biggest hits, such as Michael Jackson (1975) and ZZ Top (1977). And some big acts released two greatest hits records that decade, such as Elton John (1974 and 1977) and John Denver (1973 and 1977).

GH records proliferated in the 1970s.

Yes. I've got a bunch of them. On vinyl. Lots of 60s and 70s groups.

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 7 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

(01-10-2020 03:49 PM)XLance Wrote:  At Carolina, we have reduced capacity by almost 20%.
22" seat back chairs replaced aluminum benches. Not good if you want to share a stadium blanket with someone on a cold day, but having more space and more leg room is a plus. It's also eliminated people down the row squeezing in a few friends and inconveniencing everybody else.
Bathrooms and concessions are less crowded and the parking problems have been eased.
Customer service (comfort and convenience) replaced a "pack 'em" in mentality and it seems to be working.

Those all seem like changes for the better. Quality over quantity.

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

(01-10-2020 07:49 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 06:40 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  And finally, kick-off times that are geared for media’s convenience, and not for fans in the stands. Tulane and Southern Miss just kicked-off a game at 10:30am local time a few days ago. We all know about the MAC games on Tuesday/Wednesday nights. And Mountain West games that kick-off at 8pm or even 8:30pm. Sure, the die-hards will put up with it. Not many others will.

Related to what I said in the bowl attendance thread: The price of the exposure and money that the TV guys provide is that TV wants to treat the stadium like a TV studio at which the entertainment is performed before a live studio audience. Whether every seat in the studio audience is filled is not their first priority.

There are four TV "windows" for college football on Saturdays. If every game was started at the time that the fans in the stands most wanted it to be started, there would be lots and lots of games in the two middle windows, fewer games in the first window, and even fewer in the fourth. The games wouldn't be distributed so as to maximize TV viewership -- but distributing the games in a way that tries to maximize TV viewership is *exactly* what the TV networks are paying for.

There should be a ton of Noon and 330pm games. With only a few 730-8pm games. No late window games.

(01-10-2020 08:46 PM)3BNole Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 02:27 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I think chairbacks - or at least benchbacks - are becoming a must for stadiums. People aren't willing to shell out a fortune for their back to hurt and be packed in like sardines for 4 hours.

I can deal with tv timeouts as long as cellular service allows me to check scores. Back aches and claustrophobia are far more likely to signal leaving early.

I agree 100% with this. I literally live in Tallahassee, grew up an FSU fan and am an alumnus. I only go to 1-2 games a year (regardless of how good they are) because honestly when you add in the time it takes for the game and just to get there, the uncomfortable nature of the benches, the heat (in Florida), and the cost... well it generally isn’t worth it to me, unless they’re playing someone interesting that I haven’t seen before.

Went to FSU myself. With the improvements in streaming technology, the availability of satellite, and the sheer number of TV games, more and more folks going to games never make it into the stadium because the TV's at the tailgate are going to let you see more than you will in the stadium. At the same time, FSU is removing the seats that, while not the best from a viewing standpoint, allowed for the point of entry for folks to take the kids to. Most folks in North Florida can't afford the club seats that have replaced them and the 4 to 9 hour one-way drive for the folks that can gets costly and time consuming.

Here is the problem. Conferences are spread out too far apart these days. Nebraska. Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Arkansas and Texas A&M do not fit culture wise, and geography do not fit. Penn State Rutgers and Maryland do not fit in the Big 10. They all are outliers than the core conferences they are in. Arkansas have not really been a NC contender since leaving the SWC. I think we might need to create more than 5 power conferences based on their geography. Fans would fill stadiums better if the games are closer like driving distances than have to fly all over the place for games.

(01-11-2020 05:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Here is the problem. Conferences are spread out too far apart these days. Nebraska. Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Arkansas and Texas A&M do not fit culture wise, and geography do not fit. Penn State Rutgers and Maryland do not fit in the Big 10. They all are outliers than the core conferences they are in. Arkansas have not really been a NC contender since leaving the SWC. I think we might need to create more than 5 power conferences based on their geography. Fans would fill stadiums better if the games are closer like driving distances than have to fly all over the place for games.

David the divisions will replace the smaller conferences. Here's why. Conference overhead (commissioner's salaries, staff salaries, office space, etc.) takes 1 full share of every conference's revenue. The more conferences you have the more you lose to overhead.

This is why consolidation is still going to be with us. But as conferences dissolve divisions will be the new conference groupings.

From the network perspective they pay more for games that engage larger regions than the old conferences provided. That pay is what lures schools to change. So as long as less overhead and more money to move are available more consolidation will occur.

(01-11-2020 05:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  I think we might need to create more than 5 power conferences based on their geography. Fans would fill stadiums better if the games are closer like driving distances than have to fly all over the place for games.

Yes! Imagine college football with 7 power conferences (ACC, Big East, B10, XII, PAC, SEC, SWC) where the 7 champs and 1 at-large (forcing everyone to schedule up OOC) make up the CFP. You can even divide the numbers so each league has a round robin. We’d get an 8-team playoff and the regular season would be a war zone.

(01-11-2020 05:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 05:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Here is the problem. Conferences are spread out too far apart these days. Nebraska. Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Arkansas and Texas A&M do not fit culture wise, and geography do not fit. Penn State Rutgers and Maryland do not fit in the Big 10. They all are outliers than the core conferences they are in. Arkansas have not really been a NC contender since leaving the SWC. I think we might need to create more than 5 power conferences based on their geography. Fans would fill stadiums better if the games are closer like driving distances than have to fly all over the place for games.

David the divisions will replace the smaller conferences. Here's why. Conference overhead (commissioner's salaries, staff salaries, office space, etc.) takes 1 full share of every conference's revenue. The more conferences you have the more you lose to overhead.

This is why consolidation is still going to be with us. But as conferences dissolve divisions will be the new conference groupings.

From the network perspective they pay more for games that engage larger regions than the old conferences provided. That pay is what lures schools to change. So as long as less overhead and more money to move are available more consolidation will occur.

One question I’m curious about — how hard do employees of a conference commission work? If contention is that at Power 5 level there are efficiencies achieved with divisions in bigger conferences, why couldn’t two lower level conferences share a commission?

(01-11-2020 03:33 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

Baseball's decline can be overstated. Yes, attendance has fallen by about 5,000 fans per game over the past 10-12 years, and that's not good. But by historical standards attendance is still decent.

For example, in 1955, at what might be called the very peak of baseball's Golden Age, average attendance at MLB games was about 13,500 per game.

In contrast, last year average MLB attendance was around 28,000.

Now true, the USA population has doubled during that time, from around 165 million in 1955 to around 330 million today. But, the number of MLB teams has about doubled as well, from 16 in 1955 to 30 today, so the increase in teams pretty much cancels out the increase in overall market size.

And even if you think it doesn't, and think 1955 attendance should be doubled to be compared to today's attendance, it's still basically the same now as then, despite baseball being the undisputed King of USA Sports at that time.

Plus, fans are paying more these days. For example, at this year's World Series between the Nats and Astros, the lowest face-value ticket price for either ballpark to see some guy walk up to the plate with "baby shark" blasting was $150.

In 1955, a bleacher seat in Yankee Stadium at the World Series to see Mickey Mantle, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra would have cost you .. $2.10, which translates in to $19 in today's money.

(01-12-2020 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 03:33 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

Baseball's decline can be overstated. Yes, attendance has fallen by about 5,000 fans per game over the past 10-12 years, and that's not good. But by historical standards attendance is still decent.

For example, in 1955, at what might be called the very peak of baseball's Golden Age, average attendance at MLB games was about 13,500 per game.

In contrast, last year average MLB attendance was around 28,000.

Now true, the USA population has doubled during that time, from around 165 million in 1955 to around 330 million today. But, the number of MLB teams has about doubled as well, from 16 in 1955 to 30 today, so the increase in teams pretty much cancels out the increase in overall market size.

And even if you think it doesn't, and think 1955 attendance should be doubled to be compared to today's attendance, it's still basically the same now as then, despite baseball being the undisputed King of USA Sports at that time.

Plus, fans are paying more these days. For example, at this year's World Series between the Nats and Astros, the lowest face-value ticket price for either ballpark to see some guy walk up to the plate with "baby shark" blasting was $150.

In 1955, a bleacher seat in Yankee Stadium at the World Series to see Mickey Mantle, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra would have cost you .. $2.10, which translates in to $19 in today's money.

Keep in mind, though, that even in 1955 most games being played were still day games and the World Series didn't have a night game until 1971.

(01-12-2020 11:05 AM)whittx Wrote:  

(01-12-2020 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 03:33 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

Baseball's decline can be overstated. Yes, attendance has fallen by about 5,000 fans per game over the past 10-12 years, and that's not good. But by historical standards attendance is still decent.

For example, in 1955, at what might be called the very peak of baseball's Golden Age, average attendance at MLB games was about 13,500 per game.

In contrast, last year average MLB attendance was around 28,000.

Now true, the USA population has doubled during that time, from around 165 million in 1955 to around 330 million today. But, the number of MLB teams has about doubled as well, from 16 in 1955 to 30 today, so the increase in teams pretty much cancels out the increase in overall market size.

And even if you think it doesn't, and think 1955 attendance should be doubled to be compared to today's attendance, it's still basically the same now as then, despite baseball being the undisputed King of USA Sports at that time.

Plus, fans are paying more these days. For example, at this year's World Series between the Nats and Astros, the lowest face-value ticket price for either ballpark to see some guy walk up to the plate with "baby shark" blasting was $150.

In 1955, a bleacher seat in Yankee Stadium at the World Series to see Mickey Mantle, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra would have cost you .. $2.10, which translates in to $19 in today's money.

Keep in mind, though, that even in 1955 most games being played were still day games and the World Series didn't have a night game until 1971.

True, but there was also far less TV coverage in 1955 well, and even for the maybe 60% of homes that had it, TV for most was a 13" black and white screen with 10 people huddled around it. There are far more and better ways to experience games at home today than then.

(01-12-2020 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 03:33 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

Baseball's decline can be overstated. Yes, attendance has fallen by about 5,000 fans per game over the past 10-12 years, and that's not good. But by historical standards attendance is still decent.

For example, in 1955, at what might be called the very peak of baseball's Golden Age, average attendance at MLB games was about 13,500 per game.

In contrast, last year average MLB attendance was around 28,000.

Now true, the USA population has doubled during that time, from around 165 million in 1955 to around 330 million today. But, the number of MLB teams has about doubled as well, from 16 in 1955 to 30 today, so the increase in teams pretty much cancels out the increase in overall market size.

And even if you think it doesn't, and think 1955 attendance should be doubled to be compared to today's attendance, it's still basically the same now as then, despite baseball being the undisputed King of USA Sports at that time.

Plus, fans are paying more these days. For example, at this year's World Series between the Nats and Astros, the lowest face-value ticket price for either ballpark to see some guy walk up to the plate with "baby shark" blasting was $150.

In 1955, a bleacher seat in Yankee Stadium at the World Series to see Mickey Mantle, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra would have cost you .. $2.10, which translates in to $19 in today's money.

It's no coincidence that baseball's so called Golden Age was the Yankees and New York baseball's peak. The Golden Age talk is a media creation. Baseball was doing only okay outside the five boroughs.

(01-12-2020 11:44 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-12-2020 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 03:33 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

Baseball's decline can be overstated. Yes, attendance has fallen by about 5,000 fans per game over the past 10-12 years, and that's not good. But by historical standards attendance is still decent.

For example, in 1955, at what might be called the very peak of baseball's Golden Age, average attendance at MLB games was about 13,500 per game.

In contrast, last year average MLB attendance was around 28,000.

Now true, the USA population has doubled during that time, from around 165 million in 1955 to around 330 million today. But, the number of MLB teams has about doubled as well, from 16 in 1955 to 30 today, so the increase in teams pretty much cancels out the increase in overall market size.

And even if you think it doesn't, and think 1955 attendance should be doubled to be compared to today's attendance, it's still basically the same now as then, despite baseball being the undisputed King of USA Sports at that time.

Plus, fans are paying more these days. For example, at this year's World Series between the Nats and Astros, the lowest face-value ticket price for either ballpark to see some guy walk up to the plate with "baby shark" blasting was $150.

In 1955, a bleacher seat in Yankee Stadium at the World Series to see Mickey Mantle, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra would have cost you .. $2.10, which translates in to $19 in today's money.

It's no coincidence that baseball's so called Golden Age the Yankees and New York baseball's peak. The Golden Age talk is a media creation. Baseball was doing only okay outside the five boroughs.

That makes sense, and even in New York, it was around that time that both the Dodgers and Giants left for California. IIRC, there were other franchise movements in the 1950s as well, morseo than today's era.

When I was growing up in the 1970s, the move of the Dodgers to LA was a mythic story, the Great Tragedy of baseball history (for some reason, the Giants move to San Francisco was barely if ever mentioned). It was always cast as legions of loyal, dedicated Brooklyn fans betrayed by whatever the family was that owned the team. We were taught by the sports media that this Epic Tragedy was something that ripped at the hear of the New York Soul, hell the American Soul, and that neither the city nor country had truly been the same since. Paradise Lost.

Truth is, in 1955 the Dodgers averaged 13,500 fans per game in 30,000 seat Ebbets Field. There were a lot of Dedicated Lifetime Brooklyn Fans disguised as empty seats that year. A championship year with 4 Hall of Famers in the field and one in the dugout.

(01-12-2020 11:44 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(01-12-2020 10:45 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 03:33 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 02:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Baseball has dramatically increased ticket prices. They have downsized their stadiums, but that is to reduce supply so they can raise prices.

Made me think about the baseball stadiums. I've been in Crosley Field and Riverfront Stadium in Cincinnati, the old Rangers park in Arlington, the Astrodome and Minute Maid Park in Houston, Turner Field in Atlanta and Fenway Park in Boston. Only 2 of the 6 are still hosting baseball and Riverfront, the Astrodome and Turner Field were replaced by smaller parks.

The sport is also become less relevant each year. It could already been done for had the NFL not tried to alienate true football fans.

Baseball's decline can be overstated. Yes, attendance has fallen by about 5,000 fans per game over the past 10-12 years, and that's not good. But by historical standards attendance is still decent.

For example, in 1955, at what might be called the very peak of baseball's Golden Age, average attendance at MLB games was about 13,500 per game.

In contrast, last year average MLB attendance was around 28,000.

Now true, the USA population has doubled during that time, from around 165 million in 1955 to around 330 million today. But, the number of MLB teams has about doubled as well, from 16 in 1955 to 30 today, so the increase in teams pretty much cancels out the increase in overall market size.

And even if you think it doesn't, and think 1955 attendance should be doubled to be compared to today's attendance, it's still basically the same now as then, despite baseball being the undisputed King of USA Sports at that time.

Plus, fans are paying more these days. For example, at this year's World Series between the Nats and Astros, the lowest face-value ticket price for either ballpark to see some guy walk up to the plate with "baby shark" blasting was $150.

In 1955, a bleacher seat in Yankee Stadium at the World Series to see Mickey Mantle, Duke Snider, Jackie Robinson, Whitey Ford, Pee Wee Reese, Roy Campanella and Yogi Berra would have cost you .. $2.10, which translates in to $19 in today's money.

It's no coincidence that baseball's so called Golden Age the Yankees and New York baseball's peak. The Golden Age talk is a media creation. Baseball was doing only okay outside the five boroughs.

Winner winner chicken dinner. I quit following baseball years ago with no regret thanks to espn/the media.

(01-11-2020 11:20 AM)usffan Wrote:  Thanks - this has been an enjoyable thread to read, and I found myself a number of times agreeing out loud with what people wrote. I've used many of these same arguments to refute those who keep insisting that my alma mater (USF) needs to build an on campus stadium, since spending that kind of money on something that is undergoing such a drastic change would be folly.

One thing that I didn't see anybody mention was that another thing that has contributed to this has been schools/conferences being willing to hold kickoff times hostage for the "flex window" of broadcasting. It's hard to convince people to plan to attend a game when they don't know what time the game's going to kickoff until 13 (or, in many cases, 6) days beforehand. It dramatically impacts travel plans as well as other life events.

In many ways, we're seeing college football follow the path that MLB went down when RSN's first got full broadcast rights to games (especially home games). MLB is still making big money, but it's because of broadcasting, not because of people in the stands. For that matter, the same is becoming true of the NFL.

USFFan

Programs that draw the sort of interest that makes them hot national telecast properties typically lack sufficient population within a 30 minute drive to fill their stadium, probably couldn't within 45 minutes.

Big time college football in general requires drawing ticket buyers who must make a notable drive to the stadium. Jonesboro, Arkansas has more than doubled hotel space in the last decade and getting a hotel room for a game generally means you face a two night minimum and premium pricing for the market and you can still find that you have to stay 20 miles away for some games because no rooms are available any place most people would stay at.

That's at a G5 in a city roughly the size of Auburn, Alabama and drawing around 55,000 fewer people to a game than Auburn.

If you are traveling four hours your plans to arrive for an 11am kickoff are significantly different from your plans to arrive for a 6pm kick.

Watching on a 55 inch tv at home with a twelve pack costing less that three beers in the stadium. I get it.

Especially if you can't buy one.