The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/...ore_sports

I have no problem with his attendance reports. Points out the fallacy of the Bowl games. You guys used to complain that he only picked on UAB and he should point out attendance at other schools. Well he's doing that.

No problems with him reporting it, however it seems like that is what his bosses told him to focus on.

Of course, in online media you can throw articles out there all the time, but a majority of them will never be seen in what was called newspapers.

He's like Maury with paternity tests!

(01-03-2013 10:17 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I have no problem with his attendance reports. Points out the fallacy of the Bowl games. You guys used to complain that he only picked on UAB and he should point out attendance at other schools. Well he's doing that.

Why does the attendance matter? I'm just curious.

Oh, I don't know. Ask any business why sales figures matter?

Attendance matters, however there probably will not be any correlation made between the attendance drops & what actually is causing it.

(01-03-2013 11:09 AM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Attendance matters, however there probably will not be any correlation made between the attendance drops & what actually is causing it.

This is America. Context doesn't matter. Only the headline.

(01-03-2013 10:53 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Oh, I don't know. Ask any business why sales figures matter?

Ok. Who pays for the bowl games? And if it is so bad, why do they continue with bowl after bowl after bowl.

Also, the sales figures mean nothing. It is the net income that matters.

It's the TV revenue.

Think ESPN gives a damn if every butt in the seat got in free?

It must matters. Because there is a thread about it every time he writes about it.

Different levels of bowls have different demands upon attendance. I don't think ESPN has the same expectations for some lower tier bowls as for upper tier bowls. That doesn't mean they won't be upset by a nearly empty stadium at any bowl -- after all, that looks bad for them on TV shots. What might their expectations be for Pitt's support for its 3rd consecutive appearance in B'ham?

I sincerely hope there is a decent turnout for our bowl game which I think may be one of the better matchups in its tier. It is still a tough economy for most marginal (not alumni of either school) fans who just want to see a good football game.

Ole Miss fans have purchased quite a number of tickets.

I still will not watch or care about the game though.

(01-03-2013 01:37 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  Ole Miss fans have purchased quite a number of tickets.

I still will not watch or care about the game though.

Yeah. You and all the other 6+ billion people on earth.

Attendance at bowls does NOT matter. Period. One thing ESPN made clear during the brouhaha over the rush to add bowls years ago was that ratings are king, queen, joker, etc. ESPN (or, hypothetically, another network) pays the bowls and a bowl game pulls more eyeballs than billiards. Ad spots are sold accordingly and the circle of life is complete.

The BBVA Compass Bowl was used as a poster child as something where the actual attendance is secondary to the overall agenda.

Looks like Solomon isn't the only one that scarfs up a story he found somewhere else...

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_...s-way-down

(01-03-2013 01:43 PM)blazr Wrote:  Attendance at bowls does NOT matter. Period. One thing ESPN made clear during the brouhaha over the rush to add bowls years ago was that ratings are king, queen, joker, etc. ESPN (or, hypothetically, another network) pays the bowls and a bowl game pulls more eyeballs than billiards. Ad spots are sold accordingly and the circle of life is complete.

If attendance doesn't matter, then why do bowls take local teams, and why was UAB turned down when they were bowl eligible, citing attendance as the reason.

I know ratings is more important but to say it doesn't matter, period is ignorance.