menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: OT: CFB attendance drops...
Page: 1 of 2
mail
person
brucecuth
2/13/2018 2:11 PM
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-f... /
mail
person
Bobcat1996
2/13/2018 7:38 PM
Yes it dropped but still higher than 1985, 1988 and 1992, but not as high as in 2014. NFL attendance has also dropped and guessing so has NCAA hoops. More options for fans now.
mail
person
bobcatsquared
2/13/2018 8:50 PM
I blame it on players kneeling during the national anthem.
mail
TWT
2/13/2018 9:03 PM
I was looking up the capacity drops mentioned and found this UNC article talking about dropping from 63k to 51k while also lowering ticket prices in 70 percent of the seats. That is pretty extreme but the ACC felt pressure to go to 60k+ and compete with FSU joining the conference in the 90's. This is a clear signal they've given up trying to compete with the top programs.

https://www.athleticbusiness.com/college/unc-ad-talks-col...
mail
person
L.C.
2/13/2018 9:44 PM
Here is the full report from the NCAA:
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance...

The MAC, after being up 4.9% in 2016, was hard hit in 2017, dropping 997 to 15,394, drop of 6.1%, second worst, just ahead of the 9.3% drop seen in the AAC. Individual MAC teams were:

Toledo 20,745
Akron 19,569
Ohio 19,388
Miami 16,444
WMU 15,886
BG* 15,881 Note: only one MAC mid-week game
EMU* 14,730
CMU* 13,504
Buffalo 13,350
Kent* 13,185)
NIU 11,291 Note: three MAC mid-week games
Ball St 9,899 Note: three MAC mid-week games
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
2/14/2018 9:23 AM
When you're dealing with the smaller numbers like in the MAC, one rainy opener makes a huge difference. that probably cost us 4000 people the first home game.
mail
person
Pataskala
2/14/2018 12:00 PM
One thing not mentioned in the article is that weather played hell with the teams down south. Several games were cancelled; others were rescheduled, some with short notice (like FSU-ULM the weekend of the ACC championship game); and I think some were relocated. The teams have to deal with all the issues mentioned in the article, but the weather made things worse.
mail
person
Jeff McKinney
2/14/2018 11:53 PM
That figure for Akron is an absolute joke.
mail
person
L.C.
2/15/2018 12:21 AM
Jeff McKinney wrote:expand_more
That figure for Akron is an absolute joke.

Game by game, reported attendance was:
Arkansas Pine Bluff - 17,464
Iowa State - 22,811
Ball State - 20,199
Buffalo - 17,427
Ohio - 17,832 (Tuesday)
Kent - 21,683 (Tuesday)

I wonder if they bulk sold tickets tickets to make sure they made the 15,000 minimum?
mail
person
ShoreCat
2/15/2018 7:36 AM
Here's another take on this from a Penn State football writer.
http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2018/...

For those not wanting to look at the full article, here's two of his main takes:

"The downward trend in college football attendance jibes with the rise of smartphone technology in the last decade. They are almost perfectly diametrically opposed, both beginning in earnest in the late '00s."

"But it's pretty clear from looking at student sections across the country that they are the ones most responsible for the national downturn and this is scaring the crap out of the suits who run college athletics. Because the administrators know if students don't attend the games now, they'll be less likely to donate later when they're at prime earning age."

This isn't football, but I made it down to the Convo for the Central Michigan game. I won't beat a dead horse about the Ozone being dead (which it was), but the Uptown bars were packed before the game. With Sibs weekend, it looked like at least some of those people made it down for the game (I actually thought it was a good crowd), but it was clear that going to game wasn't on the agenda for most of the Court Street patrons that afternoon.
Last Edited: 2/15/2018 8:53:16 AM by ShoreCat
mail
person
OUPride
2/15/2018 9:09 AM
BayCat wrote:expand_more
Here's another take on this from a Penn State football writer.
http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2018/...

For those not wanting to look at the full article, here's two of his main takes:

"The downward trend in college football attendance jibes with the rise of smartphone technology in the last decade. They are almost perfectly diametrically opposed, both beginning in earnest in the late '00s."

"But it's pretty clear from looking at student sections across the country that they are the ones most responsible for the national downturn and this is scaring the crap out of the suits who run college athletics. Because the administrators know if students don't attend the games now, they'll be less likely to donate later when they're at prime earning age."

This isn't football, but I made it down to the Convo for the Central Michigan game. I won't beat a dead horse about the Ozone being dead (which it was), but the Uptown bars were packed before the game. With Sibs weekend, it looked like at least some of those people made it down for the game (I actually thought it was a good crowd), but it was clear that going to game wasn't on the agenda for most of the Court Street patrons that afternoon.
Donate to the athletic department? Yes, they may be less likely to do that in the future. It won't mean anything to the academic side. Having big time football and/or basketball has been shown over and over to have nothing to do with overall donations to a university.
mail
person
colobobcat66
2/15/2018 10:18 AM
OUPride wrote:expand_more
Here's another take on this from a Penn State football writer.
http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2018/...

For those not wanting to look at the full article, here's two of his main takes:

"The downward trend in college football attendance jibes with the rise of smartphone technology in the last decade. They are almost perfectly diametrically opposed, both beginning in earnest in the late '00s."

"But it's pretty clear from looking at student sections across the country that they are the ones most responsible for the national downturn and this is scaring the crap out of the suits who run college athletics. Because the administrators know if students don't attend the games now, they'll be less likely to donate later when they're at prime earning age."

This isn't football, but I made it down to the Convo for the Central Michigan game. I won't beat a dead horse about the Ozone being dead (which it was), but the Uptown bars were packed before the game. With Sibs weekend, it looked like at least some of those people made it down for the game (I actually thought it was a good crowd), but it was clear that going to game wasn't on the agenda for most of the Court Street patrons that afternoon.
Donate to the athletic department? Yes, they may be less likely to do that in the future. It won't mean anything to the academic side. Having big time football and/or basketball has been shown over and over to have nothing to do with overall donations to a university.

But having successfull big time athletic programs correlate with increased alumni giving. Just google it. I used to agrue with a LSU alum about this, he proved me wrong about no effect.
Last Edited: 2/15/2018 10:22:55 AM by colobobcat66
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/15/2018 11:20 AM
OUPride wrote:expand_more
Here's another take on this from a Penn State football writer.
http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2018/...

For those not wanting to look at the full article, here's two of his main takes:

"The downward trend in college football attendance jibes with the rise of smartphone technology in the last decade. They are almost perfectly diametrically opposed, both beginning in earnest in the late '00s."

"But it's pretty clear from looking at student sections across the country that they are the ones most responsible for the national downturn and this is scaring the crap out of the suits who run college athletics. Because the administrators know if students don't attend the games now, they'll be less likely to donate later when they're at prime earning age."

This isn't football, but I made it down to the Convo for the Central Michigan game. I won't beat a dead horse about the Ozone being dead (which it was), but the Uptown bars were packed before the game. With Sibs weekend, it looked like at least some of those people made it down for the game (I actually thought it was a good crowd), but it was clear that going to game wasn't on the agenda for most of the Court Street patrons that afternoon.
Donate to the athletic department? Yes, they may be less likely to do that in the future. It won't mean anything to the academic side. Having big time football and/or basketball has been shown over and over to have nothing to do with overall donations to a university.
One of the four finalists for the CEO of the OU Foundation was quoted as saying that in his public forum. The guy was from Tennessee.
mail
person
OUPride
2/15/2018 12:38 PM
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
Here's another take on this from a Penn State football writer.
http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2018/...

For those not wanting to look at the full article, here's two of his main takes:

"The downward trend in college football attendance jibes with the rise of smartphone technology in the last decade. They are almost perfectly diametrically opposed, both beginning in earnest in the late '00s."

"But it's pretty clear from looking at student sections across the country that they are the ones most responsible for the national downturn and this is scaring the crap out of the suits who run college athletics. Because the administrators know if students don't attend the games now, they'll be less likely to donate later when they're at prime earning age."

This isn't football, but I made it down to the Convo for the Central Michigan game. I won't beat a dead horse about the Ozone being dead (which it was), but the Uptown bars were packed before the game. With Sibs weekend, it looked like at least some of those people made it down for the game (I actually thought it was a good crowd), but it was clear that going to game wasn't on the agenda for most of the Court Street patrons that afternoon.
Donate to the athletic department? Yes, they may be less likely to do that in the future. It won't mean anything to the academic side. Having big time football and/or basketball has been shown over and over to have nothing to do with overall donations to a university.

But having successfull big time athletic programs correlate with increased alumni giving. Just google it. I used to agrue with a LSU alum about this, he proved me wrong about no effect.
Then why do Minnesota, Illinois or Berkeley have endowments that are larger than Alabama, Auburn and LAU combined? Why is Michigan's endowment about to pass the 10B Mark despite their football program having the worst decade in its history? Being a great school with respected academics and successful alumni is what drives academic donations, not a winning football or basketball team.
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/15/2018 12:52 PM
Jeff McKinney wrote:expand_more
That figure for Akron is an absolute joke.
No more than what we report. Every school has it's own way of "selling tickets."
mail
person
colobobcat66
2/15/2018 12:56 PM
OUPride wrote:expand_more
Here's another take on this from a Penn State football writer.
http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/index.ssf/2018/...

For those not wanting to look at the full article, here's two of his main takes:

"The downward trend in college football attendance jibes with the rise of smartphone technology in the last decade. They are almost perfectly diametrically opposed, both beginning in earnest in the late '00s."

"But it's pretty clear from looking at student sections across the country that they are the ones most responsible for the national downturn and this is scaring the crap out of the suits who run college athletics. Because the administrators know if students don't attend the games now, they'll be less likely to donate later when they're at prime earning age."

This isn't football, but I made it down to the Convo for the Central Michigan game. I won't beat a dead horse about the Ozone being dead (which it was), but the Uptown bars were packed before the game. With Sibs weekend, it looked like at least some of those people made it down for the game (I actually thought it was a good crowd), but it was clear that going to game wasn't on the agenda for most of the Court Street patrons that afternoon.
Donate to the athletic department? Yes, they may be less likely to do that in the future. It won't mean anything to the academic side. Having big time football and/or basketball has been shown over and over to have nothing to do with overall donations to a university.

But having successfull big time athletic programs correlate with increased alumni giving. Just google it. I used to agrue with a LSU alum about this, he proved me wrong about no effect.
Then why do Minnesota, Illinois or Berkeley have endowments that are larger than Alabama, Auburn and LAU combined? Why is Michigan's endowment about to pass the 10B Mark despite their football program having the worst decade in its history? Being a great school with respected academics and successful alumni is what drives academic donations, not a winning football or basketball team.
Because they have rich alumni who give to the school regardless of their athletic results. All I’m saying is that it doesn’t hurt to have athletic success, that it helps raise contributions to the school.
There are people who do care and give more because of the success. Does it mean they have the largest endowments? Of course not.
mail
person
L.C.
2/15/2018 1:58 PM
OUPride wrote:expand_more
But having successfull big time athletic programs correlate with increased alumni giving. Just google it. I used to agrue with a LSU alum about this, he proved me wrong about no effect.

Then why do Minnesota, Illinois or Berkeley have endowments that are larger than Alabama, Auburn and LAU combined? Why is Michigan's endowment about to pass the 10B Mark despite their football program having the worst decade in its history? Being a great school with respected academics and successful alumni is what drives academic donations, not a winning football or basketball team.

I have posted data here on several occasions that showed clear correlation between having being competitive at football and basketball and growth in endowment. Note that I'm not saying that the connection is a good thing. I'm merely pointing out that it very clearly exists. On the positive side, the data also showed that very elite Universities were able to sustain alumni giving without big time athletics. Thus schools like U.Chicago, the Ivy League, M.I.T. etc had excellent endowment growth despite not competing at the highest levels athletically.

Does correlation prove causation? Of course not. It's possible that active, well run Universities tend to have good endowment growth, and that the same factors also lead to more success athletically, but that one doesn't cause the other. It's similarly possible that the converse is true, and that dormant Universities that aren't well run on the academic side tend to ignore athletics as well.

As far as your specific question, Minnesota, Illinois, and Berkeley all do compete at the P5 level, so they aren't good examples. How about picking schools like, say, Grinnell, Case Western, or Rockefeller University, that don't compete in athletics at the highest levels at all? How is their endowment growth?

In any case, massive endowments come not from a single good year, or even decade, but from a long period of successful fundraising. From what I can tell, the boom in giving to Universities with successful athletic programs is relatively new, within the last 30 years. If there is causation, and I personally tend to think there is, the causation is something I have seen first hand in my own family. Even though my brother attended a different University, he has for years attended U. Nebraska football games, and now gives regularly to them.

Besides building ties to people that never attended a University, it also can keep alumni more engaged in things going on at the University. A person who is on campus regularly to attend games may look around and think "this was a great place, and I should give some money to the endowment to make it possible for others to experience this".

If you want to look closer to home, from the data I have looked at, the endowment growth for Ohio University over the last ten years has been exceptional. That period also coincides with a period of higher athletic success. Correlation? Causation? You will have to reach your own conclusion.
Last Edited: 2/15/2018 2:11:12 PM by L.C.
mail
person
L.C.
2/15/2018 2:02 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
That figure for Akron is an absolute joke.
No more than what we report. Every school has it's own way of "selling tickets."

I see a huge difference between moving tickets by selling very low cost "family packages" and selling, say 10,000 season tickets to Pepsi for $1 each, which is the kind of thing I've seen some other MAC schools do occasionally to pad their attendance numbers and "meet" the NCAA minimum attendance levels. With the family packages, a lot of people actually do attend the games, whereas Pepsi no doubt gives a few away, but the bulk of them go unused.

I have no idea how Akron sold as many tickets as they did this year. It could have been a large bulk sale, or it could have been a bunch of family packages. For their sake, I hope it was the latter.
Last Edited: 2/15/2018 2:14:04 PM by L.C.
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
2/15/2018 2:26 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
That figure for Akron is an absolute joke.
No more than what we report. Every school has it's own way of "selling tickets."
and that's wrong. Everyone reports tickets sold. WE all know this. it's always more than the actual butts in seats. But Ohio comes a hell of a lot closer to a respectable number of people at the stadium than Akron does. I don't think the situations are comparable.
mail
person
ShoreCat
2/15/2018 2:40 PM
so it looks like we've tied 2 different questions together in this thread. Does having a successful athletic program increase donations to the university, and if students are not going to athletic events any more, would they be less likely to donate money to the university in the future?

My only donations to Ohio University had nothing to do with athletics. A professor that I greatly admired challenged the college of Arts and Sciences to set up an endowment for outstanding undergraduate teaching and committed a large amount of his money if the college could raise that. Nothing against athletics, but to me, that was a far better use of my dollars than donating to the athletic department.

A major factor in donations of future alums has to be the current cost of a 4-year education. Why would an alum donate when he/she has 6 figures in student debt to pay off? Even on my limited salary, I was able to make a small donation to Ohio University because my debt was manageable.

Honestly, if the cost of a college education was what it was when I attended, I may have attended a trade school.
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/15/2018 4:06 PM
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
That figure for Akron is an absolute joke.
No more than what we report. Every school has it's own way of "selling tickets."
and that's wrong. Everyone reports tickets sold. WE all know this. it's always more than the actual butts in seats. But Ohio comes a hell of a lot closer to a respectable number of people at the stadium than Akron does. I don't think the situations are comparable.
and if you read my post you would have understood that I was talking about selling tickets, not butts in seats. Every university does have it's own way of selling tickets. For next year, every football season ticket holder technically will also "buy" a volleyball season ticket. Whether those will be counted in vb attendance has yet to be seen.
mail
person
L.C.
2/15/2018 4:19 PM
BayCat wrote:expand_more
... Does having a successful athletic program increase donations to the university, and if students are not going to athletic events any more, would they be less likely to donate money to the university in the future?... [/QUOTE]
These are exactly the questions. Everyone agrees that success in athletics increases athletic donations, but there are different opinions on the effect on general giving. Some believe they increase ties to the university, and therefore general giving. Others believe athletic donations soak up money that could have gone to general giving, and therefore decrease general giving.

As for the second part of the question, if today's students lose interest in athletics, and they may, universities are going to need to find other ways to keep the alumni engaged and connected. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. Athletics has always seemed to me to be totally unrelated to to the core mission, and therefore a strange (but oddly effective) way of keeping prior generations of alums connected.


[QUOTE=BayCat]...
A major factor in donations of future alums has to be the current cost of a 4-year education. Why would an alum donate when he/she has 6 figures in student debt to pay off? ...

Now there is a scary thought. If universities don't get their costs in line, they will pay the price, perhaps not today, but eventually.
mail
person
bobcatsquared
2/15/2018 8:13 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
For next year, every football season ticket holder technically will also "buy" a volleyball season ticket.
. . . I'm doing what?
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/15/2018 9:18 PM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
For next year, every football season ticket holder technically will also "buy" a volleyball season ticket.
. . . I'm doing what?
Your season tickets will come with a pass for the volleyball season at no additional cost. At least that's what the email that I got today said.
mail
OhioCatFan
2/16/2018 10:44 AM
To illustrate L.C.'s point about non-alumni giving to universities whose athletic contests they attend, we need look no further than John Galbreath. An OHIO graduate, he had a lifelong love affair with the football program at the Evil Empire. Though his daughter Joan, also an OHIO graduate, gave much to OHIO, father John's donations went mainly to the junior institution in Cowtown. The major exception, of course, was Galbreath Chapel, which he insisted be built on the spot where he had met his first wife.

Edit: In this regard, it's interesting to read John Galbreath's obit in the NYT: OSU is mentioned prominently, whereas his graduation from OHIO appears as almost an after thought: https://tinyurl.com/y8x6o4hs
Last Edited: 2/16/2018 10:53:21 AM by OhioCatFan
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 32
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)