Fantastic!SoFlaBear said:
I haven't, but I live in the Midwest. I'm planning on coming out for the Oregon game this September.
Fantastic!SoFlaBear said:
I haven't, but I live in the Midwest. I'm planning on coming out for the Oregon game this September.
Goobear said:
Who on this board has not been at a Cal home game the last 2 years? Just curious..
That is fantastic!socaliganbear said:Goobear said:
Who on this board has not been at a Cal home game the last 2 years? Just curious..
I fly to ~ 3/4 games now that I'm on the east coast.
+1 Spot on!Larno said:
OK, all the things listed have certainly contributed to the downturn in attendance. I travel a hundred miles to the games so the late ones get me home early in the morning, and certainly others travel further distances. But consider this: I have been attending games since 1964 and the norm for Cal football in that time is poor attendance for most games and a few games with big crowds. If all these negative things keep away fans now what was the excuse for small crowds with 12:30 games, cheap general admission seats in the end zones, family plans, and no piped-in music and silly games? And a stadium without the present amenities. I had seats in section EE for years and there were many games when we could stretch out with plenty of room around us. The peak Tedford years were outliers in this time, and those years led to the elimination of general admission and family plan but also to a renovated stadium. Yes. during the 54 years I have been attending there have been more bad years than good ones but even the good years did not always have large crowds. The fantastic 1975 win over USC had around 55,000 fans in the 76,000 seat stadium. In those 54 years I bet I could count total home sellouts on my fingers and not run out of them. I used to think that a return to winning as in the Tedford years would lead to sellouts, or near sellouts, but I'm not so sure anymore.
I do not want to sidetrack this discussion, but where exactly are the glorified portapotties? I have only seen the non-glorified portapotties.SoFlaBear said:I don't think I'm missing the point at all. Perhaps we have different takeaways.OaktownBear said:SoFlaBear said:When the program is between a third and half a billion in hock over a stadium deal, taking less money is probably not an option.OaktownBear said:
Take less money from tv networks in exchange for them deciding most of their game selections preseason and taking some risk that they might guess wrong and not have the best matchup every week.
You are missing the point. The program is losing money in dropping attendance. Ultimately, lost interest will hit television ratings too. This is not a choice between having a television contract or having fans in the stadium. The bulk of the money on the tv contract comes from selling the games, not in giving the network total authority over scheduling. It is questionable whether the conference is getting much if anything at all back for this term. By the way, there are other conferences that did not agree to these terms
The article is entitled, "College football heads in wrong direction with largest attendance drop in 34 years." Not "Cal football heads in wrong direction with largest attendance drop in 34 years." College football attendance is dropping because HD and UHD televisions provide great views. There are field goal range and first down stripes that aren't there IRL. I don't know about your house, but the prices for beer, soft drinks, and parking are far more reasonable at mine than at any stadium. The bathroom lines are shorter. Even if I splurge and go to the watering hole for a pitcher and a bunch of wings, as long as I don't get caught by my wife or doctor, it's still cheaper than the stadium.
One attendance driven aspect that is not mentioned in any of these articles, but is evident here at BI: aging baby boomer alumni (at all schools - not just Cal) aren't as able to attend and aren't enchanted with changing traditions (read: piped in music).
You'll get no disagreement from me on two things: the short notice time changes are killing us and winning cures a lot of this problem. That said, the program owes $440M and UC Berkeley had to bail Cal Athletics out. The Pac 12 Network deal isn't on DirecTV, which means it doesn't have the footprint that SEC and BTN have. As you know, both FS1 and ESPN have a 7/8 western 9/10 eastern slots to fill. A Pac 12, MW, or WAC game is chosen to close down the sports bars in New York and Chicago and to provide more programming for those who can't get enough football. Cal is generally a fun team to cover, and we have a reasonably large alumni base, so we get offered those games. Since we owe more than any other sports program in the country and UC is bailing us out, we are hardly in a position to turn this down.
Fun fact: the situation across the board isn't necessarily likely to get better. Disney bought FOX (but FS 1 & 2 and BTN remain FOX properties - Disney got all of the regional FOX affiliates, however), and is very aware of the multitude of people cutting cables. ESPN is going to take a lot of regional games and pit them on their new streaming-for-a-fee platform. If I can stream gives via the internet for a fee, why buy cable or satellite with its 150 channels of crap I don't watch? If I cut cable, I'm not watching Pac 12 Network and they don't make money. If P12N goes to streaming-for-a-fee, then we probably end up with them wanting to schedule across more days and time slots so as not to have games competing with one another.
You stated, "By the way, there are other conferences that did not agree to these terms " True, but no other school has an athletic department nearly half a billion in the hole. I'd love stability in scheduling. With our debt load, I don't see it anytime soon - we are not in a strong negotiating position. Maybe we could find 1,000 alums who'd write a check for half a mil each?
The gameday solutions aren't necessarily big revenue drivers either. A lot of alumni (myself included) think that free student admission could help fill seats and make the atmosphere more fun. I'd also favor keeping young alumni seats cheap and sweetening the deal to give kids under 12 free admission to most games. But again - families with kids will maybe stay for a half on 7 PM start nights. By the way, I mentioned bathroom lines: the east side of our stadium has glorified portapotties after having spent a fortune upgrading the facility. I don't think that helps.
BBBGOBEARS said:
and a LOT fewer night games
Too true. This begs the question, "Why doesn't Cal 'give away' tickets to just fill the stadium, and possibly build a base of some sort?"oskidunker said:
Not going to happen. Bottom line is they get more from tv thennwhat they lose from ticket sales
Because they still need the money they get from ticket sales - and if you give tickets away for free, there's no incentive for current season ticket holders to continue to buy season tickets, or even donate, when they can just get the tickets for free.Bobodeluxe said:Too true. This begs the question, "Why doesn't Cal 'give away' tickets to just fill the stadium, and possibly build a base of some sort?"oskidunker said:
Not going to happen. Bottom line is they get more from tv thennwhat they lose from ticket sales
Cal is similar to Stanford in that very few recent grads, can/choose to, live close enough to attend games. Traveling is now much more expensive than the recent past just to catch a game with friends.
I am not sure that is correct when it comes to Cal. There are a large number of Cal graduates that live in the Bay Area.Bobodeluxe said:Too true. This begs the question, "Why doesn't Cal 'give away' tickets to just fill the stadium, and possibly build a base of some sort?"oskidunker said:
Not going to happen. Bottom line is they get more from tv thennwhat they lose from ticket sales
Cal is similar to Stanford in that very few recent grads, can/choose to, live close enough to attend games. Traveling is now much more expensive than the recent past just to catch a game with friends.
Let's schedule UC Davis every year!B.A. Bearacus said:
Only solution to better attendance: more wins. 50% is unacceptable.
'Give away' was in quotes for a reason. In the past, there have been many promotions run to get the 'townies' to attend games!often with great success. A former long time ticket official was run out of the job due to insistence on resurrecting these programs. The all-in on jT's mirage of big time football lost a generation of two of casual fans who were priced out. We now have an empty student section, and overpriced lesser seats for everyone else.GMP said:Because they still need the money they get from ticket sales - and if you give tickets away for free, there's no incentive for current season ticket holders to continue to buy season tickets, or even donate, when they can just get the tickets for free.Bobodeluxe said:Too true. This begs the question, "Why doesn't Cal 'give away' tickets to just fill the stadium, and possibly build a base of some sort?"oskidunker said:
Not going to happen. Bottom line is they get more from tv thennwhat they lose from ticket sales
Cal is similar to Stanford in that very few recent grads, can/choose to, live close enough to attend games. Traveling is now much more expensive than the recent past just to catch a game with friends.
OK Then why not give away tickets as follows:GMP said:Because they still need the money they get from ticket sales - and if you give tickets away for free, there's no incentive for current season ticket holders to continue to buy season tickets, or even donate, when they can just get the tickets for free.Bobodeluxe said:Too true. This begs the question, "Why doesn't Cal 'give away' tickets to just fill the stadium, and possibly build a base of some sort?"oskidunker said:
Not going to happen. Bottom line is they get more from tv thennwhat they lose from ticket sales
Cal is similar to Stanford in that very few recent grads, can/choose to, live close enough to attend games. Traveling is now much more expensive than the recent past just to catch a game with friends.
oskidunker said:
I would have thought that firing Dykes and hiring Wilcox would have increased ticket demand. New hope etc. I think you are seeing an aging fan base that has had enough of late games and unsure game times. Winning or losing was never a factor in my friends renewing tickets. Many felt disrespected when they were surveyed year after year regarding the game day experience, told Cal they wanted traditional experience and found the canned music continued along with the inane games and the band sitting and not playing .The use of time outs to present sponsors with awards and to introduce the Tidly Winks team all take away from the band. Stop the presentations.
They gear the game day experience to 20 year olds yet that age group doesn't,t come . They are short sighted by charging students who decide they would rather do something else.
The new Athletic Director better look at these surveys and implement the changes asked for or they will kill the program.
What you got in mind? Incontinence treatment, senior living residences, denture cream, hemorrhoid treatments and Depends?oskidunker said:
They gear the game day experience to 20 year olds yet that age group doesn't,t come . They are short sighted by charging students who decide they would rather do something else.