Attendance?

[savbandjacket]

You’re not negotiating very hard! Agreed that networks don’t care about live attendance but it is a major source of revenue for schools. The GTAA is millions of dollars poorer than it could be. The question is whether we could set some games with fixed times, some games with flexible ones, more advance notice of game times, etc. I’m not sure AA’s understand how big a deal game time is for attendance.

I don’t think AAs have any control over game time. That control was likely contractually given over to Disney/ESPN/regional sports networks in exchange for rights to broadcast conference games. That would be something you would have to work into the next tv deal and I don’t think we have much leverage. We are damned lucky that anyone wants to carry acc football games as it is.

 

[18in32]

I don’t think AAs have any control over game time. That control was likely contractually given over to Disney/ESPN/regional sports networks in exchange for rights to broadcast conference games. That would be something you would have to work into the next tv deal and I don’t think we have much leverage. We are damned lucky that anyone wants to carry acc football games as it is.

Yes, it's already been signed away contractually, and it needs to be clawed back, or at least negotiated in the modified way I described/hypostulate. And you're crazy if you think we have no leverage. The networks have invested a fortune in building out the capacity to broadcast, and need 'content' to fill those hours. There's only 7 SEC games a week you know. Gotta do something with the hundreds of other hours of screen time they're selling.

 

[GT98]

Can you show me the math for TV dollars > live attendance? I agree that's the current way it's viewed, but what I'm positing is that AAs do not well understand the impacts they're having on live attendance by catering to TV viewership

I do not have those exactly, but these articles suggest that gap is a grand canyon width of difference:

College TV deals show huge paydays for Big Ten, SEC, ACC; projections top $1 billion in 24-25

The college athletics world is in a state of flux, but big money is scheduled and projected to keep flowing into college football - especially in the sport's top conferences.

footballscoop.com

Analysis: If SEC adds Texas and Oklahoma, the conference could generate as much revenue as NCAA

A 16-team SEC with Texas and Oklahoma could have nearly $1.3 billion in revenue for its 2024-25 fiscal year, according to USA TODAY Sports analysis.

www.usatoday.com

I agree with you about the live attendance being negatively impacted. Perhaps, the AA's took the fans for granted, but the decision was made a few decades ago. Unfortunately, GT does not have a huge alumni/sidewalk fan base that will be at the games regardless (we all know the reasons for this, no need to rehash). However, it does feel to me that the fans in the stands (however many are there) are the "live studio audience at this point." Surely, not every AD is a dope out there and that suggests to me that the TV contract $ absolutely swamps gameday revenue.

I do wonder if like you said that the NIL is the beginning of the end/coming collapse/etc. And, I do think that college football would split again into Div. 1 and Div. 1aa. if the NIL really does cement the have and have nots.

 

[GT flunkout]

This discussion is off the rails. Gametimes have been fickle because of TV for two decades. NIU was an evening start which only drew 34K. This is 100% about product on the field and it's silly to assume all these other arguments that go back 50 years when we averaged over 50K in 2015.

Sure, there's a negligible effect with some of these things, but most of you these are ridiculous excuses. If you prefer TV, that's fine, just own it.

 

[GT98]

You’re not negotiating very hard! Agreed that networks don’t care about live attendance but it is a major source of revenue for schools. The GTAA is millions of dollars poorer than it could be. The question is whether we could set some games with fixed times, some games with flexible ones, more advance notice of game times, etc. I’m not sure AA’s understand how big a deal game time is for attendance.

Having "some" games might be an idea that would work. Given guys like Swofford that was at the helm of the most recent deal, I very much doubt his ability to do anything that would help the schools (other than UNC of course). Still, the ACC as a whole has little leverage in any such negotiations as being the 3rd (or 4th) conference in the pecking order.

I think that the AA's do understand and of course, GT games at night are going to be much better attended than a nooner, almost regardless of opponent or the team's record. I also renew my season tickets even though the last handful of years, I can only make about half the games due to my son's respective sports schedules. So, mark me down are in favor of more night games as I can make 90% of those.

 

[18in32]

This discussion is off the rails. Gametimes have been fickle because of TV for two decades. NIU was an evening start which only drew 34K. This is 100% about product on the field and it's silly to assume all these other arguments that go back 50 years when we averaged over 50K in 2015.

Sure, there's a negligible effect with some of these things, but most of you these are ridiculous excuses. If you prefer TV, that's fine, just own it.

Well of course winning is the most important thing. I mean, making sure the stadium is not on fire is probably the most important thing. But after that, winning is the most important thing.

But there are long term declines in live attendance across CFB, independent of the variations between programs and between seasons. That's happening for all the same reasons that people chat on social media instead of arranging coffee with a friend across town... technology has radically changed the way people interact with each other and the world.

But that doesn't change the fact that the GTAA is seriously adversely impacted by low attendance (not to mention the effect on the team, fan morale, etc.). Attendance really matters, and the GTAA needs to think more structurally about how to address it.

 

[DaltonJacket]

That is due to the long play of politicians and the board of regents in ööööing Tech at every turn. That and having a substantial number of teachers indoctrinating young children on uga bullshit.

This......I've been a teacher for 20 years and I can count the number of other teacher Tech fans I've met on one hand. Its pretty frustrating!

 

[andrew]

Well of course winning is the most important thing. I mean, making sure the stadium is not on fire is probably the most important thing. But after that, winning is the most important thing. But there are long term declines in live attendance across CFB, independent of the variations between programs and between seasons. That's happening for all the same reasons that people chat on social media instead of arranging coffee with a friend across town... technology has radically changed the way people interact with each other and the world. But that doesn't change the fact that the GTAA is seriously adversely impacted by low attendance (not to mention the effect on the team, fan morale, etc.). Attendance really matters, and the GTAA needs to think more structurally about how to address it.

Winning is probably 95% of it. All the other stuff you guys are mentioning is valid, but only about 5% of the reason for our attendance woes.

Gameday experience, fickle start times, game flow interrupted by commercials, etc. is why U[sic]GA and the other big boys have a few thousand empty seats for mediocre matchups. Losing consistently is the reason we have 20,000+ empty seats every game unless the opponent shows up with a lot of fans.

 

[BainbridgeJacket]

Winning is probably 95% of it. All the other stuff you guys are mentioning is valid, but only about 5% of the reason for our attendance woes.

Gameday experience, fickle start times, game flow interrupted by commercials, etc. is why U[sic]GA and the other big boys have a few thousand empty seats for mediocre matchups. Losing consistently is the reason we have 20,000+ empty seats every game unless the opponent shows up with a lot of fans.

I do not agree at all. It's important, maybe even the most important factor, but not by that much. Using that logic, no bad programs would have strong attendance and yet many of the bad SEC schools do. Does it just mean more?

 

[manjano mdudu]

Attendance may not mean much to networks, but you can rest assured it makes a huge difference in the highly competitive world of recruiting. Think top recruits are going to be the slightest impressed with their game visit after attending the full stadiums at even marginal SEC programs, much less the successful ones?
Yes, we likely have some bandwagon fans that will show up if the teams starts winning, but at the moment our talent base is at best paltry. Pretty evident we have a "chicken or the egg" scenario, but as long as the stadium remains a relative dead zone, what top players are going to consider passing on other more exciting opportunities?
Fan apathy produces like on field results. Change the former to improve the latter.

 

[18in32]

Does it just mean more?

Absolutely. I attend church a couple miles from the Tech campus, with lots of Tech students and recent graduates. But on Sundays it's the guys wearing Auburn and Florida polos who are constantly talking about Saturday's games.

 

[GT flunkout]

I do not agree at all. It's important, maybe even the most important factor, but not by that much. Using that logic, no bad programs would have strong attendance and yet many of the bad SEC schools do. Does it just mean more?

Who are the "bad" SEC schools? The huge, large, comprehensive flagship land-grant institutions that are overwhelmingly in-state students, who stay in state (or come to ATLANTA) once they leave? I assume you're talking about USCe, Kentucky, Missouri, etc. Schools that have natural built-in advantages to having local alumni bases and complete control of the media in the state, 50% at worst. It's a bad comparison.

 

[andrew]

I do not agree at all. It's important, maybe even the most important factor, but not by that much. Using that logic, no bad programs would have strong attendance and yet many of the bad SEC schools do. Does it just mean more?

Yes, for sure. They have more fans than GT and football means more to most of them than it does to most GT football fans. Obviously there are diehard GT fans (many of them on this board) but way fewer than at the average SEC school.

But even big programs with lots more fans than Tech are suffering attendance drops. That's due to factors other than winning, and that's when you see the few thousand empty seats at places like Bama and U[sic]GA.

We've dropped from regularly having 45k+ actual attendance at various points throughout the past decade to only like 25,000 butts in seats now. And that is almost solely due to the fact that we haven't been winning at all. Only a very small percentage of that drop can be attributed to things like too much PA music, flexible start times, etc.

 

[BainbridgeJacket]

Yes, for sure. They have more fans than GT and football means more to most of them than it does to most GT football fans. Obviously there are diehard GT fans (many of them on this board) but way fewer than at the average SEC school.

But even big programs with lots more fans than Tech are suffering attendance drops. That's due to factors other than winning, and that's when you see the few thousand empty seats at places like Bama and U[sic]GA.

We've dropped from regularly having 45k+ actual attendance at various points throughout the past decade to only like 25,000 butts in seats now. And that is almost solely due to the fact that we haven't been winning at all. Only a very small percentage of that drop can be attributed to things like too much PA music, flexible start times, etc.

Based on what data?

 

[andrew]

Based on what data?

ESPN commercials.

More seriously though, it's anecdotal based on fifteen years of being a Tech fan, going to home games regularly, going to away games whenever possible, etc.

Perhaps I am wrong and Tech's fanbase is just as big and just as obsessed as, say, Ole Miss's or South Carolina's. But I doubt it.

 

[BainbridgeJacket]

ESPN commercials.

More seriously though, it's anecdotal based on fifteen years of being a Tech fan, going to home games regularly, going to away games whenever possible, etc.

Perhaps I am wrong and Tech's fanbase is just as big and just as obsessed as, say, Ole Miss's or South Carolina's. But I doubt it.

That's not what I was asking for data for, but ok.

 

[andrew]

That's not what I was asking for data for, but ok.

I know. That's why I said what I have is anecdotal and perhaps I'm wrong.

I don't have hard data. But let me ask, do you think Tech has as large of a fanbase as Ole Miss and South Carolina, and that on average our fanbase takes football just as seriously as those two schools' fanbases? I know that thinking isn't the same as data, but I'm just curious what your opinion is.

 

[vapspwi]

We've dropped from regularly having 45k+ actual attendance at various points throughout the past decade to only like 25,000 butts in seats now. And that is almost solely due to the fact that we haven't been winning at all. Only a very small percentage of that drop can be attributed to things like too much PA music, flexible start times, etc.

I think the PA, start time, etc. are just excuses for people who, at the core of it, just didn’t care that much about coming anyway. I wish we weren’t driving people away, but they had one foot out the door already.

I still believe that some of our drop off this year is Covid-related, either directly (people scared to come - I know a few of these) or indirectly (pissed off by policies, or just realized last year that they didn’t really need to come).

JRjr

 

[BainbridgeJacket]

I know. That's why I said what I have is anecdotal and perhaps I'm wrong.

I don't have hard data. But let me ask, do you think Tech has as large of a fanbase as Ole Miss and South Carolina, and that on average our fanbase takes football just as seriously as those two schools' fanbases? I know that thinking isn't the same as data, but I'm just curious what your opinion is.

Please provide data to support this statement, specifically the bolded:

Only a very small percentage of that drop can be attributed to things like too much PA music, flexible start times, etc.

Also, please prove there isn't a correlation between scheduling regional teams and attendance.

 

[andrew]

Please provide data to support this statement, specifically the bolded:



Also, please prove there isn't a correlation between scheduling regional teams and attendance.

For the third time, I don't have hard data and acknowledge that I may be wrong. It's just my opinion based on my experiences over the past fifteen years. You can ask a fourth time but that won't change.

Based on your posts, is it safe to assume that you think Tech does have just as large and serious of a fanbase as Ole Miss, South Carolina, and other middle-of-the-road SEC schools? Or would you rather not give your opinion?

EDIT: Nm, I see what you mean, you're asking why I think things like flexible start times, scheduling regional teams, etc., is only a small percentage of the reason for our attendance drop. I think that because when we were winning before, we were regularly drawing 40,000+ (more for bigger games) of actual people in the stands, and flexible start times, expanded conference, etc., were in place at that time too. The difference is that we were winning with some regularity. When we stopped winning the fans stopped coming.

I mentioned that before and you asked why the same didn't happen to SEC schools who also aren't winning with regularity, and that's when I said I think it's because SEC schools have more fans than us and those fans care more than us in general, but I don't have any hard data on that, and yadda yadda yadda.