Given the recent discussion on the decline in student ticket sales, I thought this was an interesting article about the same issue across college football as a whole.
The growing number of empty seats in student sections across the U.S. is a sign of soaring ticket prices, more lopsided games and fewer matchups against longtime rivals, and the proliferation of televised games that make it easier than ever for students to keep tailgating long after kickoff.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
A similar article was published last year that included the letter from Nick Saban to the Bama student body telling them why they should buy tickets. Given that we went to college in the buzzing metropolis of Blacksburg, I wonder what current students are doing instead of going to the game. There isn't much else going on in Blacksburg on game days.
Yep (thread here). Glad to see reputable publications like the WSJ are also recycling news stories every year. SMH...
Wow, pot calling the kettle black much? We've been running the same story every November for 10 years
"The Parsimony Principle"
or Occams Razor. Tuhmato/Tomahto
With Television, the Internet, and Video Games being what they are today there are figuratively infinite options all competing for a student's entertainment time and eyeballs.
Wonder what the SEC is doing to get students into the games? Several schools have double digit increases, while 3 just have a slight decline.
Wonder if the general decline among all schools has anything to do with generational differences?
wifi is one thing. And shifting the ticket policy, I believe, from fewer student tix to more "public sales" tix.
Very True - NFL stadiums are installing wifi to attract the fantasy football players to games rather than infront of a TV with RedZone.
Yeah, but EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION - THE DEPENDENCE ON WiFi kills the game atmosphere. Mark Cuban was as correct about that topic as anyone I've noticed. Short version of his answer - do you want 10K students looking down at their iPhones, or would you rather they be engaged in the atmosphere? EDIT - it would be instructive for those interested in the topic to google the articles & interviews given by Cuban on the topic. it IS enlightening.
Yep - I agree. 100% Fan engagement to the game and the things happening in the stadium is where the goal should be - not providing wifi so that you can check facebook while there is a timeout.
Those TV timeouts take forever if you're in the stadium though. I still remember being in Lane and hearing multiple fans yelling for the "guy in the red hat" to get off the field.
I get what you are saying, and even agree, but,
butts in seats > no butts in seats.
Oh, I agree, but $EC schools (And pro stadiums for all sports) are putting in wifi boosters to attract people to the seats. When they pan back, you don't notice the kids looking at their phones in the 300 section, but you do notice the empty red seats at Bammer! It's all about appearances down there. So, they fill the seats and move along.
I'd rather have 10k fans in the stands looking at their phones than 10k fans on their couches looking at their phones watching the game on TV.
You can't force people to be engaged in the game by denying them the experience that they want, you have to "force" people to be engaged by providing a dynamic, compelling product on the field so they don't want to be looking at their phones.
Also, if they check facebook on a time out, who cares?
I'd love having wifi so I can keep up with my other teams. While VT is my top team I still like to know what's going on around the country. There's nothing wrong with checking the scores (or fb,instatweet, etc) during one of the 50 commercial breaks
Social Media is part of people's lives in 2014. We may not all like it, but it's the reality of the situation. Successful endeavors, especially in the entertainment sphere, embrace social media and exploit it. Trying to keep it out of the experience is very "Get of My Lawn"-ie to me.
Remember, all recruits are on twitter, instagram, and probably three other things I don't even know about because I'm too old. If you want to stay a part of that recruit's consciousness, #GOHOKIES Trending by thousands and thousands of fans is one of the best ways to do exactly that.
I agree completely with you, I'm perfectly fine with people being on their phones. Whether it be facebook, espn, tkp, etc. I was just saying I use it for scores, personally
That misses the point completely. It is NOT an either/or equation. Cuban (nor I) did not say WiFi should be banned, so that is a pointless tangent and a complete misunderstanding of the knowledge. An objective, not emotional, observation of the discussion that Cuban made would reveal that the times people are checking their tech devices for info from outside the arena - Facebook, scores, whatever - are times that they are not engaged in the fan experience. Whether it is during a timeout, when the band is playing & the cheerleaders/spirit squad is trying to engage fans, or the giveaways, or whatever, those are times that the fanbase can boost the environment, just as during the game. People check their tech devices when their attention span (with whatever they're doing) lapses, not when they are fully engaged. The argument Cuban made effectively and was ignored here, is that by engaging the fans, then they don't get bored enough to check for outside info. It makes sense when one steps away from the base emotional response and considers the macro. If you're wrapped up in the game, you don't mind waiting until afterwards to see how your fantasy team is doing.
When you said "Wifi kills the atmosphere" I inferred that you meant Wifi was responsible for the fans not being engaged. I agree with pretty much this entire post, if you keep fans engaged they won't bother to check their phones. To me that's a failure of the people producing the entertainment product, not the fans or the technology.
Personally, I wish we would institute a "wait-list" style seating where 15 minutes after kickoff (not 15 minutes of game time) we start to admit students with IDs to fill seats similar to how we do for Basketball. Now this would likely decrease the number of student season tickets sold, but if those wait list people are restricted to upper East Stands and Upper South Endzone while season ticket holders get the prime seats, then I don't think it would be a big deal.
EDIT: Thinking about ticket sales and the possibility of taking a seat that was sold to someone, I think they could make it so that they only admit as many students as tickets they didn't sell. Just something to get more students to the games would be preferred IMO. I'm all for First-Come-First-Served style seating so those who want to be at the games can go to the games.
I'm absolutely in for a First Come First Seated way - Just make the entire North End Zone that way. Personally, I believe that when we went to the online lottery system, it made it "too" easy to sign up for tickets.
My roommate and I had to wake up before the crack of dawn to get a ticket number, that was then drawn from a hat. When your number was called, you got in line and picked up your ticket on the spot, and could get multiple depending on how many pink athletic cards you had. Being dedicated to wake up, skip class, and wait in a long line, meant that you were dedicated to the game.
Free beer in stadium with ticket?
Frankly, this new type of student that's on the rise in the burg is really starting to frustrate me. I graduated in '12, but I've been attending VT games all my life and I've noticed a trend really developing over the past few years of students just leaving the games early. I think it partly is due to our team having done well while these new Hokies were in middle school and high school and they got use to having such good teams. Now, when they finally attend games, if they are no longer big games, its not worth their time as they are "guaranteed wins". I've often heard students say, "We're up at halftime, and its only *insert team name here*. Let's go." Now, given we've had a "rough" past 2 years, these kids no longer are even interested in going.
This has been strengthened by the fact that I have had discussions with current students, and this is truly their mind set. They'd rather go, drink, and leave to go drink more and go downtown than stick it out through the rest of a game, especially in blowouts.
The mind set of the students attending now has changed, and they just want to be there to party. Its kind of sad actually. If the team isn't doing well, "Let's leave and go to TOTS where we can have a good time" or if the team is doing well, "Let's leave and go to TOTS; this game is getting boring." I'm not sure what can be done to fix that.
What specific time are you referring to that this "changed?" When I was in school 15 years ago we did the exact same thing during games. You leave early in blowouts to crappy teams to get to BW3s early and beat the rush. So it sounds to me like nothing's really "changed," in a decade and a half.
A Typical Fall weekend for me in 2000: Wake Up. Drink. Go to Game. Drink. Leave When game was in hand. Drink. Eat. Nap. Wake Up. Shower. Drink. Drink. Drink. Pass Out. Wake Up. Assess Location. Return Home if Necessary. Eat. Nap. Eat. Start Paper Due tomorrow.
Yeah, that behavior was present in the time I was there as well, about 10 years ago...
But that said, the 'leave early' tended to trend more towards the Arkansas States of the world, and even then, you would only really start to clear out when there was a 20+ point lead in the second half, or if it was more than 2 tds in the 4th. I think what Miner is trying to say is that this standard is now being applied to games like Duke or Marshall, where people leave because the opponent isn't a big enough name for their fancy, despite the score.
^This. Thank you for articulating that much clearer than I was able to do.
Perhaps he'll come to clarify, because that's not what I got from his post at all. I got "Students sure have changed recently" and then he went to go an and describe student mindsets that have existed for literally two decades or more.
It strikes me like what is happening is that the reality of college student mindset in general once he actually attended college conflicted with the idealized version he constructed before he attended. It's fine, it is what it is, I'm kind of sorry I chimed in...I just kind of get over the ragging on other hokie fans for not being "good enough fans" thing. It was old when people were doing that 15 year ago, too :)
No, I agree... I don't like the "our fans suck" mindset that gets spread from time to time. Constantly seeing a bunch of old farts reminisce about how the 70s and 80s were so great (because "you got to appreciate what good football really was") and how fans nowadays were spoiled for even complaining that the offense sucked really, REALLY pissed me off about TechSideline. The whole "True Hokie" concept, which is what this whole argument centers around (that someone can be a more pure Hokie than someone else) is just not appropriate.
That being said, there really is no excuse for leaving a close game early if you legitimately have nowhere else to be.
I'm thinking mid to late 2000's, so roughly when you were there or after you had gone. Granted, I was only in high school, but I attended quite a few games each year, both big and small, and never noticed anyone leaving. At least not the massive exodus that has started to occur lately. I do know that around 06-10ish time frame, I never remember the North End Zone being almost empty after halftime for nearly every game. Then around when 11-12 (when I graduated), I noticed more and more people leaving the stadium after halftime. Last year, I noticed it was much worse than the previous years. Maybe I'm biased because I'm a new alum. That's a good possibility.
My opinion is that what you are seeing is standard fan/college student behavior being exacerbated even further by the rather lackluster product that VT has put on the field for the last half decade or so. At the end of the day, football is an entertainment product. If it's not entertaining, people won't pay to consume it.
Touche. That's very likely what I'm seeing and I'm just spinning it incorrectly. I guess I'm just one of those people who I'm going to go regardless of how we are doing.
Edit: How WELL we are doing. I fail at typing sometimes.
FWIW, I appreciate the conversation. I wasn't trying to attack you specifically or anything. I agree with you, I attended every game possible when I went to Tech, even if I left early in blow-outs. People like us are a special kind of fan for teams, and rare. The thing is, I don't think the secret is to try and force casual fans to become like us. I don't think it's possible. I think what you have to do is compel casual fans to care more. You do that by winning, winning in an entertaining fashion, and winning "big games."
I did not take it as a personal attack at all! I made the post wanting to get some discussion on whether anyone else noticed what I was seeing or not, and as you stated, its likely the result of poor performance these past 2 years rather than a mentality change.
I think we still have some of the best fans out there (even in my delusional stance I had before, I believed that). As you stated, we need those wins to help get some of the casual fans to come back to the game, first off. Secondly, and likely more difficult, to keep them engaged and stay the whole game.
Butts in the seats first though. Win, win, win!
I was a student in Blacksburg in the late 80's. My mindset was also - "I want to party."
Kids aren't changing really. The environment changes, and kids adapt.
Gotta admit, it wasn't any different in the early 80's either. Didn't participate in it, but it was definitely there. And Bill Dooley football didn't really do much for the excitement level, so the party was usually on well before kickoff back in the day, too.
This is why I don't go to every game.
Student tickets can be pretty expensive. I pay $34 a game at tOSU and they sold over 29k student packages for 2014. If you want to upgrade a student ticket to bring a non-student friend, you have to cover the difference + fee. My VT friends laughed at me when I quoted $115. The only person that can upgrade a ticket is the original purchaser, making things more complicated.
Games are a minimum 6hr commitment and I only live 3 miles from the Shoe, about an hour walk (faster than driving back). If I go with my parents, at least 8hrs because they watch the band before and after.
I'd rather stay home and watch both the VT (where 87.5% of my loyalty lies) and tOSU games. I can't even get enough of a signal to get score updates in the shoe.
I still insist that the BCS became a major driver in creating student fanbase apathy. In 1993, making a bowl for any major conference college program was a huge deal, and those seasons go down in lore for many fanbases. The BCS coupled with the huge proliferation of bowl games devalued bowl games to the point where even playing in the Orange and Sugar Bowls in the last 4 years generally created little enthusiasm within our own fan base. By around 2008, I got the feeling that within most fan bases that once a team suffered their first loss (especially if they were upset) around a 1/3 of the fanbase checked out.
The best thing for live attendance and TV ratings for college football would be a 16 team playoff with 9 automatic bids for conference champions. It makes conference games much more meaningful and keeps fanbases engaged. Plus, 17 incredibly meaningful games would destroy 40+ bowls that are glorified scrimmages besides the final 4 playoff games.
That's an interesting perspective - I've never thought of that, but you're right - I'd like to see the trends in attendance since 2000 for all of the FBS programs.
Nice take, French!
Well, I think the other thing about that, too, is the tie-ins. I know with our team, even just amongst friends, there was a "I just want a different location," kind of thing going on with the bowl games. It was just the always going to the Peach/Chik-fil-A bowl, or the Orange Bowl. I remember before the tie-ins when we got to go to different locations (as long as they were big time kind of bowls). Certainly the Diamond Bowl in San Francisco was a crappy venue, and considered an afterthought kind of bowl.
I definitely see the idea that if you lose one game, a lot of fans duck out because there's no chance at a national title shot, particularly if that one loss is late in the season.
Totally agree. Conference tie-ins to bowl games have killed a lot of the excitement towards the end of a season.
When I was at VT (06-11), we went to the Orange Bowl 3 times and the Chick-Fil-A Bowl 2 times. The fact that we only played in two different locations during the five years I was there was such a bummer, regardless of the success we saw on the field in those years. The way that college football seems to work is that teams are dominant in cycles, so to set up a system where a team might end up playing in the same location multiple times over a 5 year period is just silly to me. Yeah, Miami & Atlanta are fun cities, but if you were just there a year earlier, what's the point? Especially in a bowl (while it's marketed as a big deal) that's just a consolation prize behind the National Championship for most teams.
In 2012 when we barely qualified for a bowl game, I was hoping that we'd get to play in the Music City Bowl... Nashville would have been so fun! But nope, off to Florida again, only in Orlando this time. The way bowl tie-ins work is so screwy that even if you barely qualify for a bowl, the organizers only care about which team is going to travel the best. It's one of the reasons why we were gifted the Sugar Bowl even though we got destroyed by Clemson in the ACC Championship... same with 2012 when the Russell Athletic Bowl (who got 3rd pick of ACC teams) chose us instead of the Music City Bowl (6th pick), because they know VT travels well.
There are a few teams in the Pac12/B1G that don't mind the same destination every year. I hear California is nice in January.
I totally agree about the Miami fatigue, and I've never even been to an Orange Bowl. It's hard to convince people to go to the same city every year. There is, of course, one wonderfully awesome exception:
Unfortunately, unless we make the playoffs, that problem has only been compounded going forward. Your reward for winning the ACC is a trip to Florida for a bowl, be it either the Orange Bowl (vs SEC non-playoff #3), or (if ND takes it from us) the Capital One Bowl or Russell Athletic, both in Orlando. The Sugar Bowl is no longer a possibility for the ACC, thats purely a SEC-Big12 matchup from now on.
Which makes me all the more glad that I made the three Sugar Bowl trips. As for the Florida bowls? Orlando is decent - a nice 'family vacation' trip. Tampa is good, too, much more so if it is an adult only trip. Jacksonville is Charlotte, only more boring and further away while being just as cold. Miami is just a mess.
Students aren't the ones fueling bowl attendance - alumni are. The student issue is primarily about attending home games.
I don't like the term 'student apathy' when it comes to game attendance. I think people don't understand how important bandwidth availability is to young adults. In 2014 having a stadium without excellent cell coverage is like having a stadium without excellent concessions and restrooms. Students will not sacrifice their primary link to their community for the sake of attending the game, especially when big screen TVs and alcohol beckon.
Regarding our fan base and bowl game enthusiasm - what killed those were the bowl tie-ins and our team's under-performance in big games. Even the Orange Bowl tie in became onerous.
Do you think the increase in security is a factor? When I was student it was so easy to get drinks into the game the best party was in the stands, and if you left at halftime for refills you could just walk back in, often with no security check. (late 80's)
That's not the issue. It's still easy enough to get stuff in. I'd say you could even make the argument that some people get too drunk at the games. Enough so that they become a burden/annoyance and stop actually caring at all for what is going on down on the field.
/sarc Television has ruined everything. Damn you HD widescreen video and surround sound.
i will also throw out schedule fatigue...more repeat games vs teams there is no real "rivalry" with. expanded conferences have been the root cause of this.
other than your top 3 or 4 annual rivals, variety is good. playing the same 7-10 teams every year, especially when 3-4 of them aren't rivals in any form of the word, can be boring.
i find travelling to road games where i have never been before is much more fun than most (not all) games in Lane these days...
I probably speak for thousands of fellow Hokie Birds here...
I am SOFA KING tired of playing East Carolina. I also think we deserve a break from Boston College. With one move, the ACC could get more interesting - bring Clemson over to the Coastal, and move UVa over to the Atlantic. UVa is our new cross division game, and a Florida State/Clemson ACC Championship game would be a cash flood.
I like your idea, but the ACC is not going to prevent UNC and UVA from playing every year ("South's Oldest Rivalry" and all that)
It seems that the home schedules get filled with more and more cupcake and less meat every year. When I was at VT, the regular season was eleven games. That twelfth game wasn't added to bring in more power-house match-ups. Add to that farming out our most desirable games to neutral sight locations, which is great for the payday, but sucks for the fan and the home schedule. Joining the ACC was great for us, but as the conference expanded, we got left with even less desirable match-ups. When do we play FSU or Clemson next? Having BC as the cross-division rival does not help.
As for other schools and in general, you can drink a lot more at home and not have to worry about driving, eat whatever you want, not wait in line for the bathroom, watch the game with other people that you have chosen to watch the game with instead of hoping you are not seated next to some obnoxious, ignorant, belligerent drunk cursing the players and coaches, and you can easily check out another game or scores during commercials with just about every other game being on TV or the internet. All of this with an HD television, countless replays, and camera angles that show you every little detail that you miss being in the stands. Sure you miss the game-day atmosphere, but with surround sound pumping in the crowd noise it is almost like being there in your own living room.
So, it is no surprise to me that fan interest in attending games has declined. This is true for all sports. Fans are finally wising up to the fact that they pay good money for their tickets and they expect a better ROI. The decline in student attendence is just an extension of the decline in fan attendence in general.
Somewhat OT but you mentioned all the neutral site games. Personally, I'm starting to get tired of these. To me, it's fun once every now and then but we've played one 4 out of 5 years prior to this season. While something like Bristol should be great because it's on a different scale from just transporting a game to DC or Atlanta, I'm much happier when we trade home games with an Ohio State University (or LSU, A&M and Nebraska like in the past). Having some of the great games offsite while I was there (08-11 seasons) didn't make me any less likely to go to the games, but there's this thought of "we've played BAMA twice in the past 5 years, how much better would it have been if one was in Lane (even if it was the one after I graduated)."