Football attendance

[grizindabox]

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-must-innovate-as-fbs-attendance-dips-for-sixth-straight-year-to-lowest-since-1996/

 

[indian-outlaw]

Probably a good thing. We are all way to football nuts in this country. It is not a good sport for the student athlete. It's time to bring on baseball, hockey and wrestling. We could field all three at the DI level for the price of an FCS football team that nobody has ever heard of outside of the state of Montana.

 

[BozAngelesGriz]

aw, look at you Sun Belt! up 5.5% from 2018. App St. probably helped bring up the average:

https://theappalachianonline.com/app-state-leads-sun-belt-in-home-attendance-third-time-in-four-years/

"The 2019 football season saw the Mountaineers break records. They became the first team in North Carolina to win 13 games in a season; the first team to win its first five bowl games; achieved a new App State and Sun Belt record for an AP Top 25 ranking at No. 20; and was ranked in the College Football Playoff rankings for the first time in school and Sun Belt history.

The 2019 season also saw a spike in attendance from the 2018 season to lead all schools in the Sun Belt Conference. Kidd Brewer Stadium hosted a total of 148,022 people during home football games this past season.

...App State increased its home football attendance by over 31,000 from the 2018 season."

 

[kemajic]

Probably a good thing. We are all way to football nuts in this country. It is not a good sport for the student athlete. It's time to bring on baseball, hockey and wrestling. We could field all three at the DI level for the price of an FCS football team that nobody has ever heard of outside of the state of Montana.

All three combined might pull 5% of the revenue of football, but otherwise an insightful thought. UM had baseball and could hardly get a game in in the MT springtime weather.

 

[indian-outlaw]

Probably a good thing. We are all way to football nuts in this country. It is not a good sport for the student athlete. It's time to bring on baseball, hockey and wrestling. We could field all three at the DI level for the price of an FCS football team that nobody has ever heard of outside of the state of Montana.

All three combined might pull 5% of the revenue of football, but otherwise an insightful thought. UM had baseball and could hardly get a game in in the MT springtime weather.

Not sure this is true. How does the UND hockey team compare to UM football as far as revenue? Also, does it always have to be about revenue? Why not consider what is best for the student athlete?

 

[kemajic]

Probably a good thing. We are all way to football nuts in this country. It is not a good sport for the student athlete. It's time to bring on baseball, hockey and wrestling. We could field all three at the DI level for the price of an FCS football team that nobody has ever heard of outside of the state of Montana.

All three combined might pull 5% of the revenue of football, but otherwise an insightful thought. UM had baseball and could hardly get a game in in the MT springtime weather.

Not sure this is true. How does the UND hockey team compare to UM football as far as revenue? Also, does it always have to be about revenue? Why not consider what is best for the student athlete?

So you suggest cutting a very successful football program at UM and substituting it with baseball (previously unsuccessful at UM, hockey and wrestling (previously unsuccessful at UM. Then you pick a rare successful hockey program to compare. And you think revenue is not important; news flash, college sports are a business, particularly at universities like UM who are struggling financially. I get it; replace a program that produces great revenue with three that consume revenue. Then our football student athletes just go somewhere else to play and we deal with how good hockey is for that group of student athletes. Find an estimate for the demo of the football facilities and float a taxpayer bond to replace the lost revenue. It all makes perfect sense like most of your idealistic posts.

 

[indian-outlaw]

Probably a good thing. We are all way to football nuts in this country. It is not a good sport for the student athlete. It's time to bring on baseball, hockey and wrestling. We could field all three at the DI level for the price of an FCS football team that nobody has ever heard of outside of the state of Montana.

All three combined might pull 5% of the revenue of football, but otherwise an insightful thought. UM had baseball and could hardly get a game in in the MT springtime weather.

Not sure this is true. How does the UND hockey team compare to UM football as far as revenue? Also, does it always have to be about revenue? Why not consider what is best for the student athlete?

So you suggest cutting a very successful football program at UM and substituting it with baseball (previously unsuccessful at UM, hockey and wrestling (previously unsuccessful at UM. Then you pick a rare successful hockey program to compare. And you think revenue is not important; news flash, college sports are a business, particularly at universities like UM who are struggling financially. I get it; replace a program that produces great revenue with three that consume revenue. Then our football student athletes just go somewhere else to play and we deal with how good hockey is for that group of student athletes. Find an estimate for the demo of the football facilities and float a taxpayer bond to replace the lost revenue. It all makes perfect sense like most of your idealistic posts.

Maybe it's time we do the right thing by the student athletes in the state. Maybe a money making business model is not always best for our student athletes. You can keep your beloved football but there is no reason we need to have it at the expense of everyone else. Maybe limit the scholarships. I would argue that way more students in the state of Montana compete in wrestling than football. I would also beg to differ that it was unsuccessful at the UM when it was cancelled. It was on the ragged edge of the top 25 in real life D1, not the JV squad that FCS is.

 

[grizpack]

How are you going to pay for baseball, wrestling and hockey? And not by cutting football, which not only pays for itself, but supports many other non-revenue sports. Curious to hear the solution.

 

[kemajic]

How are you going to pay for baseball, wrestling and hockey? And not by cutting football, which not only pays for itself, but supports many other non-revenue sports. Curious to hear the solution.

Pretty much like the Green New Deal, which he likely supports.

 

[kemajic]

I would argue that way more students in the state of Montana compete in wrestling than football. I would also beg to differ that it was unsuccessful at the UM when it was cancelled. It was on the ragged edge of the top 25 in real life D1, not the JV squad that FCS is.

I went to several varsity wrestling matches in the 60's because my roommate wrestled. I would guess the average attendance at about 35, all students like me. If that's your bar for success, knock yourself out.

If your mission is to negatively influence football at Montana, this may not be your best forum. The Missoulian would welcome your editorials, the JV squad of newspapers.

 

[indian-outlaw]

I would argue that way more students in the state of Montana compete in wrestling than football. I would also beg to differ that it was unsuccessful at the UM when it was cancelled. It was on the ragged edge of the top 25 in real life D1, not the JV squad that FCS is.

I went to several varsity wrestling matches in the 60's because my roommate wrestled. I would guess the average attendance at about 35, all students like me. If that's your bar for success, knock yourself out.

If your mission is to negatively influence football at Montana, this may not be your best forum. The Missoulian would welcome your editorials, the JV squad of newspapers.

Well big fella, I think my point went way over your head. Wrestling in the mid 80's was truly NCAA top 25. I certainly call that success. I suppose your definition of success is purely dollars and cents, mine is whether or not it's truly competitive.

 

[kemajic]

I would argue that way more students in the state of Montana compete in wrestling than football. I would also beg to differ that it was unsuccessful at the UM when it was cancelled. It was on the ragged edge of the top 25 in real life D1, not the JV squad that FCS is.

I went to several varsity wrestling matches in the 60's because my roommate wrestled. I would guess the average attendance at about 35, all students like me. If that's your bar for success, knock yourself out.

If your mission is to negatively influence football at Montana, this may not be your best forum. The Missoulian would welcome your editorials, the JV squad of newspapers.

Well big fella, I think my point went way over your head. Wrestling in the mid 80's was truly NCAA top 25. I certainly call that success. I suppose your definition of success is purely dollars and cents, mine is whether or not it's truly competitive.

I get it now. Your definition for wrestling success is whether it's competitive, but your definition for football success is whether anybody cares. Maybe there was a window when wresting was competitive but attendance indicates nobody cared; football is consistently competitive and people care, as indicated by consistent attendance even though it's the JV league.