Dr. Gross on the NJ Games

[JeremyCuse]

I'm with you here. I have absolutely no problem pulling out 5k seats (44,444 for example) to add some nice premium seating which will also look better on TV. Nothing worse than seeing blocks of silver in the middle of your tv screen. If we do return to the late 90s winning wise, I think the program would sell out 44,444 for conference games. The reduced capacity would create some demand for tix which we have rarely seen here. I see no shame in dropping capacity a bit to further improve the Dome seating and reduce the amount of hideous silver

Not going to happen, zero interest on the Hill in downsizing the dome. Not that I disagree with you but its a pipe dream.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Pitt just had a sellout this past season...

What game? Notre Dame?

 

[Bill Orange]

My biggest complaint is starting price of tix. I live in NJ and will not be attending, specifically because I cannot afford the tix right now. Was expecting some cheap seats in the $50 range. Nope. Oh well.

Here you go:

http://www.nunesmagician.com/2012/8/27/3271975/syracuse-vs-usc-groupon-tickets-deal

 

[kingottoiii]

I'm with you here. I have absolutely no problem pulling out 5k seats (44,444 for example) to add some nice premium seating which will also look better on TV. Nothing worse than seeing blocks of silver in the middle of your tv screen. If we do return to the late 90s winning wise, I think the program would sell out 44,444 for conference games. The reduced capacity would create some demand for tix which we have rarely seen here. I see no shame in dropping capacity a bit to further improve the Dome seating and reduce the amount of hideous silver

I could be wrong but IMO the late 90s isn't realistic for our program in the current state of CFB. I think we certainly can have years like 98 but having a run like 96-98 will be difficult. To win three straight conference titles in the ACC will be very hard. When we went on that run in the BE Miami was down and recruiting rivals Pitt, RU, UConn were not competing for kids. We will be playing at least 10 BCS games every year when we move to the ACC. IMO the expectation for SU going forward should be 8-5. That to me should be the typical year for SU. Some years we will get 10 Ws, other years we will get 5 Ws. My question is what will the typical 8-5 season bring attendance wise? IMO that will be 42k so there is more benefit in going down to 44k than there is by staying at 49k.

 

[GoSU96]

Excess capacity is never a good thing. Does the casual fan care about Clemson, BC, MD, Pitt, NC St, and Wake? Or GA Tech, UNC, Duke, and UVA? I think the ACC move will absolutely help the butts in seats. So that announced 40k that is actually only 36k will actually be 40k. I think the ACC move will help for the real fans and decrease no shows. But it has been a long time since we have had over 42k at SU. In the 2000s we reached that number only twice. And one of those, the butts in seats was likely under 42k. In the last 12 years the actual attendance averaged over 43k zero times. You certainly can blame the GRob years on our record. But how can one explain the last 5 years of P and the Marrone years so far? Can we average much more than 42k if we are a 6 to 8 W program year in and year out? If so then we should keep capacity at 49k. If not then why not spruce up the Dome and make it look full at 44k?

How do I explain the Marrone years. He's up 7K from the year before he started, and that's without a star(s), a ton of success, super attractive schedule.

 

[Cuseman78]

How do I explain the Marrone years. He's up 7K from the year before he started, and that's without a star(s), a ton of success, super attractive schedule.

Thats all well and good, and attendance has been better, but much of that is based upon giveaway tickets and dirt cheap seasons.

Drop capacity to 44,444, throw in some nice seats between the 20s, eliminate the silver benches , and hopefully when we get back to 8 win seasons on a regular basis, we can jack up season ticket prices beyond 100 bucks again and the athletic dept can make some cash off of this program. Create more demand by eliminating about 10% of the supply

 

[Marion202]

There was a time when nobody went to a Rutgers game. There was more activity in the parking lot. Last few times I went the stadium was filled, with Rutgers fans. The stadium is a pain in the neck to get to with nothing around. Tolls all over the place. Yet they are going after years of mediocrity. We get 30,000 for Basketball we can do the same with football; we just need to start winning.

 

[kingottoiii]

How do I explain the Marrone years. He's up 7K from the year before he started, and that's without a star(s), a ton of success, super attractive schedule.

LOL. Everyone gave up on the 2008 season before it started. Using that as a basis is silly. Also this has nothing to do with Marrone. He doesn't have attendance numbers, the program does. 2008 was a waste of a year. Of course no one showed up. The fact that attendance increased vs that point is not an accomplishment. Fact is that SU is still under 40k per game the last 3 years and that is the announced number, not butts in seats.

Last three years per game is at 39820
Four years prior per game was at 36440
Difference 3380

That isn't much of an increase vs the lowest point in our program's history. 2009 brought increased excitement and we were a few plays away from a Bowl. 2010 brought hope and then we went out and had a winning season. 2011 we were coming off a high as a program and started 5-2 yet still couldn't get people to show up. This year will be more of the same. I think the UConn game in 2010 told us all we need to know about the size of our fanbase. We were 4-2 in conference with a chance to tie for the conference championship. And if things broke right go to a BCS game. We were playing a rival school. It was a night game. Yet we had an attendance of 41500 and much less than that actually showed up. That was a sad day.

 

[kingottoiii]

Thats all well and good, and attendance has been better, but much of that is based upon giveaway tickets and dirt cheap seasons.

Drop capacity to 44,444, throw in some nice seats between the 20s, eliminate the silver benches , and hopefully when we get back to 8 win seasons on a regular basis, we can jack up season ticket prices beyond 100 bucks again and the athletic dept can make some cash off of this program. Create more demand by eliminating about 10% of the supply

Good point. When did the $100 season tix start? And there certainly has been more of a push at getting people in with give aways and cheapies. If those policies were not implemented where would we be? You can argue that the attendance has been the same the last 3 years vs 2005-2007 despite the increase in Ws and competitiveness.

----Edit----

2005-2007 SU avg'd 37375
2009-2011 SU avg'd 39825

So despite being a better product and having a bigger push for people to show up, we only have gotten about 2500 more people. That is why I think if we go from the 5-7 type of program we have been the last 3 years to a 7-5 type of program (which IMO is our realistic typical season), we will only be at about 42k per game. Sure if we have the 9-3 type of seasons we had under McNabb we could get 47k per game. But that isn't a realistic expectation for our program IMO. Once in a while sure but not consistently. I think if we go down to 44k it will help with attendance more than hurt. And SU will likely be making more money from it. The capacity should match the size of a fan base.

 

[44cuse]

Bingo, this has been a disaster for SU's NYC fans.

There aren't many SU Football anywhere. That's the problem.

44cuse

 

[rrlbees]

How do I explain the Marrone years. He's up 7K from the year before he started, and that's without a star(s), a ton of success, super attractive schedule.

I wouldn't get too giddy. I'd bet that 7k is close to equaling the freebies and $10 seats we now give out like they are candy. Also the freebie student tixs. Mot sire how many openers we have some that. I bet the real bump is closer to 2k.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[OrangeXtreme]

You can't reduce capacity for football without reducing capacity for basketball.

At the present time, fan #24,500 can still get a decent basketball seat.

If you eliminate 5000 seats, fan #24,500 will end up on the far side of the mythical curtain.

Why screw him over?

Losing seats sounds like a permanent solution to what could be a temporary problem.

It's not like it costs more $$$ to heat and light the Dome with 49,200 seats as it would with 44,000.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

I also wonder if we'll ever play any games as part of the deal that's supposed to start in 2019? The ND and PSU series are a go, but after that, given how much our financial circumstances have changed with ACC membership, I'm skeptical we ever fulfill that contract.

We agreed to the deal when we needed 5 OOC games every year. Now we only need 3.

IMO, the deal in 2019 goes away.

 

[OrangePA]

Despite losing, that was one of the loudest times I've heard at the Dome. Great game.

Should have won that game.

muffed punt that goes out of the FS endzone - ouch! Still hurts!

Reyes fumble inside the FS 20 yard line - ouch!!

PP pass intercepted in the FS endzone as time expires - triple ouch!

A win that day would have likely changed SU Football history.

 

[OrangePA]

Good point. When did the $100 season tix start? And there certainly has been more of a push at getting people in with give aways and cheapies. If those policies were not implemented where would we be? You can argue that the attendance has been the same the last 3 years vs 2005-2007 despite the increase in Ws and competitiveness.

----Edit----

2005-2007 SU avg'd 37375
2009-2011 SU avg'd 39825

So despite being a better product and having a bigger push for people to show up, we only have gotten about 2500 more people. That is why I think if we go from the 5-7 type of program we have been the last 3 years to a 7-5 type of program (which IMO is our realistic typical season), we will only be at about 42k per game. Sure if we have the 9-3 type of seasons we had under McNabb we could get 47k per game. But that isn't a realistic expectation for our program IMO. Once in a while sure but not consistently. I think if we go down to 44k it will help with attendance more than hurt. And SU will likely be making more money from it. The capacity should match the size of a fan base.

Completely disagree.

If anything, capacity should be increased.

It is amazing - that you and I see the SU Football world so differently.

 

[javadoc]

Should have won that game.

muffed punt that goes out of the FS endzone - ouch! Still hurts!

Reyes fumble inside the FS 20 yard line - ouch!!

PP pass intercepted in the FS endzone as time expires - triple ouch!

A win that day would have likely changed SU Football history.

Not having a guy fast enough on D to catch those damn FSU RB's, ouch. They scored on 30+ yard runs, zigzagging through our D like we were in wheelchairs. It really pointed out how slow we had become as a team.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Not having a guy fast enough on D to catch those damn FSU RB's, ouch. They scored on 30+ yard runs, zigzagging through our D like we were in wheelchairs. It really pointed out how slow we had become as a team.

Leon Washington and Lorenzo Booker. 249 yds between the two of them.

 

[OrangePA]

I could be wrong but IMO the late 90s isn't realistic for our program in the current state of CFB. I think we certainly can have years like 98 but having a run like 96-98 will be difficult. To win three straight conference titles in the ACC will be very hard. When we went on that run in the BE Miami was down and recruiting rivals Pitt, RU, UConn were not competing for kids. We will be playing at least 10 BCS games every year when we move to the ACC. IMO the expectation for SU going forward should be 8-5. That to me should be the typical year for SU. Some years we will get 10 Ws, other years we will get 5 Ws. My question is what will the typical 8-5 season bring attendance wise? IMO that will be 42k so there is more benefit in going down to 44k than there is by staying at 49k.

Where was this post eight years ago?

 

[OrangePA]

Not having a guy fast enough on D to catch those damn FSU RB's, ouch. They scored on 30+ yard runs, zigzagging through our D like we were in wheelchairs. It really pointed out how slow we had become as a team.

Didn't matter. Yes, Leon Washington was a man among boys out there that day.

Still should have won that game.

 

[kingottoiii]

You can't reduce capacity for football without reducing capacity for basketball.

At the present time, fan #24,500 can still get a decent basketball seat.

If you eliminate 5000 seats, fan #24,500 will end up on the far side of the mythical curtain.

Why screw him over?

Losing seats sounds like a permanent solution to what could be a temporary problem.

It's not like it costs more $$$ to heat and light the Dome with 49,200 seats as it would with 44,000.

If you reduce FB capacity 10% to 44k, you would be doing the same for BBall as well. Is having a max of 32k for BBall really a big issue? Are you leaving some fans out? Sure but those are you casual fans who don't show up anytime the rest of the BBall season. Meanwhile the 20k who show up every game would have a better experience. I don't get the attitude where SU is supposed to keep catering to these casual fans. Who cares about their feelings. We should be rewarding the loyal fans by making their experience as good as possible. The reduced capacity in BBall would have effected 12 games in the last 20 years. The other 300+ games would have been better for everyone else.

As to fan #24500, you are fan #24500. You get what you pay for. How many good seats are in the Dome right now for BBall? 24k? If that is reduced to 21k by putting in real seating that would be great for 21k and suck for 3k. Why is SU supposed to keep catering to its bottom 10% of fans in FB and BBall while everywhere else in the free world the bottom 10% feel lucky just to get into a game? BTW if SU ever built a BBall only arena it likely would only be 25k. SU fans do not know how good they have it.

 

[OrangeCrush22]

What game? Notre Dame?

Yes.

But ya still gotta give it to 'em.

 

[Cuseman78]

Completely disagree.

If anything, capacity should be increased.

It is amazing - that you and I see the SU Football world so differently.

You seriously want more empty seats? Fun, fun.

Lets stop pretending that the 90s were chock full of sell-outs. Even in our best days, we struggled to fill our building.

Seating in that building has to be upgraded and if the result is a reduction in capacity, thats a bonus.

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with having a 45k seat stadium, especially when we have a unique setting like the Dome where it can sound like 90k on special occasions. People are way too hung up on the actual building capacity.

And for those who worry about basketball, WE PLAY IN A DOME. If it goes from 34k to 28k, big deal. That's still the largest and one of the most unique venues in the sport.

 

[kingottoiii]

Where was this post eight years ago?

Ugh seriously? You can't separate the difference between the NBE and the ACC? You don't realize that RU and UConn became viable because we fell? If we were still in the BE I would certainly expect 96-98 to be the norm.

 

[OrangePA]

You seriously want more empty seats? Fun, fun.

Lets stop pretending that the 90s were chock full of sell-outs. Even in our best days, we struggled to fill our building.

Seating in that building has to be upgraded and if the result is a reduction in capacity, thats a bonus.

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with having a 45k seat stadium, especially when we have a unique setting like the Dome where it can sound like 90k on special occasions. People are way too hung up on the actual building capacity.

And for those who worry about basketball, WE PLAY IN A DOME. If it goes from 34k to 28k, big deal. That's still the largest and one of the most unique venues in the sport.

I remember when the new stadium was proposed - the Dome - in 1977.

At the time we couldn't fill Archbold with a capacity of 27,000.

And a lot of folks made pretty much the same argument then that you're making now.

In our best days we had no trouble filling the place. We will fill the place again once the team starts to win and once the ACC schedule becomes a reality.

Sorry, but reducing capacity is loser approach in my judgement.

 

[OrangePA]

Ugh seriously? You can't separate the difference between the NBE and the ACC? You don't realize that RU and UConn became viable because we fell? If we were still in the BE I would certainly expect 96-98 to be the norm.

UConn and Rutgers became viable because of us?

No.

You're wrong.

Our slow demise was hastened by UConn and Rutgers - regional competitors - who both put gobs and gobs of money into their programs - and improved greatly - while we sat there with Astroturf in the Dome, no real weight room, poor locker facilities, poor coaching salaries, no indoor facility and on and on.

We called for a unilateral truce in the facilities war while everybody else charged ahead with money and development.

The excuses you noted in your post were correct - eight years ago.