It's contagious... | Syracusefan.com

It's contagious...

So you're telling me I could see New Hampshire, Fordham, and Maryland Eastern-Shore for the same price that I could see Syracuse, Louisville, and Cincinnati? Brilliant idea.
 
This is becoming a pattern: SU AD unable/unwilling to protect its fan base at away conference venues. Opposing AD's, weary of big Orange contingents and home losses to the 'Cuse (we swept PUCONN last year), have turned to the 'minimum allotment' strategy (refusing to release tickets to the general public to shut-out Orange fans). This technique was introduced by GT at the Verizon in 2011, and (since we did nothing about it) has been continued again this year, by Lee Reed/Ted Hockey.

Now... Uconn's getting in the act.

The result -- SU fans are left twisting in the wind and getting shut out by other conference venues. For the final SU-GT game, SU fans are are forced to pay GT blood money for overpriced ticket packages to get into the Verizon, while Lee Reed encourages Hoya fans to give unreleased 'public' tickets to the homeless (yes, they really do this).

So far, DG has thrown up his hands. While SU players dominate on opposing fields and courts, our AD (and our fan-base) is getting punished by opposing AD's.
 
reedny said:
This is becoming a pattern: SU AD unable/unwilling to protect its fan base at away conference venues. Opposing AD's, weary of big Orange contingents and home losses to the 'Cuse (we swept PUCONN last year), have turned to the 'minimum allotment' strategy (refusing to release tickets to the general public to shut-out Orange fans). This technique was introduced by GT at the Verizon in 2011, and (since we did nothing about it) has been continued again this year, by Lee Reed/Ted Hockey.

Now... Uconn's getting in the act.

The result -- SU fans are left twisting in the wind and getting shut out by other conference venues. For the final SU-GT game, SU fans are are forced to pay GT blood money for overpriced ticket packages to get into the Verizon, while Lee Reed encourages Hoya fans to give unreleased 'public' tickets to the homeless (yes, they really do this).

So far, DG has thrown up his hands. While SU players dominate on opposing fields and courts, our AD (and our fan-base) is getting punished by opposing AD's.
Expand...
What is TGD supposed to do? I guess I dont understand how he can affect another team's ticket policies. I'm curious as to what his avenues are to change this.

For a non-conference game I'm sure he has more leverage but for a conference game where we have to play them regardless, what can he do?
 
reedny said:
This is becoming a pattern: SU AD unable/unwilling to protect its fan base at away conference venues. Opposing AD's, weary of big Orange contingents and home losses to the 'Cuse (we swept PUCONN last year), have turned to the 'minimum allotment' strategy (refusing to release tickets to the general public to shut-out Orange fans). This technique was introduced by GT at the Verizon in 2011, and (since we did nothing about it) has been continued again this year, by Lee Reed/Ted Hockey.

Now... Uconn's getting in the act.

The result -- SU fans are left twisting in the wind and getting shut out by other conference venues. For the final SU-GT game, SU fans are are forced to pay GT blood money for overpriced ticket packages to get into the Verizon, while Lee Reed encourages Hoya fans to give unreleased 'public' tickets to the homeless (yes, they really do this).

So far, DG has thrown up his hands. While SU players dominate on opposing fields and courts, our AD (and our fan-base) is getting punished by opposing AD's.
Expand...

There's little we can do about it. What would you suggest Gross do? Where's our leverage.

There will be some payback on this, however.

I suspect that given Georgetown's woeful attendance at the Verizon Center (typically half-empty) that they are going to want to play Syracuse at home very badly. Especially now that their NNBE schedule is going to include such unattractive games such as SMU and CFL.

Attractive opponents, like Syracuse or WVU or any ACC team with substantial drawing power including their own DC-area fan base, are going to insist on "fairer" ticket policies as part of any contract. There is little incentive for SU to play Georgetown in DC if our fans and alumni aren't going to be able to get tickets.

Add to this that SU will already get a DC-area presence playing Maryland, Virginia and Virginia Tech.

So Georgetown is on the horns of a dilemma. If it allows an open-ticket sales approach, their fan base risks being drowned out at the Verizon Center. And that is a painful experience for them. They hate that. Or they can play someone else OOC and possibly have thousands on empty seats like they do for most of their games.

Georgetown's great Achilles Heel is that they have a very small fan base and they really don't like that fact exposed.

I don't know how many SU fans there are that want to travel to see a UConn game. And other than BC games, our presence in New England will be spotty. But I gotta believe that UConn will want this game more than SU does. So we will have LEVERAGE.

St Johns is used to playing in NYC in front of a mostly-Orange crowd. I suspect they will want to play SU every chance they can. We bring a huge crowd. SJC needs the money and the exposure.
 
Townie72 said:
There's little we can do about it. What would you suggest Gross do? Where's our leverage.

There will be some payback on this, however.

I suspect that given Georgetown's woeful attendance at the Verizon Center (typically half-empty) that they are going to want to play Syracuse at home very badly. Especially now that their NNBE schedule is going to include such unattractive games such as SMU and CFL.

Attractive opponents, like Syracuse or WVU or any ACC team with substantial drawing power including their own DC-area fan base, are going to insist on "fairer" ticket policies as part of any contract. There is little incentive for SU to play Georgetown in DC if our fans and alumni aren't going to be able to get tickets.

Add to this that SU will already get a DC-area presence playing Maryland, Virginia and Virginia Tech.

So Georgetown is on the horns of a dilemma. If it allows an open-ticket sales approach, their fan base risks being drowned out at the Verizon Center. And that is a painful experience for them. They hate that. Or they can play someone else OOC and possibly have thousands on empty seats like they do for most of their games.

Georgetown's great Achilles Heel is that they have a very small fan base and they really don't like that fact exposed.

I don't know how many SU fans there are that want to travel to see a UConn game. And other than BC games, our presence in New England will be spotty. But I gotta believe that UConn will want this game more than SU does. So we will have LEVERAGE.

St Johns is used to playing in NYC in front of a mostly-Orange crowd. I suspect they will want to play SU every chance they can. We bring a huge crowd. SJC needs the money and the exposure.
Expand...

Fwiw, SJU imposed "ticket gate" policies back in the 90's when Uconn was buying up all the tickets. The Uconn fans had to buy mini-packages to several SJU games. It was win-win for SJU. It allowed more seats for SJU fans/decreased the uconn contingent significantly so the arena was still full but 50-50 give or take. It also forced the Uconn fans to buy a lot of SJU games they didn't want. I wouldn't be surprised to see SJU adopt this type of policy once again, but for Cuse next time around. It's just good business, sells lots more tickets and obviously there's no longer an intra-conference comraderie.
 
mountaincuse said:
What is TGD supposed to do? I guess I dont understand how he can affect another team's ticket policies. I'm curious as to what his avenues are to change this.

For a non-conference game I'm sure he has more leverage but for a conference game where we have to play them regardless, what can he do?
Expand...

I addressed this below, but let me respond.

First, as Caesar said, "Alea iacta est" or "the die already appears to be cast" on this for this year, unless Georgetown changes their 2012-13 ticket policies.

But what Gross might have said ... and might still say ... is that this is unacceptable to SU and GU's doing this in 2013 is going to affect SU's willingness to ever schedule a game against Georgetown in DC. Or that it will cause SU to drive even a harder bargain in the future relative to SU's ticket allotment for games in DC.

Or Gross might say, "Because of your ticket practices, we will only play you at the Dome or we will insist on "2 for 1" as a scheduling practice.

I don't know if Gross would do this now or in the future. I believe Georgetown will badly want SU games in DC. But at the same time, you have to understand just how excruciating it is for a team with not much of a fan base to be reminded of that in such a public way.

I watch a lot of Orioles games on TV. Frequently there's a sign hawking Georgetown BB tickets behind the batter. They have an attendance problem. They don't like that exposed.
 
SJUBall said:
Fwiw, SJU imposed "ticket gate" policies back in the 90's when Uconn was buying up all the tickets. The Uconn fans had to buy mini-packages to several SJU games. It was win-win for SJU. It allowed more seats for SJU fans/decreased the uconn contingent significantly so the arena was still full but 50-50 give or take. It also forced the Uconn fans to buy a lot of SJU games they didn't want. I wouldn't be surprised to see SJU adopt this type of policy once again, but for Cuse next time around. It's just good business, sells lots more tickets and obviously there's no longer an intra-conference comraderie.
Expand...

Because this is an OOC game, it doesn't have to be played. SU wants the NYC exposure, so that's a factor. But making tickets harder to get for SU fans, is a disincentive for SU to schedule these games.

SU might choose to schedule some other opponents in MSG. Maybe an OOC opponent and maybe an ACC team. St John's get nothing in that deal. That's leverage, IMHO.
 
Townie72 said:
Because this is an OOC game, it doesn't have to be played. SU wants the NYC exposure, so that's a factor. But making tickets harder to get for SU fans, is a disincentive for SU to schedule these games.

SU might choose to schedule some other opponents in MSG. Maybe an OOC opponent and maybe an ACC team. St John's get nothing in that deal. That's leverage, IMHO.
Expand...

True. Doesn't have to be played. Not sure what SJU will end up doing with the Cuse, but the game fills the seats. Then again, SJU draws other teams that fill seats too but not many like Cuse does. I suspect SJU will still schedule Cuse. Win-win for both programs.
 
These Big east schools need to be able to schedule us, we don't need to schedule them when we get to the ACC.
 
SJUBall said:
True. Doesn't have to be played. Not sure what SJU will end up doing with the Cuse, but the game fills the seats. Then again, SJU draws other teams that fill seats too but not many like Cuse does. I suspect SJU will still schedule Cuse. Win-win for both programs.
Expand...

Crazy not to, IMHO.

The game not only fills the seats, but also the sports pages and the conversations in the bars and at the water coolers.
 
Folks need to stop whining about this ticket stuff. This is a business and Georgetown, Connecticut, St John's etc can do whatever they want with their ticket inventory. It is all about maximizing revenue and that is what they are trying to do. Whether you are a Syracuse fan or a Georgetown fan if you want to see the game in DC the only way to get a ticket now is to either buy a package or make a $50 donation. Same hassle for fans of both programs. We are lucky to be considered one the the premier programs in the country.

Georgetown is taking a risk in not selling out the game if they monkey around too long and that is their prerogative. Syracuse took the same risk for the Notre Dame football game in the dome - first you could only get a ticket with a season package, then they created a three game package once the season started, a couple weeks before the game they were selling singles and the game never ended up selling out. All part of doing business.

Long gone are the days where every ticket for every game was the same price and went on sale at the same time. The Georgetown game at the dome is priced higher than any other game and they are holding back good seats so they can sell them in packages. You think that 'long range only' crap they were throwing out there is true? If so that means they've sold over 33K already by October (they haven't).

If you want to see the Yankees play the Mets in Citi Field you need to also buy tickets to see the Astros and Pirates. Want a NY Giants season ticket? Pony up for a pair of full priced pre-season games. Catching the Maple Leafs in Buffalo will cost you a 4-pack. That Delta flight you booked to Florida? The guy next to you may have paid $200 more or $200 less than you did. This is how the world works it's not just a Georgetown thing.

You know what the Tennessee football fans did in 1998 for the game up here in the dome? They bought thousands of season tickets. Some even bought season tickets the following year so they could in turn purchase tickets through Syracuse for the return game.

We have a rabid fan base that travels up and down the eastern seaboard - there are numerous ways to obtain tickets to all of these away games so no reason for people to get all spun up about it. Syracuse fans will get creative, spend some $$ and get to the game like they always have. And this will not impact future Syracuse-Georgetown series in any way - the teams don't share gate revenues they split television revenues and in the end TV is what drives this ship. Dr Gross has plenty of Georgetown tix through the standard allotment for coaches, players, admin and high donors and that is all he is concerned about.

Wait until Duke comes rolling in here in the next year or two. You think Dr Gross is going to let people just pop up to the box office and pick up some singles for $35 in early October?
 
Michigan football game in the dome in 1999 - had to buy a 'Michigan Pack' which included that game and one of the directional Michigan schools.

Sold them out - many purchased by Michigan fans. For the game vs the directional Michigan Syracuse got a ton of $$ from the unused tickets sold as park of the package which would have never been sold otherwise.
 
Orange46R said:
Michigan football game in the dome in 1999 - had to buy a 'Michigan Pack' which included that game and one of the directional Michigan schools.

Sold them out - many purchased by Michigan fans. For the game vs the directional Michigan Syracuse got a ton of $$ from the unused tickets sold as park of the package which would have never been sold otherwise.
Expand...

Yep, Central Michigan, a week before. And we drew something like 46,000 because of all those people who wanted UM tickets.
 
mountaincuse said:
What is TGD supposed to do? I guess I dont understand how he can affect another team's ticket policies. I'm curious as to what his avenues are to change this.

For a non-conference game I'm sure he has more leverage but for a conference game where we have to play them regardless, what can he do?
Expand...

There's little we can do about it. What would you suggest Gross do? Where's our leverage.

Well, let's start with the following:

1- Why would SU ever in a million years agree to a 'minimum allotment' clause that allows GT -- with a 20,000 seat venue -- to issue us 141 tickets and then give the rest away to the homeless for the admitted purpose of excluding SU fans? This is a glaring oversight that invites a shady school (like GT) to take advantage. They did; and we did nothing. So they're doing it again.

2- Why would we ever agree to schedule a conference game with a rival that JUST SCREWED OUR FANS IN FEBRUARY OF 2011 without any decent ticket allotment? Once ... shame on them. Twice, shame on us. Demanding a bigger allotment before agreeing to a game date might have avoided this double-shaft.

3- Other examples where we have leverage? SU has not, to my knowledge, made its BEC contract public. But usually in agreements like this, there is a dispute resolution procedure at the conference level that we could use there or at the ECAC. Or we could threaten our own ORANGE - OUT (no public tickets, any leftovers we give to area school kids). This puts us on their level (but hey, it's just "business" right? lol).

We could rent the entire CLYDES for a private SU party. $50 entry fee for any GT fans, or threaten never to play them OOC again.

Or we could take Townie's thoughtful suggestions and turn GT's policies around, making their fans buy expensive packages; or insist that any future games we schedule against them be played at the Dome.

4- Basically, we could do any number of things to RESPOND rather than pretending this is acceptable, or being apologists for Lee Reed or claiming, as O-46R does, that this is all my fault b/c I'm 'whining'. lol. Actually 46, I'm SHOUTING. That's how upset I am that we would let GT perpetrate another ticket-gate and chalk it off to "business". Maybe this is how leveraged buyouts get done. But we're dealing with educational institutions that preach sportsmanship and fair play. Such principles may not resonate with you (46), but they're laid out on the GTAD's website -- along with plenty of plattitudes about "Jesuit values". It's now clear what all of that means ...: .

Then again, maybe you don't care b/c you don't travel to the Verizon; or you don't mind going on a ticket scavenger hunt; or you're ok with the concept of paying blood money to the GTAD so they can stack the crowd.

REGARDLESS, for many of us the idea that a holier--than-thou conference rival like GT would rather loose money (that's right) in order to screw those of us who DO like going down to DC to support our team is just a wee bit ... um despicable?!
 
reedny said:
There's little we can do about it. What would you suggest Gross do? Where's our leverage.

Well, let's start with the following:

1- Why would SU ever in a million years agree to a 'minimum allotment' clause that allows GT -- with a 20,000 seat venue -- to issue us 141 tickets and then give the rest away to the homeless for the admitted purpose of excluding rival (SU) fans? This is a glaring error that invites a shady AD (like GT's) to take advantage. And they did; we did nothing. So they're doing it again.

2- Why would we ever schedule a conference game with a rival that JUST SCREWED OUR FANS IN FEBRUARY OF 2011? Once ... shame on them. Twice, shame on us. Refusing to schedule them unless they eased up on their gray-out might have avoided this repeat performance.

3- Other examples where we have leverage? SU has not, to my knowledge, made its BEC contract public. But usually in agreements like this, there is a dispute resolution procedure at the conference level that we could use there or at the ECAC. Or we could threaten our own ORANGE - OUT (no public tickets, any leftovers we give to area school kids). This puts us on their level, but hey, it's just "business" right? lol

Or we could rent the entire CLYDES for a private SU party. $50 entry fee for any GT fans, or threaten never to play them OOC again.

Or we could take Townie's thoughtful suggestions and turn GT's policies around, making their fans buy expensive packages; or we could insist that any future games we play against them be played at the Dome.

4- Basically, we could do any number of things to RESPOND rather than pretending this is acceptable, or being apologists for Lee Reed or claiming, as O46R does, that this is all my fault b/c I'm 'whining'. lol. Not true - 46, I'm SHOUTING. That's how upset I am that we would let GT perpetrate another ticket-gate and chalk it off to "business". Maybe this is how leveraged buyouts get done. But we're dealing with educational institutions that preach sportsmanship and fair play. Such principles may not resonate with you (46), but they're laid out on the GTAD's website -- along with plenty of plattitudes about "Jesuit values". It's now clear what all of that means ...: .

Then again, maybe you don't care b/c you don't travel to the Verizon; or you don't mind going on a ticket scavenger hunt; or you're ok with the concept of paying blood money to the GTAD so they can stack the crowd.

REGARDLESS, for many of us the idea that a holier--than-thou conference rival like GT would rather loose money (that's right) in order to screw those of us who DO like going down to DC to support our team is just a wee bit ... um despicable?!
Expand...

I go to this game every year, hate / loathe (that's a rivalry) Georgetown as much as anyone, but as I understand it from the higher ups Georgetown follows the bare minimum as spelled out by conference rules for distributing tickets to us.
 
I go to this game every year, hate / loathe (that's a rivalry) Georgetown as much as anyone, but as I understand it from the higher ups Georgetown follows the bare minimum as spelled out by conference rules for distributing tickets to us.[/quote]

Understood, Bayside. But this hasn't been the case in the past. My wife and I attended a bunch of (historic) games at the Verizon - including the one GMac won at the buzzer. Up until 2011, we had no trouble getting tickets.

It stinks, as you point out. And I hope we do something to respond, as suggested above.

But even more importantly, I hope we NEVER agree to a minimum allotment clause like this again (141 tickets to a 20k venue is ridiculous). For example, I would really like to see a game at Cameron Indoor without having to buy a season package or pretend im in a Bluedevil alumni club.
 
reedny said:
I go to this game every year, hate / loathe (that's a rivalry) Georgetown as much as anyone, but as I understand it from the higher ups Georgetown follows the bare minimum as spelled out by conference rules for distributing tickets to us.
Expand...

Understood, Bayside. But this hasn't been the case in the past. My wife and I attended a bunch of (historic) games at the Verizon - including the one GMac won at the buzzer. Up until 2011, we had no trouble getting tickets.

It stinks, as you point out. And I hope we do something to respond, as suggested above.

But even more importantly, I hope we NEVER agree to a minimum allotment clause like this again (141 tickets to a 20k venue is ridiculous). For example, I would really like to see a game at Cameron Indoor without having to buy a season package or pretend im in a Bluedevil alumni club.[/quote]

I understand, I remember the SU Alumni Club gettnig thousands of tickets it seemed, and sitting in the 100s for the GMac shot, and behind the tin for the Melo game. Had to be more creative the last couple of games here. Whatever works.

It's not our agreement, it's the Big East. and apparently UL has some set aside where they give out even less than the minimum.
 
Well, it is our agreement, because we have to sign the contract with the league and that contract includes ticket policies and other provisions -- we were just asleep at the wheel here. Let's avoid this in the future, but for now ... I think GT should find out what an ORANGE-OUT tastes like!!
 
If we ever schedule a H&H with GT (my guess is, we don't - neutral site), there better be a provision for a certain (generous) allotment of tickets. If not, no deal. They need us more than we need them. A lot more.
 
orange79 said:
If we ever schedule a H&H with GT (my guess is, we don't - neutral site), there better be a provision for a certain (generous) allotment of tickets. If not, no deal. They need us more than we need them. A lot more.
Expand...
I don't see even a H/H with them, unless they guarantee us 5k tickets, minimum. Their fan base stinks. Instead of promoting their team, they'd rather shut out SU fans and give away tickets. It's amazing. I like JT3, but the AD needs to grow a set of values.
 
reedny said:
I don't see even a H/H with them, unless they guarantee us 5k tickets, minimum. Their fan base stinks. Instead of promoting their team, they'd rather shut out SU fans and give away tickets. It's amazing. I like JT3, but the AD needs to grow a set of values.
Expand...
Fixed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
169,452
Messages
4,832,215
Members
5,977
Latest member
newmom4503

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
1,112
Total visitors
1,240
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom