|
Post by aldewitt on Jan 7, 2018 15:50:16 GMT -6
There’s a guy over on the und board calling himself siouxfan97 that got me thinking. Apparently a fellow that lives in the past, he often mentions the dominance of und football in the 90s and constitently runs the FCS down. His all-time favorite theme is the lack of competition in the FCS forgetting und has provided many Saturday laughers.
In a comment yesterday he said: Besides initially thinking what a bunch of fun und will be in the MVFC, I was curious about FCS attendance.
In 2016 FCS attendance was 5.47 million. In 2008 it was 5.97 million. The peak appears to be 2010 @ 6.03 million.
At first glance you may think the FCS is losing its audience. In 10 years it’s down about 500,000. Keep in mind, in that time, several schools have moved up. I was wondering about that impact on attendance when another quote siouxfan97 made yesterday came to mind: I’ll accept his research results.
From my own research conducted at the NCAA website I found the programs that have moved up since we all joined are often big programs. Two we all are familiar with are Appy State and Georgia Southern. Together they contributed 313,917 fans every year. That leaves 7 of the 9.
The others that dropped would have less impact but you can figure with average season attendance at 45,296, 7 average teams would have contributed another 317,972 fans.
Of the 11 that dropped you have to figure poor attendance was a factor. I’m counting those 11 as 2 average teams for another 90,592 fans lost to FCS.
Total that’s 631,889 say 632,000 fans lost. On the other hand total attendance is only down about 500,000. It looks to me the FCS has picked up 130,000 fans or so and is gaining in popularity.
The problem is not that FCS is a brand losing favor, it has lots of potential. The problem is schools like SDSU and UND are not stepping up. We are all familiar with half empty stands and non-competitive teams.
SDSU cant draw flies but fields a competitive team. UND on the other hand inflates attendance wildly, has half empty stands on a good day and doesn’t even try to field a consistently competitive product. If there is any problem in the FCS it's programs like those 2 that bring many of them. Some have to improve and become competitive and some have to market their success. That's where the future of the FCS lies.
I like where USD and NDSU are, both are marketing success.
|
|
|
Post by elcoyote on Jan 7, 2018 17:04:44 GMT -6
Personally, I like FCS football simply because the quality is very good and it is so accessible. It doesn't take an act of god or a huge financial commitment just to get a ticket. A big thing that has to be taken into account in the Dakotas is that all four are the major schools in the state. There's no competing with a local power 5 for attention. As for the two South Dakota schools, a big inhibitor would be the towns they are in. As much as I love Vermillion, with a population of 10,000, many of which are college students, attendance can be a tough nut especially on a weekday night in winter for basketball. Brookings is twice as big as Vermillion, but that really isn't saying much and, personally, I think they made a mistake building an outdoor stadium although I know they would vehemently disagree. What would things look like if either school was in Sioux Falls, or, even better, South Dakota had followed the Wyoming model with one major state university providing all educational programs? NDSU has all the advantages of the South Dakota's with the added bonus of being located in the Fargo-Morehead metro area. That simply can not be underestimated. The Bison have success, no P5 competition, metro area and the accompanying access to financial backing and business sponsorship that many FCS schools simply don't have. UND could be in the same boat but not sure how big Grand Forks is and I do think they've decided to ride the hockey train to a large degree. Extreme example but compare yourself to Indiana State. Within an hour or two of their campus is Notre Dame, Purdue and Indiana for starters. I don't think even the Bison could compete with that on a football Saturday. Overall, it's a never ending battle for eyeballs and attention and I think the Dakotas do have big advantages over many other FCS schools. I'm pleased with where USD is headed and I think our financial commitment has started to and will continue to pay off in the near and long term future.
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 7, 2018 19:38:57 GMT -6
Overall attendance isn't a great health indicator. If all of D2 suddenly joined FCS the attendance would increase dramatically but the product and exposure would remain the same.
I don't think there's much to say about the health of the FCS. The schools will always have their fans, and no one else will ever care. That's how it is for sport leagues that aren't at the top level. FCS is third level behind the Power 5 and Group of 5, and I'd say that the Group of 5 is pretty much in the same boat because they aren't top level. Just as only the fans care about MVFC football, only the fans care about MAC football. They do get more exposure since they are in the FBS but I don't think it means much besides more TV money (which they need to pay the higher salaries, and attendance is still dismal, so they aren't better off at all).
|
|
|
Post by aldewitt on Jan 8, 2018 3:35:37 GMT -6
One big way a move over to FBS could pay is the attraction of the opponents. Playing Iowa or Kansas State would draw big. But, it wouldn’t be the same as when an FCS meets and beats an FBS program. The fun and excitement is beating a team that spends millions more than you.
Because divisions were set up to match schools with similar budgets we have seen schools leave FCS as they grew their programs and grabbed some market share. Growth is tough to push and the strongholds of FBS are in larger markets. It seems programs will grow to fit the market size. The market size of our region is growing. That might change the landscape in a few years?
Right now the footprint is FCS. There is no promised land in my mind. I like where we are with the MVFC and hope it remains stable.
|
|
|
Post by gorabbits on Jan 8, 2018 8:01:37 GMT -6
The problem is not that FCS is a brand losing favor, it has lots of potential. The problem is schools like SDSU and UND are not stepping up. We are all familiar with half empty stands and non-competitive teams. SDSU cant draw flies but fields a competitive team. UND on the other hand inflates attendance wildly, has half empty stands on a good day and doesn’t even try to field a consistently competitive product. If there is any problem in the FCS it's programs like those 2 that bring many of them. Some have to improve and become competitive and some have to market their success. That's where the future of the FCS lies. I like where USD and NDSU are, both are marketing success. Very interesting set of comments when USD put approximately 47,000 fans in the seats at home this year compared to SDSU's 96000. USD averages about 9400 for regular season games, SDSU 14,000 for regular season games. USD's best ever performance in the Valley is this year's 4-4 record. SDSU's worst ever performance in the Valley is 4-4. Over the last 6 years since USD joined the Valley they have a record of 24-46. During the same period UND, in a weaker conference, has a record of 32-36. USD is making giant strides now but the above comments about SDSU and UND not stepping up are, well what they are.
|
|
|
Post by usdtator on Jan 8, 2018 9:09:30 GMT -6
The problem is not that FCS is a brand losing favor, it has lots of potential. The problem is schools like SDSU and UND are not stepping up. We are all familiar with half empty stands and non-competitive teams. SDSU cant draw flies but fields a competitive team. UND on the other hand inflates attendance wildly, has half empty stands on a good day and doesn’t even try to field a consistently competitive product. If there is any problem in the FCS it's programs like those 2 that bring many of them. Some have to improve and become competitive and some have to market their success. That's where the future of the FCS lies. I like where USD and NDSU are, both are marketing success. Very interesting set of comments when USD put approximately 47,000 fans in the seats at home this year compared to SDSU's 96000. USD averages about 9400 for regular season games, SDSU 14,000 for regular season games. USD's best ever performance in the Valley is this year's 4-4 record. SDSU's worst ever performance in the Valley is 4-4. Over the last 6 years since USD joined the Valley they have a record of 24-46. During the same period UND, in a weaker conference, has a record of 32-36. USD is making giant strides now but the above comments about SDSU and UND not stepping up are, well what they are. Typical that the bunny poster would make it all about themselves and the ag school and miss the bigger picture of the discussion being had in this thread. Yes... we all know that you guys have an amazing team up there (#10turnovers). Thanks for dragging me down to your level and having to talk smack. This thread is about FCS attendance overall... they were just drawing reference to local examples.
|
|
jackjd
Senior Member
Posts: 652
|
Post by jackjd on Jan 8, 2018 13:23:29 GMT -6
Typical that the bunny poster would make it all about themselves and the ag school and miss the bigger picture of the discussion being had in this thread. Yes... we all know that you guys have an amazing team up there (#10turnovers). Thanks for dragging me down to your level and having to talk smack. This thread is about FCS attendance overall... they were just drawing reference to local examples. Potato: Clean your reading glasses. The comment about SDSU "couldn't draw flies" invited some fact checking and the resulting response about attendance numbers. To suggest SDSU is somehow holding FCS back is unsupportable by any measure. The NCAA website publishes annual attendance for football programs. I just checked the site -- it appears the 2017 numbers are not available but the 2016 and prior numbers are available. Montana is #1. NDSU is #5 overall and, of course, first in the MVFC. SDSU is 5th overall, second in the conference. Youngstown is 17th overall, 3rd in the conference. Illinois State is #25 overall, 4th in the MVFC. Missouri State is 27th overall, 5th in the conference. No other current MVFC schools appear in the top-30 listed. UND came in at 28th overall in 2016. Link: fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2016.pdf
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 8, 2018 13:43:23 GMT -6
The line about UND and SDSU didn't fit the narrative, they are 28th and 15th in average attendance for 2016. There's 122 teams in FCS so ragging on top 1/4 teams just makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 8, 2018 13:52:35 GMT -6
I decided to look into stats. I used 2016 and 2008 since those are the years in the original post.
I found that home attendance for FBS football games in 2016 was 34.8 million across 808 games played. Attendance in 2008 was 34.9 million across 751 games. The average attendance per game has dropped by 7%. Attendance in 2008 was higher than 2016 despite having to work against the single worst financial crisis since The Great Depression.
Time to call into question the health of the FBS.
|
|
|
Post by aldewitt on Jan 8, 2018 16:04:00 GMT -6
The problem is not that FCS is a brand losing favor, it has lots of potential. The problem is schools like SDSU and UND are not stepping up. We are all familiar with half empty stands and non-competitive teams. SDSU cant draw flies but fields a competitive team. UND on the other hand inflates attendance wildly, has half empty stands on a good day and doesn’t even try to field a consistently competitive product. If there is any problem in the FCS it's programs like those 2 that bring many of them. Some have to improve and become competitive and some have to market their success. That's where the future of the FCS lies. I like where USD and NDSU are, both are marketing success. Very interesting set of comments when USD put approximately 47,000 fans in the seats at home this year compared to SDSU's 96000. USD averages about 9400 for regular season games, SDSU 14,000 for regular season games. USD's best ever performance in the Valley is this year's 4-4 record. SDSU's worst ever performance in the Valley is 4-4. Over the last 6 years since USD joined the Valley they have a record of 24-46. During the same period UND, in a weaker conference, has a record of 32-36. USD is making giant strides now but the above comments about SDSU and UND not stepping up are, well what they are. Both of those programs are under performing and leave a lot of money on the table. USD is harvesting a lot more of their potential than either of them. NDSU is maxed except for ticket prices, sponsorships and media. Ps. The attendance figures mentioned by a poster above clearly disputes the statement I just made and I have to agree. The point was made they were drawn out to make the larger points of growing attendance overall and a huge potential in the empty seats we see. It was the disparaging comments about the FCS being a dying sport on the UND board that inspired the research so, all things considered, I thought the example was appropriate in light of the state of the program up there. The addition of SDSU was the empty seats I always saw when I watched them this season.
|
|
|
Post by aldewitt on Jan 8, 2018 17:21:58 GMT -6
Just for fun I did a quick count on 2017 attendance. SDSU ~78,500. UND ~43,500
|
|
|
Post by oldhare on Jan 8, 2018 19:39:05 GMT -6
Just for fun I did a quick count on 2017 attendance. SDSU ~78,500. UND ~43,500 You were either a bit too quick or your batteries are low. I found that the 6 regular season games brought 82,850. As you are a guy who is usually throwing complex numbers together for statistical analysis, I would have expected more accurate numbers. http://sdstate_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/www.gojacks.com/fls/15000/stats/2017_FB/teamgbg.htm
|
|
|
Post by gorabbits on Jan 8, 2018 20:33:28 GMT -6
Just for fun I did a quick count on 2017 attendance. SDSU ~78,500. UND ~43,500 You were either a bit too quick or your batteries are low. I found that the 6 regular season games brought 82,850. As you are a guy who is usually throwing complex numbers together for statistical analysis, I would have expected more accurate numbers. http://sdstate_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/www.gojacks.com/fls/15000/stats/2017_FB/teamgbg.htm I used the numbers from Gojacks.com and Goyotes.com's respective stats page for 2018. The links are below. The exact number for the Jacks is listed as 96,951 and for the Yotes is 46,676. The Jacks had more home games total but the regular season averages still are as shown in my first post above. You will need to scroll down on the sites to find the numbers. They are just above the scores by quarters section. http://sdstate_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/www.gojacks.com/fls/15000/stats/2017_FB/teamcume.htm stats.goyotes.com/custompages/sports/m-footbl/2017/teamcume.htm My post above was not meant to be smack put simply an accurate presentation of dat
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 8, 2018 21:13:10 GMT -6
You were either a bit too quick or your batteries are low. I found that the 6 regular season games brought 82,850. As you are a guy who is usually throwing complex numbers together for statistical analysis, I would have expected more accurate numbers. http://sdstate_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/www.gojacks.com/fls/15000/stats/2017_FB/teamgbg.htm I used the numbers from Gojacks.com and Goyotes.com's respective stats page for 2018. The links are below. The exact number for the Jacks is listed as 96,951 and for the Yotes is 46,676. The Jacks had more home games total but the regular season averages still are as shown in my first post above. You will need to scroll down on the sites to find the numbers. They are just above the scores by quarters section. http://sdstate_ftp.sidearmsports.com/custompages/www.gojacks.com/fls/15000/stats/2017_FB/teamcume.htm stats.goyotes.com/custompages/sports/m-footbl/2017/teamcume.htm My post above was not meant to be smack put simply an accurate presentation of dat No one can argue with hard data. Except maybe Coyotefan. The only thing I can come up with when Aldewitt disparages SDSU and UND is that USD's results are more impressive given the inputs and environment. I'm not sure it's his point and I'm not going to argue it. I think it is much more likely that he just hates UND and SDSU and will give neither credit for anything.
|
|
jackjd
Senior Member
Posts: 652
|
Post by jackjd on Jan 8, 2018 21:41:55 GMT -6
Yotes, I think you pointed out the better question when you wrote: "Time to call into question the health of the FBS." There's been a lot written about how most FBS programs are constantly looking for funds in an effort to stay productive at that level. Certainly the top tier of teams make a boatload of money but most FBS programs pray they can break even in football. That's the information I think about when people start talking about moving to FBS.
aldewitt: Are you making an argument that percentage of available seats sold is the preferred measure? Skewed example to illustrate: Two schools in the region -- so their game-ticket prices are close to equal (e.g. USD game tickets and SDSU game tickets do not vary by much). School A has a 5,000-seat stadium and they sell all 5,000 seats -- 100% -- for every home game. School B has a 20,000 seat stadium and they sell only 50% of available every game. Don't tell me you prefer the revenue from 100% of 5,000 seats vs. 50% of 20000 seats? [You wrote above: "Both of those programs (talking about UND and SDSU) are under performing and leave a lot of money on the table. USD is harvesting a lot more of their potential than either of them."
Oldhare noted above that you regularly provide statistical analysis on games. Your pregame analysis is a reason why I will stop in and check this board out because of your interesting and logical statistical prediction of game outcomes. Today's comments are uncharacteristic.
|
|