The CardBoard
We're #52 (in football attendance) - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: We're #52 (in football attendance) (/thread-13227.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

We're #52 (in football attendance) - TreesAndBirds - 12-16-2016

Between Rutgers and East Carolina.

Overall attendance down.

Of course the article doesnt mention refusal to set game times significantly in advance, inconvenient game times and playing a number of games before students arrive as a reason.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-attendance-in-2016-crowds-decline-for-sixth-straight-year/?ref=yfp

We're #52 (in football attendance) - TreesAndBirds - 12-16-2016

Between Rutgers and East Carolina.

Overall attendance down.

Of course the article doesnt mention refusal to set game times significantly in advance, inconvenient game times and playing a number of games before students arrive as a reason.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-attendance-in-2016-crowds-decline-for-sixth-straight-year/?ref=yfp

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - terry - 12-16-2016

Stanford's attendance tends to run about 5,000 less in even-numbered years than in odd-numbered years. That's because our home schedule is much less attractive in even years, with U-S-C as the only top-tier opponent. In odd years, we have home games against C.al, Notre.Dame, Oregon, UCLA, and Washington.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - terry - 12-16-2016

Stanford's attendance tends to run about 5,000 less in even-numbered years than in odd-numbered years. That's because our home schedule is much less attractive in even years, with U-S-C as the only top-tier opponent. In odd years, we have home games against C.al, Notre.Dame, Oregon, UCLA, and Washington.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - Mick - 12-16-2016

(12-16-2016, 04:48 PM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:Between Rutgers and East Carolina.

Overall attendance down.

Of course the article doesnt mention refusal to set game times significantly in advance, inconvenient game times and playing a number of games before students arrive as a reason.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-attendance-in-2016-crowds-decline-for-sixth-straight-year/?ref=yfp


It would be interesting to see that same list expressed as a function of total enrollment.  All of the schools in the Top Ten are very large schools with enrollments that are 2x to 4x Stanford's enrollment.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - Mick - 12-16-2016

(12-16-2016, 04:48 PM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:Between Rutgers and East Carolina.

Overall attendance down.

Of course the article doesnt mention refusal to set game times significantly in advance, inconvenient game times and playing a number of games before students arrive as a reason.

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-attendance-in-2016-crowds-decline-for-sixth-straight-year/?ref=yfp


It would be interesting to see that same list expressed as a function of total enrollment.  All of the schools in the Top Ten are very large schools with enrollments that are 2x to 4x Stanford's enrollment.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - 82 Card - 12-17-2016

(12-16-2016, 07:40 PM)Mick link Wrote:It would be interesting to see that same list expressed as a function of total enrollment.  All of the schools in the Top Ten are very large schools with enrollments that are 2x to 4x Stanford's enrollment.

I have created such lists in Excel. Not sure how to go about posting whole list here.

For the most part I have used undergraduate and total enrollment figures from Wikipedia. Some of the state schools are hard to pin down. Many don't break down enrollment between undergraduate and graduate. Some of the state schools have many campuses. I tried to only count the main campus but may have messed up.

I computed average attendance per student using undergraduate enrollment and total enrollment. Using average attendance per undergraduate, Stanford came in 5th after Notre Dame, Army, Air Force and Navy. Using average attendance per enrolled student, Stanford came in 20th, behind Army, Air Force, Navy, Notre Dame, Tulsa, TCU, Tennessee, Nebraska, Clemson, Wake Forest, Miami, Rice, LSU, Auburn, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, Alabama and Baylor. Within the PAC 12, the closest competition was from USC, which came in 22nd when using only undergraduates and 52nd using total enrollment.


Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - 82 Card - 12-17-2016

(12-16-2016, 07:40 PM)Mick link Wrote:It would be interesting to see that same list expressed as a function of total enrollment.  All of the schools in the Top Ten are very large schools with enrollments that are 2x to 4x Stanford's enrollment.

I have created such lists in Excel. Not sure how to go about posting whole list here.

For the most part I have used undergraduate and total enrollment figures from Wikipedia. Some of the state schools are hard to pin down. Many don't break down enrollment between undergraduate and graduate. Some of the state schools have many campuses. I tried to only count the main campus but may have messed up.

I computed average attendance per student using undergraduate enrollment and total enrollment. Using average attendance per undergraduate, Stanford came in 5th after Notre Dame, Army, Air Force and Navy. Using average attendance per enrolled student, Stanford came in 20th, behind Army, Air Force, Navy, Notre Dame, Tulsa, TCU, Tennessee, Nebraska, Clemson, Wake Forest, Miami, Rice, LSU, Auburn, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, Alabama and Baylor. Within the PAC 12, the closest competition was from USC, which came in 22nd when using only undergraduates and 52nd using total enrollment.


Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - DC 86 - 12-17-2016

Another factor which relates to attendance is how many alumni live within reasonable proximity to campus. For example, I'm sure that a significant portion of the Nebraska alumni base live within driving distance of Lincoln, whereas a significant portion of our alumni base is scattered throughout the country (many on the east coast) and overseas.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - DC 86 - 12-17-2016

Another factor which relates to attendance is how many alumni live within reasonable proximity to campus. For example, I'm sure that a significant portion of the Nebraska alumni base live within driving distance of Lincoln, whereas a significant portion of our alumni base is scattered throughout the country (many on the east coast) and overseas.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - stupac2 - 12-17-2016

(12-17-2016, 04:09 AM)82 Card link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=16297.msg182761#msg182761 date=1481942447]
It would be interesting to see that same list expressed as a function of total enrollment.  All of the schools in the Top Ten are very large schools with enrollments that are 2x to 4x Stanford's enrollment.

I have created such lists in Excel. Not sure how to go about posting whole list here.

For the most part I have used undergraduate and total enrollment figures from Wikipedia. Some of the state schools are hard to pin down. Many don't break down enrollment between undergraduate and graduate. Some of the state schools have many campuses. I tried to only count the main campus but may have messed up.

I computed average attendance per student using undergraduate enrollment and total enrollment. Using average attendance per undergraduate, Stanford came in 5th after Notre Dame, Army, Air Force and Navy. Using average attendance per enrolled student, Stanford came in 20th, behind Army, Air Force, Navy, Notre Dame, Tulsa, TCU, Tennessee, Nebraska, Clemson, Wake Forest, Miami, Rice, LSU, Auburn, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, Alabama and Baylor. Within the PAC 12, the closest competition was from USC, which came in 22nd when using only undergraduates and 52nd using total enrollment.
[/quote]

I would either post to google docs or make a bar chart.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - stupac2 - 12-17-2016

(12-17-2016, 04:09 AM)82 Card link Wrote:[quote author=Mick link=topic=16297.msg182761#msg182761 date=1481942447]
It would be interesting to see that same list expressed as a function of total enrollment.  All of the schools in the Top Ten are very large schools with enrollments that are 2x to 4x Stanford's enrollment.

I have created such lists in Excel. Not sure how to go about posting whole list here.

For the most part I have used undergraduate and total enrollment figures from Wikipedia. Some of the state schools are hard to pin down. Many don't break down enrollment between undergraduate and graduate. Some of the state schools have many campuses. I tried to only count the main campus but may have messed up.

I computed average attendance per student using undergraduate enrollment and total enrollment. Using average attendance per undergraduate, Stanford came in 5th after Notre Dame, Army, Air Force and Navy. Using average attendance per enrolled student, Stanford came in 20th, behind Army, Air Force, Navy, Notre Dame, Tulsa, TCU, Tennessee, Nebraska, Clemson, Wake Forest, Miami, Rice, LSU, Auburn, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, Mississippi State, Alabama and Baylor. Within the PAC 12, the closest competition was from USC, which came in 22nd when using only undergraduates and 52nd using total enrollment.
[/quote]

I would either post to google docs or make a bar chart.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - TreesAndBirds - 12-17-2016

Note that 25 of the schools listed above us have average attendance of 98% of capacity or higher, suggesting they could have sold more tickets if their stadium was larger.

Also note the statistics reflect announced attendance, not actual attendance.

As pointed out there are lots of valid reasons why our attendance is lower, including two professional football teams and two other Division 1 football teams within 50 miles.


Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - TreesAndBirds - 12-17-2016

Note that 25 of the schools listed above us have average attendance of 98% of capacity or higher, suggesting they could have sold more tickets if their stadium was larger.

Also note the statistics reflect announced attendance, not actual attendance.

As pointed out there are lots of valid reasons why our attendance is lower, including two professional football teams and two other Division 1 football teams within 50 miles.


Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - CornFed - 12-17-2016

(12-17-2016, 09:22 AM)DC 86 link Wrote:Another factor which relates to attendance is how many alumni live within reasonable proximity to campus. For example, I'm sure that a significant portion of the Nebraska alumni base live within driving distance of Lincoln, whereas a significant portion of our alumni base is scattered throughout the country (many on the east coast) and overseas.

Funny that you would choose Nebraska for your example.  I get your general point, but it is interesting about Nebraska's fanbase.  I had read many years ago that over 50% of their 100,000 fans or so, travel more than 150 miles to attend home games.  You know.  The old "what else is there to do in that God-forsaken place?" meme.  It is pretty impressive. 

When I was a boy, I had several opportunities to go to games.  Lincoln was about 150 miles away and we had to drive through Omaha to get there.  As we were leaving Omaha, with 60 miles to go (for those of you who are English majors) there were highway patrol personnel directing traffic.  The Huskers have a loyal fanbase.  One could probably describe them as maniacal.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - CornFed - 12-17-2016

(12-17-2016, 09:22 AM)DC 86 link Wrote:Another factor which relates to attendance is how many alumni live within reasonable proximity to campus. For example, I'm sure that a significant portion of the Nebraska alumni base live within driving distance of Lincoln, whereas a significant portion of our alumni base is scattered throughout the country (many on the east coast) and overseas.

Funny that you would choose Nebraska for your example.  I get your general point, but it is interesting about Nebraska's fanbase.  I had read many years ago that over 50% of their 100,000 fans or so, travel more than 150 miles to attend home games.  You know.  The old "what else is there to do in that God-forsaken place?" meme.  It is pretty impressive. 

When I was a boy, I had several opportunities to go to games.  Lincoln was about 150 miles away and we had to drive through Omaha to get there.  As we were leaving Omaha, with 60 miles to go (for those of you who are English majors) there were highway patrol personnel directing traffic.  The Huskers have a loyal fanbase.  One could probably describe them as maniacal.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - Mick - 12-18-2016

(12-17-2016, 11:02 AM)CornFed link Wrote:[quote author=DC 86 link=topic=16297.msg182776#msg182776 date=1481991776]
Another factor which relates to attendance is how many alumni live within reasonable proximity to campus. For example, I'm sure that a significant portion of the Nebraska alumni base live within driving distance of Lincoln, whereas a significant portion of our alumni base is scattered throughout the country (many on the east coast) and overseas.

Funny that you would choose Nebraska for your example.  I get your general point, but it is interesting about Nebraska's fanbase.  I had read many years ago that over 50% of their 100,000 fans or so, travel more than 150 miles to attend home games.  You know.  The old "what else is there to do in that God-forsaken place?" meme.  It is pretty impressive. 

When I was a boy, I had several opportunities to go to games.  Lincoln was about 150 miles away and we had to drive through Omaha to get there.  As we were leaving Omaha, with 60 miles to go (for those of you who are English majors) there were highway patrol personnel directing traffic.  The Huskers have a loyal fanbase.  One could probably describe them as maniacal.
[/quote]

Or lots of two lane highways with semis...  :P

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - Mick - 12-18-2016

(12-17-2016, 11:02 AM)CornFed link Wrote:[quote author=DC 86 link=topic=16297.msg182776#msg182776 date=1481991776]
Another factor which relates to attendance is how many alumni live within reasonable proximity to campus. For example, I'm sure that a significant portion of the Nebraska alumni base live within driving distance of Lincoln, whereas a significant portion of our alumni base is scattered throughout the country (many on the east coast) and overseas.

Funny that you would choose Nebraska for your example.  I get your general point, but it is interesting about Nebraska's fanbase.  I had read many years ago that over 50% of their 100,000 fans or so, travel more than 150 miles to attend home games.  You know.  The old "what else is there to do in that God-forsaken place?" meme.  It is pretty impressive. 

When I was a boy, I had several opportunities to go to games.  Lincoln was about 150 miles away and we had to drive through Omaha to get there.  As we were leaving Omaha, with 60 miles to go (for those of you who are English majors) there were highway patrol personnel directing traffic.  The Huskers have a loyal fanbase.  One could probably describe them as maniacal.
[/quote]

Or lots of two lane highways with semis...  :P

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - 82 Card - 12-18-2016

I have posted my spreadsheet that ranks football attendance per undergraduate and per student (including grad students) on Google Drive at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9UkWv83ZXXdUmhnUkFCeVBoTEU/view?usp=sharing.

You will see three tabs. Each of the three tabs has the same data. The first tab is sorted by attendance per game. The second tab is sorted by attendance per game per undergraduate. The third tab is sorted by attendance per game per student (i.e. total enrollment). Some concerns:

1.  For the military academies, I have used the same number for undergraduate and total because I have only been able to find numbers for "midshipmen."

2.  Some of the state schools have multiple campuses. If it was easily available, I tried to use only the main campus. However, it was not easy to discern which numbers were for what with some of the schools. Also, some schools might have separate campuses that are so close together they really should be counted as part of the main campus.

3. Most of the data is from the Google summary for the school. With several schools, the summary only listed total enrollment. In those cases, the undergraduate number is usually from US News and World Report.

4. I probably made some mistakes. Lots of numbers, limited attention span.

Re: We're #52 (in football attendance) - 82 Card - 12-18-2016

I have posted my spreadsheet that ranks football attendance per undergraduate and per student (including grad students) on Google Drive at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9UkWv83ZXXdUmhnUkFCeVBoTEU/view?usp=sharing.

You will see three tabs. Each of the three tabs has the same data. The first tab is sorted by attendance per game. The second tab is sorted by attendance per game per undergraduate. The third tab is sorted by attendance per game per student (i.e. total enrollment). Some concerns:

1.  For the military academies, I have used the same number for undergraduate and total because I have only been able to find numbers for "midshipmen."

2.  Some of the state schools have multiple campuses. If it was easily available, I tried to use only the main campus. However, it was not easy to discern which numbers were for what with some of the schools. Also, some schools might have separate campuses that are so close together they really should be counted as part of the main campus.

3. Most of the data is from the Google summary for the school. With several schools, the summary only listed total enrollment. In those cases, the undergraduate number is usually from US News and World Report.

4. I probably made some mistakes. Lots of numbers, limited attention span.