Sports without fans in the stands

[Jmsdawg]

I find myself wondering what effect not having fans in the stands will have on future games. My initial thoughts were fans in the stands would have little effect on the tv audience. I have changed that opinion. I have watched “The Voice” every season and enjoyed the show, this last season the Live shows, normally the most exciting part, were broadcast with no audience, so boring that I quit watching. Think fanless sports may lack enthusiasm and excitement and effect the player’s performance. So I am hoping for fans in the stands soon!

 

[j66kicker]

I find myself wondering what effect not having fans in the stands will have on future games. My initial thoughts were fans in the stands would have little effect on the tv audience. I have changed that opinion. I have watched “The Voice” every season and enjoyed the show, this last season the Live shows, normally the most exciting part, were broadcast with no audience, so boring that I quit watching. Think fanless sports may lack enthusiasm and excitement and effect the player’s performance. So I am hoping for fans in the stands soon!

I agree - football with no fans?? Fox is working on putting digital fans in the seats of empty stadiums for your viewing pleasure. The video part is easy, but knowing what crowd noise to create for which game situations, and the exact timing, is the more challenging part.

 

[militarydog]

I find myself wondering what effect not having fans in the stands will have on future games. My initial thoughts were fans in the stands would have little effect on the tv audience. I have changed that opinion. I have watched “The Voice” every season and enjoyed the show, this last season the Live shows, normally the most exciting part, were broadcast with no audience, so boring that I quit watching. Think fanless sports may lack enthusiasm and excitement and effect the player’s performance. So I am hoping for fans in the stands soon!

At first I think fans will be so happy to have sports they will overlook a lot. However it will get old fast. Ultimately it will hurt the homecourt or home field advantage with reduction in noise and general intimidation factor. I still laugh about Coach Schaefer talking about going into certain arenas and having fans yell things at him that he did not realize anybody knew. Further, he also discussed how he had to train his players to not react to opposing fans. Mississippi State women’s basketball has developed a big following. It seems as a whole that women’s basketball fans are more knowledgeable and take the time to learn things about opposing players and coaches. I know I have seen our fans heckle opposing players and coaches and I’m sure it helps us with a home court advantage. Therefore I definitely think it will have a big impact to have no fans.

 

[j66kicker]

Here's an article with a lot of good quantitative info on how a year with no football could permanently devastate college sports as we know it (lots of sports dropped, the end of $75 million coaching contracts, bloated football support staffs and the arms race on gaudy training facilities - could this be the equalizer that puts the P5 on more level turf with everyone else?) The article has lots more than this, but here are some tidbits:

- Not playing football this year would cost athletic departments $4 billion (including $1.2 billion in ticket revenue).

- Each P5 school would lose an average of $62 million in football revenue (including $18.5 million in ticket sales). This is 75-85% of their athletic operating budgets.

- Athletic departments are SAVING money with the cancellation of spring sports.

- Athletic departments are losing money from universities not collecting, or refunding, student fees from students not being on campus (large amounts of student fees are siphoned off to subsidize athletics). The PAC-12 is the P5 conference with the highest portion of their athletic budgets funded by this source, although Virginia (13.4%), Maryland (12.4%) and Rutgers (11.8%) are the individual P5 schools with the highest % funded by student fees.

- Group of 5 conferences (i.e. AAC) are much more dependent on student fees, averaging 21.9%, with only $842,500 avg. media rights money being distributed to each school (vs. $30 million avg. for each P5 school). Navy makes more off their out-of-conference Notre Dame and Army games than their entire AAC conference distribution.

No football would cost $4B, alter college sports

As more college athletic departments cut sports programs, the financial wreckage is becoming clear. And it gets even worse if college football doesn't return.

www.espn.com

 

[Alydar]

I keep reading about revenue. Are those figures gross revenue or what's left after all the expenses of football are paid, like that $75 million coaching contract. I'd be curious to see what % of the average P-5 athletic dept's budget goes directly or indirectly to football.

 

[eebmg]

Well, I enjoyed the German Bundeslegia games even without fans. Very minor issue for me unless in bothers the players to the point that they are playing with less emotion and skill.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Yes, gross revenue.

Clearly football costs a whole lot. But if, at the big football schools (i.e. P5), football is indeed relied upon to support the non-revenue sports, then I guess the logic is pretty straightforward that it brings in more than it costs.

It still depends on the school whether or not it brings in more than it costs. Of course, its contribution to shared conference revenue is a big factor not to be forgotten.

And then it just depends on how you cook your books.

Happy to see Rutgers is no longer #1 in student fee funding. I knew about Maryland as well, did not know about Virginia.

Someone on Facebook was recently grousing about Rutgers' student fee funding. I'd be curious (but not curious enough) about the cost per student, and of course the Covid 19 effect on student fees will be another issue.

 

[oldhusky]

This scenario may be like a lab experiment regarding the components of the home court advantage. We may find that a normal home court advantage of say 3 points a game or so goes down, but nowhere close to zero.
The crowd factor is probably a major part of that but far from the only factor. The court familiarity is one. The lighting, backgrounds etc that the home players are used to.

Travel is probably a big factor maybe as much as the crowd. Travel is tiring and takes you out of your normal routine. Different bed, temperatures, noises, food etc.

So if the home court advantage decreases somewhat but still remains, the decrease is likely due to the crowd advantage, and what remains is due to those other factors like familiarity with the court and the many factors associated with travel.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

At first I think fans will be so happy to have sports they will overlook a lot. However it will get old fast. Ultimately it will hurt the homecourt or home field advantage with reduction in noise and general intimidation factor. I still laugh about Coach Schaefer talking about going into certain arenas and having fans yell things at him that he did not realize anybody knew. Further, he also discussed how he had to train his players to not react to opposing fans. Mississippi State women’s basketball has developed a big following. It seems as a whole that women’s basketball fans are more knowledgeable and take the time to learn things about opposing players and coaches. I know I have seen our fans heckle opposing players and coaches and I’m sure it helps us with a home court advantage. Therefore I definitely think it will have a big impact to have no fans.

He was referring to me, though I don't know anything about him other than what's in the news. His wife introduced herself to me before the game in Columbia.