UCF might not be a huge draw...

[zls44]

The lower end zone (student section) is shown as sold out as are a few other sections, but it sure won't look good to recruits who like to play in an exciting environment.

Maybe charge realistic prices.

 

[Nostical]

We're in a new paradigm that requires thinking outside the box. In fact they should turn the box inside out. The school should get ahead of the curve and start paying folks to come to the games. Fill the stadium, sell more concessions, enhance the atmosphere. You can thank me later.

 

[BugsyCT]

It's been said a million times - the only way to put fannies back in the seats is for the team to win games.

 

[champs99and04]

Ah, now you are getting it. And so that is my point about reaching out to other markets and marketing the product. Right now college sports predominately sells "frat environment" and that doesn't appeal to all. I'm not a marketing wizard, so I'll leave the problem solving to others. Its just my observation that there is no effort to appeal to other groups other than the usuals.

From what I've observed, not selling the frat environment is a bigger problem than selling it. They have made too much of an effort to accomodate people beyond the targeted demographic (students), and as a result they've undermined the appeal of attending live events at all. How many stadiums now have luxury boxes or member areas where you can insulate yourself from the rest of the crowd? They've taken something that was attractive due in large part to discomfort and re-created your living room...and then they wonder why people aren't coming to the games.

The lack of diversity is a symptom of backwards thinking, and it's always been overly simplistic to think that minorities aren't coming to games because they don't identify with a party atmosphere or frat culture. They reject the bad parts about those things, sure, but the real reason they don't attend - as someone else mentioned - is because they don't think it's socially convenient to do so. It's not an aversion to fun, it's an aversion to exclusion. In other words, any marketing department that asks what they can do to get minorities to attend games is bound to miss the underlying issue, which is that everyone wants to have as much fun as the person that's having the most fun. You don't accomplish that by then making it less fun for everybody.

Older people are not immune to having a good time either. That doesn't mean they're going to act like 20-year-olds, but it means they'd probably prefer a more controlled version of whatever the students are experiencing. To the extent that the short-term corporate solution to these problems is always to pull back on what they think people can handle is counteracted, and then some, by depleting your customer base long-term. Not only are you puncturing the spirits of your most vocal fans, but you're also costing yourself the most valuable recruiting tool a business can have.

By no means do I want to rev a crowd up to the point that it's impeding the enjoyment of those who want to observe peacefully, but making the overall experience less desirable as a way to attract new people is almost certainly a losing philosophy. Better to communicate the appeals of inclusivity to your core base than make a zero sum game out of something where the high tide raises all boats.

 

[Exit 4]

From what I've observed, not selling the frat environment is a bigger problem than selling it. They have made too much of an effort to accomodate people beyond the targeted demographic (students), and as a result they've undermined the appeal of attending live events at all. How many stadiums now have luxury boxes or member areas where you can insulate yourself from the rest of the crowd? They've taken something that was attractive due in large part to discomfort and re-created your living room...and then they wonder why people aren't coming to the games.

The lack of diversity is a symptom of backwards thinking, and it's always been overly simplistic to think that minorities aren't coming to games because they don't identify with a party atmosphere or frat culture. They reject the bad parts about those things, sure, but the real reason they don't attend - as someone else mentioned - is because they don't think it's socially convenient to do so. It's not an aversion to fun, it's an aversion to exclusion. In other words, any marketing department that asks what they can do to get minorities to attend games is bound to miss the underlying issue, which is that everyone wants to have as much fun as the person that's having the most fun. You don't accomplish that by then making it less fun for everybody.

I don't have strong feelings about the marketing angles or the outreach. Again, I'll leave that to others. I will stand by my observation that the actual attendance at college football stadiums is not as diverse as our society (by a wide margin) and so I conclude the marketing is missing out on an opportunity.

 

[Adios]

For someone who collects things that often have little or no value, to anyone other than him, that might seem scary. I much prefer to expose my children to as many different cultures and experiences as possible; rather than continue to collect toys and junk that will be used several times and then either discarded or donated.

I am not thinking of Garbage Pail Kids cards. I am thinking of actual savings.

Not everyone collects junk, either.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

The live experience just ain't what it used to be.

Went to Yankee Stadium last night, got in line to get in around 645 and didn't get to my seats until 720 due to security.

I understand the need for security, especially in NY, but tweedle dee and tweedle dum poking a flashlight for 10 minutes through a mother's diaper bag accomplishes what?

I've been lucky with walking around the side of the stadium to Gate 8 lately. Usually just a few minute line, unlike the front Gate 4 and 6.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[Nostical]

And you thought I was kidding.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I've been lucky with walking around the side of the stadium to Gate 8 lately. Usually just a few minute line, unlike the front Gate 4 and 6.

Thanks, I'll check that out if I go before the seasons over. I've been going to Yankees games for years and had never seen anything like it last night trying to get in at Gate 4.

 

[HuskiesFan1014]

Um, Indians are Asians, too.

Yup. He said Asians and Indians. Thanks for the shade

 

[BlueMAB]

I am not thinking of Garbage Pail Kids cards. I am thinking of actual savings.

Not everyone collects junk, either.

You're missing the point. There's nothing scary about people deciding not to accumulate things, and instead choosing to experience things. I wouldn't call that scary, I'd call it encouraging.

 

[Adios]

You're missing the point. There's nothing scary about people deciding not to accumulate things, and instead choosing to experience things. I wouldn't call that scary, I'd call it encouraging.

If you're for dystopia, enjoy.

No one said those who have wealth don't experience things. As a matter of fact, they are likely to be able to afford to experience more.

 

[Adios]

Yup. He said Asians and Indians. Thanks for the shade

He said Asian-Indians. You're welcome.

 

[Carl Spackler]

From what I've observed, not selling the frat environment is a bigger problem than selling it. They have made too much of an effort to accomodate people beyond the targeted demographic (students), and as a result they've undermined the appeal of attending live events at all. How many stadiums now have luxury boxes or member areas where you can insulate yourself from the rest of the crowd? They've taken something that was attractive due in large part to discomfort and re-created your living room...and then they wonder why people aren't coming to the games.

The lack of diversity is a symptom of backwards thinking, and it's always been overly simplistic to think that minorities aren't coming to games because they don't identify with a party atmosphere or frat culture. They reject the bad parts about those things, sure, but the real reason they don't attend - as someone else mentioned - is because they don't think it's socially convenient to do so. It's not an aversion to fun, it's an aversion to exclusion. In other words, any marketing department that asks what they can do to get minorities to attend games is bound to miss the underlying issue, which is that everyone wants to have as much fun as the person that's having the most fun. You don't accomplish that by then making it less fun for everybody.

Older people are not immune to having a good time either. That doesn't mean they're going to act like 20-year-olds, but it means they'd probably prefer a more controlled version of whatever the students are experiencing. To the extent that the short-term corporate solution to these problems is always to pull back on what they think people can handle is counteracted, and then some, by depleting your customer base long-term. Not only are you puncturing the spirits of your most vocal fans, but you're also costing yourself the most valuable recruiting tool a business can have.

By no means do I want to rev a crowd up to the point that it's impeding the enjoyment of those who want to observe peacefully, but making the overall experience less desirable as a way to attract new people is almost certainly a losing philosophy. Better to communicate the appeals of inclusivity to your core base than make a zero sum game out of something where the high tide raises all boats.

What in the holy hell is this? observe peacefully a football game? stay home.

 

[BlueMAB]

If you're for dystopia, enjoy.

No one said those who have wealth don't experience things. As a matter of fact, they are likely to be able to afford to experience more.

What the actual .... are you talking about?

This has nothing to do with wealth. People buying less stuff and traveling more is a good thing. What exactly do you find scary about that?

 

[Adios]

What the actual .... are you talking about?

This has nothing to do with wealth. People buying less stuff and traveling more is a good thing. What exactly do you find scary about that?

Possessions does not equal collectibles. Holy cow.

Ever hear of investing? People make money on possessions. It's called capitalism. Earns them money to travel more. God Almighty.

As of 2016, 15% of Americans have $10k or more saved. I guess it's better to blow money travelling.

No more from me on this topic.

 

[NEforceUConn]

........
No more from me on this topic.

What topic?

 

[Wordbomar]

This is so true. I’m in my early 20s. Besides students there aren’t any young people buying single game or season tickets. It’s a huge problem.

I am in my early 20’s as well and I couldn’t get my friends to go to a UConn football game if I paid them. Literally. Just think, for the average 21 year old CT resident, they were 13 the last time UConn had a winning record in football.

 

[Nostical]

I couldn’t get my friends to go to a UConn football game if I paid them. Literally.

Really? Even if I offered each of them $250? (for entertainment purposes only)

 

[Wordbomar]

Really? Even if I offered each of them $250? (for entertainment purposes only)

Everybody has their price I guess

 

[Scrutiner]

UConn has a marketing department. Put it to use. Most believe winning will cure attendance ills, but when you see Florida's season ticket sales off significantly maybe it's not just UConn.

Charlie Finley did it in Oakland so why can't UConn do it in East Hartford? These are desperate times so take some chances and do some innovative things to get people to come to the games and stay till the end.

Prizes, money, trips or whatever turns people on today.

 

[BlueMAB]

Possessions does not equal collectibles. Holy cow.

Ever hear of investing? People make money on possessions. It's called capitalism. Earns them money to travel more. God Almighty.

As of 2016, 15% of Americans have $10k or more saved. I guess it's better to blow money travelling.

No more from me on this topic.

Investments are not materials. The comment was that people aren't as materialistic as they used to be. The point I made was that there's nothing scary about choosing to travel instead of acquiring materials...things...not investments...nobody said anything about investments. You're literally making this crap up as you go along to avoid defending an idiotic post instead of just acknowledging that there's nothing "scary" about choosing to travel instead of buying more stuff that will sit in your house. This has nothing to do with investing. Please do tap out because once again you're making yourself look the fool.