The CardBoard
WBB: 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: WBB: Attendance (/thread-18539.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

RE: WBB: Attendance - 81alum - 11-19-2019

Attendance at the Gonzaga game:  2863.  A great opponent, a weekend game, a promising star-studded team, plenty of great plays and excitement, and not even 3k turned out. 

Do you supposed word of Missy's attendance leaked out in advance?

RE: WBB: Attendance - triangle2 - 11-19-2019

To be really honest, it gets harder and harder to go to games thinking that Missy is going to show up to ruin my fan experience. I have actually emailed the Pac-10/Pac-12 several times about this - once, Tom Hansen responded personally, telling me that he thought Missy was a great official. After beating my head against a wall for ten minutes, I did deep breathing and tried to remind myself that the Pac executives live in an echo chamber that forecloses consideration of contrary data.

I used to go to the Pac-12 tournament but watching that many games in a row with the repeated officiating errors was just too much for me. I knew I had to stop going when I was getting worked up watching something like Colorado v. WSU where I could barely remember who was coaching much less who was out on the floor. I now appreciate watching games with a remote control and a pause button. I'm sure my cardiologist appreciates that too.

RE: WBB: Attendance - M T - 11-20-2019

(11-19-2019, 09:03 PM)81alum Wrote:  Attendance at the Gonzaga game:  2863.  A great opponent, a weekend game, a promising star-studded team, plenty of great plays and excitement, and not even 3k turned out. 

Rhetorically, why do you care about attendance, since it seems the Stanford athletic department doesn't care?  If they did, they'd have had someone who was responsible for seeing that the scheduled games are mentioned in the local newspapers and/or other media that gets in front of the local public.

At Gonzaga last year, the attendance was more than twice the attendance of the game at Stanford this year.

The game could have been hyped pretty well because Gonzaga upset Stanford last year.  How would they do against the great new players at Stanford?  Gonzaga was rated #23 (Coaches Poll) going into the match.   But, unless you were already a dedicated fan, you wouldn't have known a game was happening.

Sunday's San Jose Mercury News didn't mention the game scheduled that day, not even in the TV schedule in the sports section (oh, that's right, it wasn't on any TV station).  49ers & Raiders were playing home games on Sunday (with just enough time someone could go to one of those & Stanford).   Monday's SJMN didn't mention the game either, not even a score. 

I would suggest that the SJMN shoots itself in the foot by not covering ALL the local sports (college, high school, club, not just football).  Dedicating one page, or even a half page to local events might help them to be more relevant to potential subscribers than the other, smaller, truly local papers.

While this game was (sorta) webcast, it wasn't carried on TV.  So, those who use the PAC-12 channels or ESPN to mainline their sports, couldn't count on that source.  Still, the attendance was not so good.

It is hard to blame other competing sports events.  The 49ers & Raiders played at home at 1PM.  I don't think there were other local pro games happening at the same time.  I don't believe there were competing Stanford events (but the double header of WVB & WBB on the same day did use a lot of my day).  (In a game that could be seen on PAC-12, the as-highly-ranked WVB was also playing an unranked team that upset them in the previous match-up.  Attendance: 3463.)

Until someone convinces me that Stanford works hard to get publicity on the "other" sports, I will believe a large reason the sports aren't getting attendance is because Stanford isn't getting the word doesn't out to the public.   Stanford must have their reasons.  Someone want to ask the AD?

RE: WBB: Attendance - BostonCard - 11-20-2019

I can think of two reasons why one might care about attendance: BC

RE: WBB: Attendance - qwerty49 - 11-20-2019

(11-20-2019, 12:17 PM)M T Wrote:  
(11-19-2019, 09:03 PM)81alum Wrote:  Attendance at the Gonzaga game:  2863.  A great opponent, a weekend game, a promising star-studded team, plenty of great plays and excitement, and not even 3k turned out. 

Until someone convinces me that Stanford works hard to get publicity on the "other" sports, I will believe a large reason the sports aren't getting attendance is because Stanford isn't getting the word doesn't out to the public.   Stanford must have their reasons.  Someone want to ask the AD?

Honestly I don't believe Stanford has the proper level of commitment to put in the kind of professional (repeat -- professional) marketing that is needed for the mission of competing for live attendance in a local market where there are so many options.  (i.e. Nebraska sells out WVB without blinking because there aren't many other options in Lincoln in late fall).  It's a brobdingnagian mission that needs to recognize the role of TV and other publicity in encouraging live attendance, and I'm not convinced Stanford is willing to commit the resources and budget to take it on.  It's more than just a Facebook page from Stanford Football.  I don't believe the AD thinks attendance is an issue.  I think Stanford is content to be a niche player in terms of sports and attendance.  

Times have changed.  For example IIRC Bob Murphy et al did little to "sell" Plunkett's H-man campaign; it pretty much was self-generating. In the last 10 years we've arguably had 5 more opportunities to follow-up on that, and the results speak for themselves.

Now that the rising tide of Stanford football has receded from the national scene, I believe the other "boats" like WBB have lost a big chance to bump attendance up to another level.  Fan enthusiasm is incredibly contagious, and we're kidding ourselves if we believe it also doesn't affect recruiting to some degree.

In another thread, Biketoc posted a photo from the Gonzaga game.  What strikes me about that photo is the 45 or so fans sitting in the background.  I think I see 2 kids, and 2 adults who look under 50.  That's not a recipe for a growing fan base.

RE: WBB: Attendance - chimera - 11-20-2019

I sadly agree the athletic department seems not to be trying hard (enough) to get people to games.  Tickets are expensive compared to most teams, as well, and the cost has risen rapidly over the past few seasons (at least my season tickets have).  The program doesn't appear to be trying all that hard to keep up engagement with current fans and the athletic department doesn't appear to be trying all that hard to bring in new fans.  Thus we get what we see now - inexplicably poor attendance for a team that is both excellent and fun to watch.  I used to see more info and promotions for the team than I see now.  

Getting to and from games from other parts of the Bay Area is also harder now.  My drive down from San Francisco is more stressful than it used to be.  Parking used to be easier.  I never go in the parking structure because I don't want to wait forever to get out of it after games.  The fan base is aging, and all these seemingly little things add up.

RE: WBB: Attendance - WBB fan - 11-20-2019

(11-20-2019, 01:08 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  I can think of two reasons why one might care about attendance:
  • If you go to the game yourself (and to a lesser extent, if you watch it on TV), higher attendance, and more enthusiasm amongst attendees, makes for a better experience.  There is nothing quite as watching a live sporting event along with a sold-out crowd that is rocking the stadium.
  • A louder, more energetic stadium and fanbase may impart its energy to the team and help it do better
BC

I think there's a subtle third reason. Recruits may be affected -- wanting to play for a school where there's an enthusiastic fan base, in front of large crowds.  As for the players already at Stanford, a strong fan base, good attendance, makes them feel good about where they are, can add to their desire to excel.

RE: WBB: Attendance - BostonCard - 11-20-2019

Good point Joan.

BC

RE: WBB: Attendance - oldalum - 11-21-2019

One factor affecting WBB attendance is probably the significant decrease in the past 15 years in number of girls playing competitive basketball locally. Fewer parents are bringing their girls to watch great play. W Soccer is a good comparison: it is very popular among girls locally, and they and their families are filling the stands at games (several conference games were sell-outs this year). This despite some games being played at night in cold weather, versus indoors for basketball.

RE: WBB: Attendance - 81alum - 11-21-2019

(11-21-2019, 08:57 AM)oldalum Wrote:  One factor affecting WBB attendance is probably the significant decrease in the past 15 years in number of girls playing competitive basketball locally. Fewer parents are bringing their girls to watch great play. W Soccer is a good comparison: it is very popular among girls locally, and they and their families are filling the stands at games (several conference games were sell-outs this year). This despite some games being played at night in cold weather, versus indoors for basketball.
That has the ring of truth to it.  But is this can't be true universally.  Oregon sold 7000 season tickets.  Is the Eugene weather so bad that girls stay indoors and play basketball rather than going outdoors to play soccer?  Or is it a class thing, that wealthy areas like the Bay Area are seeing parents turning their kids away from basketball to soccer?

The concussion stats I've seen have soccer being the worst offender after football and the very worst sport for girls, with basketball pretty far down the list.  I wonder if this will have a longer term (and positive) impact on girls basketball.  In fact, female soccer players suffer more concussions than male football players.
https://www.webmd.com/brain/news/20170315/which-high-school-sport-has-the-most-concussions
In any case, switching girls from basketball to soccer looks to me like a pretty dangerous decision.

RE: WBB: Attendance - oldalum - 11-21-2019

(11-21-2019, 11:06 AM)81alum Wrote:  The concussion stats I've seen have soccer being the worst offender after football and the very worst sport for girls, with basketball pretty far down the list.  I wonder if this will have a longer term (and positive) impact on girls basketball. 
The soccer concussion problem is serious but doesn't seem to be denting its popularity yet.

Both girls' soccer and basketball share the additional problem of ACL tears.

RE: WBB: Attendance - M T - 11-21-2019

(11-21-2019, 08:57 AM)oldalum Wrote:  W Soccer is a good comparison: it is very popular among girls locally, and they and their families are filling the stands at games (several conference games were sell-outs this year). This despite some games being played at night in cold weather, versus indoors for basketball.

If Maples had a capacity of 2000, WBB & MBB would see full stands and sell-outs.  (It is a shame Cagan seats so few.  Stanford's
team should have more room for fans to come.)
WSoccer:
Arizona @ Stanford, 11/3 Sunday noon.... Attendance: 2251 (61 deg, dry)
Cal @ Stanford, 11/8 Fri 7PM... Attendance: 2407 (55 deg, dry)

Of note,
#2 Stanford @ #3 USC 9/28 Sat 1PM ... Attendance: 957  (sigh!  WBB suffers the same fate at USC)


Somewhere around 2011, Stanford fully blocked the vision of anyone wanting to watch soccer through the fence behind the goals.

(For comparison, Avery Aquatic Center has a capacity of 2530.  I would guess there were roughly 1500 attending Saturday.)

RE: WBB: Attendance - Viking_Guy - 11-21-2019

Does anyone have a link/remember the story of Arrillaga's absolute anathema for soccer in the stadium?  I vaguely remember a story about it being made deliberately too small for international soccer events.

And the other thing - the fans are not the most important stakeholders for DAPER.  Donors, sponsors, TV networks, and revenue streams all seem to outweigh the interests of spectators.

Feeling cynical today,

VG

RE: WBB: Attendance - BobK - 11-21-2019

If VG was talking soccer in the football stadium the Earthquakes played there as long ago as 2008

RE: WBB: Attendance - terry - 11-21-2019

(11-21-2019, 04:20 PM)Viking_Guy Wrote:  Does anyone have a link/remember the story of Arrillaga's absolute anathema for soccer in the stadium?  I vaguely remember a story about it being made deliberately too small for international soccer events.

I also have heard that the field at the Stadium is too small for international soccer. It's my understanding that the field is designed to bring the football seating as close to the action as possible, rather than incorporating the empty space that would be required to fit international soccer fields. That makes sense to me. I wouldn't want to push football seating farther from the field just to accommodate an occasional international soccer match. 

But there's not an absolute ban on soccer at the Stadium. The San Jose Earthquakes play a game at Stanford every year. As I recall, the Stadium also has hosted exhibition matches between foreign teams.

RE: WBB: Attendance - MVCard - 11-21-2019

Is there something the Band / Dollies / Tree / Cheerleaders should be doing differently in order to attract more fans to the games?

From what I can tell, it’s the same routine as 25 years ago... with maybe a few new songs here and there.

RE: WBB: Attendance - jonnyss - 11-21-2019

interesting point about the other sports. yes, there is not time/bandwidth in the week for me to go to women's bball AND vball, much less soccer. so many riches!

and then there are the 49ers and (for the past few years) the warriors.  eugene, spokane, and storrs don't have nearly as many compelling alternatives. 

if you really want to see poor attendance, check out women's bball at ucla and usc - another location with lots of events competing for fan time.

fwiw, the best attendance that i can remember was for the candace vs candice games. lots of junior high school girl candace fans filled the stands. i can't remember, did the tennessee and UConn games used to be played while school was in session? recently, the tennessee games have been during break.

RE: WBB: Attendance - justafan - 11-21-2019

From here in rural Arkansas, being able to attend games in person seems like such a luxury.  I do try to see the team play live once per season, but I'm grateful for the streaming and broadcasts otherwise.  I was listening to the Oregon State vs Missouri State game this past week.  During halftime the Oregon State Assistant Director of Athletics was interviewed for the Missouri State broadcast.  She is a Missouri State graduate and stated she was trying to build attendance there by modeling after Missouri State years ago under Mary Jo Wynn.  I remember those days and they use to pack the house.  I can't report all the specifics but I do remember happily getting my free admission ticket just by showing my graduate student ID.  I think they basically did anything they could to fill seats.  Later, of course, they stopped because they no longer needed to provide incentives.  It is worth noting, however, that attendance has dropped off significantly over the past decade or more.  Here in Arkansas, Mike Neighbors is trying to build support for the women's team.  Recently they hosted Elementary School Day with a 10:00 am tipoff.  It wasn't a full house but with several thousand screaming kids, it might as well have been.  Hopefully, they had a good time and will be future season ticket holders!  I do think having a good crowd makes the game experience better for both fans and players.  I also agree that it could impact recruiting.  I hope those of you who are closer to campus can maybe come up with creative ideas.  Is there some way to repurpose those empty season-ticket seats so they get donated to students or community groups?

RE: WBB: Attendance - Viking_Guy - 11-21-2019

Jonny--

I think that was before Stanford imposed the ban on regularly scheduled games during Dead and Finals Weeks, and also before the rise of women's Thanksgiving tournaments - I remember Tennessee games being in that late November slot.

On soccer in the stadium - the reason it sticks in my mind (as a soccer guy) was that I recall seeing/hearing a story that the field would've only had to be about 3-5 yards wider or longer to accommodate international soccer, and remembering the absolutely amazingly wonderful 1994 World Cup game v. Brazil in the old setup.  And that John A played a part in making sure that didn't happen.

VG

RE: WBB: Attendance - muiron - 11-21-2019

(11-19-2019, 09:03 PM)81alum Wrote:  Attendance at the Gonzaga game:  2863.  A great opponent, a weekend game, a promising star-studded team, plenty of great plays and excitement, and not even 3k turned out. 

Do you supposed word of Missy's attendance leaked out in advance?

Hmm, women's soccer regularly goes north of 2300 in a stadium that holds 2300. It is nearly the end of the quarter for th students - because of the latest possible Thanksgiving, classes are in their penultimate week - just "dead week" (kind of meaningless now) afterwards. They may be feeling stressed...though I hope/expect full houses at the Q for Friday (and we hope) Sunday NCAA women's games. (The men also have a match on Sunday but not sure they'll sell out.)