[2006alum]

Best evidence this is not a "Pac-12" problem.  This is at least a Bay Area or West Coast problem.  Specifically, relatively little West Coast love for College Football.

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...13c0e7f1dd

If this game is anywhere east of the Mississippi I suspect demand would still be strong.   As it stands, tickets are selling below face value.  That's crazy.


Next few CFP Championship games will be either in or much closer to the SEC and ACC footprint, and I doubt any of them will have soft demand concerns.

Interesting - and I am not surprised. I feel like I've been the gadfly broken record in all these threads seeking to blame Larry Scott for everything and accusing the PAC-12 corporate bigwigs of destroying the conference. IMHO, lack of population density, far greater opportunity cost vis-a-vis other fall/winter activities, and an intrinsically small fan base for college football all contribute more than Larry Scott does to our competitive disadvantages.

In the past, when media rights didn't drive AD budgets to anywhere near the same degree, rich colleges like Stanford, U$C, Cal and UCLA all had an edge on the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world because those universities couldn't fully capitalize on the market value of their product, and they're much poorer universities overall. Now they can commoditize their larger fan bases, and the arms race is on. I suspect in about 5-10 years, when the tide (crimson or otherwise) starts to go out because of CTE, cord-cutting, and the realization that the media deals are actually probably overblown relative to their real value, I think parity will return. Until then, start becoming a fan of volleyball, water polo, golf, soccer and tennis... or women's basketball.

And to that end: I continue to be befuddled by the PAC-12's demise in men's basketball, because the above conditions don't apply as much, and Stanford was a top ten team and selling out maples for every game as recently as the late 2000s, when NCAA $$$ was already flowing widely in men's basketball. Moreover, the fact that Title IX requires that women's teams share the bounty (or the scraps) from the media rights as the men's teams, coupled with the fact that the PAC-12 is now arguably the top women's basketball conference, suggests that the problem is neither with the PAC-12's structure/media rights/organization or with intrinsic interest in/passion for basketball on the best coast. Cal just set a new record of ~11,000 fans in attendance for a home game vs. UConn, and both OSU and Oregon are now averaging around 5,000 butts in seats per game in media markets 1/30th the size of the bay area. Washington was regularly selling out during the Kelsey Plum show. PAC-12 WBB has only gotten stronger every year since around 2010, so Darth Scott's death grip hasn't seemed to reach every corner of the rebellion quite yet, which also makes me think other forces are at work here.

[2006alum]

Best evidence this is not a "Pac-12" problem.  This is at least a Bay Area or West Coast problem.  Specifically, relatively little West Coast love for College Football.

https://www.sfgate.com/sports/annkillion...13c0e7f1dd

If this game is anywhere east of the Mississippi I suspect demand would still be strong.   As it stands, tickets are selling below face value.  That's crazy.


Next few CFP Championship games will be either in or much closer to the SEC and ACC footprint, and I doubt any of them will have soft demand concerns.

Interesting - and I am not surprised. I feel like I've been the gadfly broken record in all these threads seeking to blame Larry Scott for everything and accusing the PAC-12 corporate bigwigs of destroying the conference. IMHO, lack of population density, far greater opportunity cost vis-a-vis other fall/winter activities, and an intrinsically small fan base for college football all contribute more than Larry Scott does to our competitive disadvantages.

In the past, when media rights didn't drive AD budgets to anywhere near the same degree, rich colleges like Stanford, U$C, Cal and UCLA all had an edge on the Alabamas and Clemsons of the world because those universities couldn't fully capitalize on the market value of their product, and they're much poorer universities overall. Now they can commoditize their larger fan bases, and the arms race is on. I suspect in about 5-10 years, when the tide (crimson or otherwise) starts to go out because of CTE, cord-cutting, and the realization that the media deals are actually probably overblown relative to their real value, I think parity will return. Until then, start becoming a fan of volleyball, water polo, golf, soccer and tennis... or women's basketball.

And to that end: I continue to be befuddled by the PAC-12's demise in men's basketball, because the above conditions don't apply as much, and Stanford was a top ten team and selling out maples for every game as recently as the late 2000s, when NCAA $$$ was already flowing widely in men's basketball. Moreover, the fact that Title IX requires that women's teams share the bounty (or the scraps) from the media rights as the men's teams, coupled with the fact that the PAC-12 is now arguably the top women's basketball conference, suggests that the problem is neither with the PAC-12's structure/media rights/organization or with intrinsic interest in/passion for basketball on the best coast. Cal just set a new record of ~11,000 fans in attendance for a home game vs. UConn, and both OSU and Oregon are now averaging around 5,000 butts in seats per game in media markets 1/30th the size of the bay area. Washington was regularly selling out during the Kelsey Plum show. PAC-12 WBB has only gotten stronger every year since around 2010, so Darth Scott's death grip hasn't seemed to reach every corner of the rebellion quite yet, which also makes me think other forces are at work here.