serious question re: the future of college football...
- Thread starter Sheffielder
- Start date
As far as I heard, the 35k was based on a lot of analysis of our fan base and how to create a home field advantage. Based on the data, filling a higher capacity could only be done with opposing fans. When our games exceeded 35k, we seem to lose the home field advantage and diminished the experience of season ticket holders. The athletic department would rather give up the revenue for a better fan experience. The idea that it is better for the football team if the crowd was cheering loudly for the home team then cheering loudly for the away team. This was done by Jim Phillips and his staff. I am sure we all have seen this happened in many games when we play big fan based teams. With extra revenue from the B1G media deal and certain alums willing to fork over big bucks like never before, revenue from added seating capacity is less relevant.
Last edited:
And don't forget the concerts and other minor events adding revenue.
It may not plug the gap with the 70+k behemoths, but it probably can plug the gap enough with the 50-60k stadia.
I think you hit the nail on the head. The extra revenue from having 10-20k extra opposing fans a handful of times is just not worth it for how it degrades the experience for our fans.
For at most a few million, that just isn't worth it in the context of an AD that will be running a budget around $150 million by the time the stadium opens and with all the major capital projects done for the foreseeable future (and likely to work on shifting donors towards university sponsored NIL once that starts).
5 concerts at 3k is 150,00 tickets sold.. If the football loses 10,000 opposing fans per game for 7 games ( which is generous) that is 70,000 fewer tickets sold With the concerts, NU will be ahead in revenue plus have a better experience for STH. The game will also look better on TV with much fewer empty seats. It was a well thought out plan including not asking extra donations from the masses to build the stadium. They went directly to Pat Ryan to donate and went after him big. Phillips and his team deserves a lot of credit.
The analysis assumes how many NU ticket holders willing to pay more than double for these tickets than current prices will not be willing to sell off their tickets to visiting team fans?
The smaller venue just means that when the Nebraska horde travels into town there will only be 20-28,000 UoN fans in the stands with 7-15,000 NU fans.
NU will always have a smaller, less rabid fan base than the vast majority of other Big10 schools. A smaller venue won’t change that fans from other schools will be seated next to NU fans
The smaller venue just means that when the Nebraska horde travels into town there will only be 20-28,000 UoN fans in the stands with 7-15,000 NU fans.
NU will always have a smaller, less rabid fan base than the vast majority of other Big10 schools. A smaller venue won’t change that fans from other schools will be seated next to NU fans
*Disclaimer: I love(d) the old stadium and would have preferred a face-lift and spend more on NIL.
That said, the 35k make sense. Anything more seats than that will be empty or filled with yahoos. But...a cautionary tale. I was a Cleveland Indians fan in the mid-90s when they built Jacobs Field, and it was nearly impossible for years for ordinary fans to get and/or afford tickets. For YEARS. Now, there were other factors - the Tribe was good for the first time in a generation or two. Coincidentally, they went to the WS in 1995 for the first time since 1954. Also, the Browns left for Balt at that time. But, no real yahoo effect (Nebraska, OSU, Iowa). No new opponents /first time football trip to Chicago (Pac 12 brethren).
Bottom feeders like me that buy $20 seats in the secondary market will be forced to join The Rock oops I mean buy season tickets. Because, I assure you, the yahoos WILL get tickets. Look no further than the same Cleveland Indians and their virtual away games vs the Cubs in the 2016 series. There will be plenty of visiting fans for all but non con and small/disinterested fan bases (e.g. Maryland).
I think Northwestern sees this as a good problem.
Whether people like it or not, the new design is deliberate - it's not a mistake. They have decades of evidence to suggest we don't produce a good live crowd. They've made a choice to lean into the problem and create a unique gameday experience with a smaller stadium that ensures a good view anywhere in the building, and an arc to capture sound (I know we'll never be Autzen Stadium, but I like the potential similarity when it comes to manipulating acoustics). And if by chance Northwestern catches a gust of wind and becomes a sustained contender, I think NU would be all too happy to price tickets according to the market and bleed us dry. For them it's a win-win.
I'm sure they've also done the math on this, calculated it against the odds (and our tv money) and realize a bigger stadium for occasionally bigger crowds wouldn't yield enough sustained revenue in the bigger picture to be 70% full (or less) most of the time.
But have they seen @Eurocat ’s analysis?
B
The smaller stadium likely makes it a better venue fo concerts and bigger stadium likely has higher overhead so had to justify for a couple dates per year,. Especially as we add West Coast teams that will have no draw diminishing the number of high attendance games from 2 to one per year
I assume that is 30K for concerts not 3K. And the 30K figure leads to an intimacy that a Soldier Field or similar venue just could not offer. Also a lot better for community relations for 30K vs 50K for night time concerts with such limited parking in the area. But reality is that there are only a handful of visiting teams that would be coming in that would make even a 10 K difference. IA, WI, Mich, OSU. (ILL if they are having a great year?) And reality is that with the new teams entering the BIG and the elimination of divisions, we will likely be be playing those 4 to 5 teams only about half as often as we do now
Reality is we have around a 15K ST base and room 3K students? That is unlikely to change much. And just like Wilson Club does not generally sell their tickets, higher price tickets less likely to be sold as they are probably in stronger hands and harder to get enough for them to cover the costs. So worst case crowds 50-50 and that is a heck of a lot better than it is now.
Look at what has happened to WR last night. If we were still at 8400 capacity there would have been another 2K IL fans there and we would have been outnumbered 2-1 rather than relatively even. 50-50 crowds can be a lot of fun but home team significantly outnumbered not so much
The IL game was 50/50 if you ignore the student sections, but it was a solid 65/35 in favor of NU with the packed student sections. The IL fans were enough to be very loud when they wanted to be.
This thread has now morphed into the age old debate on how big the stadium should be. It’s already been decided. Talk about scope creep. Cap it and let Eurocat start a new thread (again) about stadium size!
Nah, I am happy to keep this one going.
Look. Here is scenario one. Rice. 70,000 stadium. Regular attendancein the "teens". They made a decision to reduce. I would fully have supported this move (in the off chance I would had some say in the matter).
Stanford's old stadium was also too big for them. They reduced, I would have supported this move.
Other examples are teams are Tulane (Superdome to smaller on campus stadium). UAB (Legion Field to smaller on camputs stadium), Central Florida (Citrus Bowl to smaller on campus stadium). All of these solve their issues, all of these cases I would have supported.
But Northwestern is different. We are making a stadium that is smaller than our current average attendance draw. And not just one year's draw, many years. To take the past ten -
2010 36,449
2011 33,442
2012 35,697
2013 39,307
2014 38,613
2015 33,366
2016 34,798
2017 35,853
2018 43,873
2019 37,736
2020 Covid
2021 30,796 (Covid still a concern for many)
2022 28,697
2023 23,257 (Fitz scandal, Wrigley Game).
It just doesn't make sense to me to make a stadium that is smaller than most years average attendance (or very close to it, guaranteeing we will all be squeezed in like Sardines). We got many of those numbers because we were able to match lower attended non conference games (the 25k gams) with 45k games against the bigger teams. Now we will not have that.
I know it seems like nothing will change unless when they dig they find some historical anti-temeperenance league burial ground under the stadium and have to halt, and I will make the best of it, I just think this is a big sad mistake. I am truly depressed about this.
Look. Here is scenario one. Rice. 70,000 stadium. Regular attendancein the "teens". They made a decision to reduce. I would fully have supported this move (in the off chance I would had some say in the matter).
Stanford's old stadium was also too big for them. They reduced, I would have supported this move.
Other examples are teams are Tulane (Superdome to smaller on campus stadium). UAB (Legion Field to smaller on camputs stadium), Central Florida (Citrus Bowl to smaller on campus stadium). All of these solve their issues, all of these cases I would have supported.
But Northwestern is different. We are making a stadium that is smaller than our current average attendance draw. And not just one year's draw, many years. To take the past ten -
2010 36,449
2011 33,442
2012 35,697
2013 39,307
2014 38,613
2015 33,366
2016 34,798
2017 35,853
2018 43,873
2019 37,736
2020 Covid
2021 30,796 (Covid still a concern for many)
2022 28,697
2023 23,257 (Fitz scandal, Wrigley Game).
It just doesn't make sense to me to make a stadium that is smaller than most years average attendance (or very close to it, guaranteeing we will all be squeezed in like Sardines). We got many of those numbers because we were able to match lower attended non conference games (the 25k gams) with 45k games against the bigger teams. Now we will not have that.
I know it seems like nothing will change unless when they dig they find some historical anti-temeperenance league burial ground under the stadium and have to halt, and I will make the best of it, I just think this is a big sad mistake. I am truly depressed about this.
If you attended games you would quicker realize how wrong you are.
Yes. Two games per year vs Enormous State skew the average upward. Also, tickets sold vs butts in seats. We had about 10k for the MD game. It was sad.
Fact is, the university apparently doesn't care about those 2-3 games per year where we have 43-47(?) K. They are attempting to create demand through scarcity.
Finally, this thread gets to the real heart of the issue.
But the point still eluding most here is the biggest player in the secondary market will be Northwestern (as in limiting numbers of tickets to the general public and instead manipulating the secondary market directly).
While I’m sure many would be happy to see the stands filled with purple wearing people, the fact is your “experience” is of little concern compared to the ability to reap the profits from the bigger games on the schedule (and to intentionally limit number of tickets issued to others)
I’d guess there are a number of lessons learned from the 2018 season ticket. (Nebraska, Illinois, Michigan, Notre Dame all at home). I assume there data to show either (a) how many season tickets were purchased for one specific game or (b) how one game was sold to pay for the ticket.
At the end of the day which is worse to you and your “experience”? 20,000 Ohio State fans in the stadium or the two assholes sitting adjacent to you because your purple seat neighbor decided to get some of his money back by just selling the OSU game?
O no the sky is falling. What are we going to do. I have had that experience that you are so worried about in the present stadium. Some good experiences and some bad (Iowa fans in particular). I think we can handle it.
Wouldn't be so quick to brush off the potential of a 2nd tier tournament.
Maybe the powerhouses wouldn't care so much about winning it, but like for the Europa Cup, the smaller schools or those in smaller conferences would care (more so than winning the Toilet Cleaner bowl).
To make things more interesting, would even contemplate inviting the top ranked FCS team.
So imagine a field which included - NDSU, Tulane and a power in a down year, say, Michigan (among others).
I'd definitely be more excited about that (imagine playing hated conference rival Michigan in the finals) than some meaningless bowl game where matchups are based on politicking and potential viewership than actual performance on the field.
Last edited:
Problem is it's harder to see the benefit for Big Ten/SEC schools when the two conferences already own the best bowl lineups.
Citrus, Outback, Music City, Gator, Vegas, Pinstripe, Alamo, Texas, etc. are already the best bowls with the biggest payouts and best TV windows; they generate the highest ratings with the best matchups.
A mini-tournament might work for the top 12-16 left out if most slots go to the Big Ten/SEC, but it also might just muddy the waters up with the CFP and damage both. It might just result in extremely low rated matchups for the early rounds. In which case it's better to keep the current lineup that guarantees 2-5 million for the current matchups.
Probably best to just stick to the current bowl structure at least while the new 12 team CFP tries to generate a following with its early games during the 2 early bowl weeks.
Last edited:
