Stansbury Speaks...

[andrew]

Excellent post! Lots that can be put up for debate. First one I have is: T.S. says that 90% of the GTAA comes from football, but coaches are worried about over scheduling ( read: need to schedule more cupcakes). Further stating that the football schedule needs more breathers & warm ups! Lot of competition in Atlanta for peoples entertainment dollars, adding more FCS teams to the ones we have scheduled will not attract fans! How about trying to play big time teams that folks would really like to see.

Age old question of which ultimately brings in more money: a better record or better individual games.

I think the answer is probably the former. Of course last year we had the latter.

 

[18in32]

Age old question of which ultimately brings in more money: a better record or better individual games.

I think the answer is probably the former. Of course last year we had the latter.

I personally would rather go 12-0 against the Little Sisters of the Poor and UGA than go 8-4 against Clemson, FSU, VT, etc. Obviously we'd all prefer to go 12-0 against a Murderer's Row and be the greatest football team ever.

 

[ChrisW]

Am I the only one that misread the thread title as Stansbury Steaks?

(aka little nuggets of information)

I thought, "Wow Stephon Marbury is way more into the GTAA than i would have thought."

 

[swampsting]

I do too. Every time.

I bet stansbury steaks are sous vide.

They're wrapped in Canadian bacon.
Bazinga!

 

[GT flunkout]

I personally would rather go 12-0 against the Little Sisters of the Poor and UGA than go 8-4 against Clemson, FSU, VT, etc. Obviously we'd all prefer to go 12-0 against a Murderer's Row and be the greatest football team ever.

Everyone here wants to believe that winning will bring sellouts and crowds.

The truth about Georgia Tech is that winning only gives us a slight bump. The biggest determinant of crowd size/revenue is 1) opponent 2) kickoff time.

We are only going to have 45K show up for Bowling Green for a noon kick no matter what our record was the previous year.

 

[andrew]

Everyone here wants to believe that winning will bring sellouts and crowds.

The truth about Georgia Tech is that winning only gives us a slight bump. The biggest determinant of crowd size/revenue is 1) opponent 2) kickoff time.

We are only going to have 45K show up for Bowling Green for a noon kick no matter what our record was the previous year.

I think it has an effect. If we are highly ranked, we'll only have 45k for a Bowling Green nooner. But if we have a crappy record we'd probably only draw 30k or so...

Talking about butts in seats, not ticket sales.

 

[B]

The truth about Georgia Tech is that winning only gives us a slight bump.

You are correct. However, I would like to try sustained winning (at a level higher than CCG's 7 wins per year era) over a period of 5 years or so to see if perhaps that would move the needle a bit. At Tech, past performance is not an indicator of future performance. A 10 win season can be followed by a 4 win season. Too much variability imo to attract new fans.

 

[GT flunkout]

You are correct. However, I would like to try sustained winning (at a level higher than CCG's 7 wins per year era) over a period of 5 years or so to see if perhaps that would move the needle a bit. At Tech, past performance is not an indicator of future performance. A 10 win season can be followed by a 4 win season. Too much variability imo to attract new fans.

This is a good point and I wish that I could agree. We have a sizeable part of our fan base, myself included, that became rabid during the seasons from 1998 to 2001 and we haven't had a sustained period of excitement like that since. Fixture in preseason polls, three wins in a row versus Georgia, Heisman candidate, etc, in 2001 we were a strong Darkhorse MNC Contender and started in the top 10. We still weren't selling out most games at the end of that run although the stadium only seat 42-46k at the time.

Over a slightly longer time period I think it would be enough to move the needle... it just hasn't happened in almost 70 years.

In 2001 we were close to a sell-out every game however. Even if the revised Stadium capacity was only 42k.

98 finished in top 10
99 spent almost all season in the top 10 before the upset lost to Wake at the end
00 - upset #5 Clemson, top 15 before the bowl
01 - started top 10 and Dark Horse MNC contender

 

[18in32]

This is a good point and I wish that I could agree. We have a sizeable part of our fan base, myself included, that became rabid during the seasons from 1998 to 2001 and we haven't had a sustained period of excitement like that since. Fixture in preseason polls, three wins in a row versus Georgia, Heisman candidate, etc, in 2001 we were a strong Darkhorse MNC Contender and started in the top 10. We still weren't selling out most games at the end of that run although the stadium only seat 42-46k at the time.

Over a slightly longer time period I think it would be enough to move the needle... it just hasn't happened in almost 70 years.

In 2001 we were close to a sell-out every game however. Even if the revised Stadium capacity was only 42k.

98 finished in top 10
99 spent almost all season in the top 10 before the upset lost to Wake at the end
00 - upset #5 Clemson, top 15 before the bowl
01 - started top 10 and Dark Horse MNC contender

It was the attendance bump that GOL's success brought us that prompted the decisions to expand the North Stands and raise Grant Field's seating capacity to 55k.

People like a winner, and they like the excitement of winning. It would have *some* positive effect on attendance for sure.

 

[Diseqc]

Age old question of which ultimately brings in more money: a better record or better individual games.
Of course last year we had the latter.

Andast year had record revenue.

Sounds like case closed.

 

[gogt5]

SUSTAINED winning will sellout the stadium. if we can win 9 to 10 games for a few years in a row then we will be all good

 

[18in32]

And last year had record revenue.

Sounds like case closed.

Only if you forget about inflation...

 

[GT flunkout]

Andast year had record revenue.

Sounds like case closed.

Only because of CFA kickoff payout.

Last year's attendance at BDS was the lowest it has ever been in the current configuration

 

[18in32]

Only because of CFA kickoff payout.

Last year's attendance at BDS was the lowest it has ever been in the current configuration

Why do you think that? NCAA says last year was only (!) the 4th-lowest attendance in the 15 years since the expansion.

2017: 46,885
2016: 47,503
2015: 50,707
2014: 48,519
2013: 49,077
2012: 43,995
2011: 48,232
2010: 46,449
2009: 51,584
2008: 47,489
2007: 50,280
2006: 50,617
2005: 51,607
2004: 46,817
2003: 52,862

 

[GT flunkout]

Why do you think that? NCAA says last year was only (!) the 4th-lowest attendance in the 15 years since the expansion.

2017: 46,885
2016: 47,503
2015: 50,707
2014: 48,519
2013: 49,077
2012: 43,995
2011: 48,232
2010: 46,449
2009: 51,584
2008: 47,489
2007: 50,280
2006: 50,617
2005: 51,607
2004: 46,817
2003: 52,862

You're right. That said last season was far from a good year using other metrics. It was the lowest average attendance with the benefit of a uga game at home.

 

[Diseqc]

You're right. That said last season was far from a good year using other metrics. It was the lowest average attendance with the benefit of a uga game at home.

So you were just making öööö up earlier though?

 

[GT flunkout]

So you were just making öööö up earlier though?

Pretty much

I pulled all the numbers in another thread and remembered them wrong and then didn't recheck them. Lazy

 

[Diseqc]

Only if you forget about inflation...

I'd be interested in your proof that if accounting for inflation it wasn't

 

[18in32]

I'd be interested in your proof that if accounting for inflation it wasn't

I'd be interested in that proof, too.

 

[ramblinwise1]

Don't forget before we axed the south stands we had capacity of 56K or thereabouts. And we sold it out several times. What was attendance for the 1973 Ugay game? Over 60K.