Rutgers should cut football ticket prices to increase attendance

Jun 14, 2022
4
7
3
Rutgers has a football attendance problem. It is arguably the biggest threat to our future in the Big Ten and really needs to improve sooner rather than later. The best way to do this is to lower ticket prices.

StatenIsland is right. Rutgers football attendance is absolutely the biggest threat to our future in the Big Ten, and if something isn't done about it, we are likely to get kicked out of the conference.

When Rutgers and Maryland were invited to the Big Ten, it had nothing to do with the Big Ten adding the number 1 and number 9 media markets, or anything to do with all the money we've added to the conference coffers. It had to do with stadium attendance, and if we don't get our numbers up to the 100K range to match some of our conference-mates, we will find ourselves without a conference to call home.

Now that the Big Ten has added UCLA and USC, they control the number 1, 2, 3, and 4 markets, if they cared about such things. But they would give up a presence in the number 1 market, rather than face the embarrassment of empty seats in a football stadium.

Last season Rutgers ranked 4th from the bottom in Big Ten football attendance, ahead of only Northwestern, Illinois, and Maryland, and just 2000 fans behind Indiana and Minnesota. All 6 of these teams are soon to be kicked out. Minnesota is already in discussions with the Big 12, just in case.

If Rutgers can't drastically increase attendance, we should be proactive in finding another conference ASAP. I suggest that we reach out to the ACC. If we were in the ACC, our attendance last season would have seemed respectable, ahead of Duke, Wake, Syracuse, Fredo, Ga Tech, Virginia, Miami, and Louisville.





---------------------------------------------------------
Some people might point out that Rutgers had the largest attendance increase from 2019 (Ash's last season) to 2021 (Schiano 2.0's 2nd season). They might say that shows that fielding a more competitive team is what drives attendance increases. But that is cherry-picking data. Everyone knows that winning has nothing to do with attendance.

---------------------------------------------------------
The trick to a convincing argument on the internet is to ignore data that doesn't support your theory. Or explain it away in a footnote.
 

cubuffsdoug

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Apr 8, 2002
12,174
18,491
113
This sh*t has to stop. Someone is creating multiple screen names to make it seem like several posters agree with the OP. Each poster who agrees all joined not too long ago around the same date. All of you come blazing with two plastic knives to the gunfight without valid facts to back your argument other than your opinion.

Lesson #1: Learn how the B1G is making so much money off its TV media deal; that will explain why your argument has bullet holes.

Lesson #2: Learn how the B1G is selecting schools for the conference. That will give you insight into why some of the teams, the doubters continue to mention, don't have as strong of a chance of joining the B1G. Academics, AAU, etc., remain important in deciding whether certain schools are worthy of joining the B1G.

Lesson #3: RIF (reading is fundamental). There is a lot of info out there explaining everything that some of the more informed posters continue to preach. It will save you time and embarrassment of repeating the same argument with no merit.

The mods have to clean this up. Start checking to see if some of the same screen names are registered to the same person using different accounts, IP addresses, etc.
 
Last edited:

kupuna133

Senior
Jul 13, 2015
1,896
1,788
113
This sh*t has to stop. Someone is creating multiple screen names to make it seem like several posters agree with the OP. Each poster who agrees all joined not too long ago around the same date. All of you come blazing with two plastic knives to the gunfight without valid factors to back your argument other than your opinion.

Lesson #1: Learn how the B1G is making so much money off its TV media deal; that will explain why your argument has bullet holes.

Lesson #2: Learn how the B1G is selecting schools for the conference. That will give you insight into why some of the teams, the doubters continue to mention, don't have as strong of a chance of joining the B1G. Academics, AAU, etc., remain important in deciding whether certain schools are worthy of joining the B1G.

Lesson #3: RIF (reading is fundamental). There is a lot of info out there explaining everything that some of the more informed posters continue to preach. It will save you time and embarrassment of repeating the same argument with no merit.

The mods have to clean this up. Start checking to see if some of the same screen names are registered to the same person using different accounts, IP addresses, etc.
Pointed out the same thing a couple of years ago in another thread. Same posters circle jerking each other with registration and posting histories pretty much identical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRU2RU

brgRC90

Hall of Famer
Apr 8, 2008
32,458
12,894
113
This sh*t has to stop. Someone is creating multiple screen names to make it seem like several posters agree with the OP. Each poster who agrees all joined not too long ago around the same date. All of you come blazing with two plastic knives to the gunfight without valid facts to back your argument other than your opinion.

Lesson #1: Learn how the B1G is making so much money off its TV media deal; that will explain why your argument has bullet holes.

Lesson #2: Learn how the B1G is selecting schools for the conference. That will give you insight into why some of the teams, the doubters continue to mention, don't have as strong of a chance of joining the B1G. Academics, AAU, etc., remain important in deciding whether certain schools are worthy of joining the B1G.

Lesson #3: RIF (reading is fundamental). There is a lot of info out there explaining everything that some of the more informed posters continue to preach. It will save you time and embarrassment of repeating the same argument with no merit.

The mods have to clean this up. Start checking to see if some of the same screen names are registered to the same person using different accounts, IP addresses, etc.
Claiming the Big Ten is about to kick out almost half of its current members, some of whom have been there for a very long time, is especially silly. Conferences almost never kick out members and the Big Ten is expanding, not shrinking, and looking to sign a media deal worth $1 billion to $1.5 billion. Kicking out members from large states is not a great way to get someone to give you a billion dollars.
 

bigmatt718

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Mar 11, 2013
10,646
12,415
113
Philadelphia, PA
This sh*t has to stop. Someone is creating multiple screen names to make it seem like several posters agree with the OP. Each poster who agrees all joined not too long ago around the same date. All of you come blazing with two plastic knives to the gunfight without valid factors to back your argument other than your opinion.

Lesson #1: Learn how the B1G is making so much money off its TV media deal; that will explain why your argument has bullet holes.

Lesson #2: Learn how the B1G is selecting schools for the conference. That will give you insight into why some of the teams, the doubters continue to mention, don't have as strong of a chance of joining the B1G. Academics, AAU, etc., remain important in deciding whether certain schools are worthy of joining the B1G.

Lesson #3: RIF (reading is fundamental). There is a lot of info out there explaining everything that some of the more informed posters continue to preach. It will save you time and embarrassment of repeating the same argument with no merit.

The mods have to clean this up. Start checking to see if some of the same screen names are registered to the same person using different accounts, IP addresses, etc.
Seriously...it's time to take out the trash, mods.
 
Jun 14, 2022
4
7
3
Claiming the Big Ten is about to kick out almost half of its current members, some of whom have been there for a very long time, is especially silly. Conferences almost never kick out members and the Big Ten is expanding, not shrinking, and looking to sign a media deal worth $1 billion to $1.5 billion. Kicking out members from large states is not a great way to get someone to give you a billion dollars.

You're missing the big picture. The Big Ten doesn't care about things like media markets or dollars. They care about empty seats.

If any of the teams I listed above are still in the Big Ten by 2025, I'll get a tonsillectomy.


------------------------------
Time to sing my avatar's theme song.
 

OntheBanks

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jul 26, 2001
12,328
3,480
113
Staten Island, NY
Seriously...it's time to take out the trash, mods.
Maybe, there should be a one time $5 credit card charge to register to get a user name. Maybe, new members should register to a specific home site and the home site should be displayed right under their user name when posting.
 

RU Cheese

All Conference
Gold Member
Sep 14, 2003
3,623
1,948
113
There's a lot of sarcasm going on here, and if it wasn't clear the first time, I'd suggest you read the footnotes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terry_2426

ddsmugs

All Conference
Gold Member
Jun 5, 2009
4,362
2,573
113
Bridgewater
Winning will help. Possible if we could get some comments about practice and player development fan base could get energized. The more information about practice is suppressed makes me feel like team is not good. Pro teams have open practices with fans. I guess I can't handle the truth.
 

i'vegotwinners

All American
Dec 1, 2006
5,696
870
113
the B10 isn't kicking anyone out.

but attendance means a lot more to recruiting and on field performance than fancy locker and weight rooms.

schools don't see building attendance as an investment, the way they see brick and mortar.

they should.
 

AreYouNUTS

Legend
Gold Member
Aug 1, 2001
103,510
24,662
113
“Hands off” by Greg? Assuming Greg was “hands on”, don’t you think he was because of a poor OL and Vedral’s limitations? He wanted to make sure turnovers were kept under control and therefore we stayed in games to give ourselves a chance to win for as long as possible. I don’t think we were exactly a team who could run and gun with the OL, QB and not to mention WRs after Bo went down. Remember those games we won at the start of the season like @SU where we didn’t turnover the ball? Remember what happened once we started turning it over like vs Wisc?
Yes..."hands off" by Greg. Like it was expected this time around. Let the OC run HIS offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brgRC90

AreYouNUTS

Legend
Gold Member
Aug 1, 2001
103,510
24,662
113
If I had told you a few months ago that UCLA and USC would be in the Big Ten, you probably would have laughed. Anything is possible in the current college football environment, where loyalty and regional rivalries have taken a back seat to money. If a member of the current conference is not competitive on the field and drawing small crowds that look embarrassing on TV, the Big Ten (or any of these new superconferences) won't hesitate to replace them. That's why it's important to fix this problem NOW.

Great idea as long as the buses run more efficiently than the ones in the parking lot, as another poster rightfully pointed out.

It's for one game, not the season, but thank you for sharing this nevertheless. It's too bad the Rutgers athletic department isn't doing a good job sharing this promotion and that we have to find out on a message board made up mostly of hardcore fans.

Umm, nobody should be "beaten" for posting a football opinion on a message board. Are you seriously advocating violence? That is despicable. By the way, I never said RU was going to get thrown out, I said we are at risk of being thrown out if the bad attendance and poor play continues over an extended period. Those denying that there is any risk are wearing scarlet-colored glasses with their heads buried in the Jersey Shore sand.


I am not intimidated by your bullying and namecalling. Take your fake tough guy act somewhere else. Trying to censor an opinion you don't like (and evidently are incapable of arguing against) is a telltale sign of cowardice.

I agree, this is small-time stuff that should have been solved 15 years ago. The fact that Rutgers charges $25 to park in a shuttle bus lot and then can't even get you to the game on time (or back to your car in less than 90 minutes) is really disgraceful. Someone in the athletic department should lose their job over this and be replaced by someone competent to work out these inexcusable parking logistical issues. And Rutgers should not charge one cent for anyone to park in a lot that requires one of these chronically late shuttle buses.
We're not getting kicked out of the B1G. Period. I'll take that one to the grave. Wouldn't have "laughed" at USC/UCLA because I understand the "why's" of it, however, still don't love it (although we get to play at The Rose Bowl and Coliseum which I absolutely LOVE lol....).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terry_2426

AreYouNUTS

Legend
Gold Member
Aug 1, 2001
103,510
24,662
113
Yet our offense is producing all the same frustrations it did with Schiano v1.0--and I'm reading all the same excuses.
Hey I agree. Greg has been TOO "hands on" thus far which is why I'm 100% behind letting GW play, from snap 1, and take the good with the bad until the good far outnumbers the bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brgRC90

retired711

Heisman Winner
Nov 20, 2001
15,571
6,430
113
71
Cherry Hill
Reduce the sound system noise and increase the prices.
My friends at Cal also bitterly complain about the music played over the sound system at football games. I'm sure those of you who have been at colleg football games elsewhere will agree that, unfortunately, this is not a Rutgers problem exclusively.
 

brgRC90

Hall of Famer
Apr 8, 2008
32,458
12,894
113

like notinr...., I'm with you guys on football but nothing else:)
I really wonder why in this day and age when everyone is pass happy and even teams like Tulsa and Ball State can score more than we do against teams like OSU or PSU our offense can't move the ball against ANYONE except teams like Delaware or Temple. Is Schiano still obsessed with ball control football?? Even teams like Ohio State and Alabama, with their iron-clad defenses, no longer try to grind their way downfield and plan on scoring 4 or 5 TDs in every game (if not more). And I wonder if that's the issue: winning programs say "we only need to score 31 or 35 points in a few games a year but that's how we're going to win them so our offense will plan to score 31 or 35 points for every game in order to be ready for those games" while Schiano thinks "we only need to score 31 or 35 points per game a few times a year (assuming the defense is doing well) so we won't worry about that, we'll worry about ball control for the other 9 games," basically conceding a few games per year and building an offense that's safe, plodding, can't score quickly and so can never come back from behind, which they never do.
 

retired711

Heisman Winner
Nov 20, 2001
15,571
6,430
113
71
Cherry Hill
I really wonder why in this day and age when everyone is pass happy and even teams like Tulsa and Ball State can score more than we do against teams like OSU or PSU our offense can't move the ball against ANYONE except teams like Delaware or Temple. Is Schiano still obsessed with ball control football?? Even teams like Ohio State and Alabama, with their iron-clad defenses, no longer try to grind their way downfield and plan on scoring 4 or 5 TDs in every game (if not more). And I wonder if that's the issue: winning programs say "we only need to score 31 or 35 points in a few games a year but that's how we're going to win them so our offense will plan to score 31 or 35 points for every game in order to be ready for those games" while Schiano thinks "we only need to score 31 or 35 points per game a few times a year (assuming the defense is doing well) so we won't worry about that, we'll worry about ball control for the other 9 games," basically conceding a few games per year and building an offense that's safe, plodding, can't score quickly and so can never come back from behind, which they never do.
You are a very knowledgeable fan, and so I'm sure you know that Schiano would say that we would have too many turnovers with a wide-open offense. At least up to now, he hasn't trusted our offensive line or our skill guys. So he prefer a plain-vanilla ball-control approach.
 

RUTGERS95

Hall of Famer
Sep 28, 2005
33,440
1,431
113
I really wonder why in this day and age when everyone is pass happy and even teams like Tulsa and Ball State can score more than we do against teams like OSU or PSU our offense can't move the ball against ANYONE except teams like Delaware or Temple. Is Schiano still obsessed with ball control football?? Even teams like Ohio State and Alabama, with their iron-clad defenses, no longer try to grind their way downfield and plan on scoring 4 or 5 TDs in every game (if not more). And I wonder if that's the issue: winning programs say "we only need to score 31 or 35 points in a few games a year but that's how we're going to win them so our offense will plan to score 31 or 35 points for every game in order to be ready for those games" while Schiano thinks "we only need to score 31 or 35 points per game a few times a year (assuming the defense is doing well) so we won't worry about that, we'll worry about ball control for the other 9 games," basically conceding a few games per year and building an offense that's safe, plodding, can't score quickly and so can never come back from behind, which they never do.
mind boggling right....

I have not been happy with the offense, have said it many times in that the formations, play calls, stupid fake pitch to empty backfield just wreaks of poor coaching. You work with what you have, you don't try and fit a square peg in a round hole
 

brgRC90

Hall of Famer
Apr 8, 2008
32,458
12,894
113
mind boggling right....

I have not been happy with the offense, have said it many times in that the formations, play calls, stupid fake pitch to empty backfield just wreaks of poor coaching. You work with what you have, you don't try and fit a square peg in a round hole
Lots of fake plays also reeks of desperation. I think back to Cincinnati under Brian Kelly. There is no way Cincinnati was getting tons of great WRs and QBs yet they ran circles around Schiano's defense. Maybe our WR corps isn't top notch but there's no way they're all so bad the coaches can't find ways to get them open against teams like Northwestern or Illinois or Indiana, and in bad years for those teams. And yet--they're never open. They can't all be incompetent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUTGERS95

brgRC90

Hall of Famer
Apr 8, 2008
32,458
12,894
113
You are a very knowledgeable fan, and so I'm sure you know that Schiano would say that we would have too many turnovers with a wide-open offense. At least up to now, he hasn't trusted our offensive line or our skill guys. So he prefer a plain-vanilla ball-control approach.
Playing not to lose with the end result that he often calls fake plays in desperation, which can and sometimes do end very badly, and often loses to teams he could be beating. But this is what we saw during Schiano v1.0, even when he'd been the coach for a decade, so I don't believe he doesn't trust his offense yet. He seems to never trust his offenses. I watch a lot of other games in the fall and NOBODY has more crippled, more plodding, more boring offenses than we do--and it's not working. Again.
 

retired711

Heisman Winner
Nov 20, 2001
15,571
6,430
113
71
Cherry Hill
Playing not to lose with the end result that he often calls fake plays in desperation, which can and sometimes do end very badly, and often loses to teams he could be beating. But this is what we saw during Schiano v1.0, even when he'd been the coach for a decade, so I don't believe he doesn't trust his offense yet. He seems to never trust his offenses. I watch a lot of other games in the fall and NOBODY has more crippled, more plodding, more boring offenses than we do--and it's not working. Again.
What QB has he ever had -- either the first time or this time -- that you would trust to run a big-play offense? Just curious.
 

brgRC90

Hall of Famer
Apr 8, 2008
32,458
12,894
113
What QB has he ever had -- either the first time or this time -- that you would trust to run a big-play offense? Just curious.
Probably any of them was capable of running an offense that at least could complete some forward passes and be good at something. We've had offenses that, of course, don't throw downfield but also can't throw underneath coverage. Oh and can't run either, or do screen passes. What's Schiano doing recruiting bunches of guys who can't make any kind of offense work?
 
Sep 11, 2006
56,425
15,688
113
This sh*t has to stop. Someone is creating multiple screen names to make it seem like several posters agree with the OP. Each poster who agrees all joined not too long ago around the same date. All of you come blazing with two plastic knives to the gunfight without valid facts to back your argument other than your opinion.

Lesson #1: Learn how the B1G is making so much money off its TV media deal; that will explain why your argument has bullet holes.

Lesson #2: Learn how the B1G is selecting schools for the conference. That will give you insight into why some of the teams, the doubters continue to mention, don't have as strong of a chance of joining the B1G. Academics, AAU, etc., remain important in deciding whether certain schools are worthy of joining the B1G.

Lesson #3: RIF (reading is fundamental). There is a lot of info out there explaining everything that some of the more informed posters continue to preach. It will save you time and embarrassment of repeating the same argument with no merit.

The mods have to clean this up. Start checking to see if some of the same screen names are registered to the same person using different accounts, IP addresses, etc.
Well.. I partially agreed with teh concept and I am a real fan and I suspect OP is too. But yeah, there are new accounts here trying to spread a miserable story.
 
Sep 11, 2006
56,425
15,688
113
You are a very knowledgeable fan, and so I'm sure you know that Schiano would say that we would have too many turnovers with a wide-open offense. At least up to now, he hasn't trusted our offensive line or our skill guys. So he prefer a plain-vanilla ball-control approach.
I think Wimsatt may be the answer. From what I have seen, it looked to me like Gleeson had a specific thing he wanted to do and couldn't.. or wouldn't.. adjust to the talent we had on hand. We had drop-back QBs of various abilities and he wants more of a spread QB to run that Okalhoma State style offense... which is exciting.. but this is not Oklahoma, nor is it the Big XII.

So, I think, Vedral had that Nebraska background and was recruited there by Frost who ran a similar offense at UCF. He was the best match.. but had limitations. Then you have to get Rutgers undermanned squad to run that offense against superior talent most weeks of the year. That didn't help Vedral or Gleeson. I just don't think he could, or would, have made adjustments for the offense to be better based on what we actually can do.. what the talent we have can do against the big boys. It would have meant more dropback stuff.. screens to punish a pass rush.. etc.

NOW.. maybe that's okay. In GS first stint here he did the same thing with his defense. We lost to inferior talent many times early in his HC career. I think it was the famous Nova game.. with people cursing him vocally and mocking him all around me that I thoguht I finally saw what was going on.

It made ZERO sense that we did not shift into a stand-up, beat the guy across from youu defense vs Nova.... BUT... if you assume, as I did, that there had to be a logical reason for this choice.. and if you put it together with everythign you had seem.. like the 80-7 beatdown by WVU... you might have arrived at teh same conclusion... that GS was runnign his defense.. no matter what.. training the players to run it.. no matter what. Assignment D.. stunts and blitzes... even when those would hurt you because the opponent accounted for that.

That trainign period had a lot of ugly games.. but the system learned the defense... then new players.. better players arriving had everyone on the defense to coach them. They saw every player ahead of them doing the same thigns.. running Schiano's D. And that D got real good... world-shaking good.

Maybe that's the plan here with Gleeson. Run his offense even if the players are relatively incapable of it.. because, eventually.. the system will be in place and it will click for all of them.

That's my hope anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: retired711