|
Post by AzTex on Jul 7, 2015 9:42:28 GMT -8
No, it is not an exaggerated comparison. It is spot on. The crowd's distance from the court/field and the density of the crowd around the court/field amplifies the emotion and atmosphere of the games. I keep bringing up that Aztec Bowl was such a great place to watch a football game in because of the pitch of the seats and the closeness to the field. Viejas is built with that same seat pitch. I just hope the new on campus, or near campus, stadium is designed with that in mind. Isn't Viejas built with the same pitch as Aztec Bowl due to the fact they are IN Aztec Bowl? Not disagreeing with you, but I thought that was part of the idea of building the arena in that location. And I completely agree with you in that any new stadium (if built) should have that same pitch so the fans can be right on top of the action. Might make for a REALLY steep upper deck though. There isn't any disagreement about this. I just didn't explicitly say that the seating pitch was because Viejas was built in Aztec Bowl. I'm just thankful that they took advantage of the existing pitch and didn't make any modifications to it. Of course, they could have built a basketball arena elsewhere on campus with the same pitch and saved Aztec Bowl for our future OCC, but that's a sob story for another thread.
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Jul 7, 2015 10:07:23 GMT -8
Don't be too surprised by UCLA's lack of student support. This was entirely predictable. UCLA and Cal, in order to balance the books in the UC system began to aggressively sell admissions slots to overseas students and out-out-of-state students. Those students pay a whopping $52k per year to attend, as opposed to the $17k that Calif. resident students pay. As a result of this back-door money grab, UCLA and Cal -- two of the most popular/prestigious public universities on the planet -- grant 20% of their admissions slots to overseas students (primarily from China) and another 20% from out of state. So right off the bat, 20% of the student population likely has about as close to zero interest in attending school sporting events as you can get. The other 20% has limited geographic loyalty and likely has fairly low sporting event attendance. Furthermore, close to 60% of each school's student body is female, another demographic that has comparatively low sporting event attendance rates. By the time you add it all up, probably only 20% of the student body would be classified as active, interested college sports fans. Not a huge draw.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jul 7, 2015 11:08:51 GMT -8
Don't be too surprised by UCLA's lack of student support. This was entirely predictable. UCLA and Cal, in order to balance the books in the UC system began to aggressively sell admissions slots to overseas students and out-out-of-state students. Those students pay a whopping $52k per year to attend, as opposed to the $17k that Calif. resident students pay. As a result of this back-door money grab, UCLA and Cal -- two of the most popular/prestigious public universities on the planet -- grant 20% of their admissions slots to overseas students (primarily from China) and another 20% from out of state. So right off the bat, 20% of the student population likely has about as close to zero interest in attending school sporting events as you can get. The other 20% has limited geographic loyalty and likely has fairly low sporting event attendance. Furthermore, close to 60% of each school's student body is female, another demographic that has comparatively low sporting event attendance rates. By the time you add it all up, probably only 20% of the student body would be classified as active, interested college sports fans. Not a huge draw. Maybe their attendance isn't all that great for basketball, but I would gladly take Cal's average attendance for football (47,669 for a 5-7 team).
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Jul 7, 2015 21:08:22 GMT -8
Don't be too surprised by UCLA's lack of student support. This was entirely predictable. UCLA and Cal, in order to balance the books in the UC system began to aggressively sell admissions slots to overseas students and out-out-of-state students. Those students pay a whopping $52k per year to attend, as opposed to the $17k that Calif. resident students pay. As a result of this back-door money grab, UCLA and Cal -- two of the most popular/prestigious public universities on the planet -- grant 20% of their admissions slots to overseas students (primarily from China) and another 20% from out of state. So right off the bat, 20% of the student population likely has about as close to zero interest in attending school sporting events as you can get. The other 20% has limited geographic loyalty and likely has fairly low sporting event attendance. Furthermore, close to 60% of each school's student body is female, another demographic that has comparatively low sporting event attendance rates. By the time you add it all up, probably only 20% of the student body would be classified as active, interested college sports fans. Not a huge draw. Maybe their attendance isn't all that great for basketball, but I would gladly take Cal's average attendance for football (47,669 for a 5-7 team). A cogent argument longtimebooster, but the fact is, (having done my graduate work there in the late '70's so I'm still somewhat connected to the "landscape"), the reason there is lack of support for basketball is the program is crap. (Something State just might have to contend with when Coach Fisher takes the big vacation). UCLA football is averaging over 75,000 a game so community support is far from the issue. When I was going to school there the decision was made to move the program to the burbs, (and stop playing second fiddle to BOTH USC and the newly arriving Raiders). As outrageous as the idea was at the time to some, it was obviously a resounding success, helped in no small part by the success of Terry Donahue, (coupled with the timing of the dominance of UCLA over SC during the Ted Tollner years that pretty much sealed UCLA's community support for future years). This brief history lesson is brought to you by those who wonder how a program, (SO unlike UCLA), mired in mediocrity since the departure of Claude Gilbert, with attendance figures between 25-35,000 a game, is going to generate enough capital to justify another off-campus stadium. Thank goodness for myopia, right?
|
|