|
|
29,896
Dec 4, 2019 22:46:37 GMT -8
Post by AztecBill on Dec 4, 2019 22:46:37 GMT -8
Same season in the new stadium will sell the place out consistently.
|
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 4, 2019 23:03:53 GMT -8
Post by zurac315 on Dec 4, 2019 23:03:53 GMT -8
I can only speak for myself but I do think that a new and more intimate stadium will make a difference. I really don't like going to the present giant, old stadium. I found it to be a rather dismal experience sitting so far away from the action and I used to mentally compare it to the old Aztec Bowl experience. In Aztec Bowl I felt part of the game. At the stadium in Mission Valley I felt like I might as well have been watching it on a 19" TV. It really wasn't much fun. For the people who bother to go the new stadium should be a better experience. And financially it should help the Aztec program, shouldn't it? I don't know the details very well but it seems like we pay quite a bit to use the present stadium and don't get to keep much in terms of revenues. My impression has been that attendance in general has been falling somewhat with regards to college sports.
|
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 5, 2019 16:38:37 GMT -8
Post by tonatiuh on Dec 5, 2019 16:38:37 GMT -8
I don't know why u think QCOM is a dump. We thought it was pretty impressive, just needs a facelift. The parking was easy and it was almost full, the trolley stop is right there. Where are you going to park at SDSU west? And why do we need more retail? And there goes the Holiday Bowl. But I guess I'm beating a dead horse. The current stadium was not built for football, it was built for multi-use and was actually better for baseball than football. SDSU doesn't need 65k seats. The new stadium will be better suited for football, the front 12 rows will be close to the action and not "obstructed view" because the first row will be 5 to 6 feet above the playing surface. A 35K seat stadium will mean that seats will be more at a premium, so you can charge more for them - revenue the program desperately needs though now they will have the burden of paying off the stadium debt added to the budget. And, finally, having just 22K-25K actual butts in the seat won't look as bad as it does in the current stadium. You are right, though. Whatever bowl we host will be a step down from the HB. So, who said we would lose the Holiday Bowl for sure? I don't believe that any of the Holiday Bowl games ever went full capacity. We may have been the closest in 1986 when 59,473 fans showed up for our Holiday game vs. Iowa. Even P5 schools nowadays don't send enough fans to fill it up. When we get the new stadium completed we could start a new bowl game and call it something else. At least it would be easier to fill up for a big & interesting game. And, we would have a beautiful new stadium to play in and have a bowl game in. |
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 5, 2019 16:56:25 GMT -8
Post by aardvark on Dec 5, 2019 16:56:25 GMT -8
The current stadium was not built for football, it was built for multi-use and was actually better for baseball than football. SDSU doesn't need 65k seats. The new stadium will be better suited for football, the front 12 rows will be close to the action and not "obstructed view" because the first row will be 5 to 6 feet above the playing surface. A 35K seat stadium will mean that seats will be more at a premium, so you can charge more for them - revenue the program desperately needs though now they will have the burden of paying off the stadium debt added to the budget. And, finally, having just 22K-25K actual butts in the seat won't look as bad as it does in the current stadium. You are right, though. Whatever bowl we host will be a step down from the HB. So, who said we would lose the Holiday Bowl for sure? I don't believe that any of the Holiday Bowl games ever went full capacity. We may have been the closest in 1986 when 59,473 fans showed up for our Holiday game vs. Iowa. Even P5 schools nowadays don't send enough fans to fill it up. When we get the new stadium completed we could start a new bowl game and call it something else. At least it would be easier to fill up for a big & interesting game. And, we would have a beautiful new stadium to play in and have a bowl game in. 1984: 61243. 2005: The biggest crowd, at 65416. 2014: The last crowd over 50000. The last 4 Holiday Bowl crowds were some of the smallest crowds ever, eclipsed only by the crowd of 44457 in 1992. The Holiday Bowl also have said they contacted the Padres about moving the game to Petco Park, which would be a mistake, since so many seats in Petco Park would be useless for football viewing. |
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 5, 2019 17:37:41 GMT -8
Post by Den60 on Dec 5, 2019 17:37:41 GMT -8
The current stadium was not built for football, it was built for multi-use and was actually better for baseball than football. SDSU doesn't need 65k seats. The new stadium will be better suited for football, the front 12 rows will be close to the action and not "obstructed view" because the first row will be 5 to 6 feet above the playing surface. A 35K seat stadium will mean that seats will be more at a premium, so you can charge more for them - revenue the program desperately needs though now they will have the burden of paying off the stadium debt added to the budget. And, finally, having just 22K-25K actual butts in the seat won't look as bad as it does in the current stadium. You are right, though. Whatever bowl we host will be a step down from the HB. So, who said we would lose the Holiday Bowl for sure? I don't believe that any of the Holiday Bowl games ever went full capacity. We may have been the closest in 1986 when 59,473 fans showed up for our Holiday game vs. Iowa. Even P5 schools nowadays don't send enough fans to fill it up. When we get the new stadium completed we could start a new bowl game and call it something else. At least it would be easier to fill up for a big & interesting game. And, we would have a beautiful new stadium to play in and have a bowl game in. I actually looked at attendance for the Holiday Bowls before ever making a post about us losing it. We will have a bowl game here, we may even keep the name but it will be a lower tier bowl than the Holiday Bowl, more on par with the Poinsettia Bowl. Last year the HB sold 47,007 tickets for the game which is the lowest amount since 1992 when it hosted unranked Illinois and Hawaii. But even recent years have averaged in the high 40s in ticket sales. The new stadium should be a great place to watch a game (as long as they don't go cheap with seat types) but it will not be large enough to accommodate a higher tier bowl game. The fact that San Diego in December is a nice place to visit will be enough to get some sort of bowl game here. |
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 7, 2019 12:04:04 GMT -8
Post by tonatiuh on Dec 7, 2019 12:04:04 GMT -8
You bet it will be!
|
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 7, 2019 15:28:05 GMT -8
Post by aztech on Dec 7, 2019 15:28:05 GMT -8
If I recall our attendance started to rise during Hoke's second season here. He won with a balanced team and they were entertaining. That's been missing despite our one dimensional wins under Rocky. That's something to consider if we expect to fill the new stadium.
|
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 8, 2019 9:12:49 GMT -8
Post by aardvark on Dec 8, 2019 9:12:49 GMT -8
If I recall our attendance started to rise during Hoke's second season here. He won with a balanced team and they were entertaining. That's been missing despite our one dimensional wins under Rocky. That's something to consider if we expect to fill the new stadium. Hoke's 2nd and final year as head coach, we averaged 31813/game in announced attendance. With Rocky as HC, we have averaged anywhere between 39865 (1st year) and 29065 (2015, and the average was brought down as we had 20959 while hosting the CCG). Rocky's time as head coach has corresponded with an overall drop in college football attendance. W/L records also don't seem to matter, as in 2015, the Aztecs went 11-3, but had the lowest attendance in Rocky's tenure, yet in one of his worst seasons (8-5 in 2011), they averaged almost 40k. |
|
|
|
29,896
Dec 8, 2019 10:22:12 GMT -8
Post by aztecnails on Dec 8, 2019 10:22:12 GMT -8
the biggest factor in home attendance is the lack of a top out of conference or conference opponents. in 2020, the Aztecs host ucla (sept 19), which should be the top home attendance followed by the sky show? game against sacramento state (labor day weekend), who is in the fcs playoffs as a ranked team just like weber state. Missing boise state has hurt home football attendance. the rest of the 2020 home conference is hawaii, unlv, san jose state and colorado state will be lucky to break 30,000. in 2011, 57,000+ saw the Washington state game (reg. season record home attendance) followed with 52,000+ for boise state. also, the fact that the fresno state game was on Friday hurt that games attendance as it conflicted with high school football. even notre dame and navy sold out the stadium. in the 80s and 90s, the holiday bowl sold out regularly as it did during the 2005 Arizona and Nebraska game. the holiday bowl's biggest problem is ticket prices are over $100+ now and the wac/mountain west champion no longer plays in the holiday bowl.
|
|
