I believe the upcoming story containing the records will prove enlightening to you, the reader, and the staff deeply values your continued trust in The Hullabaloo as the eyes and ears of the Tulane community.
Below are the real numbers for 1998, just as the "Cowen nightmare" was beginning (Scott became president in July of 1998). Bowden/RR would have more than sold out a 25,000 seat stadium for 5 of 6 of our home games with only the exception of Navy, and if memory serves me correctly, a game for a weekend, September 26th, during which most of New Orleans had evacuated for Hurricane Georges.Dave breslin wrote:Can we compare attendance of '97 and '98 and graph the results in pre and post cowdick's reign?
What I am really showing is that Bowden/RR "outgrew" Yulman stadium way back in 1998.KsWave wrote:And if Tulane shows it can post those numbers on a consistent basis, I'm sure there will be a push for expanding the OCS to accomodate. But really by pushing those numbers you're showing that even in Tulane's most successfull season ever there was never a need for a 70,000 seat stadium.
Yes, for the best season in Tulane football's history, we would draw too many fans to fit in the proposed stadium. I think that will be a welcome problem when the time comes again.Wave755 wrote:What I am really showing is that Bowden/RR "outgrew" Yulman stadium way back in 1998.KsWave wrote:And if Tulane shows it can post those numbers on a consistent basis, I'm sure there will be a push for expanding the OCS to accomodate. But really by pushing those numbers you're showing that even in Tulane's most successfull season ever there was never a need for a 70,000 seat stadium.
Very scattered. Not sure what I was expecting, but meh.Wave755 wrote:http://www.thehullabaloo.com/news/artic ... f6878.html
The numbers leaked to Ed Daniels and others were a bit off, but the true turnstile numbers are abysmal just the same. I will always believe, rather than the Superdome, our present plight is the result of poor leadership since 1998, i.e. – no to Rodriguez in 1998, 2003 “Review”, 7 years of Scelfo and 5 years of Toledo, including an “extension” after the disastrous 2010 season.Wave755 wrote:http://www.thehullabaloo.com/news/artic ... f6878.html
For the Ole Miss game in 1997 we had just under 37,000, and that season we went 7-4, I attended Teevens second to last last game in 1996, there could not have been 2,500 people in attendance. Overnight we recovered from 5 years of Teevens once Bowden/RR arrived.KsWave wrote:Yes, for the best season in Tulane football's history, we would draw too many fans to fit in the proposed stadium. I think that will be a welcome problem when the time comes again.Wave755 wrote:What I am really showing is that Bowden/RR "outgrew" Yulman stadium way back in 1998.KsWave wrote:And if Tulane shows it can post those numbers on a consistent basis, I'm sure there will be a push for expanding the OCS to accomodate. But really by pushing those numbers you're showing that even in Tulane's most successfull season ever there was never a need for a 70,000 seat stadium.
“We don’t think under any circumstances that Tulane’s ever going to fill a 30,000 person stadium,” Booth said. “The Tulane football program is so weak and has been so weak. I don’t believe building a 30,000-person stadium repairs a broken football program. Until Tulane comes to the table with a reasonable proposal this is not only going to damage the neighborhood, but I don’t think it’s going to be good for university either.”
Quite true, but you can control your schedule a lot more when you're an independent. In the early 80s it looks like Tulane may as well have been in the SEC based on scheduling. Join a poor conference and you get poor opponents. Heck, most of original C-USA is in a better conference now. If changing conferences is like switching deck chairs on the Titanic, staying in C-USA is like jumping overboard before it even hit the iceberg!tpstulane wrote:I graduated in 1981, look at those numbers and look at who we played. The dropoff over time is more due to the horrible schedules and not so much losing. When you play attractive teams people will at least come out to see your opponent. We lose and play a terrible schedule nowdays.
http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews ... f6.pdf.pdf
Yep, I think the conference schedule is only going to get worse, that makes OOC schedule that much more important to draw "football" fans. There are mistakes in that PDF file. There is no way in hell in 1994 we only had 16K for the LSU game.KsWave wrote:Quite true, but you can control your schedule a lot more when you're an independent. In the early 80s it looks like Tulane may as well have been in the SEC based on scheduling. Join a poor conference and you get poor opponents. Heck, most of original C-USA is in a better conference now. If changing conferences is like switching deck chairs on the Titanic, staying in C-USA is like jumping overboard before it even hit the iceberg!tpstulane wrote:I graduated in 1981, look at those numbers and look at who we played. The dropoff over time is more due to the horrible schedules and not so much losing. When you play attractive teams people will at least come out to see your opponent. We lose and play a terrible schedule nowdays.
http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews ... f6.pdf.pdf
This is NOT to be taken as any endorsement of the concept of the "You'll Love" Stadium...but if Tulane is going to be almost playing almost entirely a line-up of C-USA games (of the newest rendition of C-USA) with a UL-Monroe or an SLU or McNeese or Army or Navy thrown in here and there at "You'll Love" Stadium and not having, say, consistent multiple 10-win seasons (with a 12-game schedule) then I'd say that that analysis of how attendance is going to be is probably about right.tpstulane wrote:If Cowen was any kind of competitor he should take this quote personally and prove this women wrong.“We don’t think under any circumstances that Tulane’s ever going to fill a 30,000 person stadium,” Booth said. “The Tulane football program is so weak and has been so weak. I don’t believe building a 30,000-person stadium repairs a broken football program. Until Tulane comes to the table with a reasonable proposal this is not only going to damage the neighborhood, but I don’t think it’s going to be good for university either.”
You are correct, however...what I expect to happen is that initially there will be some kind of novelty effect and people will be anxious to see what's going on and there will be some good crowds...but over time that phenomenon is going to fade away...and then what kind of regular attendance there is will depend both on how much of a consistent winner the program is and what kind of opposition that they play against (and the weaker of a schedule that you play the stronger of a consistent winner you will have to be in order to hold anyone's respect). Eventually things are gonig to go back to being like how they are right now and when they do Tulane will be stuck with this white elephant of a project, i.e. the payoff will not be very strong.threeputt wrote:I'm changing my tune on this tiny stadium ... In the last 30 years we have had exactly TWO games with over 30k in attendance (sans LSU) vs USM in 1982 and Bama in 1992.
Shoot a 10k stadium should be more than enough as we have only played 5 games in front of more people in the last 10 years.
I know I know .. I am missing the big picture .. I get it
The point is that it is incumbent on Tulane to make it happen. Pessimistic people like you don't think we have a large fan base out there. The fact is we do and as has been pointed out our attendance numbers can jump quickly. People making the argument you make about 97 and 98 always leave out very important factors. Those factors are Tulane had not had a winning season in 15 years before 97. The 30 years before those 15 weren't too good either. The actual attendance under Teevens had clearly sunk to the 5k level, In 97 we didn't beat anyone of significance. In 98 no one knew we would go undefeated. We didn't play any ranked team again. Yet as the season went on the numbers grew. Two games were affected by the storm in 98. There was literally an evacuation going on during the Navy game. The next game against USM was affected as MS. got hit hard by the hurricane and fans were busy w/clean up. The facts are our numbers can jump very quickly. It is stupid to build a tiny, cheap stadium now rather than waiting to see what we do under CJ and wait to see what happens w/conference realignment if he succeeds.KsWave wrote:As I said, that will be a welcome problem when it happens. And I would think that if there are SEC/big-traveling opponent games, Tulane will look into using the Dome once per year.
I actually wasn't trying to be pessimistic at all actually. I would have said "that will be a welcome problem if it ever happens" instead of how I did actually word it.winwave wrote:The point is that it is incumbent on Tulane to make it happen. Pessimistic people like you don't think we have a large fan base out there. The fact is we do and as has been pointed out our attendance numbers can jump quickly. People making the argument you make about 97 and 98 always leave out very important factors. Those factors are Tulane had not had a winning season in 15 years before 97. The 30 years before those 15 weren't too good either. The actual attendance under Teevens had clearly sunk to the 5k level, In 97 we didn't beat anyone of significance. In 98 no one knew we would go undefeated. We didn't play any ranked team again. Yet as the season went on the numbers grew. Two games were affected by the storm in 98. There was literally an evacuation going on during the Navy game. The next game against USM was affected as MS. got hit hard by the hurricane and fans were busy w/clean up. The facts are our numbers can jump very quickly. It is stupid to build a tiny, cheap stadium now rather than waiting to see what we do under CJ and wait to see what happens w/conference realignment if he succeeds.KsWave wrote:As I said, that will be a welcome problem when it happens. And I would think that if there are SEC/big-traveling opponent games, Tulane will look into using the Dome once per year.
I am even quite perplexed by the turnstile count for the LSU games of 1989 - 35,193; 1991 - 23,504; and 1994 - 16,706??? Not the way I remember it, but only 16,706 for 1994?Wave755 wrote:Here is the long awaited Hullabaloo SMG turnstile count article:
http://www.thehullabaloo.com/news/artic ... f6878.html
That's probably "no shows" those LSU numbers are 100% incorrect.Wave755 wrote:I am even quite perplexed by the turnstile count for the LSU games of 1989 - 35,193; 1991 - 23,504; and 1994 - 16,706??? Not the way I remember it, but only 16,706 for 1994?Wave755 wrote:Here is the long awaited Hullabaloo SMG turnstile count article:
http://www.thehullabaloo.com/news/artic ... f6878.html
