Tulane Hullabaloo Turnstile Records Lawsuit & Article

[tpstulane]

http://www.splc.org/news/newsflash.asp?id=2469

Tulane editor suing Louisiana for football attendance records

October 12, 2012
NEW ORLEANS — The editor of Tulane’s student newspaper is suing the state of Louisiana for attendance records from football games the school played at the Superdome.

Since May, The Tulane Hullabaloo has sought turnstile attendance figures. Editor-in-Chief Ryan Jones filed his lawsuit last week after hearing from state officials that SMG, the private company hired by Louisiana to run the Superdome, refused to release the records.

Jones said the Hullabaloo wants attendance records to investigate the state of the Tulane football fan base after several dismal seasons. In addition, proposed plans to build a new 25,000-seat on-campus stadium have been criticized by local residents, who question the accuracy of paid attendance figures released by the university.

Jones said he suspects there is a huge difference between paid attendance, which is the only record Tulane is required to release by the NCAA, and turnstile attendance, the actual number of people who attended football games.

SMG manages more than 220 public assembly facilities across the globe, including seven in Louisiana, according to its website. SMG has managed the Superdome since 1977.

“This is nonsense,” said Scott Jones, Ryan Jones’ father and the primary attorney on the case. “It’s a big national corporation, and they been basically playing around because they think they’re the big kid on the block. They’ve been kind of bullying around the student newspaper.”

A spokesman for the Division of Adminisation declined to comment on the case. SMG officials could not be reached.

Following this through to the end is a valuable lesson for the Hullabaloo and its writers, Ryan Jones said.

“I can’t see anything that would leave much more of a lasting impression than trying to obtain these records from a company that’s much bigger than you, from the state, and being told no and then preserving to the end and ultimately obtaining the records you were looking for and ending up with a great story because you persevered.”

[ExileWave]

I wish Ryan luck....it will be an embarrassing story if it comes out. Finally someone at Tulane willing to fight the system. He will probably be kicked out of school by SC.

[winwave]

They should be requesting a copy of the contract between the Dome and Tulane also.

[tpstulane]

They should be requesting a copy of the contract between the Dome and Tulane also.

+1

[jonathanjoseph]

They should be requesting a copy of the contract between the Dome and Tulane also.

+500

[msdos]

They should be requesting a copy of the contract between the Dome and Tulane also.

If it's anything close to the deal back in the 70's, then the OCS will reveal just how retarded SC and RD are

[tpstulane]

Interesting that the NIMBY's want a turnstile count as well....................
Something stinks here...........
http://saveourneighborhoods.me/category ... y-stadium/

5.If attendance is a concern, the NCAA requirements are a 15,000 person average once over a two-year period. That average can be attained simply by selling out one game in a stadium with a capacity of 15,001. Hence, a stadium with a seating capacity of 15,000 and a standing capacity of 5,000 would allow Tulane to easily attain the required average. Furthermore, a preferable game-day experience is to have a 15,000 person stadium fully packed than a 25,000 person stadium half-filled.
6.If some other reason (economic) exist for the proposed stadium size, what are the basis/parameters for those reasons?

B. Stadium size
7. What is the average game attendance for Tulane games at the Superdome? Turnstile attendance, not ticket sales. What is the actual turnstile attendance for each home football game since 2006? Why does the current design plan for a facility substantially larger than turnstile attendance?

[golfnut69]

I wish Ryan luck....it will be an embarrassing story if it comes out. Finally someone at Tulane willing to fight the system. He will probably be kicked out of school by SC.

I wonder if Ryan would be suing if he had to pay the attorney fees...but since the ole man is the attorney of record, it looks like both he and dad are bored $hitle$$ ...I am not sure what actual versus paid has to do with anything, at present Tulane is in good standing with the NCAA regarding "attendance/paid" averages per game...but it also shows how a "big name" that travels needs to be on the home schedule every year...Ole Miss...Miss State....Georgia....Texas A&M ...Bama are all canidates in the years they are not scheduled to play in Baton Rouge ...travel cost for these teams and fans are minimal and can be used for recruiting purposes

[tpstulane]

I wish Ryan luck....it will be an embarrassing story if it comes out. Finally someone at Tulane willing to fight the system. He will probably be kicked out of school by SC.

....but it also shows how a "big name" that travels needs to be on the home schedule every year...Ole Miss...Miss State....Georgia....Texas A&M ...Bama are all canidates in the years they are not scheduled to play in Baton Rouge ...travel cost for these teams and fans are minimal and can be used for recruiting purposes

+1
Absolutely!

[jonathanjoseph]

Bravo, Hullabaloo editor. Me thinks we might be about to get some press coverage to the disastrous results Cowen/Dickson have produced. The Hullabaloo might not be the only journalists asking questions. Nothing could be more useful for the program than some real journalism.

[Fred Dowler]

Bravo, Hullabaloo editor. Me thinks we might be about to get some press coverage to the disastrous results Cowen/Dickson have produced. The Hullabaloo might not be the only journalists asking questions. Nothing could be more useful for the program than some real journalism.

Not just the results themselves but the ridiculous differential between paid and actual that's been growing year after year like the size of Pinocchio's nose.

There's no way to start to really fix things with the program and turn it all around without restoring trust where trust has been broken by the powers-who-are when right now it's very hard to believe almost anything that they say.

[mbawavefan12]

Interesting that the NIMBY's want a turnstile count as well....................
Something stinks here...........
http://saveourneighborhoods.me/category ... y-stadium/

5.If attendance is a concern, the NCAA requirements are a 15,000 person average once over a two-year period. That average can be attained simply by selling out one game in a stadium with a capacity of 15,001. Hence, a stadium with a seating capacity of 15,000 and a standing capacity of 5,000 would allow Tulane to easily attain the required average. Furthermore, a preferable game-day experience is to have a 15,000 person stadium fully packed than a 25,000 person stadium half-filled.
6.If some other reason (economic) exist for the proposed stadium size, what are the basis/parameters for those reasons?

B. Stadium size
7. What is the average game attendance for Tulane games at the Superdome? Turnstile attendance, not ticket sales. What is the actual turnstile attendance for each home football game since 2006? Why does the current design plan for a facility substantially larger than turnstile attendance?

So pathetic, it's none of their business. Forgetting arguments for or against the stadium, TU can easily say that the plan is to build up the fan base by winning and having the 40k in attendance like 98, so the current stadium is actually too small. It's absolutely blows my mind that NIMBYs want a say on the size of the stadium, or better yet, TU has allowed them to have a say.

Saw a discussion about this very topic somewhere else. I couldn't believe that folks were calling for this kids head and saying how he is acting irresponsibly. The kid wants to be a journalist (perhaps) so it's his job to relay the facts and let the readers make their own decision. Others would prefer we would just hide from reality, it's disgusting. If any of the students from the Hullaballoo read this, dig into the state of the athletic department because soon you and most of your classmates will have degrees and you must all protect that investment. Open dialogue is the best course of action in 95% of life. Also, I would love to see a comprehensive analysis of the Cowen and Dickson tenures. Do not be afraid as Cowen and Dickson will retire as rich men and you will have to defend your TU degree for the rest of your lives.

[jonathanjoseph]

Interesting that the NIMBY's want a turnstile count as well....................
Something stinks here...........
http://saveourneighborhoods.me/category ... y-stadium/

5.If attendance is a concern, the NCAA requirements are a 15,000 person average once over a two-year period. That average can be attained simply by selling out one game in a stadium with a capacity of 15,001. Hence, a stadium with a seating capacity of 15,000 and a standing capacity of 5,000 would allow Tulane to easily attain the required average. Furthermore, a preferable game-day experience is to have a 15,000 person stadium fully packed than a 25,000 person stadium half-filled.
6.If some other reason (economic) exist for the proposed stadium size, what are the basis/parameters for those reasons?

B. Stadium size
7. What is the average game attendance for Tulane games at the Superdome? Turnstile attendance, not ticket sales. What is the actual turnstile attendance for each home football game since 2006? Why does the current design plan for a facility substantially larger than turnstile attendance?

So pathetic, it's none of their business. Forgetting arguments for or against the stadium, TU can easily say that the plan is to build up the fan base by winning and having the 40k in attendance like 98, so the current stadium is actually too small. It's absolutely blows my mind that NIMBYs want a say on the size of the stadium, or better yet, TU has allowed them to have a say.

Saw a discussion about this very topic somewhere else. I couldn't believe that folks were calling for this kids head and saying how he is acting irresponsibly. The kid wants to be a journalist (perhaps) so it's his job to relay the facts and let the readers make their own decision. Others would prefer we would just hide from reality, it's disgusting. If any of the students from the Hullaballoo read this, dig into the state of the athletic department because soon you and most of your classmates will have degrees and you must all protect that investment. Open dialogue is the best course of action in 95% of life. Also, I would love to see a comprehensive analysis of the Cowen and Dickson tenures.

Um, what?! Irresponsibly? Who would say such a moronic thing?

Tell whoever said that to look up "journalism" in the dictionary. Obviously a Cowen apologist who thinks that the facts are "irresponsible". That more questions haven't been asked already is criminal.

Thankfully, I know someone else is asking questions. I have my fingers crossed and am optimistic that something will come of that pretty soon.

[DrBox]

Yall realize that these guys, while they support your position of no stadium, do NOT support your position of "Big Time Football", don't you? You really think it's a good thing for long term viability to publish 592 or whatever it is? You think that they will take that information and then conclude that, yes, the problem with the stadium is that it's too small? Now Cowen and Dickson will have to defend the investment in football at all, because only the diehards like us will agree that if we win we will draw.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

[tpstulane]

Yall realize that these guys, while they support your position of no stadium, do NOT support your position of "Big Time Football", don't you? You really think it's a good thing for long term viability to publish 592 or whatever it is? You think that they will take that information and then conclude that, yes, the problem with the stadium is that it's too small? Now Cowen and Dickson will have to defend the investment in football at all, because only the diehards like us will agree that if we win we will draw.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

I look at it from a different angle. It seems the only way we further the program is to shame our admin into doing things. What's worse, having 592 in the stands or publishing it?

[LSU Law Greenie]

I just don't think it helps things to publish it - everyone already knows how bad attendance is.

[Fred Dowler]

Yall realize that these guys, while they support your position of no stadium, do NOT support your position of "Big Time Football", don't you? You really think it's a good thing for long term viability to publish 592 or whatever it is? You think that they will take that information and then conclude that, yes, the problem with the stadium is that it's too small? Now Cowen and Dickson will have to defend the investment in football at all, because only the diehards like us will agree that if we win we will draw.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

I'm pretty sure that Dickson did say publicly that he had made a presentation before the Board justifying the investment in the stadium and I'd certainly hope and figure that these people, whom one could presume are all fairly sharp business leaders, would be asking some tough questions. And then doesn't the Board also have an athletics subcommittee that keeps on top of things on an ongoing basis? Then, finally, certainly anything that brings about questioning and a robust analysis by the whole TU community of the situation based on the actual facts (and a rejection of the party line), given that things are definitely by no means going well, has got to be a very welcome development if that happens. Ergo, the thought that continuing with the usual cover-up and Cone of Silence is helpful and necessary to the long-term viability of the program is patently absurd.

[ajcalhoun]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

Dr. Box, please clarify. Do you mean The Board of Administrators or this message board?

[DrBox]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

Dr. Box, please clarify. Do you mean The Board of Administrators or this message board?

I meant the message board.
But certainly Tulane's BOA has some too.

I look at it from a different angle. It seems the only way we further the program is to shame our admin into doing things. What's worse, having 592 in the stands or publishing it?

They're both bad.
Publishing it won't change the 592 in the stands but will create an additional bad.

This is a Hullabaloo that has published stories about how we can't hope to compete with USM - our real rival is with Loyola. Yea, I want to get in bed with them.

[DrBox]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

I'm pretty sure that Dickson did say publicly that he had made a presentation before the Board justifying the investment in the stadium and I'd certainly hope and figure that these people, whom one could presume are all fairly sharp business leaders, would be asking some tough questions. And then doesn't the Board also have an athletics subcommittee that keeps on top of things on an ongoing basis? Then, finally, certainly anything that brings about questioning and a robust analysis by the whole TU community of the situation based on the actual facts (and a rejection of the party line), given that things are definitely by no means going well, has got to be a very welcome development if that happens. Ergo, the thought that continuing with the usual cover-up and Cone of Silence is helpful and necessary to the long-term viability of the program is patently absurd.

Exhibit A

Cover-up of what? There's not a school in the country who publishes actual attendance. Not one. The only thing it will help is division 3 advocacy...ergo, you're for it.

[jonathanjoseph]

Yall realize that these guys, while they support your position of no stadium, do NOT support your position of "Big Time Football", don't you? You really think it's a good thing for long term viability to publish 592 or whatever it is? You think that they will take that information and then conclude that, yes, the problem with the stadium is that it's too small? Now Cowen and Dickson will have to defend the investment in football at all, because only the diehards like us will agree that if we win we will draw.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

Yes, because as you note Tulane currently doesn't support the position of "big time football" either. The only difference is that once $60M and physical plant is spent, it will be infinitely harder or impossible to reverse course. What's needed is competent leadership and publishing the number 592 is irrefutable evidence of incompetent and failed leadership. Anyone involved in a position of leadership that still thinks D3 is a viable route given the education bubble needs to be outed because they are dangerous to Tulane's future. 592 isn't an excuse to drop to D3, it's evidence that the current policy is failed.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

The fact is that NIMBYs or no, "big time football" probably requires staying in the Dome, but certainly nothing with 38' walls.

[sader24]

We would be the only college team in the country to publish turnstile counts. This is a move to push towards a smaller stadium or a drop down in football. Be careful what you wish for. I dont think Cowen would be shamed by the attendance figures, I think he would fill it vindicated many of his actions and comments over the years. You beat Cowen by shaming him and his performance, not by humiliating the fanbase and crushing recruiting.

[jonathanjoseph]

We would be the only college team in the country to publish turnstile counts. This is a move to push towards a smaller stadium or a drop down in football. Be careful what you wish for. I dont think Cowen would be shamed by the attendance figures, I think he would fill it vindicated many of his actions and comments over the years. You beat Cowen by shaming him and his performance, not by humiliating the fanbase and crushing recruiting.

Only in the backwards world of Tulane would 592 not be shameful for a President who's been quoted in the press as "we look forward to proving it on the field" regarding non-BCS teams playing in BCS games. 592 would be shameful for a high school.

There is not a single other D1A university where the suggestion of voluntarily dropping down wouldn't be met with men in white coats taking someone away in a straightjacket. But you are correct and there are some deep, deep problems with this university and it's future is perilous.

[tpstulane]

.... I dont think Cowen would be shamed by the attendance figures, I think he would fill it vindicated many of his actions and comments over the years. You beat Cowen by shaming him and his performance, not by humiliating the fanbase and crushing recruiting.

You're probably right. I go back and forth on this issue. Cowen would just pass the blame to our fanbase for not showing up. It's sad that we seem to lose either way with his logic.

[Fred Dowler]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there are several division-3 wolves in sheep's clothing on this board.

I'm pretty sure that Dickson did say publicly that he had made a presentation before the Board justifying the investment in the stadium and I'd certainly hope and figure that these people, whom one could presume are all fairly sharp business leaders, would be asking some tough questions. And then doesn't the Board also have an athletics subcommittee that keeps on top of things on an ongoing basis? Then, finally, certainly anything that brings about questioning and a robust analysis by the whole TU community of the situation based on the actual facts (and a rejection of the party line), given that things are definitely by no means going well, has got to be a very welcome development if that happens. Ergo, the thought that continuing with the usual cover-up and Cone of Silence is helpful and necessary to the long-term viability of the program is patently absurd.

Exhibit A

Cover-up of what? There's not a school in the country who publishes actual attendance. Not one. The only thing it will help is division 3 advocacy...ergo, you're for it.

In general is there not a serious problem with trust here?

Yes, people do already know that regular attendance is really low but if you're going to stand with the side that would rather fight than come clean and acknowledge the actual fact of the situation then what does that say? If you're going to dispute, as was said, that sunlight is the best disinfectant here then I have a problem with that.

If you really want do want the program to move forward and be viable on the Div. 1 level then how on earth is a major change in attitude and a serious effort to come clean and restore trust on the part of the administration whose track record of not being open and straightforward and candid with everyone is quite well established not part and parcel of Step A on the path?