Future OOC Games

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 12:52 pm

wave97 wrote:
nawlinspete wrote:
wave97 wrote:FWIW: We absolutely need a deck on the West side of Yulman ASAP. The current configuration of Yulman's West side is a national embarrassment.
Wrong. Yulman is a total embarrassment. A total waste of ~$100,000,000.

Yulman should be roofed and become our BB Arena. A new Tulane Stadium should be built on what had been Mc Alister Drive now that it is closed to vehicular traffic.

Or expand the current BB building onto Mc Alister and build a new Tulane Stadium on Mc Alister and turn Yulman into an IPF, tennis, track and field facility.
Okey dokey!
It's actually a much better idea than what has transpired to date.


jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 12:56 pm

winwave wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
So, basically, only 3 G5 schools had an average attendance of greater than ~37,000 (Memphis, Temple and East Carolina) and only 7 had more than ~30,000 in 2015, and Houston barely moved the needle with a ~33,000 average in its historic season. Memphis was excellent in 2014 and rode that momentum (coach and QB) into 2015, Temple played home games against Notre Dame and Penn State (those games significantly impacted home game attendance), and East Carolina always draws a big crowd with its ~28,000 enrollment. Yet, somehow, some people believe that we need a 40,000+ seat stadium to play an AAC conference schedule and to occasionally host a high profile P5. I just don't see it. Don't get me wrong - I would like to see it, but it just doesn't appear to be there. And, if we commit to doing 1 for 0s with P5s to just raise our profile instead of horrible 2/3 for 1s, our attendance would likely not increase that much even if we started hitting 7-8 win seasons.
Houston didn't have an historic season. More importantly no one knew when it started how it would turn out. Their crowds grew. Same held for us in 98. No one knew we would go 12-0. The crowds grew and would have grown more had we hired RR .

Our crowds jumped from 5k to 22k w/just a new stadium. It's crazy to not think it would make another significant jump w/a consistently winning program that was top 25. That's the goal. 40,000 is needed to draw the athletes to build such a team and to be able to get into a P5.
Exactly. "Woe is us" is deeply imprinted in the brains of Tulane faithful. The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 5999
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 1:26 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote: The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.

I wholeheartedly agree. If we could average over 30k on campus, the once a year or once every other year in the Dome game could double that, depending upon the opponent, the weekend, time of game, etc.

BTW: Any word on playing our Saturday games at night? Particularly the early season games?
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1660
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 1:55 pm

winwave wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
So, basically, only 3 G5 schools had an average attendance of greater than ~37,000 (Memphis, Temple and East Carolina) and only 7 had more than ~30,000 in 2015, and Houston barely moved the needle with a ~33,000 average in its historic season. Memphis was excellent in 2014 and rode that momentum (coach and QB) into 2015, Temple played home games against Notre Dame and Penn State (those games significantly impacted home game attendance), and East Carolina always draws a big crowd with its ~28,000 enrollment. Yet, somehow, some people believe that we need a 40,000+ seat stadium to play an AAC conference schedule and to occasionally host a high profile P5. I just don't see it. Don't get me wrong - I would like to see it, but it just doesn't appear to be there. And, if we commit to doing 1 for 0s with P5s to just raise our profile instead of horrible 2/3 for 1s, our attendance would likely not increase that much even if we started hitting 7-8 win seasons.
No one knew when it started how Houston's season would turn out. Their crowds grew. Same held for us in 98. No one knew we would go 12-0. The crowds grew and would have grown more had we hired RR .

Our crowds jumped from 5k to 22k w/just a new stadium. It's crazy to not think it would make another significant jump w/a consistently winning program that was top 25. That's the goal. 40,000 is needed to draw the athletes to build such a team and to be able to get into a P5.
#17 Houston's final home game against #20 Temple (ranks at that time of the game) had an attendance of ~35,000 (championship). By that time, everyone knew how good Houston was and everyone knew that Temple was good. ~35,000 is a relative joke for a game of that magnitude (top 25 v top 25), a team with their record (wins over Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, and Navy), a school with 136,000 living alumni within 50 miles of campus, a school with its enrollment (~42,000) and a school without direct competition from a P5 (and I'm sure Temple brought more than handful of fans to that game). Also, it's not like Houston had a terrible record during previous years (8-5 in 2014 and 8-5 in 2013). We are supposed to do better than that any time remotely soon? Really? No one is saying that we can't increase out attendance by winning, but there is a big difference between adding a few thousand fans and jumping up to 40,000+ as only 3 G5s averaged more than ~37,000 last year, and only one of them consistently does it (East Carolina).
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12004
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 3:08 pm

Like I said we jumped 17,00 just on stadium. Winning consistently will cause just as big a jump.
Find A Way!
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 3:30 pm

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote: The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.

I wholeheartedly agree. If we could average over 30k on campus, the once a year or once every other year in the Dome game could double that, depending upon the opponent, the weekend, time of game, etc.

BTW: Any word on playing our Saturday games at night? Particularly the early season games?
Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
DfromCT
Tsunami
Posts: 5999
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 3:45 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote: Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
We all know we cannot average over 30k without expansion.

The Dome will be used no more than once a year or once every few years. We aren't getting into a P5 in the next year or two, we need an invite in the 5 to 10 year time frame. Hopefully by that time we'll have forced expansion. My point was that 30k would be very successful. It would put us in the top 25% of G5 attendance, a place we haven't been in a very, very long time. To get there we'd need to get our football program to a place it hasn't been in an equally long time: knocking on then walking through the door of the top 25 in the rankings.

The longer it takes for the next Wave of P5 shuffling, the better our chances are. As we all know right now our chances are slim and none. If the Big 12 decides to move this summer, the two teams taken likely would have a year or two before entering, but it may not trigger another huge move within the other conferences, unless they convince an ACC team or two to go. But I don't think that's the direction they'd want to take.

If Cowen had made it a priority to get into a P5 when he made the (ill-fated) decision to take on the P5, we'd be in a Power conference right now. We'd also have a few more bowl games this century. I don't want to turn this into another Cow/Dick bashing thread, but he was so wrong in his reading the tea leaves and "Tulane Model."
" For every alum, no matter where they are...I want a football coach that's going to make Saturday something you anticipate and look forward to." --Troy Dannen

Thank you all for your support as my son Zach continues to beat leukemia
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 7590
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 3:51 pm

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote: Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
We all know we cannot average over 30k without expansion.

The Dome will be used no more than once a year or once every few years. We aren't getting into a P5 in the next year or two, we need an invite in the 5 to 10 year time frame. Hopefully by that time we'll have forced expansion. My point was that 30k would be very successful. It would put us in the top 25% of G5 attendance, a place we haven't been in a very, very long time. To get there we'd need to get our football program to a place it hasn't been in an equally long time: knocking on then walking through the door of the top 25 in the rankings.

The longer it takes for the next Wave of P5 shuffling, the better our chances are. As we all know right now our chances are slim and none. If the Big 12 decides to move this summer, the two teams taken likely would have a year or two before entering, but it may not trigger another huge move within the other conferences, unless they convince an ACC team or two to go. But I don't think that's the direction they'd want to take.

If Cowen had made it a priority to get into a P5 when he made the (ill-fated) decision to take on the P5, we'd be in a Power conference right now. We'd also have a few more bowl games this century. I don't want to turn this into another Cow/Dick bashing thread, but he was so wrong in his reading the tea leaves and "Tulane Model."
can someone give me the cost breakdown to expand Yulman another 10 to 12,000 seats.... Thanks
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1660
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 3:57 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote: The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.

I wholeheartedly agree. If we could average over 30k on campus, the once a year or once every other year in the Dome game could double that, depending upon the opponent, the weekend, time of game, etc.

BTW: Any word on playing our Saturday games at night? Particularly the early season games?
Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
It's true that we cannot average over 30,000 in Yulman due to its size, but we need to worry about consistently selling out games before we start playing the what if we had another 10,000 seats game. Plus, it would be great publicity and exposure for Tulane to have headlines saying that Tulane is forced to expand its stadium due to the fact that it consistently sells out games. However, we aren't to those headlines yet.
winwave wrote:Like I said we jumped 17,00 just on stadium. Winning consistently will cause just as big a jump.
I'm not saying that we cannot achieve more behinds in seats, I'm just saying 35,000+ won't happen anytime soon even if we win - mid 2020s at the absolute earliest.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12004
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 4:54 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote: The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.

I wholeheartedly agree. If we could average over 30k on campus, the once a year or once every other year in the Dome game could double that, depending upon the opponent, the weekend, time of game, etc.

BTW: Any word on playing our Saturday games at night? Particularly the early season games?
Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
It's true that we cannot average over 30,000 in Yulman due to its size, but we need to worry about consistently selling out games before we start playing the what if we had another 10,000 seats game. Plus, it would be great publicity and exposure for Tulane to have headlines saying that Tulane is forced to expand its stadium due to the fact that it consistently sells out games. However, we aren't to those headlines yet.
winwave wrote:Like I said we jumped 17,00 just on stadium. Winning consistently will cause just as big a jump.
I'm not saying that we cannot achieve more behinds in seats, I'm just saying 35,000+ won't happen anytime soon even if we win - mid 2020s at the absolute earliest.
We have to agree to disagree on the timing of expansion. There's a good reason Houston built to 40k straight up w/clear expansion capability to 50k. It was to show players and P5's they were serious about football. Put yourself in the shoes of recruits that are worth getting, the type that can really help us elevate the program. They are going to see other facilities. They are not going to be the least bit impressed by Yulman. The move to improve it needs to be much sooner than later.

Again we'll have to agree to disagree on how quickly we can get a sizeable jump in attendance from consistent winning. In 98 we went from 5,000 at the beginning to 38k at the end. If we follow w/RR we get that much bigger. In one of your post above you said you hope you're wrong on that issue. Hopefully we win consistently soon and you are proven wrong.
Find A Way!
User avatar
nawlinspete
Swell
Posts: 1627
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 5:04 pm

Read and weep again:

Missouri schedules CUSA member North Texas in FB; but we're too proud to schedule against desirable teams because they wont give us "equitable" 1 - 1 or 2 - 2. Let's get real and start to rebuild our brand name. We need to swallow hard and acknowledge that we have, at this time, virtually no leverage for "equity."
Once and Again, With Smart Choices and a Bit Of Patience
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 7:11 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote: The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.

I wholeheartedly agree. If we could average over 30k on campus, the once a year or once every other year in the Dome game could double that, depending upon the opponent, the weekend, time of game, etc.

BTW: Any word on playing our Saturday games at night? Particularly the early season games?
Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
It's true that we cannot average over 30,000 in Yulman due to its size, but we need to worry about consistently selling out games before we start playing the what if we had another 10,000 seats game. Plus, it would be great publicity and exposure for Tulane to have headlines saying that Tulane is forced to expand its stadium due to the fact that it consistently sells out games. However, we aren't to those headlines yet.
winwave wrote:Like I said we jumped 17,00 just on stadium. Winning consistently will cause just as big a jump.
I'm not saying that we cannot achieve more behinds in seats, I'm just saying 35,000+ won't happen anytime soon even if we win - mid 2020s at the absolute earliest.
Your inability to see past the past is not useful. "mid 2020's" at the earliest is 10 years away. Baylor is only 5 years removed from not having been to 1 bowl game since 1991, which is even worse than Tulane has been during the Cowen era. Houston went from losing to a horrendous Tulane team filled with freshman at home to beating FSU in the Peach Bowl in 1 season.

It's very much the "old Tulane" way of thinking to expect constant sell outs to be a "PR opportunity" regarding stadium expansion. Teams that win and have demand for seats don't need cheap PR tricks. Good marketing doesn't sell a bad product, but a great product can be sold despite bad marketing.

The list of things Tulane "cannot" do went across the street with Rick Dickson. Get on board.
golfnut69
Green Wave
Posts: 7590
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 7:51 pm

nawlinspete wrote:Read and weep again:

Missouri schedules CUSA member North Texas in FB; but we're too proud to schedule against desirable teams because they wont give us "equitable" 1 - 1 or 2 - 2. Let's get real and start to rebuild our brand name. We need to swallow hard and acknowledge that we have, at this time, virtually no leverage for "equity."
ough

Pete, the only reason Mizzou scheduled No Texas is for recruiting purposes...Mizzou, like Kansas, K-State OU, Ok State has to have players from Texas, because their states do not produce enough players to be competitive on a regular basis...this game allows Mizzou to come back to the DFW recruiting market...so mom and dad can see little Johnny closer to home
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1660
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 8:04 pm

jonathanjoseph wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote: The flip side of that coin is that people think we need to average 50K or 80K to be very successful, which is also not true. 30K-35K in average attendance and contending for top 25 status would put us squarely on track to be the next Baylor.

I wholeheartedly agree. If we could average over 30k on campus, the once a year or once every other year in the Dome game could double that, depending upon the opponent, the weekend, time of game, etc.

BTW: Any word on playing our Saturday games at night? Particularly the early season games?
Right. But we LITERALLY CANNOT average over 30K on campus because we built a too small stadium. And you don't expand to 30K, you have to expand to 35K-40K to be able to average 30K, so we're $100M in expansion efforts away from being able to do that. Which is why that Dome will remain an option more than anyone thinks.
It's true that we cannot average over 30,000 in Yulman due to its size, but we need to worry about consistently selling out games before we start playing the what if we had another 10,000 seats game. Plus, it would be great publicity and exposure for Tulane to have headlines saying that Tulane is forced to expand its stadium due to the fact that it consistently sells out games. However, we aren't to those headlines yet.
winwave wrote:Like I said we jumped 17,00 just on stadium. Winning consistently will cause just as big a jump.
I'm not saying that we cannot achieve more behinds in seats, I'm just saying 35,000+ won't happen anytime soon even if we win - mid 2020s at the absolute earliest.
Your inability to see past the past is not useful. "mid 2020's" at the earliest is 10 years away. Baylor is only 5 years removed from not having been to 1 bowl game since 1991, which is even worse than Tulane has been during the Cowen era. Houston went from losing to a horrendous Tulane team filled with freshman at home to beating FSU in the Peach Bowl in 1 season.

It's very much the "old Tulane" way of thinking to expect constant sell outs to be a "PR opportunity" regarding stadium expansion. Teams that win and have demand for seats don't need cheap PR tricks. Good marketing doesn't sell a bad product, but a great product can be sold despite bad marketing.

The list of things Tulane "cannot" do went across the street with Rick Dickson. Get on board.
Baylor is in the Big 12. It, TCU, Stanford, Northwestern, USC, Duke, Vanderbilt, BC, Syracuse, Wake Forest, and Miami cannot be compared to us since they are in P5s and they each reap all of the benefits that being in a P5 entails to each of its members (instant national relevance of a team starts winning, tv exposure, tv money, better facilities, better coaches, better recruits, etc.). We, in contrast, are part of the G5. Our private school peers are Rice and Tulsa.

I've been hitting on my next point all day. Which G5s are drawing huge crowds consistently other than East Carolina? Name one. I mean, only 7 G5s averaged more than ~30k last year. The idea that winning will solve the attendance issue doesn't make sense when there doesn't not appear to be a current example among the G5. Boise State, Cincinnati and Houston are on point counter examples.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12004
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 10:48 pm

Like I said we'll have to agree to disagree. I've hammered home how much our numbers jumped without even winning. When having this conversation you have to envision a quality football team that is winning consistently. I know that's hard to do b/c of what we have been through but that type of program will draw.
Find A Way!
DrBox
Riptide
Posts: 3093
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 11:20 pm

nawlinspete wrote:Read and weep again:

Missouri schedules CUSA member North Texas in FB; but we're too proud to schedule against desirable teams because they wont give us "equitable" 1 - 1 or 2 - 2. Let's get real and start to rebuild our brand name. We need to swallow hard and acknowledge that we have, at this time, virtually no leverage for "equity."
That is incorrect. We don't schedule uneven series because we don't have to schedule an even series to get good games in town.
Uneven series are pointless anyway
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Thu May 05, 2016 11:37 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Baylor is in the Big 12. It, TCU, Stanford, Northwestern, USC, Duke, Vanderbilt, BC, Syracuse, Wake Forest, and Miami cannot be compared to us since they are in P5s and they each reap all of the benefits that being in a P5 entails to each of its members (instant national relevance of a team starts winning, tv exposure, tv money, better facilities, better coaches, better recruits, etc.). We, in contrast, are part of the G5. Our private school peers are Rice and Tulsa.

I've been hitting on my next point all day. Which G5s are drawing huge crowds consistently other than East Carolina? Name one. I mean, only 7 G5s averaged more than ~30k last year. The idea that winning will solve the attendance issue doesn't make sense when there doesn't not appear to be a current example among the G5. Boise State, Cincinnati and Houston are on point counter examples.
That argument is both lazy and obviously incorrect. In fact, it's PROVEN FALSE by the Baylor example, since they had Big 12 resources since the SWC days and yet only went to one bowl game in 20 years. The idea that Tulane "can't" be successful due to a lack of P5 resources is just a Dickson excuse and shouldn't be confused with an intractable problem.

None of those other schools are in New Orleans, a world famous sports destination city that none of Boise, Cincinnati nor Houston can aspire to. Every opposing fan considers the road trip.

You are confusing correlation with causation. Sure, it goes without saying that most of the higher attended programs are in P5 conferences. But there are only ~60 total G5 universities. Even counting the Sun Belt, 7 averaging >~30K is still over 10%. If you reduce it to just the AAC, MWC and MAC, you're talking about 7 out of 34 universities, or about 20%.

Enough with this Rick Dickson BS you keep spouting as gospel. It's really not that much to aspire to be in the top 10% or 20% of the G5 for attendance when you consider most of the G5 schools are in the middle of no where. Thankfully, we have leadership which no longer considers such embarrassingly low bars to be unachievable.

Rick Dickson's list of excuses no longer serve a purpose here.
Aberzombie1892
Swell
Posts: 1660
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 7:01 am

jonathanjoseph wrote:
Aberzombie1892 wrote:
Baylor is in the Big 12. It, TCU, Stanford, Northwestern, USC, Duke, Vanderbilt, BC, Syracuse, Wake Forest, and Miami cannot be compared to us since they are in P5s and they each reap all of the benefits that being in a P5 entails to each of its members (instant national relevance of a team starts winning, tv exposure, tv money, better facilities, better coaches, better recruits, etc.). We, in contrast, are part of the G5. Our private school peers are Rice and Tulsa.

I've been hitting on my next point all day. Which G5s are drawing huge crowds consistently other than East Carolina? Name one. I mean, only 7 G5s averaged more than ~30k last year. The idea that winning will solve the attendance issue doesn't make sense when there doesn't not appear to be a current example among the G5. Boise State, Cincinnati and Houston are on point counter examples.
That argument is both lazy and obviously incorrect. In fact, it's PROVEN FALSE by the Baylor example, since they had Big 12 resources since the SWC days and yet only went to one bowl game in 20 years. The idea that Tulane "can't" be successful due to a lack of P5 resources is just a Dickson excuse and shouldn't be confused with an intractable problem.

None of those other schools are in New Orleans, a world famous sports destination city that none of Boise, Cincinnati nor Houston can aspire to. Every opposing fan considers the road trip.

You are confusing correlation with causation. Sure, it goes without saying that most of the higher attended programs are in P5 conferences. But there are only ~60 total G5 universities. Even counting the Sun Belt, 7 averaging >~30K is still over 10%. If you reduce it to just the AAC, MWC and MAC, you're talking about 7 out of 34 universities, or about 20%.

Enough with this Rick Dickson BS you keep spouting as gospel. It's really not that much to aspire to be in the top 10% or 20% of the G5 for attendance when you consider most of the G5 schools are in the middle of no where. Thankfully, we have leadership which no longer considers such embarrassingly low bars to be unachievable.

Rick Dickson's list of excuses no longer serve a purpose here.
You do understand that major tv money is a relatively new phenomenon? TV money didn't become a big deal until around the BCS, so any "but they were in the SWC!" arguments don't make sense since the TV money wasn't there back then like it is now.

But that's irrelevant to my point.

It doesn't matter that Baylor lost for those years. The point is, any team in a P5 can become relevant by consistently beating the highest profile teams in its conference, whether it's Baylor or Wake Forest. We don't have the luxury of having big name teams on our schedule consistently.

However, that has nothing to do with the points that either of us are trying to make.

My point is, there is no evidence that winning alone will cure what ails us, and I have provided substantial real world evidence to back up my point. Most counter points to my point are either wishful thinking theories with no evidence or examples of looking to the distant past for how things were and pretend as though the past is achievable in this modern college football climate (which it's not).

Also, why bring up Rick? That has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
winwave
Wild Pelican
Posts: 12004
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 10:34 am
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 7:12 am

There's no evidence winning consistently won't cure our ills as it's something Tulane hasn't done. Though when we have won our attendance did go up. So imagine what it would do when we won consistently.
Find A Way!
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 17668
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 9:37 am

The pinnacle of Tulane football attendance occurred in the late 70's early 80's. Tulane played an attractive schedule and won. At that time the Dome was fairly new and Tulane attracted a lot of new fans because of playing there. This was during the period that I attended Tulane and we beat LSU 3 out of 4 years (1979,1981 and 1982). The Terrance level in the Dome was even open. We put a legit 40,000-45,000 on a regular basis. From the mid 80's up until 1997 we lost and started to play a less than attractive schedule and attendance began to drop off precipitously. I think we probably lost 2 generations of fans over that time frame. It's going to take awhile to replace those lost generations if ever. The competition for the entertainment dollar has also greatly increased since then. I don't know all the answers. I would be happy just to see what would happen if we started to win 9 or 10 games a year for the next 4-5 seasons. That's what it may take to gain interest locally at this stage.
Stadiums get old, winning never does.
Tulane Class of 1981
VanceWGreen
Ripple
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:48 pm
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 9:56 am

Play like-minded schools.
User avatar
MicMan
Surge
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:00 pm
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 1:33 pm

tpstulane wrote:The pinnacle of Tulane football attendance occurred in the late 70's early 80's. Tulane played an attractive schedule and won. At that time the Dome was fairly new and Tulane attracted a lot of new fans because of playing there. This was during the period that I attended Tulane and we beat LSU 3 out of 4 years (1979,1981 and 1982). The Terrance level in the Dome was even open. We put a legit 40,000-45,000 on a regular basis. From the mid 80's up until 1997 we lost and started to play a less than attractive schedule and attendance began to drop off precipitously. I think we probably lost 2 generations of fans over that time frame. It's going to take awhile to replace those lost generations if ever. The competition for the entertainment dollar has also greatly increased since then. I don't know all the answers. I would be happy just to see what would happen if we started to win 9 or 10 games a year for the next 4-5 seasons. That's what it may take to gain interest locally at this stage.
This was also the era of the University College, there were plenty of pro-prospect players on the roster. Tulane played and beat (doormat) SEC teams with regularity. Throw in the occasional upset of a ranked team (Fla State, LSU), and TU was far from a pushover. That should be the goal: Not a pushover.

The observation that Tulane lost two generations of potential fans is the key here. if you lose for long enough it takes time to rebuild attendance even when winning.
User avatar
wave97
Swell
Posts: 1250
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:08 pm
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 3:48 pm

VanceWGreen wrote:Play like-minded schools.
We'll all hold hands, gaze into each other's eyes and sing Kumbaya.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 4:44 pm

Aberzombie1892 wrote: You do understand that major tv money is a relatively new phenomenon? TV money didn't become a big deal until around the BCS, so any "but they were in the SWC!" arguments don't make sense since the TV money wasn't there back then like it is now.

But that's irrelevant to my point.

It doesn't matter that Baylor lost for those years. The point is, any team in a P5 can become relevant by consistently beating the highest profile teams in its conference, whether it's Baylor or Wake Forest. We don't have the luxury of having big name teams on our schedule consistently.

However, that has nothing to do with the points that either of us are trying to make.

My point is, there is no evidence that winning alone will cure what ails us, and I have provided substantial real world evidence to back up my point. Most counter points to my point are either wishful thinking theories with no evidence or examples of looking to the distant past for how things were and pretend as though the past is achievable in this modern college football climate (which it's not).

Also, why bring up Rick? That has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
I'll continue to bring up Dickson as people continue pushing his excuses as narratives. No, you cannot legitimately suggest that major TV money is a relatively new phenomenon. There is a reason that Lousiville and others were starting down this path 20 years ago, because the writing was on the wall. Only Cowen and Dickson let a 20 year trend sneak up on them and then tell everyone that no one could have seen it coming, when literally everyone else saw it coming.

Yes there is evidence that winning alone will cure what ails us. It's called common sense and economics. The idea that winning WON'T cure what ails us is stupid enough that it could only have originated with Cowen/Dickson.

Stop pushing Dickson's narratives. Dannen absolutely knows that winning cures everything, just as in business (as Mark Cuban always says) sales cures everything.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Fri May 06, 2016 4:46 pm

VanceWGreen wrote:Play like-minded schools.
Vance!

Going from Dickson to Dannen is a god send for fans but a nightmare for comedians.

Thank goodness those running the show now have a different idea of "like minded". Now if we could only explain that to some of these fans.
Post Reply