Pac-10 Attendance and Analysis

The numbers from this year's Pac-10 numbers and some analysis. Here is the ESPN link which provided the numbers.

almost 2 years ago maccabita4life 10 comments 0 recs |

Comments

ursa

If that’s your blog, I’m RIGHT there with you. URSA was so incredibly frustrating. Took almost 2 hours of relentlessly trying to log on until it worked. Pretty frustrating. And it’s also my last quarter here. Kind of surreal.

Hopefully the people screwing up ursa today didn’t prevent you from getting your classes.

by longbordr52 on Feb 22, 2010 11:55 PM PST reply actions

yeah URSA was horrific

its funny it would happen in my last quarter also as an undergrad, oh well.

by maccabita4life on Feb 23, 2010 12:19 AM PST up reply actions

For a split second

I thought this was about basketball and I was STUNNED and knew it was wrong. The trgans leading basketball attendance? LOL! Glad to see we are 2nd in the Pac in football and just wait…we will climb!

GO BRUINS!!!

"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel

by uclafan11 on Feb 23, 2010 12:08 AM PST reply actions

Quick question macca

Can you hypeperlink in your blog? If you can, I would suggest your hyperlink Ted’s post.

Also, as hard as we have been on our students, I think our administration needs to continue to step up its effort to market our program in creative ways, our alums need to step up, and oh yeah we need to have a winning record in the Pac-10 conference this season.

by Nestor on Feb 23, 2010 4:08 AM PST reply actions

done

by maccabita4life on Feb 23, 2010 10:43 AM PST up reply actions

Statistics...

Good find, maccabita…

Gross attendance is definitely important, as revenue is directly related to the number of tickets sold. More tickets = more money.

But if you look at attendance as a percentage of the stadium capacity, here’s what we get

1. Oregon 101% (really)
2. OSU 93%
3. $c* 91%
4. UW 89%
5. Cal 83%
5. Furd 83%
7. WSU 74%
8. UCLA 70%
9. UofA 62%
10. ASU 60%

Ranking the Pac this way gives us a different perspective on our attendance.

Obviously, attendance will always be correlated with performance, and Los Angeles is not known for it’s die-hard Cub-like fan base, Our low percentage is also biased by the fact we play in a huge stadium. But each empty seat is a lost opportunity, both from a fan-support and from a revenue standpoint.

This shows that UCLA has a lot of potential for growth, and it really is critical that we capitalize on that opportunity. Hey Marketing, are you paying attention?

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Feb 23, 2010 10:50 AM PST reply actions

Hmmmm....

are all of the Rose Bowl seats available for every one of UCLA’s home games? I thought that was only the case for the U$C* game, and the rest of the time a couple of sections were closed? That would bump up our percentage…

But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by tasser10 on Feb 23, 2010 10:56 AM PST up reply actions

Good question

I did the math based on the Rose Bowl capacity of 92,542. If the virtual capacity were lower, that would increase our percentage.

But if there are buyers, they’d should open up the seats. I want to see 92,542 fans in blue every Saturday. Anything less means someone needs to work harder.

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Feb 23, 2010 11:18 AM PST up reply actions

I was wondering about that

and posted as such (anonymously) on his blog. Thanks for doing the math.

by KSBruin on Feb 23, 2010 11:32 AM PST up reply actions

Ah, good call

It was the first question that came to my mind, too. And then I saw the post (yours) and had some free time.

As I said, gross attendance is good, but we also have lots of room to improve that gross number. Hopefully, as we get better and better recruits, see more results on the field, and start destroying $c* on a regular basis, it will all come together.

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Feb 23, 2010 11:39 AM PST up reply actions