Pac-12 Football and half empty stadiums

Discussion in 'On The Field' started by texas_ex2000, Sep 17, 2011.

  1. texas_ex2000

    texas_ex2000 2,500+ Posts

    Even with Texas in town, they only have like 40k in attendance. Awesome conference.
     
  2. XOVER

    XOVER 500+ Posts

    PAC attendance is embarrassing.
     
  3. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    I actually give UCLA a little slack. Think about it - they're in Los Angeles. Massive city, and I'd bet maybe 1 percent of the population (if that) has any connection to the school other than location. And even there, there's plenty more schools in the area if you even care about college sports, plus you're in a metro town that cares about professional sports. And on top of that, you've got the beach and great weather, so if I live in LA, no way to I go to a UCLA game unless they're playing for a national championship or featuring the next Vince Young in their lineup.

    Basically it's a more academically credible version of U of H. without the nice weather and surfing.

    Having said that, why do we care if our opponents don't sell out? As long as I can watch it on TV, I'm fine with it - in fact that's good news because if I want to go to a game, I know I can get there for cheap.
     
  4. BigEarlinBastrop

    BigEarlinBastrop 250+ Posts

    And a lot more places to spend a Saturday afternoon than in heat struck central Texas. But, it's evident that Longhorns and most B12 and most SEC schools fill seats better than PAC. If we join them they will come to notice.

    Remember overhearing a USC fan on cell phone from the pre-game tailgate, "There are sooo many people in orange here."
     
  5. Zona Horn

    Zona Horn 500+ Posts

    A few comments:

    I was at the game. Rose Bowl seats 100,000. There were 70,000 fans at least, or more than ku, ksu, Baylor, missou, okie state, tech, and isu. In other words, more than everyone in big 12 except UT, OU and (usually) ATM.

    Ucla has not been good since 1999. I can recall 70 percent football stadiums during mackovic years. Very few schools sell out after a decade of mostly losing seasons.

    The rose bowl is 30 miles from campus. Hence student attendance suffers.


    In the 90's they actuall
     
  6. Zona Horn

    Zona Horn 500+ Posts

    Sorry. iPhone glitch. Anyway, in 90s they did sell out, which was 100k. Like many scoops when they are good they are full and when they are bad it's less so.

    I will say this - the atmosphere was great and the fans were super cool. We end up at neuheisel family tailgate and they gave me and my family field passes - very cool thing to give away to a bunch of kids in orange (who then wore "guest of coach Rick Neuheisel" badges all game long). My 7 and 9 year old boys got high fives from McCoy and Shipley as they ran off field in pregame, and they were wearing number 8 and 12 jerseys so that was cool!
     
  7. Pentaconta

    Pentaconta 1,000+ Posts

    Autzen Stadium says hi.
     
  8. 2222Horn

    2222Horn 100+ Posts

    Longhorns travel well in CA. Great burnt orange atmosphere (like the 05 Rose Bowl and the 01 Stanford game). Lots of NorCal Texas alums went down for the weekend. Breakfast and beach in Santa Monica in the morning and then over to Pasadena for the game.
     
  9. texas_ex2000

    texas_ex2000 2,500+ Posts


     
  10. XOVER

    XOVER 500+ Posts

    PAC: According to ESPN, official attendance for Texas at UCLA is 54,583. I would say "half empty" is a fair descriptor.

    B1G: Iowa drew 70,585 against Pittsburgh.

    PAC: Oregon drew 58,847 against Missouri State.

    B1G: Nebraska drew 85,110 against Washington.

    PAC: Stanford at Arizona was a midnight game and drew 49,636.

    B1G
    : Arizona State at Illinois drew 50,669.

    Of Interest: Utah at BYU was a midnight game, and drew 63,742.

    Of Interest: TCU drew 32,719 against Louisiana-Monroe.
     
  11. ViperHorn

    ViperHorn 10,000+ Posts

    Xover, Texas does not want to end up in the B1G as recruiting inside of Texas will take a big hit. Kids in Texas play PAC ball, not sleep inducing B1G ball.
     
  12. XOVER

    XOVER 500+ Posts

    And you think this why, ViperHorn?

    Judging from objective attendance figures, it seems to me that its the PAC that suffers from somnolence, not the B1G.
     
  13. texas_ex2000

    texas_ex2000 2,500+ Posts


     
  14. general35

    general35 5,000+ Posts

    the pac is a weak and soft league. end of story. preach whatever argument youl ike but tht is the truth. they send out a good top to middle product every 4 years or so.
     
  15. ViperHorn

    ViperHorn 10,000+ Posts


     
  16. Zona Horn

    Zona Horn 500+ Posts

    I'm not sure any Texas fan should be callin the Pac10 weak or soft given our mediocre record against th the past 15 years. PAC 10 actually has a winning record against every BCS conference over last 15 years, including SEC. True story.
     
  17. XOVER

    XOVER 500+ Posts

    Now I see.

    If Texas goes B1G, then we have to stop using systems featuring multiple offenses and speed on defense.

    I guess there's some league rule out there or something known only to the elect?

    Or maybe you think that because you don't get to watch enough PAC football since so much of it is played on Sunday mornings?

    OTOH, we all did get to watch a UCLA club today from the PAC. I wonder how many kids thought UCLA was boring because they run, run, run and don't seem to like to throw much? And what little they do throw, the ball is always intercepted? It also looked to me like UCLA could use several more speed guys on defense. Did you see Fozzy Whitaker run away from those slow, plodding UCLA defenders? Texas even had a TE catch and run for a 45 yard score.
     
  18. texas_ex2000

    texas_ex2000 2,500+ Posts


     
  19. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts


     
  20. HighPlainsBevo

    HighPlainsBevo 250+ Posts

    Great to meet some of HornFan nation at the Rose Bowl on Saturday! Having said that, while the UCLA fans were nice enough, they really are a sorry example of college football fans. Even USC across town had poor attendance. Granted, a lot to see and do here, but their late arrival (in some cases they haven't arrived yet), early departure, and general lack of good old fashioned vitriol, was very interesting. Don't want to draw too many conclusions from one game, but should we end up in the PAC€, we should own this beyotch.
     
  21. ctrl+alt+del

    ctrl+alt+del 500+ Posts

    Saturday's attendance:

    A&M 86,623
    USC 65,873 (Lowest since 10/29/2002)
    Mizzou 63,420
    Oregon 58,847
    Colorado 57,186
    UCLA 54,583
    K-State 50,483
    Arizona 49,636
    Baylor 43,090
    Cal 33,952 (AT&T Park)
     
  22. Touchdown

    Touchdown 100+ Posts

    Colorado only had that many because they were playing CSU in Denver so both schools were represented. Pretty sad. The stadium looked empty for the most part.
     
  23. HornBud

    HornBud 2,500+ Posts

    Except for the Oregon schools, the Pac12 just doesn't seem football crazy. This alone is reason enough for me to not be thrilled about joining up with this lot, and am much more interested in Big10 country.
     
  24. Mesohorny

    Mesohorny 1,000+ Posts

    Viper,

    Your lines of reasoning make no sense.

    What does B1G's "very boring brand of football" have to do with how Texas would play?

    "Thanks for inventing the Wish Bone offense, Coach Bellard, but none of the other SWC schools play that way, so we better not," said DKR in 1969.

    Maybe the HarsinWhite O could help bring the B1G O's into the 21st century? In the mean time, we could have fun playing them.

    And as far as your postcard story, if a kid would opt for OU so that he can see the Pacific from the team bus a couple of times in his 4 yr career, why wouldn't he just go to a So Cal school and see the ocean everyday? Lots of good players go to Collie Station, Norman, Baton Rouge, Tuscaloosa, etc., etc., none of which are especially glamorous places.

    And the weather differences are non-factors, always have been.

    Your hatred or fear of B1G has you reaching for excuses.
     
  25. waazel

    waazel 100+ Posts

    As one of the Pac 10 fans on this board, I'll chime in on this topic. Yep, the Pac 10 is in a down-cycle right now. Conference is mediocre at this point. Stanford is very good. Oregon is very good (I would still love to see them play an OOC heavy mid-season without 6+ weeks to prepare). UW, SC, ASU, and probably Utah and Cal are capable of that 20-30 range. UCLA is an embarrassment. UA is hurting. WSU and OSU are what they are. I don't know what to make of CU. I believe this is the culmination of stagnation in the front office (Tom Hansen) and lack of motivation/money from the schools. The landscape has changed and I think the Pac 10 was the last to figure it out. I was always frustrated that Pac 10 coaches mantra for years was "we just want to win our conference and go to the Rose Bowl". USC was the only one interested in winning. Washington was until their admin turned over in the mid-90's and basically rolled over for the NCAA, didn't invest back in facilities and made atrocious decisions for HC (Tyrone Willingham - are you f'n kidding me?!!). Oregon has turned it on but may get slapped back to earth here shortly. But I digress. I think the future is bright for the conference for a couple of reasons:

    1. Larry Scott. This guy is clearly thinking ahead of the game. He almost shocked the world last year by pulling the Pac 16 heist last year, but the rest of CFB wasn't ready and scrambled to keep the Big 12 together. That worked out well... [​IMG] Anyway, I think he is going to demand the apathetic conference members to start producing a better product. With the new money coming in from the TV deals, there is no reason that coaching hires need to be pulled off of the CFB scrap heap (Dennis Erickson? Rick Neuheisel?). Stadiums are getting upgraded already (AZ, UW and Cal). Stanford just rebuilt. I believe ASU has designs to renovate Sun Devil Stadium. With CA budget woes and an NFL stadium on deck, USC looks like it may finally get its hands on the Coliseum to own rather than rent.

    2. Coaching. As mentioned above, Pac 10 coaching hires have been less than inspired recently. But look how many are due to turnover as soon as next year: UCLA, ASU, Arizona, WSU are all on the hot seat. Kiffin will ride out the sanctions and then turn that job over after the first two-loss season once restrictions are lifted. Take a look at the candidate list in the next year and we'll see if there has been a attitude shift. If names like Norm Chow pop-up then it is same old **** and my words here are wasted. If you hear about hot coordinators (e.g. Malzahn) or trying to pull HC's from somewhere (say Dan Mullen), then we may be on to something.

    3. Population shift. 10 years ago, how many blue-chippers were coming out of AZ? A couple? How about Vegas? Utah? But these areas are becoming increasingly talent-filled and producing players. Not to mention the increasing influx of Polynesian players coming from Hawaii as well as the Polynesian communities in the West (Seattle, Utah, So Cal).

    For as much as the perception of the Pac 10 around the country is that it sucks - their winning record against every other BCS conference says otherwise. The fact that 9 of the 12 schools have been to a BCS bowl speaks to depth (only ASU, UA and Cal haven't been IIRC). All but WSU, CU and UCLA have won BCS bowls. I could think of a lot worse situations for OU/UT to come into. But does Tech have to come along? I'm thinking we get inspired and pull ND into the mix. They already have long-standing relationship with SC. They have had a recent one with Stanford. They are eager to start a new one with UT. Let's make it official and bring them into the fold too.

    Sorry pretty long, but just some thoughts.
     
  26. Horn2Run

    Horn2Run 1,000+ Posts

    Hopefully the announcement tomorrow or Tues is that TEXAS and ND are moving to the B I G next year, with the conference searching for 2 additional programs to join very soon

    Screw the PAC. Too weak. Midnite football, midnite basketball, midnite baseball. Let 0u suffer thru that ****. I'd rather be in the B I G
     
  27. Joe2005

    Joe2005 500+ Posts

    Three things:

    1. UCLA sucks. When we sucked in the 1990s, we had pretty crappy attendance too, and that was in an 80,000 seat stadium as opposed to the much larger Rose Bowl.

    2. UCLA's semester hasn't even started yet - their students are still moving in. So student attendance will of course be lower.

    3. The stadium is something like 30 miles away from their campus. Dumb all around, but that will always depress attendance because it makes it a pain for the kids to attend the game.

    Besides which, this is great for all the Longhorn alumni along the west coast - much cheaper and easier to go to those games.
     
  28. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts

    Maybe California football fans are just lame. San Francisco's stadium was about 33% Dallas fans.
     
  29. Texas Jack

    Texas Jack 1,000+ Posts


     
  30. atxbomber

    atxbomber 1,000+ Posts


     

Share This Page