(12-15-2014 10:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  These are the official NCAA figures so please no griping about butts in seats and the like, with change from last year:

1) ECU .............44,786 ...... +2%
2) UCF .............37,812 ......-10%
3) Memphis ......33,851.......+19%
4) USF ..............30,694.......-12%
5) Cincy ............28,840........-9%
6) Houston .......28,311.......+17%
7) UConn ..........27,461........-11%
8) Tulane ..........25,012.......+27%
9) Temple..........23,370.........+4%
10) SMU ...........21,528.......+15%

Looks like the three Big East teams each took a plunge. UCF had a post-Bortles hangover, while Tulane benefited from a new stadium. Everyone else seemed to go up by various amounts.

Nice to have 4 teams at 30,000+ even if some of the numbers may be inflated. I gotta say I am kind of disappointed in UCF's attendance this year. I know the smu game really hurt the average as well as week night games but that is still only about 84% of our capacity. I think we really should strive to have atleast 90% every week. Hopefully we have a more attractive home schedule next year which would help.

You can't blame the weak schedule because you aren't the only ones who had to put up with it. ECU got wrecked by the SMU and UCONN games as well.

Tulsa couldn't even get passed 20K with one of the home games against Oklahoma. They will consistently drag the average down.

UC played downtown....meh


next yr will be a huge difference

(12-16-2014 04:28 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 02:07 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 12:22 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 09:44 AM)Juan Tibonya Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 05:50 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  There we go one fish took the bait

Now really, you can't taint this response as troll action here just because USF has a very bad reputation for fudging the numbers. 2013 USF lies even worse

To even attempt to claim attendance in the 30,000 has to be the biggest joke going. the reason why you "were waiting for it" is because it is a laughable as it gets.

It is troll action because everyone and their mother on this board is well aware that USF counts tickets distributed as many other schools do. This has been discussed ad nauseum every attendance thread. Yet its like a knee jerk reaction for some in your fan base that only have issues with USF numbers.
Notice how the only ones to jump on it are ucf fans

Is it important to have folks in the stands when your program plays? Absolutely

Is it also important to revenue from those tickets used to attend games? Absolutely

Ticket revenue doesn't seem to be an issue for the program that always carries the brunt this criticism, but getting people in the seats is. All of us face problems on the field, on the court, at the gate, or from a myriad of other sources; if we didn't we'd be in a P5 conference. Don't some folks have more interesting things to discuss than shortcomings of everyone else's program, fan base, etc?

Derive for yourself what the below numbers mean, they were taken from the same data that was referenced in the below thread and have been referenced on this and previous boards that many of us have been a member of for a decade or so:
http://csnbbs.com/thread-687551-post-115...id11548401

Ticket Revenue 2013:
UCF $3,939,506
Cincinnati $7,416,843
UConn $8,889,522
ECU $6,859,822
Houston $3,812,821
Memphis $8,299,006
South Florida $6,888,742

I'll bet ucf doesn't count booster fees and other income while others do. Ucf charges a booster fee for all seats nearly to endzone seats. Doesn't make sense we are under others especially having better attendance than most.

Quote:Methodology

The data, updated for 2013, are based on the revenue and expense reports collected from more than 225 public schools in the NCAA's Division I that have an obligation to release the data (the NCAA does not release the data publicly). The others are private or are covered under a state exemption.

The best way to use the data is to compare a school's expenses over time to see how they have changed. Because the categories are standardized, comparisons between schools are possible as well. The school's president or chancellor reviews the data before it's submitted to the NCAA, which also does a general audit of the data. In an effort to standardize reporting, NCAA staff members have worked with the National Association of College and University Business Officers to formulate definitions for each category. Still, some schools interpret the reporting rules slightly differently.

Schools' conference membership, typically the affiliation for basketball, are based on alignments for the 2012-13 school year.

Note: Dollar amounts have not been adjusted for inflation.

Source: USA TODAY public-records requests to each university.

--

Category explanations

--

Summary categories:

Total Revenue: Includes all sources

Total Expenses: Includes all operating expenses

Total Subsidy: The sum of students fees, direct and indirect institutional support and state money. The NCAA and others consider such funds "allocated" or everything not generated by the department's athletics functions.

Percent subsidy: Percent of revenues from allocated sources.

--

Revenue categories:

Ticket sales: Sales of admissions to athletics events. Include ticket sales to the public, faculty and students, and money received for shipping and handling of tickets. Does not include amounts in excess of face value (such as preferential seating) or sales for conference and national tournaments that are pass-through transactions.

Contributions: Includes amounts received directly from individuals, corporations, associations, foundations, clubs or other organizations by the donor for the operation of the athletics program. Report amounts paid in excess of a ticket's value. Contributions include cash, marketable securities and in-kind contributions such as dealer-provided cars, apparel and drink products for team and staff use. Also includes revenue from preferential seating.

Rights/Licensing: Includes revenue for athletics from radio and television broadcasts, Internet and ecommerce rights received from institution-negotiated contracts, the NCAA and conference revenue sharing arrangements; and revenue from corporate sponsorships, licensing, sales of advertisements, trademarks and royalties. Includes the value of in-kind products and services provided as part of the sponsorship (e.g., equipment, apparel, soft drinks, water and isotonic products).

Student fees: Fees assessed to support athletics.

School funds: Includes both direct and indirect support from the university, including state funds, tuition, tuition waivers etc. as well as federal Work Study amounts for athletes. It also includes university-provided support such as administrative costs, facilities and grounds maintenance, security, risk management, utilities, depreciation and debt service.

Other: All other sources of revenue including game guarantees, support from third-parties guaranteed by the school such as TV income, housing allowances, camp income, etc.; tournament/bowl game revenues from conferences; endowments and investments; revenue from game programs, novelties, food or other concessions; and parking revenues and other sources.

--

Expense categories:

Coaching/staff: All salaries, bonuses and benefits reported on the university's tax forms for coaches and staff, as well as third-party contributions.

Scholarships: Athletically-related student aid, including summer school and tuition discounts and waivers (including aid given to student-athletes who have exhausted their eligibility or who are inactive due to medical reasons), and aid for non-athletes such as student managers.

Buildings/grounds: Facilities costs charged to the athletics program, including debt service, maintenance, utilities and rental fees.

Other: Includes guarantees paid to other schools, severance payments to past coaches and staff, recruiting, team travel, equipment and uniforms, game day and camp expenses, fundraising and marketing costs, spirit group support, medical expense/insurance and conference dues. It also includes expenses charged to athletics by the university, such as building maintenance.

(12-16-2014 04:28 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 02:07 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 12:22 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 09:44 AM)Juan Tibonya Wrote:  

(12-16-2014 05:50 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  There we go one fish took the bait

Now really, you can't taint this response as troll action here just because USF has a very bad reputation for fudging the numbers. 2013 USF lies even worse

To even attempt to claim attendance in the 30,000 has to be the biggest joke going. the reason why you "were waiting for it" is because it is a laughable as it gets.

It is troll action because everyone and their mother on this board is well aware that USF counts tickets distributed as many other schools do. This has been discussed ad nauseum every attendance thread. Yet its like a knee jerk reaction for some in your fan base that only have issues with USF numbers.
Notice how the only ones to jump on it are ucf fans

Is it important to have folks in the stands when your program plays? Absolutely

Is it also important to revenue from those tickets used to attend games? Absolutely

Ticket revenue doesn't seem to be an issue for the program that always carries the brunt this criticism, but getting people in the seats is. All of us face problems on the field, on the court, at the gate, or from a myriad of other sources; if we didn't we'd be in a P5 conference. Don't some folks have more interesting things to discuss than shortcomings of everyone else's program, fan base, etc?

Derive for yourself what the below numbers mean, they were taken from the same data that was referenced in the below thread and have been referenced on this and previous boards that many of us have been a member of for a decade or so:
http://csnbbs.com/thread-687551-post-115...id11548401

Ticket Revenue 2013:
UCF $3,939,506
Cincinnati $7,416,843
UConn $8,889,522
ECU $6,859,822
Houston $3,812,821
Memphis $8,299,006
South Florida $6,888,742

I'll bet ucf doesn't count booster fees and other income while others do. Ucf charges a booster fee for all seats nearly to endzone seats. Doesn't make sense we are under others especially having better attendance than most.

And equivalent ticket prices. I read the linked thread and didn't see those numbers anywhere.

(12-16-2014 07:41 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  Top 15 Non-P5 Attendance:

1) BYU..................57,141
2) ECU ................44,786
3) UCF ................37,812
4) Fresno..............34,876
5) Army................34,262
6) Memphis .........33,851
7) Boise St............32,504
8) Navy................32,502
9) USF ................30,694
10) Cincy .............28,840
11) UTEP................28,377
12) Houston .........28,311
13) Air Force..........28,161
14) UTSA...............27,576
T15) UConn ..........27,461
T15) Marshall..........27,461

American - 8
MWC - 3
CUSA - 3
Indep - 2
Sun Belt - 0
MAC - 0

I have to admit, I did not realize was #2 in attendance for G5. That is really impressive. As for the Thursday night games, ECU fans will go and that was what VT used to get national attention. If ECU could even get a NIT level Basketball program, they would be an ideal candidate when expansion happens. Basketball has been the Achilles' hill in their efforts in moving the program up. They would have been in the Big East years ago if not for Basketball.