Football Attendance Committee

[LA_Mustang]

http://www.smudailycampus.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/02/12/402b08e5bf126

[JasonB]

Ummmm.... win?

[The Brown Hornet]

I wonder if the attendance at these committee meetings is similar to the attendance at the football games. :devil:

[LA_Mustang]

They all want to think of these great ideas to get people to the games but no one up there wants to address the real problem....the administration is not committed to winning.

[Eddie P]

You're right. All those idiots who were at that meeting need to just throw their hands in the air, go back to their hole, log on to the internet and [deleted] about it on ponyfans.com. That will certainly help attendance for the upcoming football season. To hell with anyone who would take the time out of their day to help this program.

<small>[ 02-12-2004, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: Eddie P ]</small>

[LA_Mustang]

I dont think anyone called them idiots, but you. The people in the athletic department work very hard and do a great job, its just that they are try to sell something that is not very sellable. Eddie P, let me ask you a question. Do you think the powers that be have put the coaches, marketing staff, and ticket office in a position to be successful?

[PlanoStang]

Originally posted by LA_Mustang:
They all want to think of these great ideas to get people to the games but no one up there wants to address the real problem....the administration is not committed to winning.

Almost correct, it may not be the administration that is not committed to winning. More likely, its the board of trustees, who controls the admin like puppets.

Those old rich fogies, and their family reps got burned a few years with all the athletic scandals, and they don't want to go there again.

I guess this wasn't a really serious meeting or Russ Potts would've been invited :laugh:

[NavyCrimson]

i agree - why?

what's the point?

once we start winning - & when, then the attendance problem will work itself out...

now let's move on to something more relevant.

but i do agree with you 'LA MUSTANG' re/ the committment from the administration - until that happens & if it did, things will then change for sure & for good...but only then!

next!

[Southland]

Originally posted by LA_Mustang:
They all want to think of these great ideas to get people to the games but no one up there wants to address the real problem....the administration is not committed to winning.

...has nothing to do with the administration. The Board of Trustees makes those decisions, not the managers employed by the University.

SMU hasn't had a connection with non-alumni Dallas residents since pro football arrived in 1960. I fully support any brainstorming to create partnerships that drive attendance, and no one should discourage those efforts just because of his/her bitterness towards the Board.

Copeland, the athletic department, the alumni association, the mustang club, et al have nothing to do with University policy toward redtagging. That falls solely on the shoulders of the Board.

We're all frustrated, but here is the group you should direct your suggestions to...

http://www.smu.edu/leadership/trustees.asp

[cowboypony]

1. I don't profess to know what all the policies that are at SMU right now (I, like everyone on this board read about what "our opinion" is of those policies). I do feel that we are not quite yet on a level playing field. If we're not, I have to question what our motivation is for staying in the game. In other words, either succeed or drop out. I am hopeful that things have changed, and will continue to change, in order to allow us to not only be competitive - but win. Time, of course, will tell.

2. As for the marketing efforts of the Athletic Dept. I suggest that any of you spend some time with those folks and get a feel for their ideas and what they are doing. I did just that this Summer with Woody Noris and came away feeling that we're doing a very nice job in trying to get people in the stands.

3. No doubt, winning is the key variable in attendance. Having said that, however, I think we are sinking deeper in the whole every year that we don't produce a winning product. I've said this many times on this board about how my biggest fear is how we've lost one, if not more, generations of SMU fans. Most people who graduated after 1987 have very little allegiance towards, or care about, SMU athletics. Why? Becuase they never knew of SMU when it was in the SWC, winning championships, going to bowl games, or even being remotely competitive. Further, many of my SMU friends who are in their late 30's and early 40's (who have children and would otherwise be the heart and soul of our attendance base) say to me, "I don't really even follow them anymore. I've just lost interest."

So, yes, winning is critical. However, my concern is making up 15 years of ground in what is otherwise a relatively small support base. Someone posted on here a while back that kids don't grow up "bleeding red and blue" the way they do for the Longhorns, Aggies, Sooners, etc. So, when you include the youth, the recent graduates, and the people in their 30's and 40's, we've lost touch with most of our support base.

It is very sad where we have landed. I do know that the marketing people have a good organization towards filling the stands. I do believe, however, that we're nearing a crossroad to either be a big time program or stop playing the game (I don't mean "bigtime" like Texas, LSU, etc. - I mean like TCU). Nothing would sadden me more than watching SMU athletics ride off into the sunset. I will remain hopeful that the powers that be come to the understanding that SMU needs to be proud and strong in it's athletic programs b/c without it, the university will do it's own version of riding off into the sunset.

[LA_Mustang]

My fault. I meant the board of trustees not the administration. I do not want anyone to thing that I'm saying the athletic department employees are not doing their jobs....because I know for a fact they do the best they can, as have Dement, Cavan, and Bennett. They've all been put in a winless situation by the board of trustees.

[LA_Mustang]

Cowboy, your right. I know Shawn and his group are full of energy and creative ideas to get people to come to games. They work their asses off. The problem is the product, not the marketing.

[PerunaPunch]

I agree with Southland in that college football in Dallas took a nose dive in the '60s when the Cowboys moved in. However, Mustang Mania in the '80s proved that issue could be overcome. Woody needs to take a hard look at what TCU has done with their Home Team campaign and learn from it.

Everybody knows that in order to be successfull, SMU needs to reach out to non-alumni college football and basketball fans in Dallas. Sure, the "product" is a big part of the problem, but our advertising doesn't appeal to non-SMU alumni. Never has. I think they've done a very good job with the promotional events targeted toward high schools, Boy Scouts, FCA, football camps, etc. – but the advertising needs to support the strategy of appealing to Dallas residents whether they're alumni or not.

[Stallion]

quite frankly the time to reach a great number of these fans is past-they have gone from disappointment, to displeasure, to anger, to hostility, to humiliation to embarrassment-Many have TUNED OUT-they are totally indifferent and have moved on the teams such as the Cowboys, Mavs, Stars that aren't such pathetic losers-the ONLY way to reach these fans now is create a MODEL for long term sustainable success which includes SUCCESS against teams they care about ie natural and/or traditional rivals. I mean let's face it-we drew 10,000 for a game involving our conference favorite which has won 90% of its games over the last two years. Despite the rants of the cheerleaders we had no more than about 12,000 SMU fans at any home game last year. It doesn't get much worse than that especially considering the long Division 1-A tradition at SMU.

<small>[ 02-12-2004, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: Stallion ]</small>

[cowboypony]

I know 2 people who sat on TCU's Committe of 100 (or whatever they called it) and someone who was on their Board of Trustees. In real simplistic terms, they basically concluded that they were pissed off at being left behind in college athletics (starting with the breakup of the SWC). TCU determined that they must focus like never before in order to remain a player in D1. They didn't feel that they could merely go to the WAC and survive long-term. They felt that they needed to elevate themselves to the highest possible position regardless of which conference they were stuck in. In other words, they didn't desire to play down to their new level of competition. What they didn't do is conclude that they'd been left behind and that they would attempt to compete merely in the lower level conference they were placed in.

The other thing they did was significantly reach out to the Ft. Worth and greater Tarrant County community. I have somewhere a letter signed by the entire Board of Trustees that basically said they would do whatever it takes to produce championship caliber teams.

Pretty simple, huh. However, it also proves that it can be done. SMU has so many strengths to position itself among the elite of the non-BCS schools. SMU also has the obvious challenges. However, I think that those challenges can be overcome. First, we must reintroduce our own family SMU. Second, we must focus on the next generation (or, the next generation that will be lost if we're not careful). Third, we must win. Finally, once the first 3 are done, we'll be able to legitimately go after the non-SMU Dallas market who, I believe is receptive to attending a fun, competitive athletic venue to see great football/basketball. Look at TCU's attendance. Does anyone really think that those 35K all went to TCU? Of course not. They've created a nice little niche following. Again, it shows that we can do it.

As was posted earlier SMU's situation begins and ends with our Board of Trustees. I continue to be amazed at the people on this board who state that Copeland, et al., don't do what it takes to win. It's ridiculous to believe that someone who has made a career as an athletic director does not desire to win. The ultimate decisions and direction comes from the very top.

I have always felt that a strong, very direct, letter from the entirety of our Board of Trustees to the SMU community stating that we will settle for nothing short of success, would go a long way to bringing our lost generations back into the fold.

I don't know anyone on SMU's Board of Trustees personally. I don't really know what this body thinks of SMU athletics. As an alum and loyal fan, I would like to know. We have the facilities either built (Ford) or on the drawing board (Moody). We have a great university in a huge metropolitan area. We have a wonderful campus. We have a good history in athletics. We have the financial wherewithall to accomplish many things (at least compared to all non-BCS schools) While we can't do anything about the BCS, I believe the answers to all our problems are right in front of our noses and easy to see.