Just for jtstang-Announced Attendence Inflated

[Stallion]

the WAC Fan Forum has an interesting article from the Nevada Reno Gazette on the effect of the new NCAA attendance requirements. Nevada has had announced crowds of 52,631 in 3 games this year-approximately 17,500. Actual attendance based on the new NCAA formula is only averaging 10,508 well below the NCAA probation threshold of 15,000. Are we sure that SMU's attendance figures are not similarly inflated? We should all write a little thank you note to Elvis and his Texas Tech Red Raider fans for keeping us from that nitemare. Any thought of dropping schools like Tech, OSU and A&M is officially off the table.

[jtstang]

the WAC Fan Forum has an interesting article from the Nevada Reno Gazette on the effect of the new NCAA attendance requirements. Nevada has had announced crowds of 52,631 in 3 games this year-approximately 17,500. Actual attendance based on the new NCAA formula is only averaging 10,508 well below the NCAA probation threshold of 15,000. Are we sure that SMU's attendance figures are not similarly inflated? We should all write a little thank you note to Elvis and his Texas Tech Red Raider fans for keeping us from that nitemare. Any thought of dropping schools like Tech, OSU and A&M is officially off the table.

Of course our numbers are inflated--I bet anything the "official" attendance from each game is the number of tickets sold. It's announced during the game and I don't imagine the stubs are counted during the game.

And you are right about dropping our games against big time programs--too bad we don't have any on the schedule at home next year.

[PonySnob]

Is playing A$M really that big of a deal? Isn't the return game in Dallas in 2011 or 2012? Who knows if SMU will even still be D1 by then. It looks like A$M scheduled that game so they can start off next season with a nice [deleted] whipping of a former conference team. Any idea as to what kind of check SMU will get for playing them?

[jtstang]

That guy's article says the first year you don't make it is a "freebie"--but that's not my recollection of what the by-laws say. I thnk if you don't make it you are on restricted status right away. It's been a while since I looked at that stuff. Maybe PK can clarify.

[PK]

This is what I found last time I looked:

20.02.4 Restricted Membership.
Restricted membership is a membership classification status assigned to an institution that fails to comply with the minimum requirements of its division (e.g., sports sponsorship, scheduling). The institution placed in such status loses eligibility for a number of membership privileges and has from one year to three years to comply with the requirement involved. Failure to comply reclassifies the institution to corresponding membership (see Bylaw 20.3.5).

In other word, screwing up one year does not mean instant disassociation.

This would seem to be the bylaw that applies, although the rules seem to be pretty vague as to what actually happens to someone who does not meet the attendance requirements. Most of the bylaws seem to talk about meeting appropriate amounts of scholarships (financial aid) and sponsoring the appropriate number of sports. So for what it is worth, here is the only bylaw that I can find that seems to address the issue and then only from the position of being on restrictive membership status.


20.3.5.1.5 Voting Privileges and Eligibility for Championships. The institution shall identify its preferred division and, during the period of “restricted membership,” shall be:
(a) In compliance to the greatest extent possible with that division’s scheduling criteria;
(b) Bound by all other applicable rules of the Association;
(c) Permitted to vote only on dominant issues, unless the “restricted membership” status is in one sport, in which case its loss of voting privileges shall apply only to that sport; and
(d) Ineligible for NCAA championships and postseason football contests, unless the “restricted membership” status is in one sport, in which case loss of eligibility for championships and postseason football contests shall apply only to that sport.

[PK]

Here is jt's favorite By Law:

20.9.6.3 Football-Attendance Requirements. [I-A] The institution annually shall average at least 15,000 in actual attendance for all home football games. (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/04)

20.9.6.3.1 Counting Attendance. For purposes of computing attendance figures, an individual may be counted if any one of the following conditions applies: (Revised: 4/25/02, effective 8/1/04)
(a) Attendees are issued tickets that are collected upon admission to the game and retained; (Revised: 4/25/02, effective 8/1/04)
(b) Attendees enter through and are counted by a turnstile that is monitored by a representative of the department of athletics who verifies in writing the accuracy of the count on a per-game basis; or (Revised: 4/25/02, effective 8/1/04)
(c) Attendees enter through a gate at which a representative of the department of athletics counts them individually with a manual counter, and the representative provides a written statement verifying the accuracy of the count on a per-game basis. (Revised: 4/25/02, effective
8/1/04)

20.9.6.3.3 Certified Audit. In meeting the football-attendance requirements of Division I-A, an institution must undertake an annual certified audit verifying its football attendance. The audit must be conducted by an outside auditing firm. The audited football actual-attendance figures must be received in the NCAA national office not later than the February 15 following the completion of the football season and NCAA national office staff shall verify compliance with all Division I-A attendance requirements. The certified audit and materials (including the
ticket manifest) must be available for inspection for a four-year period. (Adopted: 1/10/92, Revised: 4/25/02, effective 8/1/04)

20.9.6.4 Additional Financial Aid Requirements. [I-A] The institution shall satisfy the following additional financial aid requirements: (Adopted: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/04)
(a) Provide an average of at least 90 percent of the permissible maximum number of overall football grants-in-aid per year over a rolling two-year period; and
(b) Annually offer a minimum of 200 athletics grants-in-aids or expend at least four million dollars on grants-in-aid to student-athletes in athletics programs.

20.9.6.4.1 Type of Financial Aid Counted. The institution shall count only athletically related financial aid awarded to counters (as defined in Bylaw 15.02.3). (Adopted: 3/10/04 effective 8/1/04)

20.9.6.4.2 Exception—National Service Academies. [I-A] The national service academies are exempt from all financial aid requirements set forth in Bylaw 20.9.6. (Adopted: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/04)

20.9.6.5 Waivers [I-A]. There shall be no waivers to the Division I-A membership requirements set forth in Bylaws 20.9.6.1 through 20.9.6.4. (Adopted: 4/24/03 effective 8/1/03)

They say what you have to do...but not what happens if you don't except as perhaps noted in my previous post.

[jtstang]

Actually that's not as bad as I thought. We're nowhere close to competing for football championships so, that ain't that bad. It will only apply to that one sport. I thought I had read somewhere that restricted membership precluded sharing in the post-season bounty generated by conference mates, but maybe I just imagined that.

[PK]

I can't swear that this is all that is involved...only that it is all that I could find. The NCAA Manual has well over 500 pages. So who knows...probably not even the members of the NCAA.

[Charleston Pony]

bottom line in this attendance issue is that yes, we need to continue playing TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech and even Navy/Army or UNT to guarantee at least one or two good crowds each year. Once we begin CUSA play and add Houston, UTEP & Tulane as visitors to Ford every year, I really don't see us having any trouble averaging 15k. Of course, I'm assuming we aren't in for another 15 seasons of 1-10 football.

[jtstang]

Anybody know what the home schedule is next year?

[KnuckleStang]

Mustang35 posted a bunch of future schedules a couple of months back. I can't find the thread. But I believe our OOC next year looks something like this.

TCU
Baylor
@A&M

[Mustangs35SMU]

2005
9/10 vs TCU
9/17 @ Texas A&M
9/24 vs Baylor
TBA @ UAB
TBA @ Marshall
TBA vs ECU
TBA @ Houston
TBA vs Tulane
TBA vs UTEP
TBA vs Rice
TBA @ Tulsa

2006
TBA ? Boston College
9/09 @ Northwestern
9/16 vs Wake Forest
TBA vs UAB
TBA vs Marshall
TBA @ ECU
TBA vs Houston
TBA @ Tulane
TBA @ UTEP
TBA @ Rice
TBA vs Tulsa

2007
9/01 @ Wake Forest
TBA vs Northwestern
9/22 @ TCU

2008
TBA @ Northwestern
9/20 vs TCU

2009
TBA vs Northwestern
9/26 @ TCU

2010
9/11 vs TCU

2011
TBA @ Texas A&M

2012
TBA vs Texas A&M

[Charleston Pony]

TCU, Baylor and UTEP will all be well attended and Rice may turn out to be the homecoming game, so next year's attendance will be fine. We'd better be competitive by 2006 or that schedule could be a problem.

[Stallion]

Wow! the bottom has fallen out in the support for the Nevada FB team-they had only 7,000 attend yesterday and have dug themselves an incredible hole in meeting the 15,000 attendance mark since they are averaging around 8,500 per game.

[Stallion]

Wow! the bottom has fallen out in the support for the Nevada FB team-they had only 7,000 attend yesterday and have dug themselves an incredible hole in meeting the 15,000 attendance mark since they are averaging around 8,500 per game. I wonder if they rethinking their decision in playing creampuffs like Sacrament St.