Page 1 of 3
Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:52 am
by Dwan
1966 - SWC Champs - 8-3 - 39,800
1967 - 3-7 - 29,100
1968 - 8-3 - 38,860
1972 - 7-4 - 25.648
1973 - 6-4-1 - 19,956
1974 - 6-4-1 - 28,312
1975 - 4-7 - 25,110
1976 - 3-8 - 29,946 *Ron Meyer's first year
1977 - 4-7 - 25,644
1978 - 4-6-1 -51,960 (non conference games @Flordia, @ Penn State, @ Ohio State, confer @ UT)
1979 - 5-6 - 55,758 (first full season at Texas Stadium)
1980 - 8-4 - 36,773
1981 - 10-1 - SWC Champs - 33,325
1982 - 11-0-1 - SWC Champs - 40,863
1983 - 10-2 - 39,499
1984 - 10-2 - SWC Co-Champs - 39,903
1985 - 6-5 - 34,617
1986 - 6-5 - 35,677
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:02 am
by well travelled pony
About what is has been, yep. Though the years I was there, '83-'87, the big home games were always sellouts or just shy. Empty seats for some non-conference, Rice, and Baylor.
Go Ponies!
Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:53 am
by GiddyUp
Texas stadium held 65k right?
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:14 am
by PerunaPunch
Texas Stadium held 65k.
Ownby Stadium, where the Mustangs played until the '30s (when their largter games moved to the Cotton Bowl), held 23.7k
The original Cotton Bowl held 45k, but because of Doak & Co., seating was expanded to 75k
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:27 am
by Topper
78 and 79 were Russ Pott's Mustang Mania years and included huge numbers of free tickets and sometimes they counted unused free tickets as attendees. No way that many people were in the stands. Bob Hitch was the AD then, and he decided that he wanted to up ticket prices. The way to make money was to discontinue the freebies and up the season ticket prices for people who actually bought tickets. Our attendance then went down but our revenues went up.
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:30 pm
by Charleston Pony
I said when Ford was built that it was "perfect" for us because 32k plus is a big crowd for SMU...and we can always sell general admission "seating" in the south endzone for those exceptional games like TCU was last year.
Now, if we could just find a way to attract 25k no matter who we play...
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 3:52 pm
by CA Mustang
Topper wrote:78 and 79 were Russ Pott's Mustang Mania years and included huge numbers of free tickets and sometimes they counted unused free tickets as attendees. No way that many people were in the stands. Bob Hitch was the AD then, and he decided that he wanted to up ticket prices. The way to make money was to discontinue the freebies and up the season ticket prices for people who actually bought tickets. Our attendance then went down but our revenues went up.
They could count unused free tickets in those days? Heck, why didn't everyone do that?
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:39 pm
by Boston Pony
MustangMania plan was to sell low price tix to corporations like 7-11, Tom Thumb and Republic Bank then hand out the tickets. Other events like Band Day, Methodist Youth & Scouting Day brought an additional 0000's of attendees. The thought was an empty seat doesn't buy a hot dog & DP. What is often forgotten is the exciting brand of football - Mustangs set a number of passing records that year that future SMU teams will mirror. Exciting, winning football will help attendance, however we need to be realistic in our expectations. 30-35k to games would be realistic and attainable. Scheduling some regional state schools and if needed moving a game to the Cotton Bowl or Cowboy Stadium (ND, A&M,UT)if possible could be ways to have some big number games in the future.
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:54 am
by Charleston Pony
attendance figures around CUSA:
USM - 32,685
Houston - 32,107
UTEP - 31,797
Tulane - 25,158 (probably most impressive given their circumstances)
Rice - 17,314
UAB - 8,872 (hurt by weekday time slot)
other noteables:
Boise - 34,196
UNM - 33,833 (for TCU)
UNT - 17,815
Miami - 43,766 (because that's the program we want to become?)
Navy - 34,612 (future conference mate?)
USF - 44,248 (see Navy)
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:38 am
by TCUBCSBOUND
TCU was the home team yesterday and got over 30k for NEW MEXICO the worst team in D-1. Not the other way around.
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:39 am
by RGV Pony
Well go frogs. They solve the empty seats in the shade problem?
Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:43 am
by GiddyUp
Can I foe the word attendance?
I really like the design of so miss ( same capacity or close)
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 9:44 am
by mrydel
GiddyUp wrote:Can I foe the word attendance?
Wouldn't that be great!
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:50 am
by Topper
Charleston Pony wrote:I said when Ford was built that it was "perfect" for us because 32k plus is a big crowd for SMU...and we can always sell general admission "seating" in the south endzone for those exceptional games like TCU was last year.
Now, if we could just find a way to attract 25k no matter who we play...
Ford capacity is certainly substantial enough for our current needs. But I hope that if and when we need to enlarge it will be additions of upper level. We already have plenty of end zone seating available.
Re: Home Attendance - Historic Pespective
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:45 pm
by Charleston Pony
Topper wrote:Charleston Pony wrote:I said when Ford was built that it was "perfect" for us because 32k plus is a big crowd for SMU...and we can always sell general admission "seating" in the south endzone for those exceptional games like TCU was last year.
Now, if we could just find a way to attract 25k no matter who we play...
Ford capacity is certainly substantial enough for our current needs. But I hope that if and when we need to enlarge it will be additions of upper level. We already have plenty of end zone seating available.
If the demand is there, expansion might be suites rather than upper deck...more revenue and we can always put overflow students (assuming there is enough interest) in the endzone