Reusse: Is P.J. Fleck the answer to lift the Gophers out of mediocrity?

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
63,774
Reaction score
22,177
Points
113
Per Pat:

How the over-amped coach body surfing across his players in a winning locker room over a then-ranked Nebraska team can become a complete whuppin’ in Iowa City eight days later is anyone’s guess, including Fleck’s?

And, yes, Fleck did offer the traditional explanation while digesting an extra-bad defeat. The quote is always, “It’s all on me,” which is nothing in meaning or sincerity.

How could a coach with a 37-38 record in the Big Ten (he’ll get even again Saturday against lowly Michigan State) with his belief in bringing in players with strong character go from $3.5 million annually when hired to more than double that in under a decade if he actually believed it was his coaching that causes defeats such as last Saturday’s?

We aren’t buying the it’s-all-on-me hogwash, Coach Fleck, although your devotion to switch to “prevent offense” late on a bad Saturday has become a tradition worth a laugh.

www.startribune.com

Reusse: Over 8.5 seasons as the Gophers head coach, Fleck has led them to a sub-.500 Big Ten record — is he the right man for the job?

Since being hired as the head coach of the Gophers in 2017, P.J. Fleck has led Minnesota to a 37-38 record in the Big Ten and is still searching for consistency within the program.
www.startribune.com www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!
 








I heard him on the radio today saying everyone has to take accountability for the loss, he said he takes the most, but everyone needs to be held accountable.
 







btowngopher said:
I heard him on the radio today saying everyone has to take accountability for the loss, he said he takes the most, but everyone needs to be held accountable.
Click to expand...
I'm sure he's feeling accountable as he deposits his millions in the bank.

1-8 record against Iowa, but still makes millions. "Held accountable"
 



uggh Cignetti is the exception to the rule that program ascension doesn't happen over night. Look at Nebraska, Look at Wisconsin, Look at us post Mason. It took us 20 years to get back to middle of the pack in the big ten. We are finally filling up the stadium on a regular basis. The students finally give a damn. I don't like losing to Iowa all the time either but at least our stadium isn't Kinnick North anymore when they come to town. The greed and impatience of the casual fan is so annoying. Glen Mason's best teams had several heartbreaking, embarrassing losses at home. At least PJ's are on the road. Kills teams would lose bowl games to G5 teams every year.
 

TurfGopher said:
uggh Cignetti is the exception to the rule that program ascension doesn't happen over night. Look at Nebraska, Look at Wisconsin, Look at us post Mason. It took us 20 years to get back to middle of the pack in the big ten. We are finally filling up the stadium on a regular basis. The students finally give a damn. I don't like losing to Iowa all the time either but at least our stadium isn't Kinnick North anymore when they come to town. The greed and impatience of the casual fan is so annoying. Glen Mason's best teams had several heartbreaking, embarrassing losses at home. At least PJ's are on the road. Kills teams would lose bowl games to G5 teams every year.
Click to expand...
We are not finally filling up the stadium on a regular basis, in fact if you look at attendance records we have yet to achieve the attendance levels of Jerry Kill's teams. It's a disgrace, full stop.
 

TurfGopher said:
. . . We are finally filling up the stadium on a regular basis. . . .
Click to expand...
Is this true? In 2023 the Gophers averaged 38,321 in actual attendance (scanned tickets), with 5 of the 7 home games below 40,000. Has actual attendance materially increased since 2023?
 


Here are the yearly averages at the new stadium, according to the U. (Announced, not scanned tickets.) 2015 was the year after the Citrus Bowl, with the extra seats for the Vikings. The first scholarship seating requirement came after that year and the second came in 2017. That killed us.

YearAvg.
200950,805
201049,513
201147,714
201246,637
201347,797
201447,865
201552,355
201643,814
201744,358
201837,915
201946,190
2020651
202146,140
202245,018
202348,452
202447,467
 


gopherguy said:
We are not finally filling up the stadium on a regular basis, in fact if you look at attendance records we have yet to achieve the attendance levels of Jerry Kill's teams. It's a disgrace, full stop.
Click to expand...
Gonna be hard to ever beat the 2015 attendance record considering the stadium doesn’t fit that much.

Number of tickets sold doesn’t really matter. Ticket revenue matters.
They don’t price the tickets to sell out, they price tickets to maximize revenue.
I’m sure that’s information that would be made public upon request in terms of ticket revenue per season. But I don’t care to request it.



The point is, I don’t negatively judge any coach for not filling up a stadium when the pricing model isn’t a model with the goal of a sellout.


Perhaps the data would say we have more ticket revenue than the Kill years. Perhaps it would say we have less. But that’s the number that actually matters.
 


BigTenGuy said:
Is this true? In 2023 the Gophers averaged 38,321 in actual attendance (scanned tickets), with 5 of the 7 home games below 40,000. Has actual attendance materially increased since 2023?
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter. The university doesn’t care about tickets scanned or tickets sold. They care about ticket revenue.

It’s clear based on their pricing models.


I think it’s short sighted but it’s just data that doesn’t tell you anything.
3-5 Michigan state coming to town coming off a blowout loss and we are going to have unsold tickets listed for 49 bucks at the cheapest.


If they were pricing to sell out the secondary market would be more expensive than the primary market. It only usually is a game or two per year.
 
Last edited:



Some guy said:
Gonna be hard to ever beat the 2015 attendance record considering the stadium doesn’t fit that much.

Number of tickets sold doesn’t really matter. Ticket revenue matters.
They don’t price the tickets to sell out, they price tickets to maximize revenue.
I’m sure that’s information that would be made public upon request in terms of ticket revenue per season. But I don’t care to request it.



The point is, I don’t negatively judge any coach for not filling up a stadium when the pricing model isn’t a model with the goal of a sellout.


Perhaps the data would say we have more ticket revenue than the Kill years. Perhaps it would say we have less. But that’s the number that actually matters.
Click to expand...
Ticket revenue by year isn't readily available but it can be parsed with a modicum of effort, In FY24 the U had FB ticket revenue of a hair over $14,000,000. In 2017, ticket revenue was just shy of $10,000,000. In 2019, it was closer to $9,000,000. In 2014, it was $14,00,000. So based on latest available data, the U is back at the same raw number it was a decade prior but that $14,000,000 is worth about $5,000,000 less in purchasing power today than it was in 2014 so the actual effect on revenue is over a 33% decrease.

Interestingly, when the U implemented its new fee/pricing structure in 2015 or thereabouts, it was projecting an additional $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 in ticket revenue each year. But by 2018, overall ticket revenues at the U decreased from $28,000,000 to $20,000,000. That's a big chunk of change and shows that the U overvalued its product in the market place.

You've made this point before and while there might be a narrow window where your theory makes sense, its hard to see in practice that it applies at the U. Is there any evidence to support the theory? Has the U ever said, "we're fine with empty seats, empty parking stalls, less beer and popcorn sales because we have our ticket prices zeroed in"? Not that I've ever heard and its hard to imagine a scenario at the U where getting 20,000 more people through the gates each year at an average ticket price of say $50/ticket doesn't make more sense from a revenue standpoint than ticket sales now. It's hard to give the department the benefit of the doubt when looking at the colossal miscalculation it made a decade ago on fees and pricing.

If the product were in high demand, it makes sense. It's splitting hairs to be sure, but I think that the U more likely prices not to undervalue the product. But I don't believe for a minute that the U of M athletic department is smarter than the next athletic department nor do I believe for a minute that if it could, it wouldn't sell out the Bank in an hour. I frankly don't believe that there's a price point, though, at which the Bank routinely sells out and I think that gets back to the idea of not undervaluing your product.

To the original point about attendance - at least as far as overall ticket sales go, the U and PJ aren't doing too bad compared to historical sales at the Bank. I think the bigger issue is utilizing those tickets and I'll leave that to someone else to see actual utilization rate. Anecdotally, I've mentioned before that when I had season tickets, it was difficult to give them away. Granted, its about a 90 minute drive to Dinkytown from where I live, but even for interesting B1G games it was hard to find takers.
 


swede2 said:
Ticket revenue by year isn't readily available but it can be parsed with a modicum of effort, In FY24 the U had FB ticket revenue of a hair over $14,000,000. In 2017, ticket revenue was just shy of $10,000,000. In 2019, it was closer to $9,000,000. In 2014, it was $14,00,000. So based on latest available data, the U is back at the same raw number it was a decade prior but that $14,000,000 is worth about $5,000,000 less in purchasing power today than it was in 2014 so the actual effect on revenue is over a 33% decrease.

Interestingly, when the U implemented its new fee/pricing structure in 2015 or thereabouts, it was projecting an additional $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 in ticket revenue each year. But by 2018, overall ticket revenues at the U decreased from $28,000,000 to $20,000,000. That's a big chunk of change and shows that the U overvalued its product in the market place.
Click to expand...
Good info thanks
swede2 said:
You've made this point before and while there might be a narrow window where your theory makes sense, it’s hard to see in practice that it applies at the U. Is there any evidence to support the theory? Has the U ever said, "we're fine with empty seats, empty parking stalls, less beer and popcorn sales because we have our ticket prices zeroed in"? Not that I've ever heard and its hard to imagine a scenario at the U where getting 20,000 more people through the gates each year at an average ticket price of say $50/ticket doesn't make more sense from a revenue standpoint than ticket sales now. It's hard to give the department the benefit of the doubt when looking at the colossal miscalculation it made a decade ago on fees and pricing.
Click to expand...
You’re correct. It could be a miscalculation rather than a profit maximization model. But the fact that the secondary market is cheaper than the primary market for vast majority of games implies the tickets are too expensive to sell at face value.

This is either intentional or intentional. Intentional would mean they think they make more money with 45k at price X than 50k at price Y.
Unintentional would be a miscalculation.
swede2 said:
If the product were in high demand, it makes sense. It's splitting hairs to be sure, but I think that the U more likely prices not to undervalue the product. But I don't believe for a minute that the U of M athletic department is smarter than the next athletic department nor do I believe for a minute that if it could, it wouldn't sell out the Bank in an hour.
Click to expand...
They don’t have a ticket to a non sellout game for less than 49 available. They are actively choosing to not sellout games whether they’re making that choice consciously or subconsciously.
swede2 said:
I frankly don't believe that there's a price point, though, at which the Bank routinely sells out and I think that gets back to the idea of not undervaluing your product.
Click to expand...
In 2015 my season ticket group was 27 and currently it is 6. And the prices are the reason why people dropped out.
People used to not paying for the season knowing they might have conflicts and only get to 3-4. They’d give away the other tickets and eat the costs. Now the costs are too high. Don’t want to eat the tickets they can’t use.
Never have had trouble giving them away for free.
swede2 said:
To the original point about attendance - at least as far as overall ticket sales go, the U and PJ aren't doing too bad compared to historical sales at the Bank. I think the bigger issue is utilizing those tickets and I'll leave that to someone else to see actual utilization rate. Anecdotally, I've mentioned before that when I had season tickets, it was difficult to give them away. Granted, it’s about a 90 minute drive to Dinkytown from where I live, but even for interesting B1G games it was hard to find takers.
Click to expand...
Different market 90 minutes away but there were days I could give away 10-15 tickets the day before. But I lived in St. Paul.
 

Hates Monikers said:
Here are the yearly averages at the new stadium, according to the U. (Announced, not scanned tickets.) 2015 was the year after the Citrus Bowl, with the extra seats for the Vikings. The first scholarship seating requirement came after that year and the second came in 2017. That killed us.

YearAvg.
200950,805
201049,513
201147,714
201246,637
201347,797
201447,865
201552,355
201643,814
201744,358
201837,915
201946,190
2020651
202146,140
202245,018
202348,452
202447,467
Click to expand...
Higher than I expected.
 

swede2 said:
Ticket revenue by year isn't readily available but it can be parsed with a modicum of effort, In FY24 the U had FB ticket revenue of a hair over $14,000,000. In 2017, ticket revenue was just shy of $10,000,000. In 2019, it was closer to $9,000,000. In 2014, it was $14,00,000. So based on latest available data, the U is back at the same raw number it was a decade prior but that $14,000,000 is worth about $5,000,000 less in purchasing power today than it was in 2014 so the actual effect on revenue is over a 33% decrease.

Interestingly, when the U implemented its new fee/pricing structure in 2015 or thereabouts, it was projecting an additional $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 in ticket revenue each year. But by 2018, overall ticket revenues at the U decreased from $28,000,000 to $20,000,000. That's a big chunk of change and shows that the U overvalued its product in the market place.
Click to expand...
Interesting numbers, thanks for the effort. What is the source for the estimate of $1M-$2M in increased annual ticket revenue? Is that the estimate of how much in donations they anticipated that the scholarship seating program would bring in? Do all of your numbers include those donations as "ticket revenue"?
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom