Ticket Revenues Drive U Basketball Schedule

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,974
Reaction score
18,168
Points
113
per David Shama:

http://www.shamasportsheadliners.com/

Ticket Revenues Drive U Basketball Schedule

Fans may believe the Gophers home basketball nonconference schedule needs upgrading but don’t expect change in the foreseeable future. The schedule this year consists of exhibition games against Minnesota Duluth and Minnesota State Moorhead, with regular season nonconference games against Tennessee Tech, Stephen F. Austin, Utah Valley, Brown, Morgan State, St. Joseph’s, Northern Illinois and South Dakota State.

There’s not one exciting box office draw among the 10 teams. Ten years ago the Gophers nonconference home schedule at least included Marquette and Virginia. Thirty years ago Nebraska, Kansas State, Texas A&M, and Rutgers visited Williams Arena.

To maximize revenues, major college teams including Minnesota have put the nonconference home scheduling emphasis on home games with plain-Jane opponents. Jane comes to your place for a modest appearance fee and doesn’t expect a return game.

Gophers athletic director Joel Maturi told Sports Headliners that ticket revenue from men’s basketball home games ($20 million) represents about 20 percent of his total ticket revenue budget for this year. “I can’t afford too many games in a given year because financially I need to make the bottom line,” he said. “You make more money when you play at home than you do on the road.”

The other benefit with the scheduling philosophy used by major conference schools like the Gophers is they can fluff up their record by scheduling the Morgan States, Utah Valleys and Stephen F. Austins. Yet reality in Minnesota is fans pay some of the highest ticket prices in college basketball and watch a lot of low-appeal teams come to town. And the Gophers don’t generate much game day ticket sales activity for the nonconference games and last Saturday even had a buy one ticket ($35) and get another free.

Coach Tubby Smith has increased interest in the Gophers since coming here from Kentucky in 2007. But none of the nonconference games approach selling out while most or all of the Big Ten games have that potential this season. There’s a clear distinction in perceived value by the public including some season ticket holders who don’t use their tickets and leave a lot of seats open at November and December games.

The most that can be hoped for in today’s major college basketball environment is to have a couple of appealing opponents come to your town. Some other Big Ten programs did better than the Gophers this year.

Wisconsin booked a home nonconference schedule that included Arizona, Duke and Marquette. Indiana lined up Maryland, Pittsburgh and Kentucky. Illinois scheduled Utah and Vanderbilt. Northwestern played Stanford and Butler.

The Gophers were at Miami this year as part of the ACC-Big Ten rivalry. In a Thanksgiving weekend tournament in California the Gophers played Butler and Texas A&M. All three of those teams would be welcomed at Williams Arena by Gophers season ticket holders.

The Gophers schedule is more appealing in years when an ACC team plays here as part of the Big Ten-ACC challenge. The norm is alternate years for hosting an ACC team but Maturi said that's not guaranteed. He also said next year’s nonconference schedule isn’t completed and so no comparisons can be made to the present one.

It won’t be dramatically different though, but one approach that could add some marquee value in the more distant future is that Maturi and Smith have talked about a “neutral” court game at perhaps Target Center or the Xcel Energy Center against a traditional college basketball power. Presumably it would be a made-for-TV matchup.

Go Gophers!!
 

I'll be the nitpicky one who notes that Wisky/Indiana got Duke/Marquette as part of the Big Ten/ACC Challenge, not b/c they went out and scheduled them. Otherwise it looks a good summary of what we already know.
 

I think that most season ticketholders would trade two home games against boring 30 point losers, for one significant game at home and one the road, and would still pay the same whole season ticket price. And then the U wouldn't have to sell their other tickets as "buy one get one free". How would this cost the U that much more money? I realize we'd have to pay a better team to come here, but a team would pay us to go there too, and the U wouldn't have to pay to host one more basketball game. If it was a decent match-up we would probably be on espn/# and generate more revenue than being on btn.com. People want to pay for quality, not quantity. Would the schedule be more difficult? Yes. Would it prepare the team better for BigTen play? Maybe. Would fans enjoy it more? Absolutely.

Sorry, rant over.

GO GOPHERS!
 

I'll be the nitpicky one who notes that Wisky/Indiana got Duke/Marquette as part of the Big Ten/ACC Challenge, not b/c they went out and scheduled them.

And I'll be the nitpicky one that notes the ACC Challenge involved Maryland, not Marquette. :D
 

And to pile on, Wisconsin did not schedule Arizona at home. That game was played in Maui.
 


These Big 10 teams play/played a BCS team at home this season, not counting the Challenge:

(1) Illinois vs. Vandy.
(2) Indiana vs. Kentucky.
(3) Michigan vs. UConn
(4) Northwestern vs. Stanford.
(5) Penn State vs. Virginia Tech.
(6) Purdue vs. West Virginia.
(7) Wisconsin vs. Marquette.

Of the ones that didn't:

(1) Michigan State hosted mid-major power Gonzaga (part of a home and home).

Not to mention, other non-tournament games scheduled are/were:

(1) Illinois in neutral-siters vs. Georgia, Gonzaga & Mizzou.
(2) IU vs. Pitt.
(3) Iowa played at Iowa State.
(4) Michigan at Kansas & at Utah.
(5) Sparty at Texas.
(6) Northwestern hosted mid-major power Butler.
(7) Ohio State played at Butler.
(8) Penn State played at Temple (winner of 2 straight A-10 tourney titles).
(9) Purdue played at Alabama.

I think you get the gist of what I'm getting at.
 

the old adage...

You have to spend money to make money is lost on Maturi. A member of our group needed a ticket to Saturday's game and just made it clear to the hawkers that he wasn't spending more $10. He had to haggle a bit, but no real problem getting his price. And cheaper than going in on a buy one/get one. As these games are not sold out you can simply get the cheapest ticket and find a place to sit with your friends.
If only I could count part of my ticket as a charitable donation to the U, or as GL suggested, they weight the ticket prices for the non-con and BT season.
 

I think you get the gist of what I'm getting at.

Yep. When the "marquee" team on our Home NC schedule comes to the barn as 17 point underdogs (and proves it on the court) you know you have a BAD schedule.
 

These Maturi comments are not helpful. If next years schedule doesn't include a decent opponent at home in addition to the ACC Challenge, I'm done. Over $300 per seat goes towards a bunch of absolute nothing games. Unacceptable.
 



These Maturi comments are not helpful. If next years schedule doesn't include a decent opponent at home in addition to the ACC Challenge, I'm done. Over $300 per seat goes towards a bunch of absolute nothing games. Unacceptable.

On top of the ongoing poor home schedule we've had to endure the past few years, there is the very real possibility of a major expansion of priority seating next season - then we'll have the privilege of paying even more (potentially significantly more) for those "absolute nothing games". Under those circumstances I may consider bailing as well.
 

These Maturi comments are not helpful. If next years schedule doesn't include a decent opponent at home in addition to the ACC Challenge, I'm done. Over $300 per seat goes towards a bunch of absolute nothing games. Unacceptable.

Yep - he's thinking small. He wants to make a few more bucks on the games rather than provide a quality product for the fans. When you do that the fans hit the road at the first hint of a losing season. Considering that there are other ways to bring in the money if your team is popular, this is weak reasoning. If you are consistently cheating the fans on the quality of the schedule its much harder to get them to donate or buy team merchandise.
 

Maturi's excuse just doesn't add up for me. Is he really saying that sacrificing 1 home gate per year will make or break the AD budget?

1. A game against a team like Marquette (using them as an example) would sell out the gym.
2. Much less likely to have fans bolt from their ticket package by rewarding them with at least 1 NC home opponent that's worthwhile to see can only be a good thing.
3. The 'U' is in a unique position in having 3 revenue sports. At almost every BCS conf school, only 2 exist. How can a team like Purdue give up a home gate when they rely entirely on just FB and BB when we have both plus a huge moneymaker in Hockey?
4. The most expensive ticket price in the BT should mean at least 1 quality NC home opponent.
5. Unlike any other sport in college, your regular season schedule goes along way in determining your postseason position.

Add it all up and there's just no excuse for this weak of a NC home schedule. This lacks foresight in the greatest sense of the word.
 






My intent

was to give him one of the three "R's". Can you not understand that?

(Quick everyone, wave to my credibility as it floats away.)
 

Everyone raises good points. I'd like to add one more - if we do get a good NC game, not only would that game sell out, and create a lot more revenue (even if it meant losing one home game the following year), but those are going to be individual tickets sold. With a good game, good opponent, and a great experience - you've got a few thousand people more likely to return to The Barn for more games.

I took a friend to Morgan State last week, obviously there was the snowfall, but put that together with the 6K people there, the blow out game, and a dead Barn...I don't think she'll ever be back to a game she was so bored.

I do agree with ML - you have to spend $ to make $...that concept is beyond Maturi, and just about everyone in athletics.

Bottom line is, they have to do something for people forking over $35 (or $140 for a family of 4) per game for season ticket holders. Anonymous had a lot of great ideas he had posted, some were free and some had minimal costs. I've just come to accept the fact they will always make excuses for a horrible NC schedule, but at least do something to appreciate the 10k+ people that pay up and get their butts to everyone of those games.
 

It's all about keeping Tubby's 20 win season streak alive.

I've been ripped before for this response but I'm sticking with it.
 




Top Bottom