Memorial Stadium Attendance: When Do Fans Show Up and When Do They Stay Home?
Dating back to 2004, Cal's Memorial Stadium has hosted only eight sellouts in its thirty-eight home games. In the past two seasons, Memorial has only sold out one game. Cal faces no shortage of competition, as it competes with two professional football teams, two baseball teams, and a basketball team. Still, when a #12-ranked Cal team and its Heisman candidate Jahvid Best take on Maryland to redeem themselves after 2008's embarrassing loss, why is it that only 62,367 fans show up? Cal had room to fit 10,000 more butts in the seats, so why didn't Memorial sell out?
To figure this out, I looked over the last six years' worth of attendance data at Memorial Stadium. I hope to find some patterns that explained when Memorial sold out and when, like at the Maryland game, an exciting team played an important game yet still had 10,000 empty seats. After the jump we'll look at which factors contribute to sellouts and which do not. We'll do this in reverse order, though. I'll spoil the ending (talk about which variables strongly affected turnout rates) and then walk you through how I came to these conclusions.
Overall, we'll look at what brought fans to games, what didn't seem to affect turnout, and what actually seemed to keep fans away from Memorial Stadium. With these results, I can try to approximate attendance at each Cal game for the upcoming season. We'll have to hold off on that, though, until preseason rankings and other factors for the 2010 season are finalized.
I suppose you can't spoil an interesting story if you don't know what the story is about. So first, let's take a quick look at some attendance numbers. Below is a chart with attendance from every home game during the 2004 through 2009 seasons (I couldn't get enough data on the 2003 season and earlier). You can easily spot the eight sellouts (highlighted gold). Notice that most of the other games brought between 55k and 63k fans.

(if SBN's autosizing made this too small, click on it for a larger version)
It's pretty clear which games tend to sell out (USC, Stanford, UCLA). Other than that, nothing immediately jumps out at me. Our fans seem rather unpredictable. They'll show up in respectable numbers to see a team they've never heard of (Eastern Washington: 58,083) but fewer go watch Cal battle a ranked Pac-10 foe in an important conference game (Arizona 2009: 53,347).
Year-to-year, the average attendance rates seem to tell a straightforward story: more people will show up to see a high-quality team...or do they?
2004: 64019
2005: 60377
2006: 64317
2007: 63136
2008: 61633
2009: 59471
2004 and 2006, Tedford's best teams, brought the most fans. They also had the advantage of having two games that are almost guaranteed sellouts: UCLA and Stanford. So which is it, are the numbers influenced by the solid teams or by the games fans favor?
Well, here's the part where I go and ruin the story for the movie while you're still waiting in line. [SPOILER ALERT]: Fans seem to be most influenced by 1) whether Cal is playing a rival (Stanford, UCLA, or USC) and 2) opponent quality. To a lesser extent they are influenced by 3) whether Cal is highly ranked, 4) how well Cal played the previous year, and, to a much lesser extent, 5) whether Cal lost to the opponent the previous year.
Let's look at these factors in more detail (things are not as simple as they seem):
The best predictors of positive fan attendance:
1) Rivals (+10k-12k fans)
People turn out en masse to see Cal play Stanford, USC, and UCLA. Of the last eight sellouts, three belong to USC, two belong to Stanford, and one belongs to UCLA. Even when Cal did not sell out against those opponents, Memorial was usually packed (70,000+). People turn out in large numbers to see Cal take on its institutional rivals and its conference rival (a game which is often pivotal in deciding the conference standings).
2) Opponent quality (+10-15k fans for a top-15 team)
This is intuitive enough, right? The only two sellouts since 2004 that weren't against one of the rivals came when formidable opponents came to town (#11 Oregon 2006, #15 Tennessee 2007). This bonus in fan turnout is only really noticeable against top-15 opponents though. Top-25 opponents do not bring significantly more fans than unranked teams. For examples see ASU 2004 (52,652), ASU 2006 (58,024), Michgan St 2008 (62,956), Oregon 2008 (61,432) and Arizona 2009 (53,347). Except for the 2008 games, those were all well below the season average. Even the 2008 games were barely above average.
3) Whether Cal is highly ranked (+6-8k fans if Cal is a top-5 team)
When Cal was a top-5 team, significantly more fans showed up than when Cal was ranked 25th through 6th or unranked altogether. I was surprised that a top-25 or even top-15 Cal team wasn't a significant predictor, but I suppose that explains why Cal-Maryland 2009 had "only" 62k show up.
- Cal's winning percentage during the current year
- Opponent's winning percentage during the current year and previous year
What does not play a significant role in predicting attendance?
- Opponents being ranked 25th-16th
- Cal being ranked outside the top-5 or unranked altogether
- "A" or "B" non-conference opponents
Counterintuitively, fans don't seem to turn out in greater numbers when Cal is ranked outside the top-5. Additionally, they don't seem especially interested in watching teams outside the top-15 or non-conference foes from the BCS conferences.
Which factors are associated with lower attendance numbers?
How well Cal played last year ( -1500 per win)
Believe it or not, this worked in the opposite direction! When Cal was great the previous year, people showed up in lower numbers the following year. And when Cal was mediocre the previous year, fans showed up in greater numbers the next year. Don't read too much into this, though. This is mostly explained by solid teams being followed by disappointing teams (2004 to 2005, 2006 to 2007).
Revenge! (-2k-3k fans)
-
When Cal lost to a team the previous year, it seems like fewer fans showed up when that team came to Memorial the next year. This sounds like a case of Typical Pessimistic Cal Fan Syndrome: perhaps some Cal fans just can't bear to see the team beaten twice in a row by an opponent.
From this point onward, I'll explain how I derived these conclusions. If you're interested in statistics and/or data analysis this will be a good insight into the results. Otherwise, be warned: Here be numbers!
Methodology:
Most of the numbers came from CFBStats.com with a handful of others coming from ESPN. I gathered attendance numbers and, because the data worked for it, used a regular ol' regression model with a variety of variables.
First we'll look at my variables and then I'll post the wholesome, juicy regression tables.
I ran several regressions with a combination of the following seventeen variables (they're all fairly self-explanatory).
Top-25 opponent
Top-15 opponent
Top-5 opponent
(and I also tried collapsing this into the variable "ranked")
Cal top-25
Cal top-15
Cal top-5
(similarly, I tried collapsing this into the variable "Cal ranked")
UCLA
USC
Stanford
(I collapsed these into a "rival" variable for a few regressions)
Revenge: opponents qualified for this if they defeated Cal the previous year
Opponent's win percentage the previous year
Opponent's win percentage during the current year
Cal's win percentage the previous year
Cal's win percentage during the current year
Non-conference "A" or "B" opponent
Pac-10 opponent
Now let's take a look at the regression table for the model with the most variables. In case you forgot everything from Stats 20, here's a quick refresher. To interpret this table, look at the sums of the intercept (the baseline attendance number, 58468) and the coefficients (how much each variable contributes to attendance numbers). The coefficients (in the first column) approximate how many people each variable contributes to attendance. So if Cal is playing a top-15 opponent, you can guess that around 16,516 more people will show up than if Cal was playing an unranked opponent. On the other hand, if a coefficient is negative (like Cal's winning percentage the previous year), then that many fewer people will show up at any given game.
If the p-value is significant (ie if it has a * by it), then that variable predicts attendance better than random chance). The coefficients that are not significant should not be disregarded, but take their coefficient estimates with a grain of salt...it's likely they're influenced by random chance.
Here is a regression with the whole slew of variables. Interpret away!
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 58468.14 4956.44 11.796 2.64e-09 ***
OpponentT25 -2789.09 2207.68 -1.263 0.224559
OpponentT15 16516.16 3476.28 4.751 0.000217 ***
OpponentT5 1058.07 3473.54 0.305 0.764590
CalTop25 -892.15 1478.95 -0.603 0.554811
CalTop15 -91.44 1894.05 -0.048 0.962093
CalTop5 6605.79 2571.99 2.568 0.020623 *
UCLA 12518.83 2217.26 5.646 3.65e-05 ***
USC 997.34 3654.69 0.273 0.788425
Stanford 15652.60 2034.20 7.695 9.15e-07 ***
OOC-ab -2162.21 2887.75 -0.749 0.464872
revenge -2803.39 1585.78 -1.768 0.096151 .
OppWin%LastYr 6377.09 4160.35 1.533 0.144852
OppWin%ThisYr 3555.76 2918.44 1.218 0.240743
CalW%LastYr -10975.14 7527.77 -1.458 0.164202
CalW%ThisYr 5776.78 4408.14 1.310 0.208534
Pac 10 foe -2210.26 1946.36 -1.136 0.272855
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Residual standard error: 2725 on 16 degrees of freedom
(4 observations deleted due to missingness)
Multiple R-squared: 0.9299, Adjusted R-squared: 0.8598
F-statistic: 13.26 on 16 and 16 DF, p-value: 2.396e-06 ...
So what does this tell us? Top-15 Opponents, UCLA, Stanford, top-5 Cal team, and revenge are significant. You might be surprised the USC isn't significant, but this is likely due to a high level of collinearity in some of these variables (aka one variable overlaps with another). USC is always a revenge game and USC is usually in the top-15, so those variables seem to pick up on why people show up for USC games. Also, this has a very high r-squared, meaning that this combination of variables explains 85.98% of the variance in attendance numbers. As your stats professor may have told you, though, if you stick a ton of variables into a regression, it's more likely you'll get a high r-squared. These variables don't necessarily explain all the variance in attendance rates
If we collapse UCLA, Stanford, and USC into the "rival" variable, then it remains significant. Also, a couple others jump into or out of the realm of significance:
Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 61477.49 6022.64 10.208 6.50e-09 ***
OpponentT25 -4657.25 2616.40 -1.780 0.09196 .
OpponentT15 10650.36 3494.03 3.048 0.00692 **
OpponentT5 -1409.61 4162.36 -0.339 0.73879
Cal top 25 345.78 1771.61 0.195 0.84744
Cal top 15 -1500.78 2255.95 -0.665 0.51432
Cal top 5 5807.58 3109.35 1.868 0.07816 .
Rivalry 11715.91 1835.90 6.382 5.21e-06 ***
OOC A or B -701.45 3519.26 -0.199 0.84425
Revenge -3260.28 1880.69 -1.734 0.10009
OppWin%LastYr 4204.45 5052.53 0.832 0.41623
OppWin%LastYr 5420.36 3492.47 1.552 0.13806
CalW%LastYr -21211.22 8505.97 -2.494 0.02260 *
CalW%ThisYr 9139.35 5307.93 1.722 0.10224
Pac 10 foe 67.13 2258.10 0.030 0.97661
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Residual standard error: 3369 on 18 degrees of freedom
(4 observations deleted due to missingness)
Multiple R-squared: 0.8795, Adjusted R-squared: 0.7858
F-statistic: 9.383 on 14 and 18 DF, p-value: 1.350e-05
Like the last table, rivals, Cal's winning percentage the previous year, and top-15 opponents are significant predictors for attendance. Cal top-5 and opponent top-25 are borderline significant. Cal's current winning percentage, opponent's win percentage, and revenge are all borderline significant.
Well, some of you may say, do these coefficients change when Cal is playing someone who is not a rival? Let's take a look...(here I've controlled for rivals, so these are the coefficients when Cal is not playing a rival).
Coefficients: (2 not defined because of singularities)
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
(Intercept) 59183 5209 11.362 2.03e-07 ***
Top25 Opponent -3225 2304 -1.400 0.18916
Top15 Opponent 16646 3583 4.646 0.00071 ***
Top25 Opponent NA NA NA NA
Cal Top25 -1271 1739 -0.731 0.48026
Cal Top15 -1873 2265 -0.827 0.42600
Cal Top5 8398 2881 2.915 0.01406 *
rival NA NA NA NA
OOC-A or B -1823 3022 -0.603 0.55856
Revenge -2227 1855 -1.201 0.25504
OppWin%LastYr 1158 5570 0.208 0.83909
OppWin%ThisYr 6153 3632 1.694 0.11834
CalWin%LastYr -12412 8306 -1.494 0.16320
CalWin%ThisYr 7588 4627 1.640 0.12927
Pac 10 foe -1583 2069 -0.765 0.46036
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
Residual standard error: 2769 on 11 degrees of freedom
(4 observations deleted due to missingness)
Multiple R-squared: 0.8442, Adjusted R-squared: 0.6741
F-statistic: 4.965 on 12 and 11 DF, p-value: 0.0062
When Cal is not playing a rival, it seems like playing a top-15 opponent is the strongest and most significant predictor, with a top-5 Cal team being the only other significant variable. A few are close to significance (Opponent's win percentage, Cal's win percentage, Cal's win percentage the previous year).
What can we conclude from all this? Cal fans show up in large numbers when there is any combination of the following factors: Cal is a top-5 team, Cal plays a top-15 opponent, Cal plays a rival, and, just for the lulz, they stay home when Cal was good the previous year. I know, I know, these are all pretty obvious conclusions. But what is most illuminating for me is what does not strongly influence fans to attend. These are variables like 25th-16th ranked opponents, a Cal team that is ranked outside the top-5, playing an A or B non-conference opponent, and how well Cal and its opponent did the current and previous years.
If you're still reading this far, you probably have some degree of interest in statistics. If you want to see more analysis of this data, ask away! I'll be happy to oblige.
5 recs |
59 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Interesting
Given that you mentioned the competition from professional sports teams in the intro, why not introduce some variables for Niners or Raiders home game the same weekend? Baseball and basketball could be tested too.
GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!
by OskiMonsta on Jul 19, 2010 6:12 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
I would like to see them give fans at Memorial Stadium as much space as one gets in an airplane seat (coach), then revise the # of seats (60k?).
I know this will never happen, and I know it does not influence your findings, but I do think we’d have the # of sellouts increase will increasing the fan experience. The ’09 USC game was so packed, I accidentally knocked over my diet coke all over a USC fan while trying to merely put the drink down by my feet.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Was that really an accident, carp?
Proud to hold season tickets to the only NBA team owned by a Russian oligarch.
by yellow fever on Jul 19, 2010 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree with this sentiment. It seems like the Rise of Tedford (RoT) 2002-2006 led to higher attendance than the Plateauing of Tedford (PoT) 2007-2009, even though overall records were comparable. Maybe this is because Cal fans who didn’t show up for the Holmoecaust bought tickets during the RoT, packed the stadium, realized what a “difficult” fan experience it is, and then didn’t come during the PoT. And by “difficult” I mean, limited parking, limited stadium amenities, limited space, difficult to buy tickets, tickets at comparable prices to other pro sporting events with better of the aforementioned qualities.
CGB: Come join the LOLigarchy
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 19, 2010 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks
this is interesting, particularly given the current negotiations over the conference divisions.
I wonder if anybody knows what the marginal return is for each ticket sold after 50,000. This would put some context on the revenue stakes for losing the UCLA/USC home game in any year.
jh
Thanks for the analysis it was quite interesting. I’m not sure if this plays a large part in attendance or not, but I was wondering how much a factor opposing team ticket sales plays. For instance Stanford and So Cal schools typically pack the stadium with a lot of their fans, which also corresponds to the highest attendance rates.
by MN Bear on Jul 19, 2010 7:25 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
traveling fans
Because the Bay Area is so attractive to visitors (especially later in the fall), I’m sure the number of visitor ticket sales are greatly influence by the quality of both teams. I can’t imagine a rooter section for UW for the ’08 game.
This might partially explain why WSU, UA, and ASU generally have poor attendance, even if one of them is ranked highly. Not many traveling fans, since they’d have the longest trips to make.
That’s probably a good point – might be worth including a variable for distance between campuses.
Proud to hold season tickets to the only NBA team owned by a Russian oligarch.
by yellow fever on Jul 19, 2010 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions
Tennessee Travels Well.
I think this is THE explanatory factor — the opposing team’s turnout. I was shocked to see so many people in orange for our opening game against the Vols a couple years ago. I’ve never seen anything like it from a school other than USC.
The Arizona schools and Wazzu will never bring so many fans, so we’re unlikely ever to have a sellout for one of their games. We can’t generate enough interest from our fans, and they can’t deliver enough traveling fans to fill one corner of the Blue Zone, let along two.
All the other variables may just be really interesting coincidences.
by Monica's Dad on Jul 19, 2010 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions
This could probably be captured statistically by looking at the historical win percentage of a school (i.e. level of tradition).
by PlayClassyBears on Jul 19, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
How about Nebraska when they visited in '98?
The declared official attendance at that game was 67,397 (see Cal vs. Nebraska game notes).
Visually, about half of the fans in the stands were Nebraska fans (based on the amount of visible red).
Point being, Nebraska also travels well, also.
While this was a nice analysis you failed to take into account a couple of potentially very impactful variables: Weather and Kickoff Time
Late games may not draw as many fans (i.e. Arizona last year) as afternoon games, and good weather could actually discourage fans because there is the temptation to get out and enjoy a Saturday afternoon by sailing, hiking, biking, etc.
The other thing is perception. Yes, Maryland was a revenge game, but for weeks before it happened we’d heard how the tarps just sucked ass — which they did.
Just some thoughts …
Careful, man. There's a beverage here!
by SoCal Oski on Jul 19, 2010 7:52 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I’m sure weather had a big effect on the ‘08 Oregon game. It was also on ABC, so I’m sure a lot of people stayed home and watched that game.
You might also factor in the Labor Day holiday. Maryland & MSU were played on the Saturday of the holiday weekend.
by cal85 on Jul 19, 2010 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Weather surely affected Arizona ’07 as well — as I recall, it was cool and drizzly for most of the day. Possibly Minnesota ’06 too, since there was heavy fog for a night game.
Fog affects people’s decision to go to a game? If so they should be banished for life.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jul 19, 2010 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I can’t think of any reasonable explanation for why the Minnesota game in 2006 had such lower attendance than Portland State a week later. Both had similar start times (4 pm and 3:15 pm).
Season ticket holders are usually excited to show up for the first home game of the season and it would seem that a Big 10 opponent would sell more single tickets than a 1-AA school.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jul 19, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I think they were still giving out free extra tickets for season-ticket holders for the “patsy” home games at that time, so you had a bunch of people who got in free for PSU and couldn’t have gotten in for Minnesota.
That also explains the strangely high attendance for Sac St., IIRC. There were a lot of butts in seats, but the # of paying customers was probably significantly lower.
I think both were High School Band Days.
CGB: Come join the LOLigarchy
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 19, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed. I’ve sat thru pouring rain vs $C and Oregon. Fog? Pls. I can’t think of any reason not to go to the games.
http://twitter.com/solariselive
Okay, we’ve established that people on this blog will go to all the games, rain or shine. But isn’t that the point? You guys go to all the games anyway, so fans like you don’t really figure into the question of what makes some games have better attendance than others; you’re usually not among the 10-20k that fluctuate from game to game. The difference in attendance is largely left up to casual fans, who sometimes go and sometimes don’t. So the question is, what might make them go to certain games and not others?
And I’ll stand by the notion that a game played on a chilly night (like Minnesota in ‘06) might keep a good portion of those fans away. It’s probably not the biggest factor, but it is a factor. A game played in the rain will keep even more fans away.
I’m a fluctuator. I go to Big Game and the LA game. I might go to another game if I have a lot of friends who went to the school, like Colorado. I would not go to any game in the rain, no matter how much Oski paid me. And if a game’s on TV, there’s no way I’m going if it’s not one of the opponents above. Kickoff time doesn’t much matter to me, I don’t think, though I’m not wild about 7PM or, frankly, 12:30PM.
Good call on the kickoff time. I had considered that at some point, but forgot about it by the time I gathered the data. I added in some variables for early afternoon (12-1:30), mid afternoon (2-3:30), late afternoon (4-5), and evening (7pm). Mid afternoon and later afternoon were both significant (p~ .05) with coefficients of 8087.8 and 4547.8, respectively.
Weather would be pretty tedious to go back and cross-reference, so I won’t immediately go back and add it in. But I’ll keep in mind if I want to get more attendance data.
"Some people watch adult videos on their computer - I go to YouTube and watch Jahvid Best highlight clips. That’s what gets me going."- Jim Schwartz, Detroit Lions head coach
by Berkelium97 on Jul 19, 2010 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Powerful effect
I have to agree that kickoff time was definitely a good call. I imagine that there is a great deal of interaction between the non-rival games and kickoff time (who wants to see us play WSU at 8pm?). The thing is Bay Area fans really prioritize their time and I would hope the schedulers understand that when looking at kickoff times. I’m glad that in recent years the kickoff times have been getting earlier, because it was pretty bad for a while with all the late night Versus and FSN games.
I also think the time of year is a significant variable. What one might call a “holiday” effect. Clearly Labor Day and the bay bridge closure killed the Maryland game attendance. Imagine if Tennessee had come late on a bridge-closed Labor day weekend? We would never have heard the end of it from SEC folk.
Similarly, I think games played later in the year have a drop off (Big Game excluded) because many people vacation in late November early December. Most folks in the Bay Area aren’t from the Bay and for Holidays tend to go “home” (often LA)—this is especially true of students. One can use UW 2008 as an exemplar. I don’t think its just how bad they were either, look at 2006 UW (who were not good at all—but put up a good fight). That game had almost 8-9K more Cal fans.
by PlayClassyBears on Jul 19, 2010 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions
One can use UW 2008 as an exemplar. I don’t think its just how bad they were either, look at 2006 UW (who were not good at all—but put up a good fight). That game had almost 8-9K more Cal fans.
UW 2008 was almost a perfect storm of negative factors: late in the season, early start time (12 noon), Cal already well eliminated from the Rose Bowl hunt, after the Big Game, and UW was historically awful (0-12 season) and not likely to bring many fans with them. It’s too bad so many stayed home, because it turned out to be an unseasonably warm day and Jahvid Best had a near-historic afternoon.
UW was bad in 2006, but at the time the game was played they had a record around .500, so their fans wouldn’t have given up hope yet (compared to 0-11 coming into the 2008 game). Also, Cal was ranked in the Top 10 and still in the national championship race.
Wait, Tennessee DID come on a bridge-closed Labor Day weekend!!! And packed…
CGB: Come join the LOLigarchy
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jul 19, 2010 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, the Bay Bridge closure didn’t stop the Vols from taking BART. It was fun for me to drive across the GG Bridge and then the San Rafael Bridge from SF. Then I came back through San Mateo to only pay 1 bridge toll.
And the Labor Day weekend travel doesn’t add up either. Students don’t go anywhere for Labor Day since they just got back to campus a few weeks earlier. Plus I would say the Bay Area has a net gain of people for the Labor Day weekend, which should allow for more attendance.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jul 19, 2010 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Interesting, I forgot about that. Well I still think most people leave the Bay on holidays (especially SF). But perhaps that is counteracted by all those who are around will go to games…but this is in direct contrast to the Maryland game. I mean the only difference was the start time (I think) and the level of tradition. Well that and Maryland was on a downward spiral that everyone saw coming and Tennessee was on a downward spiral no one saw coming (at least not many).
by PlayClassyBears on Jul 19, 2010 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions
For examples see ASU 2004 (52,652), ASU 2006 (58,024), Michgan St 2008 (62,956), Oregon 2008 (61,432) and Arizona 2009 (53,347). Except for the 2008 games, those were all well below the season average. Even the 2008 games were barely above average.
2008 Oregon was played in a terrible condition in the rains. I say 61,432 is an incredible attendance.
I’d be curious to know how many tickets were bought versus seats filled. Probably a lot of people stayed home. Weather is a factor but the weather sucked in 2007 against USC and most of us stayed and froze our asses off in that horrible drizzle.
by PlayClassyBears on Jul 19, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
After halftime, it appeared that there were prolly less than half of the announced 61K still left.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I was there for the whole game. It was pretty miserable but worth it for the win.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jul 19, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
A fun read....
….but I’m not sure about a good record causing lower attendance the following season. Is it possible that in our better years we’ve generally had Oregon, UCLA and Stanfurd at home, and USC on the road (i.e. the even years)? The lower attendance the following year could in part be explained by the fact that we only get one heavy-hitter game at home the following season instead of two or three.
Regarding previous years’ attendance being a factor, I’d theorize that it absolutely is a positive, but it’s more like a cume of the previous three or four, or even five seasons. 40,000 used to be a well-attended game whenever the opponent wasn’t UCLA, USC or Stanfurd, and even UCLA used to draw about 50K.
attendance
What are some whole new populations of possible fans?
how to get them to come once for startesr?
by age?
distance from campus?
how to get them here?
how to publicize?
free tix?
various schools? free? 50% off the second visit?
etc etc.
I know marketing does a ton of things, but wondering if more is possible….
There are plenty of kids, youth, adults who would just enjoy the experience of attending without being up on who we are playing necessarily…..
I think this is a great question ogb. One thing that really sells people is the atmosphere. It would be great if there were more on campus activities for families on game days. Don’t the homecoming games do really well (they’re often LA teams though)? I am willing to bet that is why kickoff time is so important. Can you keep people interested in staying for a football game?
by PlayClassyBears on Jul 19, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
I have a feeling that a significant minority of fans in Memorial have no clue about the teams or about football in general. They go there because it’s a social experience. So that throws a wrench in the predictions.
Still nice job!
In other words, Go Bears!
As some others have mentioned, weather is definitely a factor, but I think you could expand that to weather vs. televization (a word? No). A really rainy game that’s not going to be on TV will still probably draw most of the serious fans, because no real fan is going to let weather keep them from their only means of seeing a game. But a rainy game that’s available on your giant flat screen tv in your warm living room? That might be a little easier to talk yourself into.
by The Wrecking Jew on Jul 19, 2010 12:58 PM PDT reply actions
useful info
I’m guessing someone in the athletic dept. has been studying these numbers with the same zeal. The athletic dept is currently promoting a deal where you get a free ticket to either CU or UW when you buy both a UCLA & UO tix. It will be interesting to see what they will try to do to sell tickets to the Davis game.
The Davis game could be a sellout if marketed appropriately. I haven’t seen any special advertising for the game on the Capital Corridor or Davis athletics websites.
Of course, not having the game time yet really hurts all these efforts.
Shocking that the marketing dept is not working on this…I guess this billboard contest is taking a lot out of them.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jul 19, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the Davis game will be close to a sellout...
…if only because it’s being seriously marketed at UC Davis, from what I hear from friends there.
That’s good to know, because from online browsing I couldn’t find anything…
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jul 19, 2010 2:57 PM PDT up reply actions
OK so after looking more closely they do have a special page on their athletics website. They’re selling tickets for $40, which makes it seem like a fundraiser since tickets can be purchased for $30 each through the Cal ticket office.
They’re also having a pregame event at Memorial Glade. That’s bullshit, they should be confined to people’s park. Or does that only apply to the furds et al?
No advertising on the Sac Bee website or Capitol Corridor, so it looks like the target audience is generally davis alumni and not the broader sacramento area population. .
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jul 19, 2010 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions
some comments
1) The other reason that USC isn’t as huge of a variable is that stadium has a limited capacity. Theoretically, if it was 100k max, then you might see additional impact. But since it cuts off at the same max for every game (and that level gets hit with a non-trivial frequency), the USC variable inevitably looks low.
2) I think the way that some of the variables swung substantially when you collapsed Stanford, UCLA and USC into one “Rivals” bucket probably highlights the issues with the analysis. It’s such a small set of data that running regression with that many variables is going to create a substantial amount of noise. FWIW, it might make more sesne to look at it 2000 – 2009, or at least 2002 – 2009 (Tedford era), and see how things change.
3) It might also be interesting to look at a logistic regression against:
A] Sellouts
B] 60k (which seems closer to a 50-50 split)
though since USC has always sold out, and all 3 rivals have always been > 60k, you’d have to adjust the process somehow.
4) You should double-check that “win % this year” is as of kickoff, since most fans don’t have accurate crystal balls, and are unlikely to factor November’s record into buying tix in September, for instance. You should also be careful about how you deal with it in the first few games, since there’ll be big swings in win %. “Games over .500” might turn out to be a better variable to use, I’m not sure.
Seems familiar
The patterns here seem to match what we saw from SC in the 90s. SC did have a few years with great expectations, some excellent players, and top 10-15 rankings, only to see 60k come to the Coliseum for what ought to have been decent games and decent draws.
I think it’s just general California fairweather fan culture. There were 40k diehards at SC games for quite a few years, and even when things were decent we’d hit 60k. Doesn’t seem that different for you guys.
Of course, as soon as SC won the Orange Bowl in 2002, it was all aboard the bandwagon.
As soon as you guys win a BCS game and are expected to contend for a national championship, you’ll start seeing tons of fat guys show up at the new stadium wearing pirated jerseys they bought off of ebay.
Rodney Sermons is my #5
by Brad Otton Is My Homeboy on Jul 20, 2010 9:41 PM PDT reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!

by 



















