Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CSU going bankrupt? lolno

Buffnik said:
What's bothering me most about the CSU viewpoint is that it's the exact same logic used by Congress. Borrow heavily to buy stuff that pleases your constituency, tell everyone you have projections that show it will stimulate revenue and bring on the boon times... go $16 trillion in debt.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen/heard, a large part of their constituency is not pleased with this.
 
CsquaredCC said:
My understanding is that the 37k is the high end of a few different models used with a 22% attendance increase being predicted based on metrics generated from other similar projects. Here is my understanding of what was presented and how the attendance numbers were arrived at:

22% higher than the average for the last three years as the low estimate.
22% higher than the 10 year average as the middle estimate.
22% higher than the best year during the last 10 years as the high
estimate.

That results in attendance numbers from 28K to 37K.
Click to expand...


well just throw 37k out the window now. Lets use TCU as an example, because they have been wildly successful this past decade and would be an excellent model for you to follow. In 2000 they averaged 23,500 fans per game and a decade later they were up to 33500. Basically in an entire decade they put 10k more people in the seats. Did you know in that same time the average growth rate in the NCAA (division 1) was 27% and 24 teams grew by 10k fans or more. So if you just got a 10k increase it would put you in some pretty elite company as in top 20% of growth in NCAA division 1 and probably number 1 in the country with a 50%+ growth rate.
 
GoBuffs08 said:
There is a reason that you only average 22k per game. It is because that is how many people care about seeing your product. At you pinnacle you did not sell out the current stadium because people in the region don't care about CSU football.
Click to expand...

Serious question.

When a CSU game is being played in FoCo on a Saturday afternoon, are there atleast 19,000 television viewers within 50 miles of Hughes watching other college programs playing other games?

It would be great to see some sort of feasibility study that quantifies how many college football fans there are in CSU's media footprint, and the reasons why they are not attending the game.

- % prefer watching ranked teams
- % affiliation with other college programs
- % cost / value. ie. More comfy watching football on the sofa
- % bad experience at stadium (traffic, parking, fan behavior, security, adverse to cheering a losing effort.)

The data points around that last category is crucial when evaluating JG's leadership.
 
tante said:
well just throw 37k out the window now. Lets use TCU as an example, because they have been wildly successful this past decade and would be an excellent model for you to follow. In 2000 they averaged 23,500 fans per game and a decade later they were up to 33500. Basically in an entire decade they put 10k more people in the seats. Did you know in that same time the average growth rate in the NCAA (division 1) was 27% and 24 teams grew by 10k fans or more. So if you just got a 10k increase it would put you in some pretty elite company as in top 20% of growth in NCAA division 1 and probably number 1 in the country with a 50%+ growth rate.
Click to expand...

CSU and TCU are two very different universities. TCU draws from a total student population of under 10,000. Over the next ten years CSU is expected to be somewhere in the 35k range. I am not saying TCU is not an instructive example on the type of growth one might see, but I don't think it is an apples to apples comparison.
 
CsquaredCC said:
CSU and TCU are two very different universities. TCU draws from a total student population of under 10,000. Over the next ten years CSU is expected to be somewhere in the 35k range. I am not saying TCU is not an instructive example on the type of growth one might see, but I don't think it is an apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...


who do you want at your games? A bunch of students pay $10 per ticket, or adults who pay $50+. What TCU was able to accomplish was even more astounding since school in a large metro area tend to do worse, especially once they hit the 4+ million range.
 
CsquaredCC said:
CSU and TCU are two very different universities. TCU draws from a total student population of under 10,000. Over the next ten years CSU is expected to be somewhere in the 35k range. I am not saying TCU is not an instructive example on the type of growth one might see, but I don't think it is an apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...

They do happen to be in a metro area that's just a wee bit bigger and more football crazed.
 
CsquaredCC said:
CSU and TCU are two very different universities. TCU draws from a total student population of under 10,000. Over the next ten years CSU is expected to be somewhere in the 35k range. I am not saying TCU is not an instructive example on the type of growth one might see, but I don't think it is an apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...

On the other hand TCU draws fans from a much higher population base in the surrounding area that CSU has with Ft. Collins. A population base that also has a culture of supporting college football. If you are counting on students for your increase in attendance they you are in trouble because students aren't the ones who pay for full priced tickets, parking, etc.
 
HouBuff said:
They do happen to be in a metro area that's just a wee bit bigger and more football crazed.
Click to expand...

the size of a metro area actually hurts football attendance, the bigger it is, the lower percentage of capacity they draw. Too many other options (pro sports teams)
 
CsquaredCC said:
CSU and TCU are two very different universities. TCU draws from a total student population of under 10,000. Over the next ten years CSU is expected to be somewhere in the 35k range. I am not saying TCU is not an instructive example on the type of growth one might see, but I don't think it is an apples to apples comparison.
Click to expand...

TCU's model is not apples-to-apples.

TCU won a Rose Bowl.
TCU is located in one of the best recruiting hotbeds in the nation
TCU is located within a the 5th largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the nation.
TCU is close people who are crazy about football.
TCU has a BCS invite in hand and an historical SWC legacy with many B12 schools.
The Amon Carter TCU stadium expansion to 50,000 is to accommodate not only their fans, but visitors from UT, Baylor, Sooners and Okie Lite fans driving up and down I35.

There are 9 billionaires in Ft Worth, more than in Ft Collins. Some who bleed purple (Charles Tandy, Radio Shack, John Davis, 1800Flowers, the Bass family)

Even though CSU may someday enroll 35,000 students versus 9,500 at TCU, it would be a mistake to minimize the importance of other factors beyond student population.
 
leftybuff said:
While on the crapper, I read the DP story. Apparently at the epic Ft. Fun town meeting, some were ther with "Save our Stadium" shirts, while others were wearing the "Be Bold" slogan. Another layer of hilarity adds on to the mess when you consider ther isn't necssarily a united front on this.

Goat on goat conflict is pretty entertaining.

Signed, Mike Orapko.
Click to expand...

I have been following this somewhat closely (obviously), and I think the opposition is actually quite significant. I will try to track it down, but I believe that there was an ON CAMPUS poll done and it was something like 70% - 80% of students were opposed to the stadium. The opposition in the community overall is almost as high.
 
dio said:
I have been following this somewhat closely (obviously), and I think the opposition is actually quite significant. I will try to track it down, but I believe that there was an ON CAMPUS poll done and it was something like 70% - 80% of students were opposed to the stadium. The opposition in the community overall is almost as high.
Click to expand...

Wait a gosh-darn minute. Are those numbers consultant verified?
 
Hey Gasm - What is the status on the Indoor Practice Facility. That still isn't paid off, is it?
 
CsquaredCC said:
That is certainly part of the long-term planning and also played a large role in why the stadium site was selected to leverage the Mason Street Bus Rapid Transit Project. Long-term goal is to connect this system to downtown Denver: http://www.fcgov.com/youtube.php?vid=LnSbJbIb9Ow
Click to expand...

Considering the issues we're having with FasTracks, that's not just a long-term goal, it's a really, really, really, really, really, really long term goal. Like, "not in our lifetimes" kind of goal.
 
sackman said:
Considering the issues we're having with FasTracks, that's not just a long-term goal, it's a really, really, really, really, really, really long term goal. Like, "not in our lifetimes" kind of goal.
Click to expand...

If I'm reading this right, that FasTracks line is really far off. It sounds like they're not even to the phase of initiating the feasibility study.

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/nm_10
 
sackman said:
Considering the issues we're having with FasTracks, that's not just a long-term goal, it's a really, really, really, really, really, really long term goal. Like, "not in our lifetimes" kind of goal.
Click to expand...

In terms of getting it all the way to Denver, you are probably right. The Fort Collins piece is pretty close to breaking ground, however. I imagine a Loveland connection is years away.

FasTracks seems like a far more difficult situation given the amount of infrastructure that is required. Boulder planning and land use laws probably don't help much either. I can only imagine how political that situation will get.
 
Last edited:
CsquaredCC said:
In terms of getting it all the way to Denver, you are probably right. The Fort Collins piece is pretty close to breaking ground, however. I imagine a Loveland connection is years away.

FasTracks seems like a far more difficult situation given the amount of infrastructure that is required. Boulder planning and land use laws probably don't help much either. I can only imagine how political that situation will get.
Click to expand...

I can guarantee it will go at least 2 times estimated budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top