Sellout Streak in 2021

[Redux]

9 hours ago, Toe said:

 

We have some people around here like @Cdog923 who are really big fans of the whole "The beatings shall continue until morale improves!" style of management. It's just like the people who think that cutting the funding of under-performing schools is the best way to get them to improve.

 

Some people believe in negative reinforcement but don't actually understand what that is

[In the Deed the Glory]

41 minutes ago, Toe said:

@In the Deed the Glory I get it, you're frustrated with the performance of the football team. And so, like a 2-year-old when it's tantrum time, you want to lash out at something. And the sellout streak is what you've chosen to throw your tantrum at.

 

But the problem is, ENDING THE SELLOUT STREAK ISN'T GOING TO DO A GODDAMN THING TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FOOTBALL TEAM. The little tantrums of 'fans' like you and @Cdog923 over this are about as helpful as those of a 2-year-old.

 

I seriously can't believe I have to explain this s#!t...

Dude, you have some serious issues you need to resolve. I didn’t  say kill it. Reading comprehension is a skill few possess any more. I said let it die. I agree with Trev. If fans buy the tickets, that’s awesome. If we have to beg others to buy the tickets, let it die. I’m about realism, not fairy tales Peter Pan, Count Chocula. 
 

You’re the one that threw the “little tantrum” and I’ve been sent on one week vacations during my 15 years around this place for less, but I guess that’s neither here nor there. 

[Lorewarn]

1 hour ago, Toe said:

@In the Deed the Glory I get it, you're frustrated with the performance of the football team. And so, like a 2-year-old when it's tantrum time, you want to lash out at something. And the sellout streak is what you've chosen to throw your tantrum at.

 

But the problem is, ENDING THE SELLOUT STREAK ISN'T GOING TO DO A GODDAMN THING TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FOOTBALL TEAM. The little tantrums of 'fans' like you and @Cdog923 over this are about as helpful as those of a 2-year-old.

 

I seriously can't believe I have to explain this s#!t...

 

 

There's no need to try and get around the rule-breaking by indirectly insinuating someone is acting like a 2-year-old.

 

Especially when you're the one restoring to caps lock, italics, bold, and cussing and the other person isn't  

[CheeseHusker]

I guess my feelings align with Alberts.

If the streak is legit, it should be preserved as best we can. But I would hate to hold onto it under false pretenses.

I'm not close enough to the program these days to really make an accurate judgement on which of these things is true... I like to think it is the former, though.

I'd certain go to games if I wasn't living in the wrong hemisphere.

 

 

[Hagg]

Nearly every game there are many seats around us in our section empty, for the past several years.  I say nearly every game because for some of the biggies we'd see strangers in those otherwise empty seats.  Once in a while we'd ask where they got the tickets and invariably it would be from a friend of a friend or co-worker, etc.  In other words, they were season tix that the owners had lost the feeling of having to come to the games.  Indeed we got ours many years ago when we lost our faculty tickets and found a pair across the stadium put out there about half an hour before we swooped them;  we're billed for them every year now.

 

A regular scalper out front once explained to me that he always had a fistfull of season tickets provided to him "by you know who" (I did not know who and still don't) most of which sell to "people getting off the busses." 

 

So, has the sellout streak been real?  Looks to us like .. um, perhaps not.  And maybe now those who were making it look real are losing their enthusiasm for doing that.

[admo]

13 hours ago, CheeseHusker said:

I guess my feelings align with Alberts.

If the streak is legit, it should be preserved as best we can. But I would hate to hold onto it under false pretenses.

I'm not close enough to the program these days to really make an accurate judgement on which of these things is true... I like to think it is the former, though.

I'd certain go to games if I wasn't living in the wrong hemisphere.

 

 

Nice!  I did notice that a few days ago.  Sounds awesome to be over there!

 

But, I do have to question your Husker loyalty now.  What do you have against ships and planes!

[BigRedBuster]

I wonder what would happen if they changed how they sell tickets.  Right now, they sell season tickets to people who are required to make a donation.  To do that for a pair of tickets, can be pretty inhibitive to many people especially if they know they can't go to all the games.  Also, everyone knows that boosters buy up tickets to conserve the sell out streak.

 

So.....why not sell season ticket packages to common fans for just the cost of the seat?  THEN, have the boosters donate the money they have been buying unsold tickets with as a simple donation.  The boosters would still be donating to the program to make it better.  More common fans can afford season tickets.  More fans are experiencing game day in Lincoln with their own tickets and becoming more and more loyal to the program.

 

I know the donation part of season tickets have kept me from buying season tickets for years.  I might consider buying them if it was changed like this.

[Mavric]

26 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I wonder what would happen if they changed how they sell tickets.  Right now, they sell season tickets to people who are required to make a donation.  To do that for a pair of tickets, can be pretty inhibitive to many people especially if they know they can't go to all the games.  Also, everyone knows that boosters buy up tickets to conserve the sell out streak.

 

So.....why not sell season ticket packages to common fans for just the cost of the seat?  THEN, have the boosters donate the money they have been buying unsold tickets with as a simple donation.  The boosters would still be donating to the program to make it better.  More common fans can afford season tickets.  More fans are experiencing game day in Lincoln with their own tickets and becoming more and more loyal to the program.

 

I know the donation part of season tickets have kept me from buying season tickets for years.  I might consider buying them if it was changed like this.

 

Most of the seats that are unsold either require no donation or very minimal.

[seaofred92]

22 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I wonder what would happen if they changed how they sell tickets.  Right now, they sell season tickets to people who are required to make a donation.  To do that for a pair of tickets, can be pretty inhibitive to many people especially if they know they can't go to all the games.  Also, everyone knows that boosters buy up tickets to conserve the sell out streak.

 

So.....why not sell season ticket packages to common fans for just the cost of the seat?  THEN, have the boosters donate the money they have been buying unsold tickets with as a simple donation.  The boosters would still be donating to the program to make it better.  More common fans can afford season tickets.  More fans are experiencing game day in Lincoln with their own tickets and becoming more and more loyal to the program.

 

I know the donation part of season tickets have kept me from buying season tickets for years.  I might consider buying them if it was changed like this.

I’ve long thought the season ticket model will need to be revamped for 95%+ of college football schools. The donations used to be largely tax deductible (changed in 2018) so it was a win win for both the STX holder (reducing taxable income) and the schools (generating unique donations which is a ranking criteria for sites like USNWR).

 

As an example- I bought season tickets for Wake Forest this year and there is no required donation for club level seating which also includes 2 alcoholic drinks per seat per game, however there’s a (small) donation required for parking ($125). Quite frankly if there was any level of donation required at all for the seats, I would’ve had zero interest in being a season ticket holder.

 

I’m a UConn grad and similarly to Nebraska, they have some season ticket options without donation requirements and some with. The highest level of donation requirement per seat is $900 to sit in the suite/club level which includes a buffet and some other things, but the ticket availability on the secondary market is so good it doesn’t really make financial sense to buy season tickets with the donation attached when you can just get individual game tickets for $30/pop.

 

One of the biggest ways to “offset” the donation is obviously with additional STX holder exclusive benefits or perks, whether it be access to additional events, programs, content, etc or doing something else. I don’t have NU season tickets so I don’t know what kind of perks come with the tickets now, but that’s what I think schools in general will have to get creative with in order to keep folks interested. 

 

The other piece is regularly playing games against local teams and teams that fans want to see games against. This is why you’re seeing teams like Alabama, UGA, etc start to schedule multiple high level non-conference games in the same season. With respect to NU, and I know this year was last minute, teams like Buffalo, Fordham, etc don’t really move the needle locally. Even looking into future years, games against GA Southern, UTEP, LA Tech, etc don’t provide any local “buzz”. If I was building future NU non-conference schedules I’d try to make it look something like: 

 

Home and home series with big name team (OU, LSU, ALA, TN, UF, Miami, Clemson, USC, etc)

Home and home/buy game with “regional” FBS opponent (MO, KU, KSU, CO, OSU, ISU, Tulsa, Colorado State, Air Force, Wyoming, maybe Texas schools like TCU, UH, Baylor, SMU, Rice, etc for recruiting)

Low FBS or FCS buy game with regional ties: Dakotas, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Idaho St, Missouri St, Northern Iowa, Drake, etc

 

The counter balance to seeing games the fans want to see is NU wants 7 home games per season- that’s a lot easier to do when you have 4 non-conference games vs 3. You would hope the Big Ten would decide to scrap divisions and break into pods (direction CFB seems to be headed). 14 is a weird number for pods but you could use the existing divisions to guarantee a certain number of permanent opponents for each team and then split the other opponents into groups that you rotate home/away with on a regular basis.

 

Long story short- yes I agree on the donations. Something has to change to continue to get butts in seats, whether it be non-conference scheduling, access to the program, conference scheduling, or something else. If it doesn’t, it’s hard to see the benefit for fans to continue to donate to buy tickets on a regular basis.

[BigRedBuster]

10 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Most of the seats that are unsold either require no donation or very minimal.

I understand that.  So, sell them from the beginning without donations.  The large donor that was buying them up can still donate that money to the program.

[Mavric]

6 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I understand that.  So, sell them from the beginning without donations.  

 

That's what I just said.  That is what they are doing.  Has been that way for a few years.

[BigRedBuster]

7 minutes ago, seaofred92 said:

I’ve long thought the season ticket model will need to be revamped for 95%+ of college football schools. The donations used to be largely tax deductible (changed in 2018) so it was a win win for both the STX holder (reducing taxable income) and the schools (generating unique donations which is a ranking criteria for sites like USNWR).

 

As an example- I bought season tickets for Wake Forest this year and there is no required donation for club level seating which also includes 2 alcoholic drinks per seat per game, however there’s a (small) donation required for parking ($125). Quite frankly if there was any level of donation required at all for the seats, I would’ve had zero interest in being a season ticket holder.

 

I’m a UConn grad and similarly to Nebraska, they have some season ticket options without donation requirements and some with. The highest level of donation requirement per seat is $900 to sit in the suite/club level which includes a buffet and some other things, but the ticket availability on the secondary market is so good it doesn’t really make financial sense to buy season tickets with the donation attached when you can just get individual game tickets for $30/pop.

 

One of the biggest ways to “offset” the donation is obviously with additional STX holder exclusive benefits or perks, whether it be access to additional events, programs, content, etc or doing something else. I don’t have NU season tickets so I don’t know what kind of perks come with the tickets now, but that’s what I think schools in general will have to get creative with in order to keep folks interested. 

 

The other piece is regularly playing games against local teams and teams that fans want to see games against. This is why you’re seeing teams like Alabama, UGA, etc start to schedule multiple high level non-conference games in the same season. With respect to NU, and I know this year was last minute, teams like Buffalo, Fordham, etc don’t really move the needle locally. Even looking into future years, games against GA Southern, UTEP, LA Tech, etc don’t provide any local “buzz”. If I was building future NU non-conference schedules I’d try to make it look something like: 

 

Home and home series with big name team (OU, LSU, ALA, TN, UF, Miami, Clemson, USC, etc)

Home and home/buy game with “regional” FBS opponent (MO, KU, KSU, CO, OSU, ISU, Tulsa, Colorado State, Air Force, Wyoming, maybe Texas schools like TCU, UH, Baylor, SMU, Rice, etc for recruiting)

Low FBS or FCS buy game with regional ties: Dakotas, Montana, Montana St, Idaho, Idaho St, Missouri St, Northern Iowa, Drake, etc

 

The counter balance to seeing games the fans want to see is NU wants 7 home games per season- that’s a lot easier to do when you have 4 non-conference games vs 3. You would hope the Big Ten would decide to scrap divisions and break into pods (direction CFB seems to be headed). 14 is a weird number for pods but you could use the existing divisions to guarantee a certain number of permanent opponents for each team and then split the other opponents into groups that you rotate home/away with on a regular basis.

 

Long story short- yes I agree on the donations. Something has to change to continue to get butts in seats, whether it be non-conference scheduling, access to the program, conference scheduling, or something else. If it doesn’t, it’s hard to see the benefit for fans to continue to donate to buy tickets on a regular basis.

 

 

If I remember right, the donation thing started when we were on top of the world and not all games were on TV.  So, there was a huge demand for tickets with a long waiting list.  So, to keep the tickets, you had to donate or they were going to go to the next people who are on the list and are willing to donate.  Also, back then, the AD department didn't have anywhere close to the TV revenue it has now.  So, those donations were a big part of the revenue for the programs.  

Now, much of that has changed.  The AD department is swimming in money.  They still have large donors willing to fork out money for projects.  The problem is getting people excited about buying season tickets.  Fix that by eliminating the donation portion for most seats.

I do like the idea of, if you want additional perks, you then donate and you have access to those.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Mavric said:

 

That's what I just said.  That is what they are doing.  Has been that way for a few years.

I don't know how long that's been.  But, I remember thinking about getting season tickets about 4 years ago when all of my kids were then in Lincoln.  At that time, the donation was still part of what I wanted to purchase.

[Mavric]

 

[Mavric]