100% wrong. The primary (not only) reason we can't fill up the stadium is we now have a consistently losing program... Fans ALWAYS follow and support winning programs in every sport in every location worldwide. No other way to look at it...
I wouldn't be so hard on Tech. Yes, the current state of the program is not helping attendance but attendance is dropping everywhere. The average attendance in 2021 was down 15 percent, more than 7,000 per game, from a record mark of 46,971 in 2008.
A winning program at Tech will net you 35,000 seats. A losing program between 15k and 20k. When we're up and down, it tends to be about 25k. Now, that's season tickets sold, not butts in seats. The remainder of seats sold depends on who we're playing and how well we're playing. It would take a historically unprecedented (recent history, as in the past 40-50 years) string of successful years or a 180 by the GTAA marketing arm to "fill up the stadium" with our people.
I agree. But TV+Expenses is putting so much pressure live attendance that I just don't see a path for Tech to reverse it. Many of the "solutions" are mired in 1980's thinking and we are way beyond that. The reality is that Tech could play in an empty BDS, still earn it's ACC share and Hudson's will be packed to the gills.
Like I have written to Todd, and told many ticket reps.... The Upper North MUST become BOGO season tickets. Basically buy one season ticket in the upper north get the seat next to it for free. That section NEVER fills out. They are better off "preselling" that section at half price than go through the season with little to no sales at all. Upper North should be about $150 per seat, with the BOGO make it $75 bucks, but to make it a kicker they are non transferable tickets. So no resell value, only for people who will show up or give their money away.
The big question is will drive more sales since I would guess most people are buying in 2 seat blocks which means 1 of the 2 seats is now free. I do think doing something to drive more people in the upper North stands is a good thing, but I just not sure this pricing would drive more seat sales versus reducing revenue on the seats (admittedly not many) you are already selling. I always thought (and suggested to TStan) having seats that could be sold to be given away to groups could be of value. So say you could contribute $50 for 5 seats (or $100 for 10 seats) that would be given to youth groups, military, first responders, etc. to help fill up the seats, hopefully create some new fans and at the least be some goodwill. You could determine which tickets apply to which games so the more popular games (GA, Clemson, etc.) would not get any free seats while games against Western Carolina would get a lot.
How would you suggest we start to fill it again?
It won't. We are in a city with multiple entertainment alternatives, playing in a conference that doesn't have many fanatics, with a team that can't win more than 3 games and a rapidly changing fanbase. Fewer live fans are likely.
Providing something people actually want - a team that wins on a regular basis would be a good start.
OK. Good suggestion, but that's very obvious at this time. What else could bring some new fans in ( we have to start somewhere)?
Obvious answer is to start winning at home AND winning at least half the road games. Start winning 10 - 12 games on average and people will be apt to actually attend the game.
You do know how ignorant this statement reads, right?
The only issue is, once we start winning consistently & big, the posters on here will complain about how expensive the tickets are. Their favorite parking spot has raised prices. Their section is too crowded with new people who don't know them... etc
Just want to point out the obvious... duh!
Why would anyone come to GT games if they are terrible and winning 3 games / year? Certainly not for a 'juice crew' or insanely loud, ****ty rap noise blaring too often. This isn't rocket science....THEY GOTTA WIN GAMES. Period. Tech football has sucked for 3 years now and is absolutely irrelevant (not trolling; proud Alum actually). I long for the day we are better but it was obvious to 'even the most casual observer' that with Collins, et. al. we were not and will not be good. If you can't see that, you are not paying attention or just don't want to see the obvious.
If we went undefeated every year we'd put more butts in the seats too. So? Neither are realistic. I guess you could have suggested something reasonable and entered into the discussion.
