My Pitt football attendance study + analysis (long read)

[HailToPitt725]

Happy 13-9 Day, everyone!

Throughout the past two weeks, we've had some pretty intense discussions about attendance and stadiums. While I have tried to stay out of it for the most part, I did decide to do my own research on the matter to see if I could come up with any explanations. I looked at every season from 2001-2017 and 1976-1981, along with national averages from those years. I had a lot of questions I set out to answer to help give a better picture as to why the attendance is what it is. Some of the things I discovered were:

- Pitt has a core fanbase of around 34,000 fans. I found this using all the single-game attendance totals under 40,000
- With an average attendance of 45,590 from those 17 years, this means that at your typical game, 75% of fans are apart of the core base, while 25% are either opposing fans or casual fans
- Playing P5-Conference schools out-of-conference doesn’t have much of an impact; Without counting Penn State and Notre Dame games, attendance only goes up 3% when playing these schools. This means that Pitt would be better off scheduling lesser competition, as they’d draw the same number of fans and they’d most likely gain more wins in the process (Pitt is only 3-7 in these games)
- Playing ranked opponents while being unranked doesn’t impact the attendance much either. In these types of games, attendance only goes up 6% (This does include West Virginia, Notre Dame, and Penn State)
- Speaking of the three stooges, here’s a statistic for all the trolls who say those schools inflate our attendance numbers: When you take away all home games against these schools, average attendance only drops 5%
- The only thing that will change attendance is winning. When Pitt is ranked, attendance goes up 12% when playing unranked opponents and 29% when playing ranked opponents (When this has occurred, attendance has never been under 60,000)
- Additionally, those who say preseason rankings are meaningless are wrong. When Pitt starts the season in the Top 25, they tend to have 10% higher season attendance
- Pitt's football attendance was 7% higher* than the national average from 1976-1981, but dropped to 1% higher from 2001-2009 (the study I used only went up to this point.) However, I don't think the reasons are the ones you'd expect
- It doesn't take several years of winning to bring fans to games. From the 17 years in the 21st century, Pitt would have a spike in attendance when they'd be successful the year before and start off strong the following year.

After going through all these numbers and comparing them something stood out to me: We have the completely wrong strategy when it comes to out-of-conference scheduling

We have this faulty belief that no matter what our record is, we will draw a few extra people to games if we have a well-known out-of-conference opponent, specifically a P5/BCS opponent. In fact, this is the exact opposite (with the exception to the three stooges.) IIRC, the only time we had 50,000+ for one of these games was the 2008 Iowa game. Even games against Texas A&M, Nebraska, Michigan State, etc. had around 48,000 max in attendance. What I found true that some people have said on here is that the common Yinzer does not care about these schools, unless they're the stooges and maybe a Ohio State, Michigan, etc. Attendance for G5 games were only slightly less than P5 games. I believe this is because these fan bases were usually closer to Pittsburgh and brought more fans to these games. At this point, who cares what your OOC strength is like? It's obvious at this point that the committee doesn't put as much value into this as one would think. Why not play 1/2 of WVU/PSU/ND at home every year and pair them up with a Marshall/Temple/Cincinnati? Not only would this lead to higher attendance at these single games, but it'd also lead to more attendance in the future because we'd win more of these OOC games and have more to play for down the stretch.

Also: I don't think an on-campus stadium would change anything with attendance. Attendance is higher at Heinz Field than it was at Pitt Stadium... Maybe it's because Heinz's numbers are slightly inflated because it holds more. Not counting the dark ages, the core fanbase of fans was lower from 1982-1990 than it is today... Maybe this is because enrollment is up and there're more alums alive today. But there's no evidence to suggest a move would back to Oakland would stabilize attendance at around 40,000 and increase it overall since bigger games would bring more. Heck, it may actually decrease attendance in the grand scheme of things since a stadium in Oakland would most likely seat <50,000 tops, causing the numbers to deflate. However, there are ways to improve the atmosphere and experience on the North Side since that's where Pitt will be indefinitely. I believe more signage and packing fans closer together is a good start. What they could do is expand their footprint over there. With construction still going on at the North Shore, why can't they purchase property to build a Pitt-themed restaurant, team store, and mini hall of fame? Additionally, connecting Oakland and the rest of Pittsburgh with the spine line (which is inevitable over time) would improve the situation as well. Like I said, there's many things Pitt could to enhance the experience without having to spend >$250 million on a new stadium. And if the numbers show anything, it's this: If you win, they will come.

This is just what I noticed and interpreted from it. Of course, everyone has their own opinions on it. I'd love to here everyone's thoughts on this. H2P.

 

[DC_Area_Panther]

Your analysis confirms what I have always believed to be true.

The only real argument the Oakland Stadium crowd may actually have (and it can’t be demonstrated in advance) is that a less empty appearing Stadium will attract better more highly ranked recruits.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Your analysis confirms what I have always believed to be true.

The only real argument the Oakland Stadium crowd may actually have (and it can’t be demonstrated in advance) is that a less empty appearing Stadium will attract better more highly ranked recruits.

I think it's the nostalgia and the utopia that results from it. What doesn't sound cool about being the Beast of the East again, tailgating in front of the Cathedral and playing on top of the hill?

However, it doesn't guarantee any type of results and would most likely be too cost prohibitive.

 

[Deer Head]

Problem is the stadium is too big. Nothing else.

 

[HailtoPitt]

- Pitt's football attendance was 30% higher than the national average from 1976-1981, but dropped to 1% higher from 2001-2009

Very nice post!

I think the fact that attendance was 30% above the national average when Pitt was really good should tell people that Pitt did in fact draw well at Pitt Stadium. It was the bozos in the administration who dropped the ball, and NOT the fans. It's apples to oranges to compare the actual attendance numbers across decades. However, the attendance percentage relative to that time period is more important, and Pitt did much better with that metric then they do now.

Of course, this will cause someone to State that those older attendance numbers were made up.

If Pitt we're to build a stadium in Oakland, and then put in an effort to have respectable teams and efforts to get the students to games like they try to do now, I think attendance would actually increase. We might lose a few people because they can't roll down the 279 hov lane and be home.in 10 minutes, but who needs fans like that if that's the only reason they attend games.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Very nice post!

I think the fact that attendance was 30% above the national average when Pitt was really good should tell people that Pitt did in fact draw well at Pitt Stadium. It was the bozos in the administration who dropped the ball, and NOT the fans. It's apples to oranges to compare the actual attendance numbers across decades. However, the attendance percentage relative to that time period is more important, and Pitt did much better with that metric then they do now.

Of course, this will cause someone to State that those older attendance numbers were made up.

If Pitt we're to build a stadium in Oakland, and then put in an effort to have respectable teams and efforts to get the students to games like they try to do now, I think attendance would actually increase. We might lose a few people because they can't roll down the 279 hov lane and be home.in 10 minutes, but who needs fans like that if that's the only reason they attend games.

I think you bring up an interesting point. Yeah, you'd lose a few fans who'd rather have the convenience of getting in/out of Heinz easier, but you'd also have a few more students who show up as well. Certainly a lot more would stay the entire time.

I think they're the reason why we've seen our numbers go down in comparison to the rest of the country. We have as many casual fans show up when we're winning than most other schools in our position. However, our core fanbase hasn't increased in size at the same rate as the rest of the country. That'll happen when you have a dark age period and make it more difficult for students to come to games. Not to mention the fact that Pittsburgh has a higher death:birth ratio than most cities and you lose some footing there as well. Instead of pandering to casual fans, they should be committed to growing the core fanbase in order to improve attendance. That means bringing regional G5 schools, too, since you'll be bringing more of their core base than you would with oSu or UCF.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Happy 13-9 Day, everyone!

Throughout the past two weeks, we've had some pretty intense discussions about attendance and stadiums. While I have tried to stay out of it for the most part, I did decide to do my own research on the matter to see if I could come up with any explanations. I looked at every season from 2001-2017 and 1976-1981, along with national averages from those years. I had a lot of questions I set out to answer to help give a better picture as to why the attendance is what it is. Some of the things I discovered were:

- Pitt has a core fanbase of around 34,000 fans. I found this using all the single-game attendance totals under 40,000
- With an average attendance of 45,590 from those 17 years, this means that at your typical game, 75% of fans are apart of the core base, while 25% are either opposing fans or casual fans
- Playing P5-Conference schools out-of-conference doesn’t have much of an impact; Without counting Penn State and Notre Dame games, attendance only goes up 3% when playing these schools. This means that Pitt would be better off scheduling lesser competition, as they’d draw the same number of fans and they’d most likely gain more wins in the process (Pitt is only 3-7 in these games)
- Playing ranked opponents while being unranked doesn’t impact the attendance much either. In these types of games, attendance only goes up 6% (This does include West Virginia, Notre Dame, and Penn State)
- Speaking of the three stooges, here’s a statistic for all the trolls who say those schools inflate our attendance numbers: When you take away all home games against these schools, average attendance only drops 5%
- The only thing that will change attendance is winning. When Pitt is ranked, attendance goes up 12% when playing unranked opponents and 29% when playing ranked opponents (When this has occurred, attendance has never been under 60,000)
- Additionally, those who say preseason rankings are meaningless are wrong. When Pitt starts the season in the Top 25, they tend to have 10% higher season attendance
- Pitt's football attendance was 30% higher than the national average from 1976-1981, but dropped to 1% higher from 2001-2009 (the study I used only went up to this point.) However, I don't think the reasons are the ones you'd expect
- It doesn't take several years of winning to bring fans to games. From the 17 years in the 21st century, Pitt would have a spike in attendance when they'd be successful the year before and start off strong the following year.

After going through all these numbers and comparing them something stood out to me: We have the completely wrong strategy when it comes to out-of-conference scheduling

We have this faulty belief that no matter what our record is, we will draw a few extra people to games if we have a well-known out-of-conference opponent, specifically a P5/BCS opponent. In fact, this is the exact opposite (with the exception to the three stooges.) IIRC, the only time we had 50,000+ for one of these games was the 2008 Iowa game. Even games against Texas A&M, Nebraska, Michigan State, etc. had around 48,000 max in attendance. What I found true that some people have said on here is that the common Yinzer does not care about these schools, unless they're the stooges and maybe a Ohio State, Michigan, etc. Attendance for G5 games were only slightly less than P5 games. I believe this is because these fan bases were usually closer to Pittsburgh and brought more fans to these games. At this point, who cares what your OOC strength is like? It's obvious at this point that the committee doesn't put as much value into this as one would think. Why not play 1/2 of WVU/PSU/ND at home every year and pair them up with a Marshall/Temple/Cincinnati? Not only would this lead to higher attendance at these single games, but it'd also lead to more attendance in the future because we'd win more of these OOC games and have more to play for down the stretch.

Also: I don't think an on-campus stadium would change anything with attendance. Attendance is higher at Heinz Field than it was at Pitt Stadium... Maybe it's because Heinz's numbers are slightly inflated because it holds more. Not counting the dark ages, the core fanbase of fans was lower from 1982-1990 than it is today... Maybe this is because enrollment is up and there're more alums alive today. But there's no evidence to suggest a move would back to Oakland would stabilize attendance at around 40,000 and increase it overall since bigger games would bring more. Heck, it may actually decrease attendance in the grand scheme of things since a stadium in Oakland would most likely seat <50,000 tops, causing the numbers to deflate. However, there are ways to improve the atmosphere and experience on the North Side since that's where Pitt will be indefinitely. I believe more signage and packing fans closer together is a good start. What they could do is expand their footprint over there. With construction still going on at the North Shore, why can't they purchase property to build a Pitt-themed restaurant, team store, and mini hall of fame? Additionally, connecting Oakland and the rest of Pittsburgh with the spine line (which is inevitable over time) would improve the situation as well. Like I said, there's many things Pitt could to enhance the experience without having to spend >$250 million on a new stadium. And if the numbers show anything, it's this: If you win, they will come.

This is just what I noticed and interpreted from it. Of course, everyone has their own opinions on it. I'd love to here everyone's thoughts on this. H2P.

I applaud the use of actual data and reason in your post.

I am curious how you derived national attendance averages between 1976 and 1981 (and also wonder why the remainder of the 80s, through Gottfried, was excluded) considering the massive changes to Divisional football structure in the NCAA during that time period. Prior to 1978, there was only one large Division 1 group. Then it split into Division 1A, 1-AA, and 1-AAA. The Ivy and SoCon dropped out of Div 1A in 1982, and the Missouri Valley (then 1A) dropped football sponsorship in 1985. So there was a lot of shuffling of schools in the 70s and early 80s as far as falling out into their final classifications. It would be difficult to make comparisons of national attendance averages between the top division in football between the 2000s and 1970s for that reason unless, perhaps, averages were calculated from the current schools that have membership in D1 FBS conferences.

I like the idea of Pitt investing in a facility that is part of, or on the grounds of, Heinz Field for Pitt specific functions and promotion. Don't know how feasible that is politically since development is managed by the SEA, but that makes a lot more sense than a lot of other suggestions bandied around.

 

[HailToPitt725]

I applaud the use of actual data and reason in your post.

I am curious how you derived national attendance averages between 1976 and 1981 (and also wonder why the remainder of the 80s, through Gottfried, was excluded) considering the massive changes to Divisional football structure in the NCAA during that time period. Prior to 1978, there was only one large Division 1 group. Then it split into Division 1A, 1-AA, and 1-AAA. The Ivy and SoCon dropped out of Div 1A in 1982, and the Missouri Valley (then 1A) dropped football sponsorship in 1985. So there was a lot of shuffling of schools in the 70s and early 80s as far as falling out into their final classifications. It would be difficult to make comparisons of national attendance averages between the top division in football between the 2000s and 1970s for that reason unless, perhaps, averages were calculated from the current schools that have membership in D1 FBS conferences.

I like the idea of Pitt investing in a facility that is part of, or on the grounds of, Heinz Field for Pitt specific functions and promotion. Don't know how feasible that is politically since development is managed by the SEA, but that makes a lot more sense than a lot of other suggestions bandied around.

That's a good point that I did not consider. Completely forgot about the shakeup. The data I used ( http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/DI/2010/Attendance.pdf ) just said FBS and did not account for it either. I used 1976-1982 because that's what many on consider Pitt's dynastic stretch. I was tempted to go with 1975 and 1982 as well, but decided not to in the end.

I just redid it by using the first six years following the breakup, 1982-87, while still using the 1976-1981 numbers. This should give it a more accurate correlation. That knocked it down to 7%. I should've noticed an outlier like that. Still, Pitt is still above the national FBS average and decreases over time, albeit a smaller one. Thanks for telling me this.

 

[ratking17]

I really enjoyed this thread. Well done.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Happy 13-9 Day, everyone!

Throughout the past two weeks, we've had some pretty intense discussions about attendance and stadiums. While I have tried to stay out of it for the most part, I did decide to do my own research on the matter to see if I could come up with any explanations. I looked at every season from 2001-2017 and 1976-1981, along with national averages from those years. I had a lot of questions I set out to answer to help give a better picture as to why the attendance is what it is. Some of the things I discovered were:

- Pitt has a core fanbase of around 34,000 fans. I found this using all the single-game attendance totals under 40,000
- With an average attendance of 45,590 from those 17 years, this means that at your typical game, 75% of fans are apart of the core base, while 25% are either opposing fans or casual fans
- Playing P5-Conference schools out-of-conference doesn’t have much of an impact; Without counting Penn State and Notre Dame games, attendance only goes up 3% when playing these schools. This means that Pitt would be better off scheduling lesser competition, as they’d draw the same number of fans and they’d most likely gain more wins in the process (Pitt is only 3-7 in these games)
- Playing ranked opponents while being unranked doesn’t impact the attendance much either. In these types of games, attendance only goes up 6% (This does include West Virginia, Notre Dame, and Penn State)
- Speaking of the three stooges, here’s a statistic for all the trolls who say those schools inflate our attendance numbers: When you take away all home games against these schools, average attendance only drops 5%
- The only thing that will change attendance is winning. When Pitt is ranked, attendance goes up 12% when playing unranked opponents and 29% when playing ranked opponents (When this has occurred, attendance has never been under 60,000)
- Additionally, those who say preseason rankings are meaningless are wrong. When Pitt starts the season in the Top 25, they tend to have 10% higher season attendance
- Pitt's football attendance was 30% higher than the national average from 1976-1981, but dropped to 1% higher from 2001-2009 (the study I used only went up to this point.) However, I don't think the reasons are the ones you'd expect
- It doesn't take several years of winning to bring fans to games. From the 17 years in the 21st century, Pitt would have a spike in attendance when they'd be successful the year before and start off strong the following year.

After going through all these numbers and comparing them something stood out to me: We have the completely wrong strategy when it comes to out-of-conference scheduling

We have this faulty belief that no matter what our record is, we will draw a few extra people to games if we have a well-known out-of-conference opponent, specifically a P5/BCS opponent. In fact, this is the exact opposite (with the exception to the three stooges.) IIRC, the only time we had 50,000+ for one of these games was the 2008 Iowa game. Even games against Texas A&M, Nebraska, Michigan State, etc. had around 48,000 max in attendance. What I found true that some people have said on here is that the common Yinzer does not care about these schools, unless they're the stooges and maybe a Ohio State, Michigan, etc. Attendance for G5 games were only slightly less than P5 games. I believe this is because these fan bases were usually closer to Pittsburgh and brought more fans to these games. At this point, who cares what your OOC strength is like? It's obvious at this point that the committee doesn't put as much value into this as one would think. Why not play 1/2 of WVU/PSU/ND at home every year and pair them up with a Marshall/Temple/Cincinnati? Not only would this lead to higher attendance at these single games, but it'd also lead to more attendance in the future because we'd win more of these OOC games and have more to play for down the stretch.

Also: I don't think an on-campus stadium would change anything with attendance. Attendance is higher at Heinz Field than it was at Pitt Stadium... Maybe it's because Heinz's numbers are slightly inflated because it holds more. Not counting the dark ages, the core fanbase of fans was lower from 1982-1990 than it is today... Maybe this is because enrollment is up and there're more alums alive today. But there's no evidence to suggest a move would back to Oakland would stabilize attendance at around 40,000 and increase it overall since bigger games would bring more. Heck, it may actually decrease attendance in the grand scheme of things since a stadium in Oakland would most likely seat <50,000 tops, causing the numbers to deflate. However, there are ways to improve the atmosphere and experience on the North Side since that's where Pitt will be indefinitely. I believe more signage and packing fans closer together is a good start. What they could do is expand their footprint over there. With construction still going on at the North Shore, why can't they purchase property to build a Pitt-themed restaurant, team store, and mini hall of fame? Additionally, connecting Oakland and the rest of Pittsburgh with the spine line (which is inevitable over time) would improve the situation as well. Like I said, there's many things Pitt could to enhance the experience without having to spend >$250 million on a new stadium. And if the numbers show anything, it's this: If you win, they will come.

This is just what I noticed and interpreted from it. Of course, everyone has their own opinions on it. I'd love to here everyone's thoughts on this. H2P.

1. An on-campus stadium in and of itself is not going to help attendance. All else being equal, it may actually decrease it. That said, an on-campus stadium is supposed to help recruiting and the smaller stadium is supposed to provide a better atmosphere which should make it a more intimidating place to play which should lead to more wins which also should help recruiting.

2. Yes, I agree that playing OKST, Iowa, MSU is pretty stupid. It doesn't help attendance and Yinzers could care less. The only P5 teams we should schedule home and homes with are

PSU
WVU
ND
OSU
Mich
Florida
Georgia
Alabama
Auburn
LSU
Texas
Oklahoma
USC
Oregon

 

[BFo8]

1. An on-campus stadium in and of itself is not going to help attendance. All else being equal, it may actually decrease it. That said, an on-campus stadium is supposed to help recruiting and the smaller stadium is supposed to provide a better atmosphere which should make it a more intimidating place to play which should lead to more wins which also should help recruiting.

2. Yes, I agree that playing OKST, Iowa, MSU is pretty stupid. It doesn't help attendance and Yinzers could care less. The only P5 teams we should schedule home and homes with are

PSU
WVU
ND
OSU
Mich
Florida
Georgia
Alabama
Auburn
LSU
Texas
Oklahoma
USC
Oregon

That sounds good in theory, but every school in the country wants to schedule those programs to home and homes. They can pick and choose the best spots that they want, I’m sure Pitt is way down most of their lists.

 

[cruzer]

Happy 13-9 Day, everyone!

Throughout the past two weeks, we've had some pretty intense discussions about attendance and stadiums. While I have tried to stay out of it for the most part, I did decide to do my own research on the matter to see if I could come up with any explanations. I looked at every season from 2001-2017 and 1976-1981, along with national averages from those years. I had a lot of questions I set out to answer to help give a better picture as to why the attendance is what it is. Some of the things I discovered were:

- Pitt has a core fanbase of around 34,000 fans. I found this using all the single-game attendance totals under 40,000
- With an average attendance of 45,590 from those 17 years, this means that at your typical game, 75% of fans are apart of the core base, while 25% are either opposing fans or casual fans
- Playing P5-Conference schools out-of-conference doesn’t have much of an impact; Without counting Penn State and Notre Dame games, attendance only goes up 3% when playing these schools. This means that Pitt would be better off scheduling lesser competition, as they’d draw the same number of fans and they’d most likely gain more wins in the process (Pitt is only 3-7 in these games)
- Playing ranked opponents while being unranked doesn’t impact the attendance much either. In these types of games, attendance only goes up 6% (This does include West Virginia, Notre Dame, and Penn State)
- Speaking of the three stooges, here’s a statistic for all the trolls who say those schools inflate our attendance numbers: When you take away all home games against these schools, average attendance only drops 5%
- The only thing that will change attendance is winning. When Pitt is ranked, attendance goes up 12% when playing unranked opponents and 29% when playing ranked opponents (When this has occurred, attendance has never been under 60,000)
- Additionally, those who say preseason rankings are meaningless are wrong. When Pitt starts the season in the Top 25, they tend to have 10% higher season attendance
- Pitt's football attendance was 7% higher* than the national average from 1976-1981, but dropped to 1% higher from 2001-2009 (the study I used only went up to this point.) However, I don't think the reasons are the ones you'd expect
- It doesn't take several years of winning to bring fans to games. From the 17 years in the 21st century, Pitt would have a spike in attendance when they'd be successful the year before and start off strong the following year.

After going through all these numbers and comparing them something stood out to me: We have the completely wrong strategy when it comes to out-of-conference scheduling

We have this faulty belief that no matter what our record is, we will draw a few extra people to games if we have a well-known out-of-conference opponent, specifically a P5/BCS opponent. In fact, this is the exact opposite (with the exception to the three stooges.) IIRC, the only time we had 50,000+ for one of these games was the 2008 Iowa game. Even games against Texas A&M, Nebraska, Michigan State, etc. had around 48,000 max in attendance. What I found true that some people have said on here is that the common Yinzer does not care about these schools, unless they're the stooges and maybe a Ohio State, Michigan, etc. Attendance for G5 games were only slightly less than P5 games. I believe this is because these fan bases were usually closer to Pittsburgh and brought more fans to these games. At this point, who cares what your OOC strength is like? It's obvious at this point that the committee doesn't put as much value into this as one would think. Why not play 1/2 of WVU/PSU/ND at home every year and pair them up with a Marshall/Temple/Cincinnati? Not only would this lead to higher attendance at these single games, but it'd also lead to more attendance in the future because we'd win more of these OOC games and have more to play for down the stretch.

Also: I don't think an on-campus stadium would change anything with attendance. Attendance is higher at Heinz Field than it was at Pitt Stadium... Maybe it's because Heinz's numbers are slightly inflated because it holds more. Not counting the dark ages, the core fanbase of fans was lower from 1982-1990 than it is today... Maybe this is because enrollment is up and there're more alums alive today. But there's no evidence to suggest a move would back to Oakland would stabilize attendance at around 40,000 and increase it overall since bigger games would bring more. Heck, it may actually decrease attendance in the grand scheme of things since a stadium in Oakland would most likely seat <50,000 tops, causing the numbers to deflate. However, there are ways to improve the atmosphere and experience on the North Side since that's where Pitt will be indefinitely. I believe more signage and packing fans closer together is a good start. What they could do is expand their footprint over there. With construction still going on at the North Shore, why can't they purchase property to build a Pitt-themed restaurant, team store, and mini hall of fame? Additionally, connecting Oakland and the rest of Pittsburgh with the spine line (which is inevitable over time) would improve the situation as well. Like I said, there's many things Pitt could to enhance the experience without having to spend >$250 million on a new stadium. And if the numbers show anything, it's this: If you win, they will come.

This is just what I noticed and interpreted from it. Of course, everyone has their own opinions on it. I'd love to here everyone's thoughts on this. H2P.

Wow. Kudos to you for a very well researched and well thought out piece. I won't comment on every issue you touched on, but I will comment on the OOC schedule.

I agree 100% that we need to get realistic with our OOC schedule. We played OSU and PSU this year. Next year we play PSU, UCF, and ND who are all ranked this year. That's simply nuts. We're much better off scheduling one really tough OOC opponent and throwing in a P5 team that we have a reasonable chance of beating. As you mentioned, it won't really impact attendance and the benefit of W's is significant for future attendance, bowl bids, and recruiting.

I hope to god that you forwarded you analysis to Heather so she can take it into consideration when making future schedule decisions.

Cruzer

 

[ratking17]

I have no way of truly quantifying this, but hear me out....and forgive me if this sounds dumb as I woke up at 3 and can't get back to sleep.

To me, the main benefit of heinz field is the easibiliy of parking. In and out in 10-15 mins. So if we have roughly 35,000 solid dedicated pitt fans,

Question 1: how many are students?
Question 2: how long does it take students to get on the bus and ride into heinz?

Then my thoughts turn to an on campus stadium. I only had 3 years of pitt stadium before we moved to 3 rivers and then heinz. After visiting Clemson last year, nothing beats the atmosphere of an on campus stadium.

To me parking is the obvious problem. What if pitt were to reverse the bussing?

Question 3: would current pitt fans (non students) be willing to park downtown and take a pitt shuttle into campus that dropped you off at stadium?

Question 4: would this decrease non student attendance?

Question 5: would it increase current student attendance and create more future season ticket holders?

I remember riding a campus shuttle at Clemson, also Rutgers.

Just some random thoughts.

I would be okay with riding a shuttle in if pitt worked with transportation to make Forbes or 5th ave one way and if getting on the shuttle didn't impact travel time by that much. I don't know realistically if that would even be possible.

The other thing is the lack of tailgating still exists in Oakland, unless you made a "grove" type area on the cathedral lawn.

 

[Burgh15]

To me parking is the obvious problem. What if pitt were to reverse the bussing?

Question 3: would current pitt fans (non students) be willing to park downtown and take a pitt shuttle into campus that dropped you off at stadium?

My expectation is that as long as a shuttle could get me from downtown to Oakland before/after the game in a comparable time that it takes me to walk to Heinz Field, yes.

 

[MarshallGoldberg]

On the scheduling question, I imagine we're stuck playing upper middle programs because we "have" to. Everyone wants Bama and Florida, so we won't get them obviously. Then they want the weakest P5 program they can find so they can meet a P5 game requirement from their conference. So a middling program like Pitt ends up playing the teams that are left. Which are other teams like Pitt or ones slightly above us.

The other challenging thing is guessing how good a team will be in 6-10 years down the road. Maybe then UCF will stink or Cincinnati will have a top 20 team. We have no clue. Army went from the weak military academy for an easy win to the best of the three this year. It's really tough and all you can do is focus on winning your conference games so you can dvance your program and contend for an ACC title game.

 

[CrazyPaco]

I have no way of truly quantifying this, but hear me out....and forgive me if this sounds dumb as I woke up at 3 and can't get back to sleep.

To me, the main benefit of heinz field is the easibiliy of parking. In and out in 10-15 mins. So if we have roughly 35,000 solid dedicated pitt fans,

Question 1: how many are students?
Question 2: how long does it take students to get on the bus and ride into heinz?

Then my thoughts turn to an on campus stadium. I only had 3 years of pitt stadium before we moved to 3 rivers and then heinz. After visiting Clemson last year, nothing beats the atmosphere of an on campus stadium.

To me parking is the obvious problem. What if pitt were to reverse the bussing?

Question 3: would current pitt fans (non students) be willing to park downtown and take a pitt shuttle into campus that dropped you off at stadium?

Question 4: would this decrease non student attendance?

Question 5: would it increase current student attendance and create more future season ticket holders?

I remember riding a campus shuttle at Clemson, also Rutgers.

Just some random thoughts.

I would be okay with riding a shuttle in if pitt worked with transportation to make Forbes or 5th ave one way and if getting on the shuttle didn't impact travel time by that much. I don't know realistically if that would even be possible.

The other thing is the lack of tailgating still exists in Oakland, unless you made a "grove" type area on the cathedral lawn.

There is nothing less comparable to Pitt's campus than Clemson's. Southern, rural 1400 acres vs northern, urban concrete grid of 140 acres. You will never approach duplicating what they have. It is physically impossible. Returning on campus is not happening at Pitt. In any case, one would have a better chance of duplicating Clemson's atmosphere in the contiguous surface lots around Heinz than in the chopped up grid of Oakland.

 

[Sarge25]

The question that needs answered is, how do you get people who didn’t go to Pitt to come to Pitt games. Pitt continues to ask Pitt current season ticket holders, alumn etc with surveys about their gameday experience etc. who cares, those guys are going to go and donate no matter what.

You have 70k Steeler fans that buy and go to games every weekend. You have another X thousand fans on a season ticket waiting list. Why not use your relationship with the Steelers to survey those guys. Hey, I see you’re a passionate football fan from the city of Pittsburgh, what could the university do to entice you to attend football games on Saturday? Maybe even offer them a free ticket to a game in case some have never gone?

Another option is to go out and hammer the fan who purchases single game or mini packages. What can we do to get you there every week instead of just a select few weekends?

Allegheny co has 1.2 million, westmoreland 365k, Washington 207k, Beaver 170k, Butler 183k. You’re telling me out of 2 million people within an hour and a half radius of Heinz field that we can’t get 70k to go to the game? Obviously it all starts with a better product on the field, but to think if team and department didn’t all come together at the same time that Pitt couldn’t fill that stadium 6 times a year is defeatest thinking imo.

 

[cbpitt2]

Your analysis confirms what I have always believed to be true.

The only real argument the Oakland Stadium crowd may actually have (and it can’t be demonstrated in advance) is that a less empty appearing Stadium will attract better more highly ranked recruits.

And bringing in more highly ranked recruits will cause more victories and more winning means more people in the stands. It's not rocket science.

Of course, whatever attendance figures you're using in your calculations for Pitt are largely inflated and not truly accurate.

 

[Burgh15]

The Steelers are averaging about 4,500 no shows this year and they're one of the top teams in the NFL with arguably two of the top five players in the entire league. It is a pipe dream for Pitt to average over 60,000 when the top team in town only does 64,000 when they're one of the best. It's time to stop being embarrassed with the 45,000 number and embrace it.

 

[jtownknowitall]

The question that needs answered is, how do you get people who didn’t go to Pitt to come to Pitt games. Pitt continues to ask Pitt current season ticket holders, alumn etc with surveys about their gameday experience etc. who cares, those guys are going to go and donate no matter what.

o.

I bet over half the people that are going to Pitt games now didn’t go to Pitt.

 

[Sarge25]

I bet over half the people that are going to Pitt games now didn’t go to Pitt.

Count me and the other guy I go with as 2, + what appears to be a party of 10 (4 adults, 6 kids) that sit to the right of us.

Let me add that I can’t stand Oakland and the thought of having to drive in and out of Oakland, parking, traffic etc is the only reason I turned them down and went to a different university. Having said that, I think they should have an on-campus stadium and would still go to games there.

 

[cbpitt2]

I have no way of truly quantifying this, but hear me out....and forgive me if this sounds dumb as I woke up at 3 and can't get back to sleep.

To me, the main benefit of heinz field is the easibiliy of parking. In and out in 10-15 mins. So if we have roughly 35,000 solid dedicated pitt fans,

Question 1: how many are students?
Question 2: how long does it take students to get on the bus and ride into heinz?

Then my thoughts turn to an on campus stadium. I only had 3 years of pitt stadium before we moved to 3 rivers and then heinz. After visiting Clemson last year, nothing beats the atmosphere of an on campus stadium.

To me parking is the obvious problem. What if pitt were to reverse the bussing?

Question 3: would current pitt fans (non students) be willing to park downtown and take a pitt shuttle into campus that dropped you off at stadium?

Question 4: would this decrease non student attendance?

Question 5: would it increase current student attendance and create more future season ticket holders?

I remember riding a campus shuttle at Clemson, also Rutgers.

Just some random thoughts.

I would be okay with riding a shuttle in if pitt worked with transportation to make Forbes or 5th ave one way and if getting on the shuttle didn't impact travel time by that much. I don't know realistically if that would even be possible.

The other thing is the lack of tailgating still exists in Oakland, unless you made a "grove" type area on the cathedral lawn.

I have used a shuttle at Notre Dame and West Virginia and I know there are shuttles at Penn State, Auburn, Florida State, LSU, Michigan State, Missouri, Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Oregon.

At the U.S. Open at Oakmont they had shuttle buses, no one complains.

 

[joeydavid]

If you want to speed up the process of Pitt turning the corner- they can't be scheduling any of those teams. The talent "gap" between Pitt and UW is minimal. The scheduling gap is massive.

Schedule a team from the MAC, a YSU, a RU and a Rice. Bank your 4 wins and on to the ACC.

1. An on-campus stadium in and of itself is not going to help attendance. All else being equal, it may actually decrease it. That said, an on-campus stadium is supposed to help recruiting and the smaller stadium is supposed to provide a better atmosphere which should make it a more intimidating place to play which should lead to more wins which also should help recruiting.

2. Yes, I agree that playing OKST, Iowa, MSU is pretty stupid. It doesn't help attendance and Yinzers could care less. The only P5 teams we should schedule home and homes with are

PSU
WVU
ND
OSU
Mich
Florida
Georgia
Alabama
Auburn
LSU
Texas
Oklahoma
USC
Oregon

 

[cbpitt2]

If you want to speed up the process of Pitt turning the corner- they can't be scheduling any of those teams. The talent "gap" between Pitt and UW is minimal. The scheduling gap is massive.

Schedule a team from the MAC, a YSU, a RU and a Rice. Bank your 4 wins and on to the ACC.

And when you get a year without Notre Dame, Clemson (still haven't been to HF since joining the ACC), Florida State (here only 1x since joining the ACC), and Virginia Tech or Georgia Tech is your best opponent, only the most loyal Pitt fans will buy season tickets. You may as well play in a 30,000 seat stadium.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Wow. Kudos to you for a very well researched and well thought out piece. I won't comment on every issue you touched on, but I will comment on the OOC schedule.

I agree 100% that we need to get realistic with our OOC schedule. We played OSU and PSU this year. Next year we play PSU, UCF, and ND who are all ranked this year. That's simply nuts. We're much better off scheduling one really tough OOC opponent and throwing in a P5 team that we have a reasonable chance of beating. As you mentioned, it won't really impact attendance and the benefit of W's is significant for future attendance, bowl bids, and recruiting.

I hope to god that you forwarded you analysis to Heather so she can take it into consideration when making future schedule decisions.

Cruzer

I appreciate it Cruzer, I'll consider sending this to her. I'd say why not schedule PSU, WVU, or ND for the one tough P5 game and then schedule something like Marshall, Temple, and Cincinnati. The service academies will always be a tough draw and I think those schools have a good chance to stay where they are right now while also bringing a decent amount of fans with them.

However, I will gladly enjoy using the UCF game as an excuse to travel to Orlando next year

 

[HailToPitt725]

And when you get a year without Notre Dame, Clemson (still haven't been to HF since joining the ACC), Florida State (here only 1x since joining the ACC), and Virginia Tech or Georgia Tech is your best opponent, only the most loyal Pitt fans will buy season tickets. You may as well play in a 30,000 seat stadium.

This is true. The only times Pitt averaged below 40,000 fans (and both were in the <35,000 range) were 2007 and 2017 (even more parallels between the two years) and both didn't have PSU, ND, or WVU at home.

However, you have to remember that both of those teams were 5-7, too.

 

[joeydavid]

That's simply not true.

10-1 Pitt team playing an 11-0 Miami for the Coastal would be a sell out or very close to a sell out. See Pitt/Cincinnati for proof of this thought.

And when you get a year without Notre Dame, Clemson (still haven't been to HF since joining the ACC), Florida State (here only 1x since joining the ACC), and Virginia Tech or Georgia Tech is your best opponent, only the most loyal Pitt fans will buy season tickets. You may as well play in a 30,000 seat stadium.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

The Steelers are averaging about 4,500 no shows this year and they're one of the top teams in the NFL with arguably two of the top five players in the entire league. It is a pipe dream for Pitt to average over 60,000 when the top team in town only does 64,000 when they're one of the best. It's time to stop being embarrassed with the 45,000 number and embrace it.

Agree.

Time to Right Size Heinz Field to 50,000 for Pitt games.

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[PITTsburghFAN]

Very nice work by the OP to use facts and logic instead of the standard anecdotes, self-delusion and fanciful thinking. And major props to Paco for one of his thunderous rebukes to the above-cited m.o. when he stopped Ratking's nonsense about Clemson's on-campus stadium and the realities of Pitt's circumstances. Boom!

A key facet of college attendance is how much engagement the athletic program gets from alum. Some years back I assembled a group of Pittsburgh marketing/PR pro's to review and advise Pitt's situation. From the data we saw, Pitt was a bit UNDER the national average for alumni participation in football attendance, a bit over in hoops (natural given the high times we were then experiencing). Now... participation via "showing up" is one thing, and participation in the form of "giving" is another. We all know that Pitt alums contribute to their alma mater's athletics programs in Pitt-i-ful amounts.

The easiest route back to 50,000+ season average attendance - which would Pitt among the leaders in city-university support - is to get another 10% of the alumni base, particularly those that live locally, to attend Pitt games. I think many of us know many fellow alums who care and even follow, but don't participate by attending.

 

[HailtoPitt]

That's a good point that I did not consider. Completely forgot about the shakeup. The data I used ( http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/DI/2010/Attendance.pdf ) just said FBS and did not account for it either. I used 1976-1982 because that's what many on consider Pitt's dynastic stretch. I was tempted to go with 1975 and 1982 as well, but decided not to in the end.

I just redid it by using the first six years following the breakup, 1982-87, while still using the 1976-1981 numbers. This should give it a more accurate correlation. That knocked it down to 7%. I should've noticed an outlier like that. Still, Pitt is still above the national FBS average and decreases over time, albeit a smaller one. Thanks for telling me this.

I figured that Paco would chime in, since the original numbers in your analysis ran counter to the continued narrative that an on campus stadium is a terrible thing for Pitt and that attendance at Heinz has been better, but only without taking into account inflation between decades.

I don't think it's totally accurate to use 82-87 attendance data and than compare it to Pitt's attendance during their winning stretch, but regardless your adjusted numbers STILL show that attendance at Pitt Stadium during those years was better than Heinz when compared to the peer schools during similar time periods.

This tells me that when Pitt was doing well, people supported the program, which runs counter to what many here attempt to suggest. It was only after Pitt's administration continually made poor decisions and did not invest in the program that fans stopped going.

What Pitt needed to do was either renovate the stadium or rebuild it on the same spot. Then stop shooting the program in the foot. Attendance would have improved and the program would be more successful.

Their plan should still be to find a location on campus and build a new stadium. One that is properly sized and will help to build the program over time.

 

[ratking17]

Very nice work by the OP to use facts and logic instead of the standard anecdotes, self-delusion and fanciful thinking. And major props to Paco for one of his thunderous rebukes to the above-cited m.o. when he stopped Ratking's nonsense about Clemson's on-campus stadium and the realities of Pitt's circumstances. Boom!

A key facet of college attendance is how much engagement the athletic program gets from alum. Some years back I assembled a group of Pittsburgh marketing/PR pro's to review and advise Pitt's situation. From the data we saw, Pitt was a bit UNDER the national average for alumni participation in football attendance, a bit over in hoops (natural given the high times we were then experiencing). Now... participation via "showing up" is one thing, and participation in the form of "giving" is another. We all know that Pitt alums contribute to their alma mater's athletics programs in Pitt-i-ful amounts.

The easiest route back to 50,000+ season average attendance - which would Pitt among the leaders in city-university support - is to get another 10% of the alumni base, particularly those that live locally, to attend Pitt games. I think many of us know many fellow alums who care and even follow, but don't participate by attending.

Perhaps you suffer from reading comprehension issues. I stated that I loved on campus experience of Clemson and that they were one of the campuses that used buses to shuttle people in and out of the stadium to parking lots. But Boom

 

[Swervin27]

Being "noon kickoff U" doesn't help either.

 

[RaleighPittFan]

Service Academies are a great draw for fans of that program.

This is a LOT less of a geographic boundary for their fan base.

That kid who grew up in Blawnox; enlisted, and stationed in Fort Hood, Tx before moving back to Blawnox; like his Dad, is a Notre Dame fan; and never set foot in Upstate NY would very likely want to see a Panthers and Black Knights game at Heinz.