Saturday's game is scary sign

December 8, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
IUbballIt’s difficult to say if Saturday’s weak turnout for the first basketball games at Lucas Oil Stadium is an indication of how bad the economy or Indiana’s basketball team is. Probably both. It’s a very troubling sign for everyone making a living in the sports world nonetheless.

The Hartford Hall of Fame Showcase featuring IU against Gonzaga and Ohio State vs. Notre Dame drew 17,007 spectators for a venue configured to seat just more than 26,000. Event organizers made the mistake of initially pricing tickets too high, then discount them 20 percent on Nov. 28. Despite offering $12 tickets, about 9,000 seats for the Dec. 6 game went unfilled. This in a market that drew 50,000 to the RCA Dome for the Hoosiers NCAA tournament preliminary round game against Xavier in 1992. I know, it’s hardly fair to compare this year’s team to the Calbert Cheaney-led squad that was making a run at the Final Four.

Still, if the very first game in a spiffy new stadium with a game featuring the No. 5 team in the nation can only draw 17,000, you have to wonder what meaningless IU games in January and February down in Bloomington will draw. IU is in a year when it can’t afford to see a big attendance decline.

IU counts on football and basketball to keep the athletic department in the black, or at least out of the red. Figures for this year aren’t available, but you can bet the football revenue is way down. In 2007, football revenue was $17 million and basketball revenue was $12.3 million, accounting for 73 percent of athletic department’s budget. If basketball revenue drops, new athletic director Fred Glass will have another serious challenge to hurdle.

I would bet Saturday’s attendance caught the attention of interests far outside Bloomington. If it is an economic indicator, other sports franchises including the Indiana Pacers, Indianapolis Indians and Indy Racing League have much to be concerned about. The fact that lat week's Pacers-Lakers game was far short of a sellout, could be another sign that life in the world of revenue-generating sports is about to get a lot more challenging. There’s certainly an early indication that weaker teams will be the first to suffer. I don't think IU's six-game package featuring Lipscomb and Northeastern for $159 is going to get it done. Saturday's game showed locals aren't about to pay $26.50 per ticket for that kind of competition.

And while the Indianapolis Colts are safe for now, with the price of their tickets, they have to be hoping the economy turns around at least a little before they launch their season ticket renewal campaign in late February. Or they may find out just how solid that waiting list for tickets really is.

“Sporting events across the nation at all levels are re-evaluating their respective ticket price points due to decreased spending by consumers,” said Brooks Downing of Best Collegiate, which organized Saturday’s basketball doubleheader. “Given the state of our economy, we felt it was proper to offer a special incentive.”

If you can’t attract Hoosiers with an IU basketball game, new venue and a special incentive, sports promoters have to be wondering what will attract fans through the turnstile. The scariest scenario: Maybe nothing.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Purdue FanDecember 8, 2008 11:44 AM
    I wouldn't worry about it. When Purdue transitioned from Gene Keady to Matt Painter, Painter's first year attendence was absolutely terrible, because it was a terrible team. Now look at attendence for Purdue Basketball this year.

    IU will have a decline in attendence until Crean's good recruits come in and then all will be fine. Granted OSU and ND played and attendence still wasn't full, but Indy is an IU town and if IU had a good team, that place would have been sold out to the brim regardless of who played second and the economy.

    The real answer will be when Purdue plays Davidson in Indianapolis. That game appears to be a great matchup with ranked teams. If that game has attendence problems (granted it is in Conseco), then you can really start to blame the economy and not poor matchups no one cares to watch (or travel to in Ohio State's case).
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • MattDecember 8, 2008 2:18 PM
    I'm predicting 10,000 to 12,000 for the Purdue v. Davidson game, and the only reason I'm predicting that high is because of Davidson superstar Steph Curry.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Daniel NealDecember 8, 2008 3:59 PM
    i wish the matchups would have been IU-Kentucky and Purdue-ND
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • DashDecember 8, 2008 4:23 PM
    Those matchups would seem to make a lot more sense than Southern Illinois vs. St. Mary's of California. That game won't sell 100 tix locally.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • EugeneDecember 8, 2008 8:47 PM
    What we need is a new stadium.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • DougDecember 12, 2008 2:53 PM
    I think you're drawing far too much from your characterization of the issue with the IU game at Lucas. I wouldn't be too concerned about the IU fan base as it is simply making a natural adjustment to the changing environment and as others have suggested, will be there as things improve. I do agree ticket prices are a factor but I have thought for a long time that our national franchasise teams cost too much, that salaries in pro sports are out of line and increasingly out of range for the average family. There's a real gap between compensation and performance, including the entertainment value and it's fast becoming a luxury fewer will keep in their budgets.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT