Future Football Schedules

[4ever_niner]

@Mr. Bojangles

[quote=“charlotteguy88, post:399, topic:28863”]Attendance is a factor for bowl committees as well. I’ve read many places (some merely opinion pieces) that bowl committees look for teams that average over 20,000 per game. Hard to do that when our stadium doesn’t hold that many. IMO we need to have 20,000 seats by next season and 25-27,000 by 2017. We can stop there if need be. But keeping the smallest stadium in FBS is the worst mistake we can make.

We have a 15,000 seat stadium to fill with over 100,000 alums, 27,000 students, and 155,000 people living in University City. I know it may take a little bit of EFFORT, but there should be no excuse not to fill that stadium up 6 times a year. The #1 priority of our Athletic Department needs to be making sure our football stadium is sold out, and we are in the process of expanding the stadium. The success of our Athletic Department depends on the success of our football program.[/quote] Agree that what you said should be our first priority. Success in other areas will follow.

[919R]

@charlotteguy88

Attendance is a factor for bowl committees as well. I’ve read many places (some merely opinion pieces) that bowl committees look for teams that average over 20,000 per game. Hard to do that when our stadium doesn’t hold that many. IMO we need to have 20,000 seats by next season and 25-27,000 by 2017. We can stop there if need be. But keeping the smallest stadium in FBS is the worst mistake we can make.

Good post. I agree we need to add some seats immediately (~20,000 or so) and we need to be at 25,000 within the next 2 years I think. After that, we could wait a few years (2-3) for further expansion if we need to.

[KSNiner]

I agree about expanding to 25k with 2 years. Sure we may not fill it for presby and fau, but the extra 10,000*30$ in sales for marshall, odu, app etc games will pay for the cost pretty quick.

Also, comparing an atmosphere of having a half filled (or even 30% filled) 25-40k stadium during some games with ga state putting 1,500 fans in the Ga dome is not valid imo. Nothing similar about these situations

[Ninerdawg]

I just remember how absolutely dead the Rich was that time we had a game during fall break. We still probably had 7,000 people there, but it was like a ghost town.

We certainly don’t have to sell out every game, but we need to be able to consistently put 20,000 in the seats if we go to 25,000. To go to 20,000 it seems like we only need to be able to consistently put 17,500 or so in the seats. That seems much more realistic to me over the next 3-5 years. We can always bring in temp seating for the Marshall’s of the world.

[49r9r]

@4ever niner

[quote=“Mr. Bojangles, post:400, topic:28863”][quote=“charlotteguy88, post:399, topic:28863”]Attendance is a factor for bowl committees as well. I’ve read many places (some merely opinion pieces) that bowl committees look for teams that average over 20,000 per game. Hard to do that when our stadium doesn’t hold that many. IMO we need to have 20,000 seats by next season and 25-27,000 by 2017. We can stop there if need be. But keeping the smallest stadium in FBS is the worst mistake we can make.

We have a 15,000 seat stadium to fill with over 100,000 alums, 27,000 students, and 155,000 people living in University City. I know it may take a little bit of EFFORT, but there should be no excuse not to fill that stadium up 6 times a year. The #1 priority of our Athletic Department needs to be making sure our football stadium is sold out, and we are in the process of expanding the stadium. The success of our Athletic Department depends on the success of our football program.[/quote] Agree that what you said should be our first priority. Success in other areas will follow.[/quote]

Agree with everything. Having the smallest stadium in FBS will hurt us, and there is no excuse for it to be that small.

[49RFootballNow]

@49r9r

[quote=“4ever niner, post:401, topic:28863”][quote=“Mr. Bojangles, post:400, topic:28863”][quote=“charlotteguy88, post:399, topic:28863”]Attendance is a factor for bowl committees as well. I’ve read many places (some merely opinion pieces) that bowl committees look for teams that average over 20,000 per game. Hard to do that when our stadium doesn’t hold that many. IMO we need to have 20,000 seats by next season and 25-27,000 by 2017. We can stop there if need be. But keeping the smallest stadium in FBS is the worst mistake we can make.

We have a 15,000 seat stadium to fill with over 100,000 alums, 27,000 students, and 155,000 people living in University City. I know it may take a little bit of EFFORT, but there should be no excuse not to fill that stadium up 6 times a year. The #1 priority of our Athletic Department needs to be making sure our football stadium is sold out, and we are in the process of expanding the stadium. The success of our Athletic Department depends on the success of our football program.[/quote] Agree that what you said should be our first priority. Success in other areas will follow.[/quote]

Agree with everything. Having the smallest stadium in FBS will hurt us, and there is no excuse for it to be that small.[/quote]

Yes, lets give that title back to the MAC.

[Agent49]

At Indiana in 2022 and 2023 per the Twitter machine.

[cibik02]

@Agent49

At Indiana in 2022 and 2023 per the Twitter machine.

Don’t think I’ve ever heard of Indiana football. Their record is nothing to brag about. Are they paying us to travel there 2 years in a row?

[NinerLove]

@Agent49

At Indiana in 2022 and 2023 per the Twitter machine.

Assuming this is not the H/H NinerJags eluded to if both years are away?

[Agent49]

@cibik02

[quote=“moss2k, post:407, topic:28863”]At Indiana in 2022 and 2023 per the Twitter machine.

Don’t think I’ve ever heard of Indiana football. Their record is nothing to brag about. Are they paying us to travel there 2 years in a row?[/quote]that’s what it seems like.

[Indy_Niner]

Hey guys new to the board. As someone who works with a lot of IU grads, they only care about the tailgate and not the game. Could be winnable games if they stay on the schedule.

Indiana football adds 3 opponents to future schedules

[Niner_National]

[quote=“Indy Niner, post:411, topic:28863”]Hey guys new to the board. As someone who works with a lot of IU grads, they only care about the tailgate and not the game. Could be winnable games if they stay on the schedule.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/2015/09/10/indiana-football-adds-opponents-future-schedules/72033158/[/quote]welcome to the board!

[Nugget]

[quote=“Indy Niner, post:411, topic:28863”]Hey guys new to the board. As someone who works with a lot of IU grads, they only care about the tailgate and not the game. Could be winnable games if they stay on the schedule.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/2015/09/10/indiana-football-adds-opponents-future-schedules/72033158/[/quote]
Welcome to the board. Were you at the basketball at Indiana when the Niners won on a last second, half-court shot?

[Indy_Niner]

[quote=“Nugget, post:413, topic:28863”][quote=“Indy Niner, post:411, topic:28863”]Hey guys new to the board. As someone who works with a lot of IU grads, they only care about the tailgate and not the game. Could be winnable games if they stay on the schedule.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/2015/09/10/indiana-football-adds-opponents-future-schedules/72033158/[/quote]
Welcome to the board. Were you at the basketball at Indiana when the Niners won on a last second, half-court shot?[/quote]

I was not. At that time, being in grade school, I was still rooting for the hoosiers. I still remember all the crazy snow that day and that half court shot. Maybe that’s what made me want to become a niner

[49RFootballNow]

I’d rather this was a 2 for 1 but OK.

[919R]

I would rather it be a 1 for 1.

[Gassman]

Seems like a good way to make some $ against a beatable P5 and mix with the elite Big 10.

As long as we have 6 home games and can get regional foes to come to our house I’m down with any interesting road games.

If they had signed this with any team in NC or SC. Forget it.

[bleedsgreenandgold]

The B10 no longer wants to play FCS schools so now they have to pay up for 6 home games. We all knew this was going to happen:

[font=arial][size=14px]“The 2021 matchup will be the first-ever meeting between Idaho and Indiana. Per Idaho athletic director[/size] Rob Spear[/font][font=arial][size=14px], the Vandals will receive a $1.2 million guarantee from IU in 2021 and $1.3 million in 2022.”[/size][/font]

[chidave]

If that’s the payout then this makes more sense

[Agent49]

[quote=“bleedsgreenandgold, post:418, topic:28863”]The B10 no longer wants to play FCS schools so now they have to pay up for 6 home games. We all knew this was going to happen:

[font=arial][size=14px]“The 2021 matchup will be the first-ever meeting between Idaho and Indiana. Per Idaho athletic director[/size] Rob Spear[/font][font=arial][size=14px], the Vandals will receive a $1.2 million guarantee from IU in 2021 and $1.3 million in 2022.”[/size][/font][/quote]
Sign me up, big pay days and more than likely a solid shot at winning by then.