gohornedfrogs
Tier 1
Maybe I'm missing something, but I can't understand why the conference leaders would be worried about our attendance at all when we more than pull our weight revenue wise. We have shown the ability to spend with the best of them, too, without asking for any subsidization. So there shouldn't be any worries about our commitment to staying relevant. Furthermore, to my knowledge, the conference doesn't share in ticket revenue, so we're the only ones losing out there.True, and maybe that is a big factor in the attractiveness of a school to a conference. I'm just speaking in terms of things fans usually associate with teams you'd want in a conference. Size of school, history and tradition of athletics at the school, overall fan interest, attendance, etc. I would guess in terms of total butts actually sitting in seats at games, we rank dead last in the conference in attendance in both football and basketball, but maybe that isn't all that important overall.
I'm sure you could find a bunch of biased state school "fans" out there who'd argue that we should be replaced by someone who fills up the stadium, but the adults who make the decisions are looking at different metrics and a lot more information than them.
Also, from 1996 to 2010, Baylor was an absolute disaster in football and basketball. No bowls. No NCAA appearances. Their football attendance numbers were about 50% less than ours now. Yet they somehow survived the biggest re-alignment in college football history coming off those horrible years.
Last edited: