Is there any hope at all that "Wazzu" will officially return? I mean there are so many uses for it, for example: "Crim-zone" seating? Puh-leese, just call that section "The Zzu" --- Aren't the craziest fans suppose to sit there anyways?
Moos a success?
- Thread starter Coug95man2
- Start date
Is there any hope at all that "Wazzu" will officially return? I mean there are so many uses for it, for example: "Crim-zone" seating? Puh-leese, just call that section "The Zzu" --- Aren't the craziest fans suppose to sit there anyways?
I knew a lot of fans that never stepped foot in Pullman after they had graduated go to the Seattle game and then begin to go to games in Pullman. It works both ways.
The bulk of the money was never supposed to come from the P12 network. That was the icing on the cake if it could be successful. The bulk of the money was always the contracts with ABC/ESPN and Fox. So, for the length of those contracts, the money is going to be OK. As long as the conference is successful on the field, they will be able to negotiate contracts after the current one is finished. I believe it still has a lot of years left.
Don't forget about the golf course
V. Lane does get credit for his edifice.
But other than that, the guy gave two sh*ts about athletics. It was also during his era that Gonzaga flat stole Spokane out from under WSU's noses. Father Spitzer de-pants'd V. Lane and took all the mucky mucks.
I blame V. Lane FAR more than Sterk. He was trying to do his job with 1 1/2 arms tied behind his back.
The number of fans who used the Seattle game as a de facto homecoming outweighed those who were inspired to return to Pullman by at least a 50 to 1 clip.
flat, so what is WSU's winning percentage overall? Or do you wanna nit pick my post some more in an effort to find me 2% wrong?
You are using 100 years of history for justifying our struggles. I pointed out that we have decades at a time where our team has had winning seasons as often as not. While it's true that our history suggests that the last 10 years isn't that surprising when we have bad coaches, but our history also suggests that good coaches have been able to win football games at WSU. When you look at WSU football from 1981 to 2003, we had a lot of pretty decent football teams and a few outstanding ones. When you factor in that WSU often only played 3 or fewer games per year in Pullman prior to 1980, the bad records prior to 1981 make more sense. Everyone knows that we aren't going to field a top 10 team every year and that we are going to have losing seasons.
If Leach is the coach that we hope he is, the time is now for us to start experiencing success. I really like the way our season is set up and I see our team in a bowl game if we start doing the little things right. Again, my only disagreement was your suggestion that WSU is so bad historically that we shouldn't expect success. If anything, the 25 years prior to Wulff suggests that we should be bowl eligible about half the time. If Leach does that this year, he will have matched that standard.
It wasn't my claim. But I have no trouble believing it.
There's even more empirical evidence in the Seattle game attendance. Some of them were only marginally above 40K. If those Seattle "fans" can't appear in higher numbers than that in Seattle, there's no way you're going to convince me that they're coming to Pullman with frequency or significance.
Good post 95. Some people complain about Moos because he talks. I have always taken the rah rah stuff with a grain of salt, just like I do for all managers, coaches, administrators, etc. But, what I like is that Moos is talking. We seldom ever heard from Sterk.Biggs, I will also contend that the concept of "any AD worth their salt can spend Pac12Network money" isn't accurate. First off, yeah anyone can spend it but not on "stuff" (Press Box/luxury suites and FOB) that is a consensus "good job". What Moos has built on the construction side, has been a pretty big hit. To go back, look at what Mr. Sterks renderings looked like compared to what we have now!!! I can guarantee you that Sterk would have immediately gone into "save" mode and done the luxury suites as cheaply as possible.
Tell me how this vision fits with WSU?
And I'll also suggest that the FOB would not have looked anywhere near what it is. I'd even go so far as to say, we might not have the FOB. I can see whomever stuffing that money away or going with a new IPF or baseball complex, basketball stadium… Lets do a whole bunch of "what-ifs" and say he'd have expanded programs and started up a LaCrosse program (men's and women's) and instead of renovating the baseball field, made it a softball field and made an entirely new baseball complex… Or just demo'ed Beasley for something new and spent it all on just that project… basketball… that'll float WSU's athletic boat… Gotta "spread the wealth around" concept. Whomever could have spent the money in so many different ways, wasted it, on and on and on. Sky is the limit on how "anyone" could have spent that P12N money.
So in that light, I agree with Moos and his vision. The idea that football floats the boat is accurate and he has spent the money in the proper way, and on things that are a consensus hit. Don't like how he talks, OK. Don't like his Pom Pom attitude… yeah but like it's been pointed out, what's he supposed to do? When looking at his actions, his true hard-core actions regarding "job description", he's done pretty good. The one area he's "if'y" on is marketing, IMHO. But I also say that without knowing his budget.
Ooooohhhh. I know... We could maybe get a new arch on the other side of the field to match the one along Stadium Way, for millions!!!!
Everytime that I have met Moos or even Dr. Floyd, they have been welcoming. When I saw Sterk, it was the complete opposite. Now, for those of you who think I was butt hurt or something, no. It was just that I prefer Moos' personality over Sterk's. I would rather have someone who is willing to talk than someone who doesn't.
Why is getting marginally above 40K in Seattle so bad when Pullman was only pulling in marginally over 20K?
Cougcenter mentions that DirectTV and AT&T are merging. We all know that DirectTV and the P12 conference have not been able to come to an agreement regarding airing the conference on the satellite provider. AT&T and the conference do have a close working partnership. If this deal does go through, it will go a long way toward getting P12 games on DirectTV.
I don't know what kind of blood money DTV wants from P12N, but I can tell you that 100% of zero is zero, which is the amount of revenue they are making from DTV now. Recent numbers have Comcast at 24% of the market share and DTV at 21%. Time to move the needle and strike that deal.
The lack of any significant increase in attendance in Pullman at any point during the Seattle game era.
Getting embarrassed in Seattle is what happened. Nearly every single year. If you are only exposed directly to Coug football once a year, in Seattle, and every year they get blasted, does it really matter what the cause is?
Well....population of the greater Seattle area is about 50 times what the population of Pullman is, yet barely 2x as many show up.
C-link is a comparatively short, easy drive for those SEattle "fans", yet they didn't come...why would they make a 5-hour plus trek to Pullman instead?
This can't be a serious debate. There's zero possibility that the number of people inspired to attend in Pullman exceeds the number that attended in Seattle instead.
The Seattle game was a joke. Relying on Seattle fans is a waste of WSU's time, money, and resources. The ones who want to come will come no matter what. The ones that don't, won't.
But to continue your analogy, 95, it's the President whose pedaling makes all the difference....he may be on the back seat of the "tandem bike" but it's his efforts (however unseen) that make Moos' work even have a chance....
Funny you say this because the majority of school donations come from the Puget Sound area.
Donations are one thing. Filling Martin Stadium is another.
I don't believe you can ignore the Puget Sound. I think you need to be realistic about how many seats you have in your stadium and how far you need to go to fill them. There are more then enough people in Eastern Washington to fill the stadium. Half of which are probably already in Pullman.
I don't believe you can ignore the Puget Sound. I think you need to be realistic about how many seats you have in your stadium and how far you need to go to fill them. There are more then enough people in Eastern Washington to fill the stadium. Half of which are probably already in Pullman.
There have been a lot of games where the attendance in Pullman is in the 20,000's. Why is that? This was even before the game in Seattle as well?
If Martin Stadium had been at capacity, there never would have been a game in Seattle. Martin Stadium is a relatively short drive from Spokane, yet they don't come.
I also do not agree with the argument that the Seattle area has a greater population, so the attendance is terrible. It was bigger than it was in Pullman. WSU is located in Pullman. Why would you think the entire population of Seattle would go? It is irrelevant how may people live in Seattle. Not all are fans.
What about fans that only show up for the Seattle game that now take phone calls from WSU to donate because they feel a little closer to the school now.
But, they also got embarrassed in Pullman. Every single year. Why would anyone from Spokane, Seattle or anywhere else want to spend hard earned money to see the Cougars get embarrassed?
You do understand that there could be dozens of reasons why attendance did not increase other than the Seattle game?
I think you're seeing that they don't spend the money.
If you put out a product that people want to see they'll come. If you consistently put out an inferior product people won't come. No one wants to spend hundreds of dollars and leave disappointed or even embarrassed.
What's the going price for a family of 4 to go to Pullman from Spokane for a game????
Exactly. People don't spend good money for a bad product. You could live less that a block away from the stadium and if the administration does not give you a reason to go to a game, people won't.
You have correctly written many times that many school presidents and their underlings really give a damn about the football team. They got what they paid for. Why should most other people care if the administration didn't?
What, now I have to make excuses for the people who don't show?
Looking at the attendance numbers, I'll give you the rules for WSU attendance...rules that have not changed since we started playing in Seattle...and rules which also apply in Seattle
- People don't come to see weak opponents. Historically, the majority of the games than have been under 30K have been against bad teams. There are a lot of Montana/Montana State, San Jose State, bad Cal and Oregon State teams, etc.
- People don't come to 2 consecutive November games - even if they are against quality opponents.
- People don't come to likely losses - when we have a bad team playing a ranked team, especially late in the season, attendance drops.
- People don't come on Thursday, and not that many come on Friday
Attendance should be higher in Seattle, based simply on population. With a couple million people inside of 30 minutes of the Stadium, there should be 40K showing up to anything....yet the Rutgers game saw 30,927. The same is not true in Pullman. If there are 30K in Martin, it means everyone in Pullman has showed up, and some of them brought friends from out of town.
All I can say about the phone calls is that the marketing office has been more aggressive with them for the past ~15 years, so it's tough to compare.
If what you are saying is true, WSU should play games in LA or SF or NY because they have high population bases. Attachment to local to a team means little, the high population is all that matters.
What is abundantly clear to me, as it is with every team (WSU or otherwise) in every sport is that people support winning teams. People do not support losing teams.
I knew you'd go there. Of course local attachment is important. But I think the Seattle game has demonstrated that there isn't much local attachment in Seattle. Half of the games there have failed to draw 50K...a third haven't made it to 45K...and the crowd that showed for Rutgers would have fit in Martin with room to spare (30,927). Seattle is a failed experiment.
You're generally right with the second statement, but I'll modify it a bit. People support winning teams, but they support them even more the following year. Our 10-2 1997 Rose Bowl team had 1 game that didn't break 30K...our 3-8 1998 team didn't have any. Our 10-2 2001 team had 2 games below 30K...the 10-3 2002 team had 1...the 10-3 2003 team had none...the 5-6 2004 team had none. People run away from a loser pretty fast though. We went from 1 game below 30K in 2007 (which was a November game, and a 2nd consecutive home game) to 4 games below 30K in 2008, and 5 in 2009 and 2010.
I haven't looked at the numbers in a couple years, but at one point our record high attendance (and ST sales) was in either 2004 or 2005 - neither of which was either a winning season or a bowl season.
