Utah State Game

[jcdshocker]

It is not part of the season ticket package. It will be an extra game played in Wichita instead of a neutral site somewhere else.

It will be an additional cost to the season tickets. I am sure season ticket holders will get some preference, not sure what, but this an extra game for Shocker fans to watch in Wichita.

[Steeleshocker]

I think a good way to handle this might be to open half of the lower bowl to season ticket holders a week before the general public. That allows the preferred seats to be taken by those who are really going to go to the game, while still allowing the casual fan a chance at some really good seats. If you don't sign up quick enough for the "season ticket holder seats" you will still have a chance at the other half of the lower bowl when they are opened up to the rest of the public.

[Aargh]

Earlier discussions of the potential schedule seemed pretty unanimous that season ticket holders would gladly give up one of the cream puff games for a road or neutral game with a quality opponent.

To put this game on the schedule means WSU will have one less home cupcake game. The neutral site happens to be Wichita. Now it seems that there is a change from the stance of gladly giving up a season ticket cupcake game for a neutral site game against a quality opponent if the neutral site happens to be Wichita.

Come on, guys. We get a neutral site game against a quality opponent in Wichita. This is a one-and-done deal, so we get an in-town neutral site and don't have a road game to return.

If we had a neutral site game in Salina, thousands of fans would gladly buy tickets and drive up there. This is the same thing, except the drive is shorter.

[WSUwatcher]

Yep

Well analyzed, Aargh. There really isn't always something to complain about.

[Zardoz]

We're getting another excellent OOC opponent which everybody wanted even if it cost them a home game. Now we have that and it may cause the season ticket holders a home game and now they are screaming bloody murder because it maybe a neutral court game and not included in their season ticket? If we were playing in Florida would you be happier?

[shockmonster]

This is more about some season ticket holders being upset with their seating assignments at IBA. I was never for losing a game in addition to paying more SASO dues and season ticket prices. It sounds like a double whammy to me.

[ShockTalk]

Let me make an example:

What I was promoting was giving up 1 cupcake home game to get a quality H/H over a 2 year period while paying the same amount for my season tickets over that two years. For this, I get to see 1 quality home game (and not 2 cupcakes) and the team gets to play that quality opponent both years.

Under this latest deal at IBA, it kind of depends on what happens next year. I suppose I will look at it as being able to go and see the road game in my above example (and paying for that), I'm just not sure what I'm going to get next year for my 2 years of the same ticket cost (assuming we lose a home game this year). I will try to be positive about this arrangement, even if the team replacing the home game I paid for was the same team that was a buy-in game just a few years ago.

[ShockerFever]

Re: Yep

Well analyzed, Aargh. There really isn't always something to complain about.

And to the contrary, you don't always have to sit around and be Eric Sexton's puppet.

I believe I was in the camp of foregoing a creampuff game for a road BCS game or neutral game. That's fine. I'm happy with that. I really don't appreciate the constant raise in SASO fees and season ticket prices. It was assumed for this to be a deal that we wouldn't have to keep paying more for less.

[ABC]

SASO dues pay for athletic scholarships. Nothing else.

[1972Shocker]

Clearly SASO dues are a pesonal seat license for Men's Season Basketball tickets and they buy preferred parking rights which, of course, is why SASO contributions are not fully tax deductible. Not sure how many SASO contributions they get that are not tied to these benefits. I doubt it amounts to very much.

According to the SASO web site:

Over the last several years, academic support needs have increased faster than donor contributions creating a funding shortfall. In order to cover this shortfall, revenue from operational budgets must be used which results in the department’s inability to grow our programs.

I suppose it's too bad that everything has to be about money, but hey it's College Athletics, it's about money and it is a challenge to play the game as it is currently structured.

[The Mad Hatter]

Clearly SASO dues are a pesonal seat license for Men's Season Basketball tickets and they buy preferred parking rights which, of course, is why SASO contributions are not fully tax deductible. Not sure how many SASO contributions they get that are not tied to these benefits. I doubt it amounts to very much.

According to the SASO web site:

Over the last several years, academic support needs have increased faster than donor contributions creating a funding shortfall. In order to cover this shortfall, revenue from operational budgets must be used which results in the department’s inability to grow our programs.

I suppose it's too bad that everything has to be about money, but hey it's College Athletics, it's about money and it is a challenge to play the game as it is currently structured.

This.

The money paid by season ticket holders is not merely about receiving a good in return (i.e. entertainment events), but is part of assuring the success of WSU sports programs.

As fans, we are not merely consumers, but stakeholders in a way. While I understand prices increases unfortunately making tickets unaffordable for some, I don't understand the mentality that the money we pay as season ticket holders is just about the teams we get to see live instead of about providing for the successful operation of the program as well.

[ShockTalk]

Clearly SASO dues are a pesonal seat license for Men's Season Basketball tickets and they buy preferred parking rights which, of course, is why SASO contributions are not fully tax deductible. Not sure how many SASO contributions they get that are not tied to these benefits. I doubt it amounts to very much.

According to the SASO web site:

Over the last several years, academic support needs have increased faster than donor contributions creating a funding shortfall. In order to cover this shortfall, revenue from operational budgets must be used which results in the department’s inability to grow our programs.

I suppose it's too bad that everything has to be about money, but hey it's College Athletics, it's about money and it is a challenge to play the game as it is currently structured.

This.

The money paid by season ticket holders is not merely about receiving a good in return (i.e. entertainment events), but is part of assuring the success of WSU sports programs.

As fans, we are not merely consumers, but stakeholders in a way. While I understand prices increases unfortunately making tickets unaffordable for some, I don't understand the mentality that the money we pay as season ticket holders is just about the teams we get to see live instead of about providing for the successful operation of the program as well.

I don't disagree with your point, TMH. However, for me, it is not just about what we get to see live. I was approaching the situation in a win/win position. As a stakeholder, I feel that the overall good of the program would be better served with less soft games at home (as i think there are too many) and am willing to give up a home game every other year to secure better competition for what I view as an improvement for the program. In doing so, as a fan, I also happen to get to view a better game every other year as well.

As for the new deal at IBA against UAB, I guess I would just as soon have a H/H over 2 years with UAB than (assuming there is one less home game this year) pay extra to see UAB this year and get that soft game added back next year. UAB's status is no different now than it has been in the past, so I find it almost humorous that what was a buy-in game a few years ago is now a season ticket holder "pay extra feature game" at IBA this year.

[Aargh]

I can see the argument of a H/H being better than a one-and-done. The H/H puts two quality games on the schedule.

Last year UAB was the CUSA conference champion with a 63 Kenpom rank. UAB lost the CUSA POY, but not a lot else from that team, so they should be a top-100 neutral court game. Maybe better than that.

Other schools around that kenpom rank last year were:
51 Texas A&M
52 Virginia Commonwealth
53 Southern California
54 UCLA
55 Georgia
56 Colorado
57 Minnesota
58 Miami FL
59 Seton Hall
60 Nebraska
61 Duquesne
62 Washington St.
63 UAB
64 Tennessee
65 Iona
66 Oakland
67 Texas El Paso
68 Boston College
69 Southern Mississippi
70 Mississippi
71 Missouri St.

UAB isn't the most glamorous name on that list, but this is a scheduling coup compared to what we were expecting.

Adding an in-town game not in the season ticket package in the same year that SASO dues and season ticket prices are raised isn't a brilliant PR move.

This in-town extra pay game looks to improve the Shox chances of getting an at-large bid. That seems to have outweighed the negatives in the minds of the WSU athletic department.

[Zardoz]

It appears that UAB can be bought, guessing they might be having some financial problems? I also think that WSU is in some way committed to play at least one game per year at IBA? Don't know what the details of the agreement are maybe UAB and WSU both get a payday. Just a thought.

[SB Shock]

UAB isn't the most glamorous name on that list, but this is a scheduling coup compared to what we were expecting.

At least it is not (hopefully) 250+ RPI killer team.

Adding an in-town game not in the season ticket package in the same year that SASO dues and season ticket prices are raised isn't a brilliant PR move.

This is really only a bad move is if for season ticket holders this is a loss of game at Koch when prices are going up. If this is a neutral/out of town game that is now accessible to WSU fans then it is probably a win.

It is clear that whatever arrangement that the WSU AD made with IBA was not fixable to stop the screw over of some season ticket holders or they are not smart enough to deal with it properly. WSU will take care of their primary SASO contributors I'm sure. Hopefully the rest of the season ticket holders will get some ability to get decent seats and I'm fine with that.

If I can get decent seats then I will go. But if I can't decent seats at least I will have the choice of either taking sucky seats or not going. Last year I had to procure alternate seats to get a decent view.