ADVERTISEMENT

ISU projected to have a bigger crowd than us.....

I included the entire decade because it was said Commings era and I decided to include the entire decade because Iowa was bad for the entire decade. With your unique position to provide your opinion please educate me on the disparity of numbers that were reported. Did Iowa lie and inflate their numbers? Was ISU incompetent and just couldn't count? With the spread in ticket sales as wide as it is there must be some fundamental reason for the disparity. Sorry if I am not going with the 'LC says so' I am surprised your reporter friends allowed the crowds to be so poorly reported. Even a little disclaimer in an article like 'a paid crowd of 27,000 but actually an over flow crowd of 49,000 was at the ISU game, read the articles, went to the games as well, don't recall that being mentioned. So share the details if you will.
I decided to do a spot check on an individual season. Obviously the 1st half of your list were at Clyde Williams which was a much smaller venue. In fact it's intriguing to think about what officials were thinking at the prospect of moving into a stadium 50% bigger than the old one. Do you suppose they wondered if they could fill it? Anyway, I decided to take a closer look at the season before Hayden Fry came, which was 1978.

I don't think it was clear in this thread whether we were talking about same day attendance or not. But let's assume we are. There are typically only about 3 or 4 games played in Iowa City and Ames on the same day in the course of a typical season. So that limits the data set significantly. In 1978, there were 3 overlapping games. In two of them Iowa's reported attendance was greater and in the other Iowa State's was greater. This is still looking at reported attendance, not how many actually showed up, so that leaves the actual attendance up for debate which can never be validated one way or another.

It's interesting to note how attendance varied during the year. Iowa's ranged from 44,444 to 60,075, a nearly 16,000 swing. The high point was the Iowa State game. Iowa State's attendance ranged from 46,450 to 51,450, for a swing of 5,000 people.

If you generalized to all games and not just the three same day games, you may argue a number of other viewpoints. For example, none of the Iowa State games were as poorly attended as the worst Iowa game. Likewise none of the Iowa State games were as highly attended as the best Iowa home game. If witnesses claimed there were far less butts in the seats at Iowa than were being reported, it wouldn't take many defections to make the claim Muskie, and to a lesser extent Lone Cone are making. But good luck proving that to anyone not wanting to believe it. It would pretty much be a waste of time.
 
If you understood what I was trying to say, why did you include statistics from the first half of the '70s when the capacity of Clyde Williams Field, where ISU played its games, was about 34,000? If I confused anybody by not specifically saying "late '70s," I apologize. I kinda took it for granted that's what we were talking about because Trice didn't open until '75.

What I was trying to say is pretty simple.

1. I would be surprised if there were even half a dozen times in the '70s when both teams were playing at home on the same day and ISU sold more tickets;

2. Much more frequently than that, more people were in the stands at Trice than at Kinnick. I was challenged to prove this, which of course is impossible.....just as it's impossible to disprove it. It's an opinion based on my experience. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm certainly prejudiced. But I also was in a position to make a judgment. I had season tickets at ISU and attended pretty much every game. I attended at least one game every year in Iowa City and talked about the Hawkeye program frequently with fans and with sportswriters who covered them, and living in Cedar Rapids, I was deluged with media coverage of the program. I would imagine I'm in a better position to form an opinion on the matter than most, if not all, the others who have been commenting here.
So basically....................

Iowa > Iowa State

Got it. Thanks, LC. You may go now.
 
I decided to do a spot check on an individual season. Obviously the 1st half of your list were at Clyde Williams which was a much smaller venue. In fact it's intriguing to think about what officials were thinking at the prospect of moving into a stadium 50% bigger than the old one. Do you suppose they wondered if they could fill it? Anyway, I decided to take a closer look at the season before Hayden Fry came, which was 1978.

I don't think it was clear in this thread whether we were talking about same day attendance or not. But let's assume we are. There are typically only about 3 or 4 games played in Iowa City and Ames on the same day in the course of a typical season. So that limits the data set significantly. In 1978, there were 3 overlapping games. In two of them Iowa's reported attendance was greater and in the other Iowa State's was greater. This is still looking at reported attendance, not how many actually showed up, so that leaves the actual attendance up for debate which can never be validated one way or another.

It's interesting to note how attendance varied during the year. Iowa's ranged from 44,444 to 60,075, a nearly 16,000 swing. The high point was the Iowa State game. Iowa State's attendance ranged from 46,450 to 51,450, for a swing of 5,000 people.

If you generalized to all games and not just the three same day games, you may argue a number of other viewpoints. For example, none of the Iowa State games were as poorly attended as the worst Iowa game. Likewise none of the Iowa State games were as highly attended as the best Iowa home game. If witnesses claimed there were far less butts in the seats at Iowa than were being reported, it wouldn't take many defections to make the claim Muskie, and to a lesser extent Lone Cone are making. But good luck proving that to anyone not wanting to believe it. It would pretty much be a waste of time.

Very interesting that your 'spot check' was the year that it was the closest in terms of average attendance with about a 4k variance in average attendance (as compiled by Iowa, ISU, NCAA and most others not named LC and sports reporters). You chose not to spot check the other Commings years where the spread was 9k to 16k. I wonder if it would be more difficult to explain why it 'might' be possible if you looked at those years.
 
I assume that by pretending not to know that sometimes ticket sales are significantly larger than actual attendance, cidhawkeye is making a Smack Week joke. I admit I fell for it.
 
LC, I am sure that it does happen, so far it has been said that it was pretty common in the pre fry era. I do however find it difficult to believe that the variance would be 10-12-14-16k per game. Perhaps you need to enlighten me on how such a wide variance occurred. I have asked a couple of different ways so maybe I need a different approach

Can you tell me how such wide variances occurred?

The accounting system?
Iowa counting people who re-entered at halftime again?
Iowa just guessing at how many people were actually there?
Iowa State running out of people who were willing to take their shoes off so they could count to 20 to add their total?

Please share how a 9-16K swing occurs.
 
Wow, look at all those UNI fans that are padding the numbers in Ames.

COQh0XMUYAATslJ.jpg:large

That is a nice pic. The stadium upgrade looks great and will hopefully cut down on the wind that used to cut through there from the south.

That being said, this is really a boring topic for rivalry week. I sincerely do not care about attendance numbers to this degree. Iowa generally has more fans at their games, but whoop de doo, who cares?
 
LC, I am sure that it does happen, so far it has been said that it was pretty common in the pre fry era. I do however find it difficult to believe that the variance would be 10-12-14-16k per game. Perhaps you need to enlighten me on how such a wide variance occurred. I have asked a couple of different ways so maybe I need a different approach

Can you tell me how such wide variances occurred?

The accounting system?
Iowa counting people who re-entered at halftime again?
Iowa just guessing at how many people were actually there?
Iowa State running out of people who were willing to take their shoes off so they could count to 20 to add their total?

Please share how a 9-16K swing occurs.
You have to be pulling legs here.
 
Maybe someday Hawk fans will stop concerning themselves with ISU. My only concern is the Hawks beating them and that's it. I don't care how many people watch a game in Jack Trice.
 
Very interesting that your 'spot check' was the year that it was the closest in terms of average attendance with about a 4k variance in average attendance (as compiled by Iowa, ISU, NCAA and most others not named LC and sports reporters). You chose not to spot check the other Commings years where the spread was 9k to 16k. I wonder if it would be more difficult to explain why it 'might' be possible if you looked at those years.
There were 4 years on your list that were candidates once I eliminated the Cycle Williams years and the Hayden Fry year. Of those 4, I did not have data for each year at the source where I found the data. That left 2 years to for me to pick from. Despite your accusation, I didn't look at the average attendance to make that pick. So what was my logic to pick between those 2 remaining? I didn't think it would be quite fair to pick an early year of Cyclone Stadium (Now Jack Trice Stadium). I kind of touched on that in my comments. It seems if you have a fan base that fit in a much smaller facility that it would take some time to build that fan base up to fill a much larger place.

One thing is certain in the history of football for both programs during the time that was being debated and that is the following. Iowa State was building their program and having unprecedented success under Earle Bruce. Iowa was going through one of the longest droughts of non winning seasons in all of college football. But even during the those dark years, Iowa still had fans that fondly remembered the late 50's and the Rose Bowls as that was still fresh enough to not be considered ancient history. There were many (and I think there still are some) lifelong fans born from that time. Had Hayden not come along when he did and rescued the program, generations of fans may have been lost.

At Iowa State, when Woody Hayes punched that player in the bowl game, it marked the premature end to the rise of Iowa State football and probably cost the next generation of fans.
 
No pulling of legs just looking for an actual answer supporting your claim that it was routine to have a 12k swing in actual people vs. what was reported by the schools, the NCAA and the news papers. So far I have gotten deflection after deflection. Just support your claim.
As far as a newer bigger facility not sparking an attendance boost, well we will agree to disagree on that. Opening day at JT this year had a boost.
 
Not real concerned about comparing attendance numbers to ISU. If the Hawks perform, they'll be selling out again in no time. If not, and Iowa fans choose to voice their displeasure with sustained mediocrity by staying away, attendance will suffer. Pretty much that simple. If ISU sells out every game, more power to them.

I do think the newly enclosed end zone looks sweet. Great photo above. I also agree with the above thought that maybe Jack Trice will be less of a wind tunnel with that end zone closed. This would be great for the action on the field. Lots of Iowa-ISU games in Trice have been severely affected by that wind, with each team only being able to mount much offense in two of the four quarters, when they had the wind at their backs. The elements are part of the game, for sure, but I'd like to see games in Trice less affected by the wind howling through from one end zone to the other. Have to think the closed end will help with that.
 
No pulling of legs just looking for an actual answer supporting your claim that it was routine to have a 12k swing in actual people vs. what was reported by the schools, the NCAA and the news papers.
Was this aimed at me? I didn't make that claim.
 
Not real concerned about comparing attendance numbers to ISU. If the Hawks perform, they'll be selling out again in no time. If not, and Iowa fans choose to voice their displeasure with sustained mediocrity by staying away, attendance will suffer. Pretty much that simple. If ISU sells out every game, more power to them.

I do think the newly enclosed end zone looks sweet. Great photo above. I also agree with the above thought that maybe Jack Trice will be less of a wind tunnel with that end zone closed. This would be great for the action on the field. Lots of Iowa-ISU games in Trice have been severely affected by that wind, with each team only being able to mount much offense in two of the four quarters, when they had the wind at their backs. The elements are part of the game, for sure, but I'd like to see games in Trice less affected by the wind howling through from one end zone to the other. Have to think the closed end will help with that.
It is still very flat land for miles around the stadium. I wouldn't be surprised to still see some affect from the wind, although it could be less predictable.
 
Was this aimed at me? I didn't make that claim.

It wasn't directed at you unless you are throwing out your opinion as fact despite evidence that contradicts that. The 'I am old so people should just believe me' or uneducated approach of Muskie just doesn't carry much weight with me. I don't do well with fact less opinion being presented as gospel.
 
No pulling of legs just looking for an actual answer supporting your claim that it was routine to have a 12k swing in actual people vs. what was reported by the schools, the NCAA and the news papers. So far I have gotten deflection after deflection. Just support your claim.
As far as a newer bigger facility not sparking an attendance boost, well we will agree to disagree on that. Opening day at JT this year had a boost.
I never said anything at all about a 12K swing. I have no idea where you got that number. Maybe that's why you think I'm deflecting.

I also said nothing about the facility not sparking an attendance boost; to the contrary, I said precisely the opposite (although perhaps not in this thread).

You seem to be claiming that tickets sold and actual attendance are the same number. As long as you take that position, I assume you aren't serious, hence the comment about leg-pulling.
 
I never said anything at all about a 12K swing. I have no idea where you got that number. Maybe that's why you think I'm deflecting.

I also said nothing about the facility not sparking an attendance boost; to the contrary, I said precisely the opposite (although perhaps not in this thread).

You seem to be claiming that tickets sold and actual attendance are the same number. As long as you take that position, I assume you aren't serious, hence the comment about leg-pulling.

I haven't said paid attendance and actual people in the stands are the same. I am saying that if schools report their number and there is a 16,000 gap between the two that there needs to be that size of a swing in paid vs. actual to support your claim that there was actually more people at the game. So if Iowa were to report that 46,000 people paid and ISU reported 30,000 people paid either ISU needed to have 30,000 paid with 46,001 actually there or to have Iowa say 46,000 paid but only 29,999 actually at the game or a combination of the two, but paid vs. actual would need to be off by a combination of 16,000 for that game. Not likely in my opinion.

As far as the new facility part, that was directed at the person who randomly picked the closest year because Jack Trice was new and that didn't count.

So please explain how the SID's were so far off in their reporting of paid vs. actual.
 
No pulling of legs just looking for an actual answer supporting your claim that it was routine to have a 12k swing in actual people vs. what was reported by the schools, the NCAA and the news papers. So far I have gotten deflection after deflection. Just support your claim.
As far as a newer bigger facility not sparking an attendance boost, well we will agree to disagree on that. Opening day at JT this year had a boost.
Adding 50% more capacity is a whole lot different than adding 10%.
 
Adding 50% more capacity is a whole lot different than adding 10%.

I agree with that. To discount the attendance because of a new stadium is what I disagree with. I didn't present attendance as % of capacity so it doesn't really matter. Maybe you can help me, how can the schools, NCAA and the newspapers be off by over 10,000 people in reporting how many people actually attended games vs. how many people paid for their ticket. LC said it happened all the time in the late 70's but can't explain how it happened or even what changed to make the reporting more accurate starting in the 80's.
 
I agree with that. To discount the attendance because of a new stadium is what I disagree with. I didn't present attendance as % of capacity so it doesn't really matter. Maybe you can help me, how can the schools, NCAA and the newspapers be off by over 10,000 people in reporting how many people actually attended games vs. how many people paid for their ticket. LC said it happened all the time in the late 70's but can't explain how it happened or even what changed to make the reporting more accurate starting in the 80's.
I'll be darned. You aren't kidding. You really are that dense.

1. The numbers are TICKETS SOLD. There is one source for those numbers. It doesn't matter how many places you see the same number, it's TICKETS SOLD. My point is that sometimes people who have bought tickets do not attend the game. Thus there is a difference, often quite significant, between ACTUAL ATTENDANCE and TICKETS SOLD. The NCAA and the box score report TICKETS SOLD, not ACTUAL ATTENDANCE.

2. I didn't say it happened all the time. I said an ISU advantage in TICKETS SOLD happened very rarely -- specifically I said I would be surprised if it happened even half a dozen times -- but that in terms of ACTUAL ATTENDANCE, it happened much more frequently in that time period.

3. You pulled the 16,000 figure out of your hawkeye -- now I see you're saying 10,000 -- and I don't know where that came from. But anyone who has attended football games during a bad year knows that neither of those numbers would be particularly surprising, especially if the weather were bad. Last year, for instance, there were thousands of no-shows at the West Virginia game. The same was true in the bad old days at Iowa.

4. In regards to (3) above, I checked a couple of games to illustrate the point for you, although I'm beginning to think it's hopeless. On Nov. 5, 1977, Iowa had 49,620 TICKETS SOLD for Indiana and ISU had 49,200 TICKETS SOLD for Colorado. ISU was 6-2 and ranked #19 nationally while Iowa had lost 5 of its previoius 6 games. If you think ACTUAL ATTENDANCE at Kinnick was larger than ACTUAL ATTENDANCE at Trice that day, you are an idiot. Two weeks later, Iowa hosted Michigan State and ISU hosted Oklahoma State. The TICKETS SOLD were, respectively, 43,700 and 41,060. Iowa had lost 6 of its previous 8 games and was finishing yet another dismal year. ISU was 7-3 and headed for a second consecutive bowl game. Again, if you think the ACTUAL ATTENDANCE at Ames was not greater than at Kinnick, you are an idiot.

5. As I checked these matters, I discovered a factor that is significant if you're desperately looking for a reason to criticize my opinion: The weren't really a whole lot of Saturdays when both teams played at home. So it would be fair to say that my statement that it was fairly frequent for ISU to have larger ACTUAL ATTENDANCE when both played at home the same day might be an exaggeration. If I had realized I might be dealing with an idiot (see #4 above), I would have phrased the statement differently. I would have said that while I'd be surprised if TICKETS SOLD favored Iowa as many as half a dozen times during the late '70s, the home games in which ACTUAL ATTENDANCE was higher at Ames were much more frequent.
 
I agree with that. To discount the attendance because of a new stadium is what I disagree with. I didn't present attendance as % of capacity so it doesn't really matter. Maybe you can help me, how can the schools, NCAA and the newspapers be off by over 10,000 people in reporting how many people actually attended games vs. how many people paid for their ticket. LC said it happened all the time in the late 70's but can't explain how it happened or even what changed to make the reporting more accurate starting in the 80's.
The NCAA dictates how attendance is to be reported. Unless things have changed, schools report tickets sales, not how many people passed through the turnstiles.

There's a big difference between tickets sold and actual butts in seats. If a team is doing well and weather is great, you would expect them to correlate pretty closely. Most people with a ticket will go to the game. When teams struggle or the weather is lousy, it seems many season ticket holders find higher priority things to do. Or maybe mom stays home that day. I've not made a claim as to how big that difference could be, but depending on conditions, I suspect it could get large.

Take that frigid Kansas game 2 years ago. A person had to be insane to go to that game in zero degree weather to watch a team that had won just 2 games going into that final game. I went, but I would guess over 1/3 or more of the tickets went unused. Heck it could have been more than 1/2, but it's really hard to guage crowd density or lack of, especially where fans are bundled up for survival. It's a bit easier to estimate when entire sections sit empty.
 
I hope JTS is jam packed Saturday and most days after that. Its more money and eventually better recruits. It makes an impact on a program and that's also good for u of I. A prospect from Texas, for example, is going to take a serious look at both programs while visiting and that means we double down on high stars choosing to stay at one school or the other. It's better for everyone.
 
The NCAA dictates how attendance is to be reported. Unless things have changed, schools report tickets sales, not how many people passed through the turnstiles.

There's a big difference between tickets sold and actual butts in seats. If a team is doing well and weather is great, you would expect them to correlate pretty closely. Most people with a ticket will go to the game. When teams struggle or the weather is lousy, it seems many season ticket holders find higher priority things to do. Or maybe mom stays home that day. I've not made a claim as to how big that difference could be, but depending on conditions, I suspect it could get large.

Take that frigid Kansas game 2 years ago. A person had to be insane to go to that game in zero degree weather to watch a team that had won just 2 games going into that final game. I went, but I would guess over 1/3 or more of the tickets went unused. Heck it could have been more than 1/2, but it's really hard to guage crowd density or lack of, especially where fans are bundled up for survival. It's a bit easier to estimate when entire sections sit empty.
cidhawkeye knows this. He's just trying to back away from his impulsive posts earlier.
 
ll be darned. You aren't kidding. You really are that dense.
Well thank you for the wonderful name calling. It's good to know that you needed to go there. I will see if I can stay away from that and perhaps provide some clarity on my thought process no matter how dense it is to you.


1. The numbers are TICKETS SOLD. My point is that sometimes people who have bought tickets do not attend the game. often quite significant, between ACTUAL ATTENDANCE and TICKETS SOLD.
The numbers are TICKETS SOLD - I have already agreed that is the case and completely understand how the process works.

There is one source for those numbers. It doesn't matter how many places you see the same number, it's TICKETS SOLD - Completely agree and thank you so very much for the redundancy. Very much appreciated for a simpleton such as myself. Even though you usually fail to answer questions I am going to ask one any way. Have you ever read an article about a sports game where in that article it says something along the lines of "a crowd generously listed at 15,000" I know I have and as old as you are and how well read you are and the connections you have in the newspaper industry I am sure you have read something along those lines. A simple Yes or No would suffice, no spin required.

My point is that sometimes people who have bought tickets do not attend the game. - Really?There is a series of commercials about Captain Obvious. You made the rotation.

Thus there is a difference, often quite significant, between ACTUAL ATTENDANCE and TICKETS SOLD. - I would like to know what your criteria for "often" and "quite significant"is half of the games? 1/3 of the games? 5,000 people? 10,000 people?

The NCAA and the box score report TICKETS SOLD, not ACTUAL ATTENDANCE. - Somewhere a dead horse gets another scar from another beating. Just to clarify I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ACTUAL ATTENDANCE AND TICKETS SOLD. I like that all caps thing, like I am shouting or something. And you called me the dense one.

2. I didn't say it happened all the time. I said an ISU advantage in TICKETS SOLD happened very rarely -- specifically I said I would be surprised if it happened even half a dozen times -- but that in terms of ACTUAL ATTENDANCE, it happened much more frequently in that time period.

I didn't say it happened all the time. - I don't believe I said that. If you knew me I tend to stay away from absolutes like that.

I said an ISU advantage in TICKETS SOLD happened very rarely - I agree with this. Although when you present later how good the Cyclones were and the riveting games that they were going to be involved in I am surprised their legendary fans didn't support better by actually buying tickets.

but that in terms of ACTUAL ATTENDANCE, it happened much more frequently in that time period. - So this means that there is a combination of things that have to happen, more people would be at the ISU game then tickets they sold. How did they get in? Comped tickets? Open gates and walk in? either way if your attendance is boosted by free tickets or no tickets needed than I would not be surprised if more people attended or the other variable is a large number of people who spent money on Iowa tickets chose not to attend that game. So if you can tell me the following. Did Iowa State have more people attend the games than tickets sold and how big was that number? Just a ball park works.

3. You pulled the 16,000 figure out of your hawkeye -- now I see you're saying 10,000 -- and I don't know where that came from. But anyone who has attended football games during a bad year knows that neither of those numbers would be particularly surprising, especially if the weather were bad. Last year, for instance, there were thousands of no-shows at the West Virginia game. The same was true in the bad old days at Iowa.

You pulled the 16,000 figure out of your hawkeye - I did just pull that out of my Hawkeye where ever you were going with that. In 1974 the spread between the TICKETS SOLD number was 16,181. So I was incorrect, I was off by 181. My bad

now I see you're saying 10,000 - My bad again, in 1977 it was a 9,856 variance in TICKETS SOLD, for those playing along it was 13,674 in 1975, 12,404 in 1976 and 4,009 in 1978.

But anyone who has attended football games during a bad year knows that neither of those numbers would be particularly surprising, especially if the weather were bad - Once again we completely agree on this. While there can be significant variances in weather from week to week I don't think the state of Iowa has a huge varied weather pattern between the central and eastern part of the state. Certainly not enough to make a much more frequently impact.

4. In regards to (3) above, I checked a couple of games
In regards to (3) above, I checked a couple of games to illustrate the point for you - Always good to cherry pick a couple of games when we have been looking at a 5 year window.



On Nov. 5, 1977, Iowa had 49,620 TICKETS SOLD for Indiana and ISU had 49,200 TICKETS SOLD for Colorado. ISU was 6-2 and ranked #19 nationally while Iowa had lost 5 of its previoius 6 games. If you think ACTUAL ATTENDANCE at Kinnick was larger than ACTUAL ATTENDANCE at Trice that day, you are an idiot. - Once again with the name calling, very nice of a respected senior citizen such as your self. Please tell me where I indicated that for that one game(in a 5 year window) Iowa had better ACTUAL ATTENDANCE.

Two weeks later, Iowa hosted Michigan State and ISU hosted Oklahoma State. The TICKETS SOLD were, respectively, 43,700 and 41,060. Iowa had lost 6 of its previous 8 games and was finishing yet another dismal year. ISU was 7-3 and headed for a second consecutive bowl game. you are an idiot. - Name calling repeated. I hope you feel better. Once again, please show me where I said during this ONE game, oops...now we are up to TWO games that the ACTUAL ATTENDANCE was better at Kinnick.

The interesting thing about these two games is that with such a juggernaut and going bowling for the 2nd game and with Iowa being sooooo dismal that the loyal supporters of ISU only bought 41,060 tickets for such an important Oklahoma State game, or that while being ranked #19 in the country that they couldn't even sell more tickets for a dismal Iowa team that was in the process of setting a consecutive non-winning season streak. So even when ISU was at the pinnacle of their program and Iowa was in the gutter more people chose to pay money to BUY TICKETS whether they ACTUALLY went to the game or not.

2 games pulled from a 5 year period doesn't really build a 'much more frequently' situation.


5. As I checked these matters, I discovered a factor that is significant if you're desperately looking for a reason to criticize my opinion:
As I checked these matters, I discovered a factor that is significant if you're desperately looking for a reason to criticize my opinion: - Never attempted to criticize your opinion, for such a well read poster I am a little surprised that you chose that approach, re -read my posts, I asked you to support your opinion. You chose not to, you instead used others opinions and supported it with nothing other than "I know so because I am old"

The weren't really a whole lot of Saturdays when both teams played at home. So it would be fair to say that my statement that it was fairly frequent for ISU to have larger ACTUAL ATTENDANCE when both played at home the same day might be an exaggeration. - Exaggeration is a good term. I don't believe I ever made the comparison to only apply to when both teams played at home on the same Saturday. I presented the picture in whole with facts.

If I had realized I might be dealing with an idiot (see #4 above), I would have phrased the statement differently. I would have said that while I'd be surprised if TICKETS SOLD favored Iowa as many as half a dozen times during the late '70s, the home games in which ACTUAL ATTENDANCE was higher at Ames were much more frequent.[/QUOTE] - Another name thrown out again, a tactic usually used by....well I will leave that alone.

Since this has been a nice little skirmish and one of us has stayed above board and not stooped to name calling and the other one is you I will ask you once again to clarify your positions on a couple of things.

During the 5 year period we have been looking at, on average was the ACTUAL ATTENDANCE at ISU higher than the tickets sold?

If no is the answer than the following, on average would have to have occurred. ISU would have to have EVERY TICKET SOLD used and the following to happen

16,181 people per game would have chosen not to use their ticket at Iowa - That would be 1/3 of the people missing each game. Not likely. Way more than for the West Virginia game mentioned earlier, for every game...lol


13,674 people per game would have chosen not to use their ticket at Iowa - Not likely as well

12,404 - You get the picture

9,856 - Ditto

4,004 - Getting close to reality, assuming 100% usage at ISU

So please keep the name calling to your self, my apologies that the questions I asked and you chose not to answer didn't meet your standard of excellence. We will agree to disagree. The numbers indicate that even in the darkest era of Iowa football the fans at Iowa supported their team with ACTUAL TICKETS sold. Whether they went to the game or not. ISU in their prime? Not as much. Carry on.




 
The NCAA dictates how attendance is to be reported. Unless things have changed, schools report tickets sales, not how many people passed through the turnstiles.

There's a big difference between tickets sold and actual butts in seats. If a team is doing well and weather is great, you would expect them to correlate pretty closely. Most people with a ticket will go to the game. When teams struggle or the weather is lousy, it seems many season ticket holders find higher priority things to do. Or maybe mom stays home that day. I've not made a claim as to how big that difference could be, but depending on conditions, I suspect it could get large.

Take that frigid Kansas game 2 years ago. A person had to be insane to go to that game in zero degree weather to watch a team that had won just 2 games going into that final game. I went, but I would guess over 1/3 or more of the tickets went unused. Heck it could have been more than 1/2, but it's really hard to guage crowd density or lack of, especially where fans are bundled up for survival. It's a bit easier to estimate when entire sections sit empty.


So on average in one of the seasons we have been looking at Average tickets sold Iowa 48,600, average tickets sold ISU 32,419, to make the actual attendance more would mean that every game at Iowa would need to be like that frigid game Kansas game and every single ticket at ISU would need to be used. Sorry fellas I find it difficult to believe that 13,674 people a game or 12,404 people a game, 9,856 people a game would not use their tickets while every single ISU ticket would be used. Not very plausible, those Iowa teams were expected to be bad, yet people bought tickets and then said I don't want to go.
 
1. It isn't a dead horse if you act like you think it's still running. If you concede that sometimes people who buy tickets don't go to the game, you have abandoned the basis for your argument, which is that it couldn't happen. It is beyond ironic that you mention sportswriters mentioning the crowd is smaller than announced, because that is one of the reasons I cited for my opinion. I worked with and talked regularly with the guys who covered the Hawkeyes for The Gazette. And yet when I mentioned this as one of the reasons for my opinion, you ridiculed me. In fact, you did it again in this post, criticizing me for using the opinions of others.

2. "LC said it happened all the time in the late 70's." Your claim in this thread. Not true.

As for how more fans were at ISU than tickets sold, nobody ever suggested that, and it's another item that came from God knows where. Nobody suggested that happened. The point isn't that ISU had more spectators than tickets sold; the point is that Iowa had fewer.

3. There you go again. The reason I couldn't figure out where you were getting your numbers is that nobody else in this thread is talking about season averages, but apparently you were. Season average is irrelevant to the discussion.

4. I picked those two because they were such obvious illustrations of my point. And why go off on an irrelevant rant about the quality of the ISU team and fans? Oh, I know.....because your earlier position has been destroyed by reality.

5. Once more we come to the nub of the discussion: You refuse to address the statement you criticized (or if you prefer, the statement you demanded I support). Of course ISU never averaged more spectators than Iowa for a season. I never suggested that. To the contrary, at least twice I made a point of saying precisely the opposite. And reviewing the thread, I can't find a single instance in which you asked that question.

The statement with which you disagreed was simply that during this period, there were many occasions when more spectators attended ISU games than Iowa games, despite the ticket sales numbers.
 
So on average in one of the seasons we have been looking at Average tickets sold Iowa 48,600, average tickets sold ISU 32,419, to make the actual attendance more would mean that every game at Iowa would need to be like that frigid game Kansas game and every single ticket at ISU would need to be used. Sorry fellas I find it difficult to believe that 13,674 people a game or 12,404 people a game, 9,856 people a game would not use their tickets while every single ISU ticket would be used. Not very plausible, those Iowa teams were expected to be bad, yet people bought tickets and then said I don't want to go.
Nobody but you is talking about averages.
 
Nobody but you is talking about averages.
How are averages get made? You cherry picked 2 games to demonstrate your 'much more frequently' point. If you think that 4-16k gaps in tickets sold and actual attendance is over come by a limited amount if cherry picked games(which by the only recognized statistic still favors Iowa) well then you know the word that applies to you.

Nice job not answering any other aspect. A nice habit you have. Good work.
 
So on average in one of the seasons we have been looking at Average tickets sold Iowa 48,600, average tickets sold ISU 32,419, to make the actual attendance more would mean that every game at Iowa would need to be like that frigid game Kansas game and every single ticket at ISU would need to be used. Sorry fellas I find it difficult to believe that 13,674 people a game or 12,404 people a game, 9,856 people a game would not use their tickets while every single ISU ticket would be used. Not very plausible, those Iowa teams were expected to be bad, yet people bought tickets and then said I don't want to go.
When you use numbers from Clyde Williams Field to make your case, you aren't seeking a truthful end to this discussion, whether the end results in agreement, or agreeing to disagree. It would be very difficult to prove anything regarding actual attendance numbers. If it is buried in news archives somewhere, it would be very difficult to find and not worth the effort for anybody. It's pretty clear we aren't seeking the truth here. It has been more about winning an argument and in this case there is no outcome that matters anyway, because the absolute truth cannot be easily proven.

The best information we have comes from people who actually went to those games and report what they saw. It has been a long time and memories can fade. But even if memories were perfect, you are determined not to accept them anyway. That's okay. We are all influenced by our biases. Sometimes we don't really want to know the truth, just like a parent believing his kid can do no wrong. So although this has been fun, it is no longer worth wasting our time on it as it's not going to change anybody's opinion at this point.
 
Last edited:
How are averages get made? You cherry picked 2 games to demonstrate your 'much more frequently' point. If you think that 4-16k gaps in tickets sold and actual attendance is over come by a limited amount if cherry picked games(which by the only recognized statistic still favors Iowa) well then you know the word that applies to you.

Nice job not answering any other aspect. A nice habit you have. Good work.
Your desperation does not become you. If you aren't going to discuss the subject at issue, just say so. Better yet, make some statement about average attendance and see if anybody disagrees with you.

You asked me to support my opinion; I did so.
 
I am unsure what this even refers to regarding the way too lengthy discussion here. Are you stating that Jack Trice, as originally built, held 50% more capacity (seating) than did Clyde Williams?
It was pretty close. The all-time record attendance at the Clyde was 36,690, and that was with people standing everywhere there was a gap. Trice, in its original configuration, with standing room was a little over 53,000. So that's 44% bigger.

Sideline seats, Trice was built with 42,500.
 
So basically what I'm to gather from all of this is that, if Iowa beats Iowa State then from that point on, Iowa will go back to having more fans in attendance each week for home games this season than Iowa State, and if they lose all bets are off......and certain Cyclone fans are salivating at that possibility?

Is that about the gist of it, or are you guys literally f***ing arguing about past attendance for no reason at all? Tell me there is at least a reason as it pertains to this actual season and that this wasn't just another Iowa-ISU pissing contest. Of course, I should note that I don't think I've ever seen a pissing contest for this rivalry so widely debated and in-depth regarding attendance before. I guess you got that going for you. Thumbs high on that one fellas. :confused:
 
So basically what I'm to gather from all of this is that, if Iowa beats Iowa State then from that point on, Iowa will go back to having more fans in attendance each week for home games this season than Iowa State, and if they lose all bets are off......and certain Cyclone fans are salivating at that possibility?

Is that about the gist of it, or are you guys literally f***ing arguing about past attendance for no reason at all? Tell me there is at least a reason as it pertains to this actual season and that this wasn't just another Iowa-ISU pissing contest. Of course, I should note that I don't think I've ever seen a pissing contest for this rivalry so widely debated and in-depth regarding attendance before. I guess you got that going for you. Thumbs high on that one fellas. :confused:
This isn't rocket science. The thread started with the question/speculation about whether ISU had ever outdrawn Iowa before. It kinda deteriorated from that point.
 
That it did, someone commented that it happened all the time in the Commings era(Muskie, not LC, my bad), then it was 'much more frequently' during that era, then it was except for the first year of that era because of the stadium, then it was 'these two games demonstrate that it was much more frequently' in that time frame. Oh and that averages don't matter because of those individual games mentioned, oh and name calling. I would ask what the criteria is for 'much more frequent' and to quantify 'significent' is but that has only caused someone to scrape the gutter and insult me without answering the request.
 
It was pretty close. The all-time record attendance at the Clyde was 36,690, and that was with people standing everywhere there was a gap. Trice, in its original configuration, with standing room was a little over 53,000. So that's 44% bigger.

Sideline seats, Trice was built with 42,500.


I find at least a couple of interesting items in your post, LC. First, I am curious as to the actual game where those 36,690 'fans' bought tickets to an isu game at Clyde Williams. When did that occur?

Secondly, I can distinctly recall (as I am sure you can too, if you are the least bit honest) a time when isu had such difficulties quantifying and discerning the number of seats and capacity of jack Trice Stadium. It was at a time when the isu athletic administration was claiming annual attendance exceeding the capacity of the venue by considerable amounts. It is a shame that they could not have relied upon you to provide them with the actual numbers (seats) back then.
 
Secondly, I can distinctly recall (as I am sure you can too, if you are the least bit honest) a time when isu had such difficulties quantifying and discerning the number of seats and capacity of jack Trice Stadium. It was at a time when the isu athletic administration was claiming annual attendance exceeding the capacity of the venue by considerable amounts. It is a shame that they could not have relied upon you to provide them with the actual numbers (seats) back then.
The NCAA at the time dictated that stadium capacity include only permanent seats. With so many hillside tickets sold at Jack Trice, the official NCAA report would often show average attendance greater than 100% of capacity. That is silly, but the silliness was a result of the NCAA, not Iowa State.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT