"Should College Athletes Be Paid?"

From The College Fix and Huffington Post

Review by Eric Southard in KIN 332

In the article, “Paying College Athletes: Not If, But How”, Rachel Cohen and Ralph D. Russo discuss the controversial topic of should college athletes be paid and if so, how should they be paid. Being a big supporter of paying college athletes, I was happy to read that Mark Emmert, President of the NCAA, is finally starting to realize that college athletes should receive some compensation while attending school. Emmert supports a stipend for these athletes, a stipend that would cover costs beyond tuition, books, and fees, which the athletes’ scholarships currently cover. Both coaches and players agree that college athletes should be paid, mainly stating that these athletes have no time to find a job and are always busy with school and their individual sports. They compare being a student-athlete to working a full time job. 

The biggest impact sports marketing has on paying college athletes is through the television deals and all the money these deals generate for the universities. In the article, Cohen and Russo talk about the lucrative TV deals the NCAA recently agreed to for football and men’s basketball. To broadcast the NCAA men’s basketball tournament, more notably known as “March Madness”, CBS and Tuner Sports agreed to a deal with the NCAA that is worth on average 770 million dollars a year. As for the new college football playoffs, which starts in 2014, the NCAA agreed to a television deal worth around 470 million dollars annually to the conferences. Instead of using all this money towards increasing the salary of college coaches, upgrading facilities, etc, the money should be put towards stipends to pay the “workers”, the ones who actually generate the money, the athletes.

"ESPN to televise college playoff"

From ESPN.com and Sports Media Watch

Review by Will Taylor in SRM 334 (section 3)

The BCS has always been criticized for how it picks the teams for the National Championship Game and people used to think that the teams that weren’t in the game didn’t receive a fair chance to prove themselves. Finally, they implemented a culture change in college football; the BCS playoff system. Now there is a much fairer shot for all the teams represented by the BCS to reach the championship. ESPN of course was the one to sign the media deal with the BCS to cover all the playoff games, the national championship, as well as other bowl games. It was a twelve year deal, from the 2014 season on to the 2025 season.The deal was worth over $7 billion dollars, and it covered all facets of media; TV, radio, mobile TV, ESPN Deportes, as well as all international media outlets of the game. The deal is huge, and could bring over $1 billion dollars in revenue. Another way that the BCS playoff system affects mass media is in the advertising before, during, and at each event. The amount of ways to advertise around this event is sure to bring ESPN as well as the BCS a huge amount of revenue. This topic is relevant to this class because it deals with stakeholders; like the universities, the BCS, and the fans. It also deals with mass media outlets, like television, the internet, and radio. It also deals with this class because we’re all avid sports fans, and this deal could revolutionize how we view college football, and sports in general.

---

Review by Ben Edsall in SRM 334 (section 3)

The current event Will and I chose to present to the class was the new college football playoff system. It has been talked about for years and will finally be implemented for the 2014 season. The playoffs will consist of four teams that are chosen from a 15 member committee. This eliminates the old system of the computers calculating what two teams would be in the championship. Hopefully the new system will diminish a majority of complaints from the old system, which made some controversial decisions of which teams played in the championship. There will now be six major bowl games which consist of two groups, the contract bowls and the host bowls.

One major influence for the new system was the potential revenue from media rights. ESPN signed a 12 year deal worth $470 million which gives them rights for TV, radio, mobile TV, games in 3D, ESPN Deportes, and internationally. This contract is projected to generate annual revenues ranging from $600 million - $1.5 billion. That amount of revenue will attract other networks to join the contract which will raise the bidding price. The increase in revenue is a positive impact, but there are also other pros and cons.

Additional pros to the new playoff system are that it provides more advertising opportunities, teams that are not powerhouses now have a shot at reaching the championship, and it removes an easy schedule that forces teams to make the championship based on performance. A few cons are that there could be some preferential treatment towards the bigger conferences, other bowl games will be viewed as less important, and it takes away revenue for teams that do not reach the playoffs. Even though this system is not perfect it is a step in the right direction and hopefully will continue to improve in the future.

This topic is relevant to the class because it plays a major role within the broadcast media. We discussed in class how television is the most dominant way of providing content to the public, and this is clearly demonstrated by ESPN signing a huge contract to control the market. Another investment was in social media to help them expand and generate revenues from other areas. Social media is taking over society and with major investments into the market it will benefit the networks and companies tremendously.

"Athletic Departments Apply Disney Principles to Game Day"

From Athletic Business

Review by Christine Steiner in KIN 332

The Walt Disney Company is known to be the best in the world when it comes to customer service. They are the leader in the hospitality industry and are viewed as the frontrunner in the amusement and resort trades. In recent years Disney has broken into the sports industry as well. They acquired ESPN, open the ESPN Wide World of Sports complex in Orlando, and sponsor countless athletic events throughout the year such as marathons, fitness trade shows, and competitions. Members of the collegiate athletics community have definitely taken notice of Disney’s success. The Athletic Business article “Athletic Departments Apply Disney Principles to Game Day” discusses the transition many collegiate athletic departments are trying to make from a typical game experience to a service-first, customer-centered experience. Arizona State University is one of the schools that has looked to Disney for guidance in this area. Last year, a group of ASU officials flew down to Florida to attend a three day event at Disney Institute, the professional development learning center for the company, to discuss how they could transfer the Disney experience to a game-day situation. This led to a three-month partnership between the two programs with the purpose of reevaluating ASU’s entire program, from its highest senior staff to the frontline hourly personnel. The results were unbelievable. ASU’s athletic director stated that the biggest difference now is “the customer comes first. Make the decision and then talk to us later, and we'll deal with whatever you do to fix their problem, because we want to be a solutions organization from here on out.” The marketing question is, “does an athletic department with eight home football games a year have to obsess over details to the same degree as a year-round theme park holding daily customer service meetings?” Would marketing an improved customer service fan experience really affect or benefit a team?

"WKU Athletic Department Says Beer is a 'Positive' at Football Games"

From WBKO.com

Review by Derek Orndorff in KIN 332 (section 1)

It seems as if Western Kentucky University has successfully found a new way to generate money and happiness at their home football games. Beer. At the start of the current football season, WKU switched up their scheme. By allowing alcohol sales at football games, the fans are showing up in larger numbers. Could it be that beer is what caused the spike in attendance, or is it all because the team is playing solid?

The 3-1 Hilltoppers claim that the idea stemmed from the athletic department and gradually grew stronger as others endorsed it. The fans seem to love the new option of buying five-dollar beers, but then again who wouldn’t? Western Kentucky is trying to regulate the sale of it by only allowing a person to purchase two beers at a time and they must be wearing a non-removable I.D. bracelet. In addition, beer sales end at the conclusion of the third quarter.

Now, with fans drinking heavily before the game and during the game, WKU must pay closer attention to fans and be ready to spring into action whenever conflict occurs. A drunken conflict is a worse conflict than just a simple sober confrontation. Security will continue to be increased with the increases in attendance and Western Kentucky will have to complete a much more extensive clean-up process with the new beers sales. However, Western Kentucky is among several other universities who have adopted alcohol sales at sporting events; Louisville, Louisiana-Lafayette, and South Alabama all sell alcohol.

I believe that Western Kentucky has made the correct decision in selling alcohol and I think there will continue to be positive effects on the football games. In the spring, I expect a rise in attendance at baseball games too, due to the sales that will be allowed there.

"ESPN agrees to pay $80 million a year to broadcast Rose Bowl"

From the Los Angeles Times

Review by Jordan Stanton in KIN 332 (section 1)

The BCS bowl game; the Rose Bowl is one of the oldest bowls in NCAA college football at 94 years old. Broadcast programs that show this game on New years day during the afternoon every year is paid 30 million a year. Starting in 2015 ESPN will be paying broadcasters 80 million per year. The Rose Bowl being nicknamed the “Granddaddy of them all” really wants to make a statement and gain all the attention they can get. There was no word on why they are getting all this money and how they are going to increase the viewing for the Rose Bowl game. Ad and commercials when the time comes will probably be out more than any other BCS bowl such as the Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl and Sugar Bowl. Yes, there are many bowls but those are the top ones that are out their besides the National Championship game. In Pasadena, California where the Rose Bowl stadium is located, they are going to do almost a 200 million dollar project on renovating the whole entire stadium. I don’t know if this contract had to do anything with this, but a stadium that is 90 years old and bring many viewers and people together deserve a new look. With the new look and the new contract for broadcasting, many good things will be in the Rose Bowl’s favor in the near future. Marketing wise, ESPN took a big hit with choosing the Rose Bowl over all the other bowls because it is the oldest bowl and the most respected bowl. Also being in California helps out the situation too because it is a beautiful location and is a high populated state. Ads and Broadcasting this bowl shouldn't be a very hard task at all and they have the best date to have the game played on, New Years day.

"Scandal at Penn State Poses Tough Choices for N.C.A.A."

From the New York Times

Review by Kirby Burkholder in SRM 334
The death penalty is a term that no college or university ever wants to hear associated with their name. Unfortunately for Penn State University, they are finding out what this term means. The death penalty is when the NCAA imposes penalties resulting in, at the most, a ban on the upcoming seasons. For Penn State, after the big scandal of Coach Sandusky being charged with sexual abuse on children, they were charged with many penalties as well. Penn State was fined 60 million dollars, a 4 year post-season ban was placed on the team, scholarships were reduced significantly from 25 to 15 for incomers, former players could transfer without NCAA transfer regulations, and all of Penn States’ wins from 1998-2011 were stripped. In the article we read, it argues whether or not these punishments are fair or not coming from the NCAA, and if the NCAA should be dealing with the penalties period since the scandal was a criminal scandal from Sandusky’s standpoint, not the actual team. 

From an outsider standpoint, you definitely feel for the Penn State community and all the players. It is hard to agree with stripping the teams’ wins from all those years for the players sake because they didn’t do anything to deserve not to have the wins counted. Actions by the NCAA did need to happen though. It was too big of a scandal, especially with other school officials being involved and staying quiet. The article makes a good point in that the NCAA can’t make the penalties too weak and then seem like the situation was handled lightly, but to what extent is enough for this type of situation? The penalties may always be arguable, but punishment definitely needed to happen because of the scandal and in order to set the example for other schools that things won’t just slide by.

This easily relates to our sport media class by the fact that this was huge in the public eye for months and months. When this scandal broke, it was all over the news, ESPN, papers, twitter, etc; all day and every day for a long time. It was the hottest topic in the US and talked about everywhere, sports fan or not. The media was eating this up and all media outlets were trying to be the first to break new information or add to the story. Still to this day it is talked about and the story is still breaking. This will go down as one of the biggest sports scandals of all times.

---

Review by Kyle Linn in SRM 334

The Death Penalty, in sports is one of the most devastating things that can happen to a universities sport program. Being banned from sport for a year is the harshest punishment the NCAA can hand out and has done this five times prior. It is the ultimate way to slowly kill a program because of implications that the NCAA can impose on that school. This is what Penn State had been facing when this article was written. The NCAA was in debate over whether they should still force strict punishment on the accused school if the person in question wasn't harming the players or the actual “team.” Yes, what Sandusky has done is absolutely one of the grossest things I have ever heard of, but it is right to punish the whole football team, especially the players who had nothing to do with it?

At the time of this article, the NCAA had not struck Penn State with all of the violations they have received to date. I think that what the NCAA has done is kind of harsh, but in another way they are sending a message to the rest of the universities out there. The NCAA has been under ridicule because of all the negative press, especially college football that has been receiving quite a bit of “off-the-field” problems with players and coaches. They are sending a message out warning everyone else to pretty much keep their noses clean because the integrity of the game is suffering.

The media breaking this story has done it in a number of forms from Twitter to Facebook. The emergence of social media and news feeds has made this story covered from head to toe literally since it broke the public. Sara Ganim was the first to break this story after she was receiving tips and information. She spent much time in the field and would send back video and news through social outlets back to the office for others below her to follow up on. Investigating the story and not giving up eventually led to her uncovering the story and breaking it to the public. Sara’s reporting and investigating shows how reporters receive information and relay it back to their office as fast as possible. I had no clue how fast media can honestly spread until I read this article. In short, Penn State has a long road to recovery to bring their football program back from the depths of where it is now. The NCAA has imposed what I think are very strict and stern penalties and are showing the rest of the schools that they are in-charge and they will continue to hunt for violations among universities throughout the country.

"Policing the social media craze"

From ESPN.com

Review by Jennifer Luck in SRM 334

140 characters. That is the amount of characters the 140 million Twitter users have to
express themselves. College athletes have joined the social media craze. For most,
they’re casual outlets that rarely cause problems. But when the outlets become online
soap boxes for emotional young adults, issues can arise.

In recent years, college coaches and athletic directors have dealt with a variety of
social media challenges. At the Catholic University of America the whole lacrosse
team was suspended because of hazing photographs of new athletes posted on their
“personal” Facebook accounts. Kansas basketball coach Bill Self had to break up a
Twitter fight between former player Tyshawn Taylor and critical fans.

Firms such as Varsity Monitor, UDiligence, and CentrixSocial have capitalized on
the growth of social media and try to help schools control negative Internet behavior.
These firms offer schools a computer application that allows them to filter and identity
problematic social media behavior. Universities are reaching out to these firms
because they want to protect their brands and players.

However, there are times where athletes possess the technology to instantly broadcast
messages and photos before any type of authority can intercept them. For example,
the University of North Carolina. The NCAA cited North Carolina for failing to
monitor their players tweets which led to an investigation and violations. Because of
one tweet posted by former football player Marvin Austin, fifteen scholarships were
revoked and a one year bowl ban was placed.

In the past, student athletes were prepped for only interviews. Now, they must be
reminded that social media is an open forum. Young men and women may think
because they have specific “privacy” settings it won’t reach a media outlet, but most
of the time it does. Student athletes and social media have become big issues on
college campuses over the last few years, but universities are taking steps to prevent
negative images of their programs from being posted and tweeted. Education towards
athletes on what to say on social networking sites has become the leading way to
keep a positive face. How universities face the social media era and their athletes will
be left up to their own discretion until the NCAA develops restrictions.

Social media is here to stay and as future employees in the sports industry we must
learn to embrace it for the way it can connect a fan base and promote a team or player
rather than shun it because of its potential embarrassing and distracting tendencies. If
we do, we will have a leg up in the arms race of college athletics.

---

Review by Caroline Snedegar in SRM 334

In the article, “Policing the Social Media Craze” it talks about the recent impact the social media has had on the world of sports, specifically concerning college athletes, coaches, and athletic directors and how they deal with the challenges that the social media brings. With the constant use of social media people now can access it basically 24/7, which means athletes and coaches have to monitor what they say even more closely since the media and audiences have access to this information the second it is published online. Where some coaches see the benefits and actually promote the use of social media like twitter; it can also hurt a program if certain players aren’t careful about what they put out on the web. While most programs rely “on individual teams to inspect social media accounts (Medcalf, 2012),” however, with the immense amount of athletes there is no possible way that everything that gets put out on a social media source can be fully monitored. The majority of athletes have “instruments that allow them to broadcast messages and photos to people around the world before any authority can intercept them (Medcalf, 2012),” which has caused either citations with the NCAA or backlash from the media and fans in general.

This article exemplifies the constant evolution of the Sport’s Media Industry, with the rapid growth of social media it has impacted how people in this field have to deal and adjust by adding another media outlet for delivering information. Guest Speaker for our class, Niki DeSantis, Assistant Commissioner for Creative Services for the CAA, even thought that the increase use of the social media and online media sources has definitely increased her work load and adds another element that has to be constantly updated for the public and is on constant display.

"JMU Announces MadiZONE to be Free For the 2012-13 Season"

From JMUSports.com

Review by Patrick Gotimer in SRM 334

The choice for JMU to provide free coverage of home JMU athletics shows a changing market for the sport media industry.

For starters, a big reason for the change is social media. Users can instantaneously comment and discuss about games and events for free via blogs, Twitter, and Facebook. This type of coverage forces better coverage (i.e. video coverage) to compete with coverage one can receive on one’s smart phone.

As for MadiZONE, turning to free coverage of JMU Sports was just a natural evolution of media. Free coverage means a greater number of viewers and more viewers means there will also be a greater demand for advertisement space. Subsequently, the revenue loss from MadiZONE subscribers when MadiZONE had to be paid for to watch, is made up and surpassed by advertisements.

To further increase the demand for advertisement space, MadiZONE must first increase the number of viewers even more; by increasing the quality of the production, MadiZONE can achieve just that. One suggestions we had for Mr. John Martin was to further market to students who, for example, may be studying but able to flip between homework and the game. In addition, by having more sequences of student spectators at the game could increase viewership. For one, people want to see their friends and family on camera. Also, prospective students will also see a better student atmosphere which could ultimately attract better student and better athletes to James Madison University.

In conclusion, MadiZONE is on the rise. It’s free subscriptions will help JMU Sports promote JMU by using MadiZONE as a recruitment tool for athletes and students alike. I look forward to the changes and updates to come to MadiZONE.
----

Review by Chase Warren in SRM 334

MadiZONE is the best place to go for all of your James Madison University sports, and it recently became free. In the past, a paid subscription was needed in order to use MadiZONE and get access to JMU athletics, but that has changed. For different reason, such as contract negotiations,  MadiZONE  decided to change its ways. This website gives JMU sports fans access to virtually any home game, and even a few away games. There are many perks to this website becoming free. It is a great way to promote JMU as a university in general and it creates a better fan base. Another perk to  MadiZONE  being free comes from a recruiting standpoint. For example, if a player is thinking about JMU but lives on the other side of the country, his or her parents will be pleased to hear that they will have free access to every home game right on their computer at home. One last thing that it does is creating a higher demand for advertising space. With that being said, the advertising space will help to make up for the lost funding created by  MadiZONE's conversion to free, rather than paid. The amount of viewers has grown exponentially since the change has been made. Last season, football games averaged about 750  MadiZONE  viewers per game, and in the home opener against St. Francis, $4,700 viewers tuned in to  MadiZONE  . The fact that this is a sports website that is interactive with fans makes it relevant to this class. It is a type of sport communication, and it becoming free is the type of thing that can happen to many different types of sports media at all levels of athletic competition. Money will always be a huge issue in the world of sports media.

“Dollars just keep climbing for college kickoff games”

From SportsBusiness Journal

Review by Daniel Allen in KIN 332 (section 1)

The article, “Dollars just keep climbing for college kickoff games,” highlights the fierce, competitive industry for opening college football games that includes a neutral site and an illustrious high payout offer to both teams competing in the game. This wasn’t always the case though as the “kickoff” as it is called started back up in 2008. The idea was and still is to give two college football teams a chance to feel what it is to have a bowl like atmosphere while increasing excitement about the beginning of the new college football season. This year highlighted two big time programs, Alabama Crimson Tide and the Michigan Wolverines, in the Cowboy Classic. The payout for the game is anticipated to be about $9.4 million dollars with each team receiving about $4.7 million dollars after the game. The article continues to list big time neutral site openers for the 2012-13 year that are expected to bring in high revenue. With such high profile games and neutral sites the marketing aspect of this seems to be ingenious. First the schools still must market the game to their fan based audience which is sort of a tough position trying to market a game that could be hours away with higher ticket prices. How do you sell 25,000 tickets to your fans with a 20-50% spike in price? At the same time as a coach you must ask, “Do I want to lose a chance of hosting a home game while increasing the chance of being on a national stage and having future recruits witness your school on the big stage?” Being on a neutral site at a NFL stadium is a market itself to future recruits. Another big factor with these games that was brought up in the article is the advertising on TV with Dick’s Sporting Goods being the winner as they were the umbrella sponsor this past weekend with advertisements during all the games. Overall, in the sports marketing world this article is perfect as it hits many aspects involving sports marketing from many different views such as the coach, fans, players, future players, and marketing departments of big time companies.

"StubHub, Paciolan go mobile for four schools"

From SportsBusiness Journal

Review by William Spreen in KIN 332 (section 1)

Smart phones have made it possible to access immeasurable amounts of information and the ability to perform services anywhere a person could possibly desire. Whether it is checking the score of a game, finding directions with GPS coordination, shopping, or even renting your favorite movie to watch in the palms of your hands these phones continue to change the ways in which both businesses and individuals conduct business and leisure activities everyday. “StubHub, Paciolan Go Mobile For Four Schools” is an eye-opening article in the August 27th issue of the Sports Business Journal discussing the introduction of mobile ticketing to NCAA college football.

North Carolina, Purdue, Tennessee and Texas are the four schools that are introducing mobile ticketing for this upcoming season. In the words of Greg Ivry, Stubhub’s business development manager, “Mobile is a seamless experience that allows fans to buy a ticket on their phone. Receive a new barcode for that ticket and then scan it at the gate and get your seat.” Forget stopping by the box office or even printing out the tickets at home, this new form of service provides consumers with the convenience of having a ticket within a matter of seconds. Making it this easy for the consumer to purchase will result in new marketing and sales strategies for both Stubhub and the University introducing mobile ticketing.

Stubhub is affiliated with thirty colleges for ticketing services, however only a few maintain legitimate sponsorship deals. With more universities embracing the secondary ticket market industry I believe that this new form of convenience will soon become the norm of the college sports world. According to Paciolan eighty percent of school’s currently have the technology to scan barcodes off of phones. The Internet in recent years has proved to be a major game changer bringing in new ways for fans to purchase tickets. This leaves you to wonder what is in store for the athletic marketing and sales world with the dawn of the Smartphone era.

"Men's College Basketball Programs Facing Attendance Declines"

From Athletic Business

Review by Heather Holston in KIN 332 (section 1)

The article “Men’s College Basketball Program Facing Attendance Declines” is about the current problem facing ticket sales in college basketball programs across America. The article states that the NCAA Division 1 basketball teams had a decline by 47 fans last season. One in five programs have seen a 20% attendance drop or more over the past four seasons. Half of the programs affected were in the Pac 12. The article list three problems that could contribute to the problem. One is the effect of the NBA being close to major colleges. The article states that more fans want to spend money on NBA games than college. Second is technology making it easier for people to stay at home and watch the games. Their saying students can watch games on the phone or ipads. Third, when it comes to basketball, viewers are more interested in the post season. Fans don’t want to watch every game because it takes time. The article had a lack of the sports marketing that the basketball venues were trying to do. In the article, it states that Duke University had declines but wasn’t going to buy into the cheesy promotions during the games. However, Bobinski states that enhancing the experience or non-conference scheduling can help reverse the decline. I believe that Bobinski is right. If the colleges want to get more students and alumni in the stands, enhancing the experience in the stadiums will help. It might be easier to watch it on tv with today’s technology but it’s not the same. If the stadiums had more in house promotions or more advertisement within the community, more people would come. The Duke reporter said they don’t play the canned pop music or any of those things before a game. It seemed to me that in the article, the colleges gave up when trying to compete with the NBA or get fans in. True the NBA may have bigger stars and more excitement, but nothing is more exciting that rooting for your own college with your friends on a Friday night. Even if that does entail cheesy promotions and canned music.

"Is March Madness Marketing’s Next Super Bowl?"

From The Street

Review by James Hemphill in KIN 435 (section 2)

The gold standard for television advertising in sporting events has been the Super Bowl, but the NCAA Tournament has made over $5.2 billion in television advertising from 275 sponsors over the course of the past decade. The 2011 NCAA Tournament garnered $738 million with only 78 sponsors. The key ingredient for the NCAA Tournament to generate nearly three quarters of a billion dollars is passion. Collegiate fans are the most passionate of all sports fans and they are comprised of mostly individuals ranging from ages 18 to 34.

CBS and Turner Sports have capitalized on the growing opportunities to make a profit from the NCAA Tournament. They signed a deal to televise the tournament for $10 billion through the year 2024. Both CBS and Turner Sports realized that the tournament is the second most profitable sporting event behind the NFL Playoffs and continues to prosper. A thirty second television spot for the NCAA Tournament Final costs roughly $1.2 million. The key ingredient for advertisers is the fact that the NCAA Tournament last three weeks and gives them more face time with their potential consumers.

The three main sponsors of the NCAA Tournament are AT&T, Coca-Cola, and Capital One. They each spend millions of dollars to have their companies all over television commercials, but none of them pay as much as General Motors for advertising during the tournament. Backed by their corporate sponsor Buick, GM spends $57.9 million on advertising for the NCAA Tournament. In terms of public sentiment, the Final Four of the NCAA Tournament ranks second in major sporting events behind only the Major League Baseball World Series. This signifies the importance of the Final Four to not only people associated with the specific universities participating in the two national semifinal games but also collegiate basketball fans across the United States.

The downside of the NCAA Tournament is that the awareness and avidity of the event is only half of the Super Bowl. While the Super Bowl has the potential to reach 86.6 million individuals through marketing, the Final Four only has 43.8 million potential customers. However, this has helped smaller companies such as Buffalo Wild Wings, Southwest Airlines, State Farm Insurance, and UPS devise marketing campaigns to promote their products during NCAA Tournament games.

The marketing and sales implications of this article are that the NCAA Tournament is one of the largest sporting events in the United States and there are opportunities for many different types of sponsors to become involved during the tournament. Although it doesn’t reach as many customers as the Super Bowl, the NCAA Tournament allows for smaller companies to advertise their product or service to potential customers. It is likely that the NCAA Tournament will continue to grow because of its popularity and it should continue to rake in large sums of money from sponsors. With the NCAA Tournament concluding this past Monday, it will be intriguing to view how successful corporate sponsors and other sponsored companies were with generating sales.

"Virginia and Virginia Tech football struggle to sell tickets to their bowl games"

From The Washington Post


Review by Julie Fox in KIN 435 (section 1)


Many college football teams are finding themselves in difficult positions now that it is bowl season again. Virginia and Virginia Tech are two of the many ACC schools struggling to sell all of their allotted tickets. According to this article, Tech had only sold about 53% of their ticket allotment to the 2012 Sugar Bowl game and Virginia was expected to fall at least 4,000 tickets short of their allotment to the 2012 Chik-fil-A bowl. The problem with the decline in ticket sales is that the school and the ACC Conference are responsible for the unsold tickets. Tech was expected to receive its largest-ever bowl payout as a result from being in the bowl game. Due to the unsold tickets, Tech will not receive nearly as large payout as expected.

Virginia Tech’s reputation was on the line for this bowl game. Tech was selected to play in the game because of their reputation as having a large fan base that travels well. The school was expected to fill a lot of seats and a lot of hotel rooms, but found themselves failing. Head Coach Frank Beamer transformed himself into a salesman, pleading with students at halftime of a men’s basketball game to buy their bowl game tickets through the school.

The problem lies within the secondary ticket market. The secondary ticket market used to consist of people selling tickets on corners outside of stadiums. Now people can go online and buy better, cheaper tickets. StubHub listed more than 7,000 available tickets for the Sugar Bowl and 4,000 for the Chik-fil-A bowl. To fix this problem, Tech needed to implement some sort of incentive for students and fans to buy their tickets through the school. Why should students buy a random ticket in the nose-bleed section through Tech, when they could buy their ticket on Stubhub and pick their own seat? They needed some sort of program where if fans bought their ticket through the school, they got a discounted price on transportation to the game. While it is understandable that the ACC has rules about ticket allotments, it might be time for them to realize that secondary ticket markets are becoming the primary source of ticket sales. It is unfair to put so much financial burden on the schools when it is constantly getting harder for them to sell tickets. I feel a good solution would be to lower the ticket allotment to each school and put more tickets for sale on websites such as StubHub where they ultimately would make more of a profit.

---

Review by Bekah Jarzombek in KIN 435 (section 1)

For the 2012 Bowl Championship Series, ACC schools were feeling the pressure to meet ticket sales numbers. The secondary ticket market was stealing fan’s business by providing lower ticket prices and convenience. Specifically, as of December 12, 2011, Virginia Tech had only sold 53% of the 17,500-ticket allotment for the Allstate Sugar Bowl on January 3, 2012. There was strong concern considering the game was less than a month away. Failure to sell tickets meant Virginia Tech and the ACC must pay for the unsold tickets. Less profit would be made off of the game. In desperation, Coach Beamer of Virginia Tech spoke at a men’s basketball game. He attempted to persuade students to buy their Sugar Bowl tickets from Virginia Tech. In addition, football players threw Mardi Gras beads into the crowd for extra motivation.

Other than the men’s’ basketball event, the article did not expand on ways Virginia Tech was attempting to fix the ticket problem. It seems the school and ACC should have recognized the problem earlier. With that said, resorting to Beamer’s begging session, three weeks before the game, was not an effective way to persuade students’ ticket decisions. The root of the problem is the Virginia Tech ticket prices are more expensive than companies such at StubHub. They can beg all they want, but a student is not going to buy a more expensive ticket if they know they can get it for a cheaper price. That doesn’t mean the fans lack passion for Virginia Tech. Their job is to go the game, and that is what they are doing…at a cheaper price.

"More College Athletic Departments Partner With State Lotteries"

From Athletic Business


Review by Justin Thorpe in KIN 435 (section 1)

The article I reviewed was entitled More College AD’s Partner with State Lottery. This article went into detail explaining how the state lottery has certain sponsorships with NCAA football teams and is expanding their reach across the country. For example, the article talks about Oregon State and the University of Oregon and how they are somewhat involved with the lottery. Oregon State chose to allow the lottery to use their trademarks in the lottery’s promotion of the “Civil War” and allows the lottery to set up displays and advertisements on only two game days; whereas the University of Oregon did not chose to lend their trademark to the lottery yet allows them to promote the lottery at all of their home games for the season. By teaming up with the lottery both Oregon State and the University of Oregon will gain roughly $60,000. Since 1990, the University of Oregon has received around $11.3 million and Oregon State has received around $10.9 million dollars in lottery proceeds. The article also talks about hypocrisy among some of the colleges in that they are willing to receive money from the lottery proceeds but do not want to allow the lottery to use any of their trademarks that may come from their football program or school.

Some college athletic departments think that there is no harm in teaming up with the lottery and allowing them to use their trademarks whereas others think that they may either not be ready to take their program to that level or do not want to be promoted in that fashion. Although the lottery can provide some benefits to colleges and/or universities such as money and promotion, not all are willing participants of using the lottery as a way to portray their image.

My take on College programs being sponsored by their state lottery is it SHOULD NOT be used at all. The NCAA is strict on ever other subject that involves players gambling, receiving extra benefits, or getting paid for play, college teams should in no way be affiliated with a corporation that promotes gambling. There is no way that the NCAA should allow college football rivalries like Oregon and Oregon state be used to promote gambling on a scratch ticket. I was intrigued by this quote in the article; the lottery is an advertiser, and the sports networks that carry the games reach an audience all across the state," says Mary Neubauer, the Iowa Lottery's vice president for external relations, adding that lottery proceeds benefit the Iowa Veterans Trust Fund and the state's general fund, which benefits education at every level. "So advertising obviously is a big component of it, but the opportunity to spread the word about good things in our state is another, and that's what we're doing with this current promotion." I feel as if that quote is a cop out for the state lottery because in actuality all they want to do is sell lotto tickets with the college programs on them so that they can increase their revenue. That’s my take on College Athletics being involved with state lotteries.

---

Review by Daniel Marchesani in KIN 435 (section 2)

I’ve never seen a state university partnering up with the state lottery, and after reading this article I think it is a great idea. I find that it is beneficial to both organizations because the schools are getting money and advertising out of it and the lotto is getting free advertising. For example over the past 20 years Oregon has received more than 11.3 million dollars and Oregon State has received 10.9 million dollars from the state lottery. Along with all that money, they have gotten ton of free advertising having its rival football game, the “civil war” written on thousands of lottery tickets. In return the lottery is allowed to advertise at the team’s home games. This is a great marketing strategy for both organizations (the lottery and whichever university they are with at the time) because they are mutually helping one another out to benefit themselves while doing know harm to anyone. "The lottery is an advertiser, and the sports networks that carry the games reach an audience all across the state," says Mary Neubauer, the Iowa Lottery's vice president for external relations. The lottery proceeds benefit the veterans in Iowa through a trust fund and go towards the states general fund which is money that goes to the education department. Mary goes on to say, "So advertising obviously is a big component of it, but the opportunity to spread the word about good things in our state is another, and that's what we're doing with this current promotion."

While others and I feel positively about this, some are against the fact that the lottery and Universities are working together. Michael O’Hara a longtime psychology professor at Iowa stated, “Gambling has been a big problem in sports, particularly college sports, and I would consider it a public-health issue.” He is strongly against the fact that State Universities are starting to associate themselves with such an issue. He believes it may end up hurting the Universities in the long run rather than continue to make it money.

Universities and the lottery working together seem to be working for both sides, while it is a great promoter for both organizations it is also a great money maker for both the school and the lottery.

---

Review by Tommi Nissinen in KIN 435 (section 1)

The article discusses the recent trend of college athletic departments partnering up with state lotteries in an attempt to raise more money for their programs. While some universities are seizing the opportunity with little hesitation, others don’t feel as comfortable about getting involved. Since many schools have been accepting indirect lottery proceeds from their states for years, it seems rather hypocritical not to get involved with the latest trend.

According to the article, one of the latest examples of the phenomenon is the Civil War scratch-it lottery ticket, which is based on the rivalry game played every year between two Oregon powerhouses, Oregon State and the University of Oregon. While the lottery ticket clearly displays the trademarks of Oregon State, the University of Oregon chose not to lend its trademarks to the state lottery. Hypocritical, some might say, especially after receiving more than $ 10.9 million from the Oregon state lottery since 1990.

Chris Bjork, an Oregon IMG Sports Marketing senior account executive, helped draft a contract which allows the lottery a promotional presence at all seven home games of the season, but doesn’t allow the school trademarks to be used in the Civil War scratch-it ticket. “Hey, you know what? We don't feel as comfortable yet. We understand that the lottery does provide the university with some significant dollars, but we're just not there yet."

Despite of denying the use of the school trademarks on the actual lottery ticket, allowing state lottery to promote during the home games brings in $ 60,000 from the state lottery, which is the very same amount that is received by Oregon State for allowing using their trademark in the scratch-it. So basically both universities are getting the same amount of money from the same sponsor. The only difference is the way they choose to represent their brand image. Oregon State is fine with having their trademarks on a lottery ticket, whereas Oregon is fine with having the state lottery promote on their campus.

Despite of their different approaches to marketing and strengthening their brand image, there is one aspect of the story both schools seem to have very few problems agreeing with.

And that is exactly 60,000 dollars.

"Colleges weigh risks, rewards of stadium beer sales"

From the SportsBusiness Journal


Review by Michael Fedorowski in KIN 332 (Section 2)

The article “Colleges Weigh Risks, Rewards of Stadium Beer Sales” (sportsbusinessdaily.com, Don Muret, September 19, 2011) weighs the benefits and negatives of allowing the sale of alcohol inside collegiate stadiums during athletic events. Beer sales during football games have been an ever-increasing trend for universities as athletic departments continue to look for new streams of revenue. The article itself concentrates on Western Virginia University for they are the newest school to follow suit. Currently it is up to the school to decide whether they will sell beer during their games, as the NCAA has no rules against it. WVU made $75,000 in beer sales during their first game and expect to gross between $500,000 and $1.2million annually this year. Selling beer not only has its increase in revenue advantage but also opens new doors to sponsorships and endorsement deals.

Companies such as Anheuser-Busch and MillerCoors can pour beer during games, but they are not permitted to advertise within the bowl arena or outside the stadium. Both the schools and beer companies still benefit greatly from sponsorships with some deals ranging in the six figures annually. Brewers also receive commercial time on radio broadcasts and program ads such as pamphlets. WVU believes that selling alcohol during games will curb binge drinking at tailgates while also bringing in extra revenue for their athletic department. It is a win-win situation. The fans, school, and brewing companies are all happy campers.

---

Review by Katie Minter in KIN 332 (Section 2)

This article was very interesting and I think a topic that has been widely discussed at different colleges and universities around the United States. In this article, Don Muret introduces us to the idea that West Virginia University has decided to start selling beer at public sporting events, especially at their football games. He explains that this idea is not widely accepted in the world of college sports except for a few colleges like Colorado State, which is right next door to Coor’s Brewery, University of Nevada, and University of Louisiana-Lafayette. With the decision of West Virginia University to start selling beer at their stadium, they are slowly intergrading the new policy and acceptance of selling beer into their football traditions. WVU estimated that they would gain $500,000 to 1.2 million dollars in new revenue from selling beer alone at their stadium this season. Along with raising revenue, they will also be increasing the opportunity to gain sponsorships. This process is taking sometime to figure out because WVU is not advertising their sponsorships inside of the stadium, except for small signs on the concourses that direct fans to the appropriate concession stand to purchase the type of beer that they want. To fill the void of advertising inside of the stadium, they are allowing the breweries to advertise on commercial broadcast and with ads in the game programs. Along with raising revenue and increasing the opportunity of sponsorships, WVU is also using this to curb the habit of binge drinking before and during games. WVU hopes this will control the level of consumption of alcohol before games, since fans will now be allowed to drink during the game and in this situation both parties win with fans being able to drink during the games, and the university can generate revenue.

I thought this article was very interesting because I think it is the beginning of what is to come in the world off college sports. I think there are still a lot of people against advertising and consumption of alcohol at on-campus events, but with the economy not being as stable as it has been and the drop in ticket sales, some schools are going to have to start offering new perks to get ticket sales up. I think it is a genius idea to be able to regulate student drinking, to an extent, and also to generate revenue for the school. It may be against a long running tradition to not drink at college games, but college student will always drink before games, and usually a lot before games to last the whole game, so why not curb that tradition and start a new tradition of selling beer during games and helping the school generate profit. I think it is still a work in progress, but I will not be surprise if in a couple years, more and more universities are starting to sell beer at on-campus events.

"Big East Teams Leave Conference for Sports Allies With Lucrative TV Market"

From Bloomberg


Review by James Hemphill in KIN 332 (Section 1)


Two of the most important universities from the Big East Conference decided to leave the conference for the greener pastures of the Atlantic Coach Conference. These institutions are Syracuse University and the University of Pittsburgh. With this realignment, the ACC is attempting to blanket the entire east coast from Boston to Miami with its product. The ACC commissioner is attempting to move the conference tournament to the Mecca of basketball: Madison Square Garden in New York City.

The departures of these two crucial universities from the Big East has upset many pure college sports fan because they are leaving the tradition of the league and the rivalries that have grown since the inception of the league. Syracuse is one of the founding members of the Big East, and will be very difficult to replace. Not only did the Big East lose these two schools, but there is talk that Rutgers and Connecticut could be next to leave. Just yesterday, the Big East received some more bad news as Texas Christian University decided to forgo their acceptance to the Big East for the more appropriate conference geographically speaking in the Big Twelve. With the departures of these marquee programs, they will have to be creative to rebuild the league. The Big East is still intending on expanding their football conference by potentially offering bids to Central Florida, East Carolina, Navy, Temple, Air Force and even Villanova. The Big East is simply in turmoil as a football conference at the moment and has a lot of work to be completed to fix the perception of the league.

The ACC is booming right now with fourteen universities going forward and possibly two more when realignment is completed. By reaching ninety million people along the Atlantic Coast, it has a lot of bargaining power to ensure that a much larger television deal is agreed upon in the upcoming years. It is conceivable that the ACC could become the first super conference with sixteen institutions and that ultimately could allocate for four super conferences of sixteen members each.

Where does the Big East go from here some may ask. They are already hurt by the fact that they are the only major conference that puts more emphasis on basketball then football, because football ultimately makes more money for the conference. They need to react quickly to these departures and figure out a method to lure the best football programs and rejuvenate a conference that has been decimated by realignment over the past decade.

From a marketing perspective, the Atlantic Coach Conference will have a much broader audience to appeal to fans with Syracuse and Pittsburgh joining the conference. This will allocate the ACC to market their product to the large media outlets of Pittsburgh and New York City. If the ACC Tournament is moved to Madison Square Garden, the conference will be able to promote the event to strong alumni bases in the New York City Metropolitan Area. On the other hand, the Big East will be hurt significantly with the departures of these two vital universities. They must lure in popular schools to ensure that the Big East brand, especially in football, does not fall apart and cause further departures to occur. They must hope for the loyalty of the conference to take precedence over the fact that two of its most popular universities have abandon the conference for basically more money and better opportunities.

"More College Athletic Departments Partner With State Lotteries"

From Athletic Business


Review by Logan Klooster in KIN 332 (Section 2)


The article we selected “More College Athletic Departments Partner With State Lotteries” was written by Paul Steinbach for the October Issue of the Athletic Business journal in 2011. This article focuses on the College athletics and allowing the images of different universities branding on lottery tickets. The first two universities the article talks about are Oregon and Oregon State. Oregon refuses to put there emblem and mascot on the lottery tickets yet, Oregon State has no problem allowing their emblem on the scratch off ticket. Both Universities are publicly owned so both universities are state funded therefore both universities receive money from the lottery ticket. “Since 1990, the University of Oregon has received more than $11.3 million in lottery proceeds, while Oregon State has received $10.9 million, according to Chuck Baumann, the Oregon Lottery's senior communications specialist.”(Steinbach, 2011) Oregon’s IMG general manager Brian Movalson says, "It would be hypocritical, I think, to accept those dollars and not participate in something like this." (Steinbach, 2011) As for the second university mentioned in this article, Iowa doesn’t want to participate in the lottery because the lottery used a parody of their fight song and used unauthorized video of the inside of the stadium. These are not the only reasons why Iowa doesn’t want to get involved with the lottery. Iowa also doesn’t want to associate college athletics with gambling. Which brings up another question. Is it ethical to predict the scores on the scores on scratch off lottery tickets? In my opinion, I think it is ethical because it is merely a hypothesis of the outcome of the game and most people do this in their head. As for the Marketing implications in this article, they mention things such as branding of universities on lottery tickets, promotions for entering lottery, sales of lottery tickets, revenues earned from lottery tickets, and fan appeal. In my opinion if the university wants to receive funds from the lottery then they must be willing to use their emblem on the lottery tickets.

---

Review by Brandon Schroth in KIN 332 (Section 2)

This article deals with college sports and the lottery. In particular, the controversy between Oregon and Oregon State. Oregon state decided to lend its trademarks to the new lottery promotion celebrating the “Civil War”, which is traditionally the last regular season game between the two teams. Oregon decided to offer the lottery a promotional presence at all seven of their home games, while Orgeon State allowed the lottery to have a presence on two gamedays. Over the years, the two schools have accepted millions of dollars in lottery proceeds. Oregon IMG general manager Brian Movalson said, "It would be hypocritical, I think, to accept those dollars and not participate in something like this." While some support these lottery proceeds, others think the issue of gambling can be a problem, especially in college sports. As the NCAA currently stands, championship events are prohibited from associating with state lotteries. However, individual schools and conferences are free to participate with state lotteries. Forty-three states now offer lotteries, and those that partner with college athletic departments do so as a means to communicate the gaming industry's contributions to their respective state societies. Like any successful sports marketing campaign, fan affinity is the key, and the same goes for promotions launched by state lotteries.

"More College Athletic Departments Partner With State Lotteries"

From Athletic Business


Review by Zack Miller in KIN 435

There is an annual game every year between Oregon and Oregon State called the Civil War. The Oregon state lottery has seen this big game as a great opportunity to cash in on some promotion by getting sponsorship on a scratch off lotto ticket from Oregon State. They tried to have the same sponsorship from Oregon, but the university’s Athletic Director didn’t feel comfortable with the idea. Instead, while Oregon State has their official logo on the ticket, Oregon has allowed promotional presence to the state lottery at each of its seven home games this year. The lottery offers a good sum of money, $60,000, for allowing the promotional use of the schools. Oregon’s IMG general manager stated that it would be hypocritical to accept the money and not allow some form of promotion for the lottery. After all, the state lotteries have given over $11 million to Oregon in the last 20 years, and over $10 million to Oregon State. I believe that the state lottery has done an excellent job in marketing and finding an easy way to use the classic rivalry game to help promote their product. The ticket is a basic two dollar scratch off and therefore is not a big expenditure for fans who want to try their luck. What is interesting is the difference in the way they have gotten promotion from the two schools. While the “Civil War” game is a state wide event, it is my opinion that Oregon actually offered a better deal to the lottery than Oregon State gives. By being able to show up at all seven home games and have a consistent presence, the loyal fans who show up at every game will realize that state lottery has an invested interest in their school. Therefore, they might be able to sell more lottery products rather than the one big game promotion that Oregon State gives. 

---

Review by Dale Robins-Bailey in KIN 435

The question of state lottery affiliation has surfaced recently with many top schools and their football programs having to make decisions. Teams like Oregon, Oregon State and Iowa have all recently signed agreements to be affiliated with their respective state lotteries. Questions of hypocrisy have been raised as some schools do accept lottery funding from the state but choose to opt out of being used in promotional lottery games. Sales of lottery scratch games would increase in those areas if they used local university teams to market them.

Recently a lot of programs have started to jump on the lottery bandwagon but there are some that feel it is not ethical to promote gambling. Some schools do not even agree with the NCAA’s rather unclear stance on the matter. The NCAA prohibits affiliation with state lotteries at NCAA championship events but looks the other way as regards to conference and out of conference games. Their official stance is that they are opposed to all types of gambling but do realize there are financial and promotional benefits of such an affiliation. Having said that the NCAA seems hypocritical in itself as it does allow gambling at the conference level at the same time as wanting to be seen as taking the moral high ground. They are aware that some members of their organization feel that the benefits of being linked with gambling establishments such as Casino’s can help market their schools. The NCAA it is missing out on a huge revenue source here as sales of tickets from championship events would surely bring in more money than conference games.

Schools are now beginning to see the benefits of a partnership with state lotteries. With over 43 states offering lotteries, it is a huge opportunity for advertising. The marketing implications mean that both schools and lotteries benefit from the advertising as schools gain exposure from scratch cards and other promotions, and the lottery improves its public relations when schools make it know they are benefiting from lottery funding. Programs include the Bright Futures program at the University of Miami.

In all, the article highlights the opinions of schools and organizations on the partnership with state lotteries.

"Fee-Fi-Fo-Funds"

From Athletics Management

Review by Rocky Morris Jr. in KIN 435 


This article discusses different ways to introduce or raise fees to increase the revenue of athletic departments within NCAA school divisions. Most of the schools that have already implemented an increase in these fees discuss how they have handled this situation when it is presented to the school as a whole and what sorts of reactions take place. The Athletic Directors of these schools see the fees as a necessary income to be able to compete at the highest level that they can at their given conferences, while understanding that it is difficult to convince an already money-strapped school to justify increasing tuition costs. For the majority of the schools in the article, they listed that they reached out to the students in one way or another and made sure that there was appropriate communication as to why fees needed to be gathered. The Athletic Director from Missouri State implemented the help of a student committee and ran a campaign to help promote a fee. At Georgia Tech, a pre-planned committee made up of only a handful of individuals decides on whether to raise additional costs, while a vote at California State University Long Beach went against a price increase because of the possible technological issue of new voting methods that didn’t quite resonate with students. Afterward, a re-collaboration from different department heads decided on a student excellence fee to bring in more funds. Still at other schools such as Buffalo State College, a fee increase means a lot and must go through much scrutiny and possible cuts to athletic budgets before getting passed. Education of why raising fees is beneficial and working together ultimately wins over the drawbacks.

---

Review by Brent Henchen in KIN 435

Every semester colleges go through an internal struggle it seems as to whether or not to increase tuition and fees. Especially with the value students and alumni place on sports, there is continually mounting pressure on college athletics to perform well; and sometimes they need more funds to stay with the competition. So, those schools are forced to increase student fees. In “Fee-Fi-Fo-Funds” Dennis Read asks directors from different school how they increase fees and asks what the resulting consequences are. In most colleges, like Missouri State, Utah State, and Georgia Tech, an increase in fees has to be passed by a legislative body. And that body usually contains current students. Dennis investigates the reactions to fund increases and examines ways in which some directors have gotten bills to increase fees approved by the required number of students.

A few of the techniques the administrators have used are to: try to influence student leaders, who will in turn influence a lot of the student body; view the proposal from the student’s perspective in order to know what benefits to convey to the students; educate the students on the athletic department’s needs; putting together a student committee to help; show the fees they charge in relation to the fees charged by other schools in the same conference, and so on. These methods, some of them used together, were mostly successful. Fees increased without upsetting a majority of the student body.

This article can help other administrators with a list of do’s and don’ts when trying to increase fees for athletics. Every year it seems more money is needed to keep up with a growing college or college athletic program. Knowing how to “sell” a fee increase is very important for maintaining a balanced budget and staying out of debt. The same selling tactics cannot be used year after year, so new persuasive arguments will need to be used, which will require administrators to continually face the problem of convincing students and faculty to approve an increase in student fees. Therefore, a universal answer to this problem cannot be determined, but instead temporary answers will have to be implemented and disposed of yearly.

"Marketing the 'Big Game': Developing a Student Rewards Program in College Basketball"

From Sports Marketing Quarterly

Review by Ryan Richardson in KIN 332 (Section 2)


Kansas State University found the student population to be sparse at non-marquee games leading up to the historically sold-out Kansas State vs. Kansas University basketball game (also known as the “Sunflower Showdown”). KSU also had a “first come, first serve” seating policy for students at home games, which created a mad rush when the gates were opened. To increase student turnout on the non-marquee games leading to the Sunflower Showdown and to create a safer alternative to students rushing to seats, KSU created a student rewards program.

Students were encouraged to sign up for the program in groups of two to ten people. Students were awarded a point for each home game they attended. The average number of games attended by members of the groups determined their seating for the

Sunflower Showdown. Pre-determined seating would eliminate the unsafe rush for marquee games and rewarding students with seats to the Sunflower Showdown would give students incentive to attend the games leading to it.

The program consisted of 3,324 students in 999 groups. Grouping the students would encourage entire groups to attend games. Registering in groups also emphasizes attending sporting events because of their social nature. Pressure is created on the students to organize and connect with members of the group for each game. This social aspect would also impact less committed spectators who want to be involved in a group. Also, if an individual’s reference group approves of going to the game, the game experience itself is perceived more favorably. Any student who only attended marquee games would be forced to attend other games.

Student attendance to the nine games leading up to the Sunflower Showdown increased on average by 1246 a game when compared to the previous season. That is an 18.2% average increase per game! The program was so successful KSU incorporated it into their other sports. This article shows marketing a rivalry is good. A rival can create an Us vs. Them mindset which helps increase the value of that specific game. Students will also be willing to attend other games to get seats for a rivalry game. It brings in the question of what else students will do to get seats to an important game. The rewards program could be implemented across all sports so attendance to less popular sports increases. The students are provided with a motivation to attend games. The perceived value or importance of non-marquee games increases. This could generate more hype and students not even involved in the program may attend because so many others are.

The program’s reward must be appealing to the customer segment you are targeting. Also, existing marketing activities such as half-time giveaways and entertainment must still be provided. It is important to keep marketing strategies focused on forming stronger connections with the team during a rewards program. Also, the social aspect of attending a game should be highlighted so win or lose, the fans enjoy their experience.

---

Review by Jake Kennelly in KIN 332 (Section 2)

In the article it discussed how UNLV was losing attendance at their sporting events and how Kansas St faced a similar issue. It outlined the problem and solution that K. State came up with, and how UNLV could apply it to their own problems. I though the article was very interesting and the idea behind it was very clever, but I don’t think it was necessary to add the UNLV section to it in addition to the Kansas State. I understand that it set up the rest of the article but they could have just based it on Kansas State as they were the ones who were actually implemented the reward system. However, I think the rewards system in a great idea and that it could be used not only in college sports but in all sports as well. I think that JMU could greatly benefit from this system as well. My friends and I only go to a few select games, similar to the situation at Kansas St. and if this reward system was in place I think it would greatly increase student attendance. Also this could be an effective strategy in the 25 strong campaign as well for next year and even for when more renovations are done on Bridgeforth. Kansas State was able to achieve an 18.2% increase in student ticket sales, combine that kind of success with all sports and you can see the potential. This article also had interesting points as to the reason people attend games. The main distinction was between fans and spectators; fans attended because of a deep rooted connection with a team and a spectator attended just to attend. So this system could also potentially turn casual spectators into die-hard fans which would increase profits in not just ticket sales but other areas as well.