Why an "ordinary" fan is not buying season tickets

Nuke99m.

All-American
Aug 30, 2002
8,616
7,675
113
We seem like a better team under Stoops but:

Joker was 6-7,5-7,2-10 for a 13-24 record
Stoops is 2-10,5-7,5-7 for a 12-24 record.

That's a hard 6 years for some fans. I can understand why some fans are in a wait and see mode.
My greatest fear is we lose to S. Miss and then get beat at Florida. If that happens the attention of a lot of fans will shift to basketball. If they turn around and then lose to USC and Alabama then we are playing Vandy at home with a 1-4 record. I was at the 40-0 loss Jokers last year. The crowd was pretty bad to say the least. I fear a repeat of that crowd.

Beat S. Miss and the rest will take care of itself. You keep the crowds hope alive with optimism for wins against Missouri, Miss St. and Vandy.
 

ukalumni00

Heisman
Jun 22, 2005
23,360
39,123
113
Will restate what others have said. Winning will bring the fans back in droves. UK football fans are starving for a winner and many have just gotten to the point of feeling like it will never happen in their lifetimes. Each person has to evaluate what their dollar is worth to them. By that, is the game day environment, tailgating, etc. worth the cost of season tickets alone? Is winning their main criteria? Everyone has their reasons why they do or do not buy season tickets.

I live too far away, but if I lived close it would be a hard decision right now to buy them when you can get cheap tickets outside the stadium. Going to a home game once a year and traveling to a few road games a year to watch UK lose has just gotten to be too much for me to bear. Its expensive, time consuming, and simply a hassle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theoledog

fuzz77

All-Conference
Sep 19, 2012
12,163
1,423
0
"These figures are based on several secondary sites and reflect only home games, so no neutral site or away games."

To those using the listing of average ticket prices...did you read the above?
What UK football tickets are being sold on the secondary market? Who is paying $106.81 for their tickets???
Anyone reading that and not immediately dismissing the article as totally useless is obviously someone who has not bought and not attempted to buy UK football tickets in many, many years.

(7) "The fact is the rest of the SEC has been outspending UK on football for decades until recently." -- Makes me wonder whose pockets were lined with all of the K-fund monies collected from season ticketholders, including myself, for all those decades.

Nobody has been paying K-fund monies for "decades" as it has only existed for now slightly more than one decade. UK was one of, if not the last SEC school to establish a K-Fund like entity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sluggercatfan

rmattox

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
4,006
0
Agree with fuzz. We've had season tickets for 30 years or so. I detest the Kfund "donation" as it is nothing more than a tax designed to pay for programs that cannot support themselves. IMO, If that money had been spent on Football; heck for the past 40 years had the money generated by Football been spent on Football, we'd be much ahead of where we are right now.
When ticket selection time came, we moved to seats that required no donation. The view is not as good, but we saved enough money to buy one more seat. In the scheme of things $wise, it didn't make a difference, but I feel much better.
 

WeepNoMore

Junior
Jan 2, 2005
1,144
260
0
fuzz77 and ram1955, thanks for the correction!

So I'll rephrase: Makes me wonder whose pockets were lined with all of the monies collected from season ticketholders, including myself, for all those decades and with the K-fund monies collected for slightly more than the past decade.
 

sluggercatfan

Heisman
Aug 17, 2004
35,953
29,631
0
I have to agree with you that the stadium is much nicer now but how much of that $180 million was spent on improvements for the average fan (who are the majority) rather than the big bucks people? Average fans got some improvement in restrooms (not everywhere in the stadium however), nicer concessions stands (which still have long lines) and that's about all I can think of. Big bucks people got the majority of the real improvements, far as I can see.
Big bucks people pay out the nose thru the "k fund" and other donations for those things they get, it's not like it's free to them. "Long lines at concessions" I'm sure are only a problem at CWS when we have one of the smallest stadiums in the league. I go to support the football team and I think what they have done for the "average fan" is just fine and the stadium is now one of the tops in the sec.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dallas-Wild

cardkilla_rivals379685

All-Conference
May 10, 2002
2,076
1,695
0
Let me try to address your post a step at a time to try to enlighten you, though enlightening a know-it-all like yourself is probably impossible. :sunglasses:

(1) self-loathing -- LMAO. My self-concept is pretty strong, thank you very much. Why? Demonstrated performance as Coach Cal likes to say.

(2) your buddy Mitch -- For the first 10 or so years of his AD administration, Marvelous Mitch was syphoning every dime he could from FB revenues to fund his and Tood's agenda to become a leader in Olympic sports. You may have missed the fact that we pay a women's BB coach, who all of a sudden can't keep players or coaches, over $1,000,000 per year. But he sure can dance!!!

Only a total revolt by "ordinary" season ticketholders and others stopped the Barnhart and Todd marauding and forced real spending on UK FB.

I've said it before and I'll say it again "Without the fan revolt, Joker Phillips would still be our FB coach and the facilities renovation/expansion would be a UK FB fan's wet dream."

(3) "Like most cheapo's . . . cheapest tickets in the SEC." A poster above offered an interesting observation. On a cost per win basis over the past 15 years UK's ticket prices most likely are among the most expensive in the SEC and, IMHO, in all of college FB.

(4) ". . . never cared to actually do what it takes to have a winning football program." Guess you missed the part where I purchased season tickets and parking pass and, I will add, paid the K-fund extortion for nearly 35 years.

(5) watered-down OOC schedule -- just stating facts. But, since everyone else has watered down their OOC schedule, I guess its ok with you.

(6) the $110 million (or is it $180 million) renovation -- I'm all for the relatively small portion spent on player facilities and the relatively small amount spent on upgrades that benefit all fans, even us "ordinary" fans.

But I do have a problem with the vast majority of the funds being spent on "catering" to the fat Cats, so Mitch can rub elbows with his rich buddies in their private sanctum and pat themselves on the back for what they are doing for UK football, while hardly bothering to watch the team getting clobbered on the field.

And do I need to remind you that our "little brother", you know the "redheaded step-child" down the road, has had chair seats, as ugly as they are, for their "ordinary" fans for the past 15+ years, while UK's "ordinary" fans had the option to pay extra to have cloth seatbacks installed on their seats.

Oh, and before I hear from the "true fans stand the entire game" crowd. You can cheer just as loud and just as hard while remaining seated. Standing should be reserved for those times when something exceptional occurs--great catch, TD, drive stopping open-field tackle, etc.--or to provide support for a game changing third down stop or goal-line stand.

(7) "The fact is the rest of the SEC has been outspending UK on football for decades until recently." -- Makes me wonder whose pockets were lined with all of the K-fund monies collected from season ticketholders, including myself, for all those decades.
Where were you revolters during Bill Curry's reign? Mitch gave Joker 3 years...which is a pretty quick hook. Quit patting yourself on the back for 'making' Mitch make the change. He did it mainly because of how poorly the team was doing.

It's really hard to take any of your nonsensical ranting about not taking FB seriously after how much they've spent on not only the renovations but also on coaches salaries.

Your cost analysis is a joke. Our tickets are the cheapest in the SEC.

Your bitching about the suites for the 'fat cats' is another infantile rant about the people who are able to donate to UK athletics.

Sorry your lazy butt didn't get a cushy seat to cry in. I bet you also cried about seating reduction. Which would have even been greater to get seats in there. They are putting bench backs on the seats, putting in wifi throughout stadium, upgraded bathrooms and concessions. I'm not sure what else you want to make your life easier as a fan.

The majority of upgrades catered to the 2 groups that can make UK football better in the long run. Players and donors. If that's what you truly want(which I don't think it is) then you should be applauding the emphasis on football instead of whining about the past.

Maybe fans like YOU were the problem. I mean you gave Curry 7 years with a terrible record. You accepted mediocrity until they tried to make things better by increasing revenue. Why did it take a coach like Joker for you to suddenly rise up?

Just sounds like sour grapes because they didn't do what YOU wanted them to do FOR YOU.
 

sluggercatfan

Heisman
Aug 17, 2004
35,953
29,631
0
Agree with fuzz. We've had season tickets for 30 years or so. I detest the Kfund "donation" as it is nothing more than a tax designed to pay for programs that cannot support themselves. IMO, If that money had been spent on Football; heck for the past 40 years had the money generated by Football been spent on Football, we'd be much ahead of where we are right now.
When ticket selection time came, we moved to seats that required no donation. The view is not as good, but we saved enough money to buy one more seat. In the scheme of things $wise, it didn't make a difference, but I feel much better.
You do realize that EVERYBODY in the country does the"k fund"" in some form(title IX has to be met)...like you I got out several years ago when they doubled the price and lost my orange lot pass, but now have seats I like better and a regular parking and tailgate spot so all is good
 

J. Shellacque

Junior
Aug 30, 2009
11,348
263
0
Lost in the recent fantastic increase in our facilities, emphasis, and money thrown at coaches is the fact that many long time fans did feel the strike was necessary at the time------and I agree with them. Despite the FACT that UK football was making more than three times what our #! IN THE NATION basketball program was (due mostly to the OTHER SEC football teams, TV, bowls, etc) we were spending LESS than our basketball program on recruiting TWENTY FIVE commits than they were on recruiting four to five basketball recruits-------when the basketball program had the best of EVERYTHING to offer recruits while football had the BARE MINIMUM being spent on it PLUS disgraces like the "recruiting room".

So, OK, that is in the past, and to me the future looks pretty bright, the fact is we lost about ten years progress in football under mitch with MINIMUM support and it caused the hole we fell into.

Funny how the majority of those programs that charge the most for tickets have 100,000 seat stadiums that they usually fill, while we just cut ours back to 61,000 while MSU increased theirs substantially to leave us ahead of only Vandy in stadium size------and in attendance, I am sure. A private school, did they hire an athletic director yet? Funny that they have made more progress in football lately than we have with our top of the line AD and spending money like mad while they were doing without an AD. I firmly believe that spending more of the money that FOOTBALL earned in that lost decade would have meant a lot more money to spend on the minor sports.

The bad taste mitch left in football fans mouth has more to do with that 14% than a lot of you think.

And yes, I am a big fan of all UK sports and love the improvement some have made, did anyone notice while the US took all three medals in the women's 100 meter hurdles possibly two athletes from UK had the talent to have finished with the gold and silver in the event, one recently setting THE world record and the other injured in qualifying? The US very likely had the FIVE best in the world in that event, and two of the best were from UK..

Fire away.
This gets old. This nonsense about how the football program makes all the money. Yeah.....because we field a team in the SEC, no matter how pitiful, and share in all the SEC money. More concession money than basketball for obvious reasons, but what about UK gear? I root for both equally, but get real and be honest about it. If it wasn't for the basketball team you would never see UK gear outside of the state anywhere.
 

rmattox

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
4,006
0
fuzz77 and ram1955, thanks for the correction!

So I'll rephrase: Makes me wonder whose pockets were lined with all of the monies collected from season ticketholders, including myself, for all those decades and with the K-fund monies collected for slightly more than the past decade.

I don't necessarily believe anyone's pockets were lined but the money generated by Football historically was not pumped back into Football.
 

rmattox

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
4,006
0
You do realize that EVERYBODY in the country does the"k fund"" in some form(title IX has to be met)...like you I got out several years ago when they doubled the price and lost my orange lot pass, but now have seats I like better and a regular parking and tailgate spot so all is good
I am very familiar with Title 9. Granted, as a Football (primarily)fan, UK goes overboard.
 

shutzhund

All-Conference
Nov 19, 2005
29,202
2,619
0
If they make good cocktails, have a nice beer selection, good happy hour apps... Have friendly and cute waitresses. Then I'm in! F- the dinner crowd.


You just described a good bar not necessarily a good restaurant. Now if getting sloppy drunk so you don't notice the bad food is the objective then a sane person you would not be.

However an owner would love to have you come back and often. Not sure about the waitresses.
 

fuzz77

All-Conference
Sep 19, 2012
12,163
1,423
0
I am very familiar with Title 9. Granted, as a Football (primarily)fan, UK goes overboard.

You think UK goes overboard?
Probably because it is the only program that you pay close attention to. If you looked around, look at what other programs are doing then you would see that what UK has done is pretty much normal. Last time I checked UK was 10th in the conference in spending on sports not named football or basketball. Of course we spend more than double our closest SEC rival in basketball. Cal's salary alone is more than what over half the conference spends in total on the sport.
 

Tskware

Heisman
Jan 26, 2003
25,130
21,640
113
You think UK goes overboard?
Of course we spend more than double our closest SEC rival in basketball. Cal's salary alone is more than what over half the conference spends in total on the sport.

Because most of the rest of the SEC yawns and changes the channel when you mention basketball
 

WildCard

All-American
May 29, 2001
65,040
7,390
0
Well, I don't have a dog in this fight (no longer a season ticket holder) but based on going to UK games since the Bradshaw era I do have some opinions...[roll]

I think "ordinary" fans are simply different now than they were in the 70s, 80s maybe even the 90s. UK has long history of great fan support of a mediocre football program. But the hard core fans from the Stoll Field days have either passed away or, like myself, are older and "less committed" to the financial and time inconveniences of being a regular "in the stands" supporter. They have been replaced in great part by a newer kind of fan...fans that "expect more" from their financial, time and emotional support of the program.

The "fan revolt" of the short Phillips era strongly suggested that many "new" ticket holders were simply not going to put up with continued on field mediocrity and would spend their "entertainment dollars" elsewhere. And there seems to be a "wait and see" with the Stoops era so far. There are certainly "more reasons" (or excuses) to not go to games now, but I do think that sustained success will move the tickets numbers up but the key word there is "sustained". JMO.

Peace
 

fuzz77

All-Conference
Sep 19, 2012
12,163
1,423
0
Because most of the rest of the SEC yawns and changes the channel when you mention basketball
Yeah, the sad part is that most of those schools end up making more (revenues - expenses) on basketball than does UK.
UK spent $20 million and had revenues of $24.5 million
UT spent $6 million and had revenues of $17 million
Ark spent $8.4 million and had revenues of $16.3 million
Mizzou spent $5.9 million and had revenues of $11.6 million
 

docinjax

All-American
May 25, 2004
14,243
6,808
78
OP is right about Mitch. He is not a great AD for football. He didn't even have the ability to find and hire a good Coach. Stoops basically came to Mitch and pitched himself as the Coach. Jurich has completely run circles around Mitch in football and it disgusts me.

Wrong. More has been done for football with Mitch as AD than was done by all previous AD's combined. If you don't like him for some reason, fine, but to say he hasn't been good for football shows your ignorance. Yes, Joker was a bad hire. But at the time it was thought by everyone that he would do a good job. Brooks included.
 

docinjax

All-American
May 25, 2004
14,243
6,808
78
If the trend continues in a season or two the Athletic Department will either pay a high priced consulting firm to come in to determine why the decline and make suggestions on how to stem the bleeding. Or better yet, appoint a blue ribbon task force with the same charge.

WeepNoMore provided each with their first bit of data ...

Or buy a bunch of boxes of Kleen-ex for all you whiners
 

ScrewDuke1

Hall of Famer
Jul 29, 2016
41,006
152,324
113
OPs screen name has to be the most ironic thing ever.

WeepNoMore weeps all the time.
 

rmattox

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
4,006
0
You think UK goes overboard?
Probably because it is the only program that you pay close attention to. If you looked around, look at what other programs are doing then you would see that what UK has done is pretty much normal. Last time I checked UK was 10th in the conference in spending on sports not named football or basketball. Of course we spend more than double our closest SEC rival in basketball. Cal's salary alone is more than what over half the conference spends in total on the sport.

Right, I care mainly about Football, but follow bball in March. So, are you saying UK does not spend enough overall on sports? IMO, the problem lies with spending excessively on bball. It would be interesting to see how UK compares in spending on Football.
Yeah, the sad part is that most of those schools end up making more (revenues - expenses) on basketball than does UK.
UK spent $20 million and had revenues of $24.5 million
UT spent $6 million and had revenues of $17 million
Ark spent $8.4 million and had revenues of $16.3 million
Mizzou spent $5.9 million and had revenues of $11.6 million
Thus the problem. Take UT for example, where do you suppose that other $11M went? Just curious, but what portion of their total revenue went to support Football either directly or indirectly? Same with UK?
 

rmattox

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
4,006
0
Well, I don't have a dog in this fight (no longer a season ticket holder) but based on going to UK games since the Bradshaw era I do have some opinions...[roll]

I think "ordinary" fans are simply different now than they were in the 70s, 80s maybe even the 90s. UK has long history of great fan support of a mediocre football program. But the hard core fans from the Stoll Field days have either passed away or, like myself, are older and "less committed" to the financial and time inconveniences of being a regular "in the stands" supporter. They have been replaced in great part by a newer kind of fan...fans that "expect more" from their financial, time and emotional support of the program.

The "fan revolt" of the short Phillips era strongly suggested that many "new" ticket holders were simply not going to put up with continued on field mediocrity and would spend their "entertainment dollars" elsewhere. And there seems to be a "wait and see" with the Stoops era so far. There are certainly "more reasons" (or excuses) to not go to games now, but I do think that sustained success will move the tickets numbers up but the key word there is "sustained". JMO.

Peace

Good post. Many may not want to hear this but, Rich Brooks and Hal Mumme both contributed to the decline of support.
Mumme by showing Ky fans we can have interesting, entertaining Football. We might not win a game, but it certainly will be entertaining. Brooks by showing Ky fans something they'd not seen in modern times....going to bowls 5 years in a row. During his last years, we entered the season expecting a bowl game. An expectation that should be fulfilled more years than not at a school like Ky. Like you said, fans in the 60's and 70's showed up for some terrible teams but they enjoyed the atmosphere. Because of RB, that changed. We're now like any other fan base that supports a team. We've experienced success. Anything less will continue to receive declining support.....as it should be.
 

theoledog

All-Conference
Nov 21, 2008
4,306
1,444
0
Good post. Many may not want to hear this but, Rich Brooks and Hal Mumme both contributed to the decline of support.
Mumme by showing Ky fans we can have interesting, entertaining Football. We might not win a game, but it certainly will be entertaining. Brooks by showing Ky fans something they'd not seen in modern times....going to bowls 5 years in a row. During his last years, we entered the season expecting a bowl game. An expectation that should be fulfilled more years than not at a school like Ky. Like you said, fans in the 60's and 70's showed up for some terrible teams but they enjoyed the atmosphere. Because of RB, that changed. We're now like any other fan base that supports a team. We've experienced success. Anything less will continue to receive declining support.....as it should be.
That is one twisted way to look at things.... not bad...just twisted.
 

know1

Heisman
Dec 8, 2002
12,855
14,923
0
If they start winning, I will likely come back as others have said.

I decided not to buy tickets this year primarily because of what I saw on the field last year. The quality and effort seemed to be in decline and there was clearly some serious drama going on behind the scenes that you shouldn't be seeing at this level. The dropped passes which started to look purposeful and players giving up on the team was disheartening. Nevermind the rumored divided locker room. Combine that with high prices and the amount of time and effort it takes to go tailgate and attend and it simply wasn't worth it to me.

I'll watch the games on TV if they look competitive or improved and I may go to a game or two if I come across some cheap, convenient tickets, but that's about it. If this year doesn't show improvement, I may start looking for a new team to root for. I've been a fan for over 30 years and a serious football fan - meaning I care about them more than I care about the basketball team - for at least the last 10. I had season tickets for the last 10 years.

What do I have to show for that? Mostly some good times tailgating and a few decent seasons and a couple of big wins. The rest was mostly disappointment and a bit of anger. I'm not paying money for that.
 

sluggercatfan

Heisman
Aug 17, 2004
35,953
29,631
0
If they start winning, I will likely come back as others have said.

I decided not to buy tickets this year primarily because of what I saw on the field last year. The quality and effort seemed to be in decline and there was clearly some serious drama going on behind the scenes that you shouldn't be seeing at this level. The dropped passes which started to look purposeful and players giving up on the team was disheartening. Nevermind the rumored divided locker room. Combine that with high prices and the amount of time and effort it takes to go tailgate and attend and it simply wasn't worth it to me.

I'll watch the games on TV if they look competitive or improved and I may go to a game or two if I come across some cheap, convenient tickets, but that's about it. If this year doesn't show improvement, I may start looking for a new team to root for. I've been a fan for over 30 years and a serious football fan - meaning I care about them more than I care about the basketball team - for at least the last 10. I had season tickets for the last 10 years.

What do I have to show for that? Mostly some good times tailgating and a few decent seasons and a couple of big wins. The rest was mostly disappointment and a bit of anger. I'm not paying money for that.
"If this year dosen't show improvement, I may have to start looking for a new team to root for. " with all due respect sir, you were never a fan to start with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDHoss

fuzz77

All-Conference
Sep 19, 2012
12,163
1,423
0
Thus the problem. Take UT for example, where do you suppose that other $11M went? Just curious, but what portion of their total revenue went to support Football either directly or indirectly? Same with UK?
UT's total revenue was $121.8 million and they spent $24.5m on football or roughly 20%.
UK's total revenue was $110.5 million and they spent $19.1 million on football or roughly 17%.

However UT reports $94.4 million in revenue from football, UK reports $35 million. Please note that UK does not consider K-Fund and some other revenues ($46m) as football and/or basketball revenue whereas UT does report those monies as football/basketball revenues. It should also be noted that UK raises more K-Fund money from basketball ticket sales than from football ticket sales. But let's simply split the Kfund money down the middle and say that $23million was from football. Then one could say that UK spent 33% of football money on football whereas UT only spent 26%.

As always there are 100's of ways to look at figures and somebody can usually find at least one way to support whatever claim they want to make. All of the data is here.

Reporting Year: 07/01/2014 - 06/30/2015
 

Rhavic

Heisman
Dec 15, 2014
33,226
23,119
68
We seem like a better team under Stoops but:

Joker was 6-7,5-7,2-10 for a 13-24 record
Stoops is 2-10,5-7,5-7 for a 12-24 record.

That's a hard 6 years for some fans. I can understand why some fans are in a wait and see mode.
My greatest fear is we lose to S. Miss and then get beat at Florida. If that happens the attention of a lot of fans will shift to basketball. If they turn around and then lose to USC and Alabama then we are playing Vandy at home with a 1-4 record. I was at the 40-0 loss Jokers last year. The crowd was pretty bad to say the least. I fear a repeat of that crowd.

Beat S. Miss and the rest will take care of itself. You keep the crowds hope alive with optimism for wins against Missouri, Miss St. and Vandy.

Do you know why we seem like a better team under Stoops but have a worse record?

Because under Stoops, we've consistently gotten better, even last year despite having the same record as we did in 2014, the team was visibly better, and with some better offensive playcalling, would have very likely went to a bowl game. Conversely, we consistently got worse and worse under Joker. he started with Rich Brooks's guys, and after a season with them, he essentially burned the program to the ground.

One thing is certain though, if kids watch UK football games, and see an empty stadium in football, but a full arena in basketball, they're going to say "Same old Kentucky", stop coming, the talent coming in dries up, the team gets down on itself, and we all know the rest because we've been there.

UK football fans want to say "We're the best because we support our teams in good times and bad", but even when times are rough, yet clearly getting better, people want to quit because it's not being done at a pace that satisfies them.
 

rmattox

All-Conference
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
4,006
0
UT's total revenue was $121.8 million and they spent $24.5m on football or roughly 20%.
UK's total revenue was $110.5 million and they spent $19.1 million on football or roughly 17%.

However UT reports $94.4 million in revenue from football, UK reports $35 million. Please note that UK does not consider K-Fund and some other revenues ($46m) as football and/or basketball revenue whereas UT does report those monies as football/basketball revenues. It should also be noted that UK raises more K-Fund money from basketball ticket sales than from football ticket sales. But let's simply split the Kfund money down the middle and say that $23million was from football. Then one could say that UK spent 33% of football money on football whereas UT only spent 26%.

As always there are 100's of ways to look at figures and somebody can usually find at least one way to support whatever claim they want to make. All of the data is here.

Reporting Year: 07/01/2014 - 06/30/2015

Good info. Is it safe to say the Kfund $ is split? I was of the impression it also supported other sports. As for Football expenditures: does that reflect money spent on renovation of the stadium? If so that may put us further behind schools that were ahead of us on stadium improvements.

How do UK's expenditures compare with other SEC schools? Money does not solve all ills, but financial commitment to a sport is the beginning of truly supporting a program. As a Football only fan, spending less than any other SEC school on Football demonstrates something other than total commitment. If that was to happen, they could charge any price they wanted for tickets.
 

GoCatsForever2k15

All-Conference
Jun 7, 2015
3,082
1,895
0
Do you know why we seem like a better team under Stoops but have a worse record?

Because under Stoops, we've consistently gotten better, even last year despite having the same record as we did in 2014, the team was visibly better, and with some better offensive playcalling, would have very likely went to a bowl game. Conversely, we consistently got worse and worse under Joker. he started with Rich Brooks's guys, and after a season with them, he essentially burned the program to the ground.

One thing is certain though, if kids watch UK football games, and see an empty stadium in football, but a full arena in basketball, they're going to say "Same old Kentucky", stop coming, the talent coming in dries up, the team gets down on itself, and we all know the rest because we've been there.

UK football fans want to say "We're the best because we support our teams in good times and bad", but even when times are rough, yet clearly getting better, people want to quit because it's not being done at a pace that satisfies them.

Kentucky fans have shown time and time again that they'll match or exceed what should be expected of them relative to team success, especially if you put just a remotely competitive team on the field. Indeed, we've been top 30 in attendance in each year under stoops.

We're still getting blown out for a ~quarter of our season. Scraped by the majority of the cupcakes on last years schedule. Losing to our instate rival year after year. Rarely beating objectively good teams.

Stoops and company have recruited better than any uk staff in my lifetime, and I hope that translates into W-L success so that we keep them around for a long long time, but pretending like this staff has shown enough on the field to warrant much stronger fan support than they're getting at this point is really silly.
 
Last edited:

Tskware

Heisman
Jan 26, 2003
25,130
21,640
113
Stoops and company have recruited better than any uk staff in my lifetime, and I hope that translates into W-L success so that we keep them around for a long long time, but pretending like this staff has shown enough on the field to warrant much stronger fan support than they're getting at this point is really silly.

Hard to argue with that really. Frankly, Stoops have had a lot more facilities to recruit with as well. But still, it is really hard to see the great leap forward on the field. As just one example, Phil Steele chooses four complete all conference teams for each conference , i.e., 1st team , 2nd team, etc., and includes specialists. In the SEC therefore, four complete teams is about 50 players or so, and he has TWO Kentucky players on it, Toth at 2nd team center and McGinniss at 4th team PK. Now that is just one man's opinion, but Steele is a highly informed opinion, and so where is all the great talent recruited by this staff? Even Vandy, Mizzou and USC have more players ranked on the first four teams by Steele than we do.

That being said, I will be in the stands for the opener. Just one more example of the definition of insanity . . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoCatsForever2k15

GoCatsForever2k15

All-Conference
Jun 7, 2015
3,082
1,895
0
Hard to argue with that really. Frankly, Stoops have had a lot more facilities to recruit with as well. But still, it is really hard to see the great leap forward on the field. As just one example, Phil Steele chooses four complete all conference teams for each conference , i.e., 1st team , 2nd team, etc., and includes specialists. In the SEC therefore, four complete teams is about 50 players or so, and he has TWO Kentucky players on it, Toth at 2nd team center and McGinniss at 4th team PK. Now that is just one man's opinion, but Steele is a highly informed opinion, and so where is all the great talent recruited by this staff? Even Vandy, Mizzou and USC have more players ranked on the first four teams by Steele than we do.

That being said, I will be in the stands for the opener. Just one more example of the definition of insanity . . .

I'll be there too. If nothing else, being a UK football fan builds character. :joy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: shutzhund

WildCard

All-American
May 29, 2001
65,040
7,390
0
I am very familiar with Title 9. Granted, as a Football (primarily)fan, UK goes overboard.
Not sure what you are saying here, ram. If you are saying UK goes overboard to support Title IX gender equity initiatives I have to disagree. The best data on this subject can be found here. I think the best single metric is the "scholarship money ratio" between men and women sports. Just grab bagging a few of UK's peers...

UK: 58:44 (The 1% difference is due to the somewhat rare men and women combined Rifle team. Per Wiki only 23 schools and just 6 P5 schools sponsor Rifle)

SC: 53:47
MO: 56:44
AR: 54:46
TN: 56:44
GA: 47:53 (That's right. More scholarship money for women than men)
FL: 49:51 (That's right. More scholarship money for women than men)
UofL: 50:50

There is little doubt in my mind UK could do a lot better here if they wanted to. FWIW, to my knowledge, while there have been some winning lawsuits by individuals against institutions, the Department of Education has never withheld a nickel of Federal funding for Title IX "violations". And that includes the recent "outbreak" of on campus sexual harassment or violence allegations which are Title IX violations.

Peace
 

know1

Heisman
Dec 8, 2002
12,855
14,923
0
Do you know why we seem like a better team under Stoops but have a worse record?

Because under Stoops, we've consistently gotten better, even last year despite having the same record as we did in 2014, the team was visibly better, and with some better offensive playcalling, would have very likely went to a bowl game. Conversely, we consistently got worse and worse under Joker. he started with Rich Brooks's guys, and after a season with them, he essentially burned the program to the ground.

One thing is certain though, if kids watch UK football games, and see an empty stadium in football, but a full arena in basketball, they're going to say "Same old Kentucky", stop coming, the talent coming in dries up, the team gets down on itself, and we all know the rest because we've been there.

UK football fans want to say "We're the best because we support our teams in good times and bad", but even when times are rough, yet clearly getting better, people want to quit because it's not being done at a pace that satisfies them.

I disagree. We looked worse to me last year. That is why I don't have tickets. If they'd truly looked better, I might have been back on board, but they didn't.
 

fuzz77

All-Conference
Sep 19, 2012
12,163
1,423
0
Good info. Is it safe to say the Kfund $ is split? I was of the impression it also supported other sports. As for Football expenditures: does that reflect money spent on renovation of the stadium? If so that may put us further behind schools that were ahead of us on stadium improvements.

How do UK's expenditures compare with other SEC schools? Money does not solve all ills, but financial commitment to a sport is the beginning of truly supporting a program. As a Football only fan, spending less than any other SEC school on Football demonstrates something other than total commitment. If that was to happen, they could charge any price they wanted for tickets.
It is safe to say that all K-Fund money goes to fund sports other than football and basketball. My comment was about from where the money is derived. The great majority of K-Fund money comes from football and basketball season ticket holders who are required to contribute in order to purchase their season tickets. The new suites and club areas in the stadium will result in more K-Fund money but won't show up as increased football revenue.

For UK, stadium improvements are not figured into these numbers. It is noted "Total Expenses in this report differ from those reported to the NCAA due to the exclusion of debt service ($6.945M) as well as a contra-revenue in the NCAA report ($901K) that is reported as an expense in this report. Total NCAA reported expenses for FY15 are $115,917,932."

No other SEC school I viewed had any notes stating any exceptions. That likely means that they roll in those figures into their EIA (Equity in Athletics) reporting and therefore inflate their expenditures in relation to UK.

UK is nearer the bottom than the top for football expenditures although if debt service was rolled in they would be nearer the middle of the pack. Mississippi State does spend less. Also when looking at expenditures as a measure you must note that not participating in a bowl game reduces expenditures (and revenues).