Attendance For 2013 (All-SEC)

[VFL1800FPD]

SEC football attendance 2013 | Saturday Down South

Ranked by % Capacity, UT comes in at a 11th in the SEC (#1 A&M with 105.49% somehow). HOWEVER, in terms of highest avg. attendance, UT comes in 2nd with 95,584. (#1 Bama with 101,505)

Not Bad. :hi::salute:

 

[BigBadVol]

I remember through the 90's and early 2000's we went several consecutive years with 100,000 plus. We never dropped below that number.

 

[oregonvol]

% of capacity is meaningless. How is it an effective gauge of attendance if it penalizes teams with larger stadiums? Ole Miss averaged 59K per game. They should never be placed 4 spots ahead of us (with 95K per game) for any useful ranking of attendance.

If you look at total attendance (which is the far more significant stat, because it suggests the number of tickets actually sold and the number of people actually there and cheering) then we are 4th, which is astounding for a team in its 4th straight losing season.

 

[VFL1800FPD]

% of capacity is meaningless. How is it an effective gauge of attendance if it penalizes teams with larger stadiums? Ole Miss averaged 59K per game. They should never be placed 4 spots ahead of us (with 95K per game) for any useful ranking of attendance.

I was confused about that when i first saw it too

 

[VFL1800FPD]

I remember through the 90's and early 2000's we went several consecutive years with 100,000 plus. We never dropped below that number.

Ya'll also had consistent success and a stadium that could hold up to 109,000 people. Now, we are stuck at 102,455, and the announced attendance will never be higher than that. So it was easier back then.

 

[jkleno]

% of capacity is meaningless. How is it an effective gauge of attendance if it penalizes teams with larger stadiums? Ole Miss averaged 59K per game. They should never be placed 4 spots ahead of us (with 95K per game) for any useful ranking of attendance.

If you look at total attendance (which is the far more significant stat, because it suggests the number of tickets actually sold and the number of people actually there and cheering) then we are 4th, which is astounding for a team in its 4th straight losing season.

I would disagree with saying % of capacity is meaningless. When our home games are nationally televised and there are numerous empty seats, it doesn't look good. I am shocked that we had 93% capacity per article. I don't think even the Ga game or USCe game had that. Oh well, times are changing and we will be back on top.

 

[Velo Vol]

% of capacity is meaningless.

It is what it is. It tells readers how full a stadium typically was.

If you don't care, you don't care. Some people do.

 

[Velo Vol]

I am shocked that we had 93% capacity per article. I don't think even the Ga game or USCe game had that.

It's tickets sold, not people at the game.

 

[oregonvol]

I would disagree with saying % of capacity is meaningless. When our home games are nationally televised and there are numerous empty seats, it doesn't look good. I am shocked that we had 93% capacity per article. I don't think even the Ga game or USCe game had that. Oh well, times are changing and we will be back on top.

It's pretty meaningless compared to total attendance (we're #4) and average attendance (we're #2). Those numbers gauge ticket sales (aka money) much better and that seems a bit more important than simply gauging how it looks on TV.

The thing is, they provide all the numbers - the average attendance, the total attendance, the % capacity, but then they do their rankings based on the least important stat? Just plain odd.

 

[bigeasy]

There is no way Florida averaged over 98% capacity

 

[Boca Vol]

Ya'll also had consistent success and a stadium that could hold up to 109,000 people. Now, we are stuck at 102,455, and the announced attendance will never be higher than that. So it was easier back then.

You question A&M being 105% of capacity but throw out the 109K figure for UT? UT's stadium has never had 109K in it! Those old figures are completely made up.