I didn't buy the student tickets this year honestly I couldn't afford it but I do want to go to a few games anyone know wr I can buy individual student tickets?
New Student Basketball Ticket Policy
I highly doubt you can get individual game tickets. But I'm guessing you can buy tickets off anoterh student and get them transferred to your MCard (like they were last year). It will probably be pretty easy to get tickets for you, as I'm guessing students who claim tickets to games they cannot make will sell them, to get someone to go, as not to incur penalties.
But will a student want to sell a student ticket to someone they don't know? What if they don't end up using it? That's your one strike.
Valid point. I'm honestly not sure. Maybe if you transfer your ticket to another person, the strike will go on them if they don't go.
So hypothetically, if they don't show up twice to games they had transfered to them, they won't be able to receive transfers in the future. it's probably not how they will do it. But that how i'd set it up.
I agree, but to be fair, I'd rather see you in the ticket office than Dave Brandon or Hunter Lochmann. The students will get punished for things that are not in their control.
I am actually furious about this. As a current student with season tickets, I dont even understand the policy? Can I claim tickets to every game? Also, if i cant attend a game, can I sell my ticket to someone else?
As some one who not only attended almost all of the home games but also games at indiana, osu, msu, the palace (both rounds) and the final four and championshp game, i do not understand why I do not have a gaurenteed ticket to every game this year.
Basically, how it works is that you get to claim tickets to games. If you claim tickets and don't use them twice, you lose your right to claim tickets. As far as I can tell, everyone can claim tickets to every game. I assume it will basically be whoever claims the tickets first. The MSU game is the only one based on attendance.
I agree with the anger, but to be fair, a lot of people will dump their tickets because of this and you are going to have no problem getting tickets to 90% of the games. The upper section wasn't filled for almost all of the home games last year. From what I can see, there will be 4 games that will be competitive: Arizona, Wisconsin, Indiana, and MSU. MSU is attendance based. Wisconsin and Indiana are later in the year so the hope is a ton of people are dropped by then. Not going to lie, Arizona will probably be chaos.
To me, if they had made all four of these games attendance based, the ticket system would be great because the seats would be practically full for every game. As of now, there's probably going to be a lot of angry students for some of these games.
I base my feeling about the Michigan Basketball student fanbase on observations I made from my three seasons of owning student basketball tickets:
2008/09 - very few students, lower expectations
2009/10 - bunch of students in the seats because of the year before's success
2010/11 - very few students in the seats because of the year before's failure
I assume this continued
It's not as automatic as football tickets are. For a lot of people it doesn't matter how good football is expected to be, they'll get tickets anyway.
For basketball, the blame is twofold:
1. the reactionary, judgmental fanbase
2. the athletic department for not realizing that we have a reactionary, judgmental fanbase
I like your dedication, I wish everyone had the same.
If there was any doubt that GA for football was more about overselling tickets than encouraging student attendance, the doubt has been erased.
This is absoluetly horrible. I'm a huge Dave Brandon supporter but this is just flat out greedy. You promised the kids tickets, you better provide them tickets. Let them sit in the upperbowl. I mean not providing a seat to 33% of the people that paid for one is a crime. Not allowing a student to attend the Michgan State game they paid for, just because they couldn't attend a Wednesday Night game on a school night. That is just wrong.
As an Alum, I am very disappointed and saddened.
I'd rather have Bo Pelini tell me to fuck off than what has come to us from our athletic department lately.
for all you students complaining - fine, just will be more seats for us "walmart wolverines" lol.
Yeah, that isn't our insult.
Also, the rule doesn't stand for regular ticket holders, you aren't expected to go to a Wednesday night game after work against middle of nowehere tech in order to see the MSU game
You make it sound like Tony Perkis is our new AD.
so this is what it feels like to agree with ghost of insert name here...
I never thought the day would come.
it feels so awkward. Does this make me an asshole, just because I agree with an asshole?
We've sucked from the teat of that meme for long enough.
you are wrong. That dude ruined multiple threads and got banned into submission and he is still here. I have no real feelings towards most posters here but Ghost is the worst. by far.
So D. Brandon. Lets say you just contracted with a company to build a new track. They start building the track but stop after 300 meters because f**** you.
I enjoy this post very much. Kudos.
As a current student who purchased tickets and attended nearly every game last year: Go fuck yourself, Dave Brandon.
As a student that has purchased tickets for the last 5 years and attended 99% of the games I concur
As someone who bought five years of student tickets when literally no one else was, who sat in an empty section in the maize seats for many a game for my freshman year because no one else showed up and I didn't feel like trying my luck sneaking into the bleachers, and spent the next three years in roomy bleacher seats that were half sold, indeed. Fuck you, Dave Brandon.
Overselling student tickets is bush league. Turning "will I get in tonight?" into a high-risk game is a ridiculous waste of students' precious time, and an easy way to piss off the people you expect to donate money to your Athletic Department in a few decades.
Wouldn't common sense dictate that when you get to 3,000 tickets sold, if 3,000 seats are available, you cease making them available for purchase?
All 3000 would almost never show up. Last year, we had games where we had probably around 1000 studnets there (weekday games against bad opponents), and then we had games the students showed up in force. This is a to account for the wildly varying number of studnets attending, so they don't give too many or too few seats to the studnets. You can oversell it because all, 4500 will almost never show up (except for certain big games).
They paid for those tickets, they should be able to decide what they want to do with them. If not a single student shows up for any game other than Michigan State, but they paid for those tickets, there should be an open seat for every single one of them. If you want to do a straight lottery system, where the students KNOW that they won't be able to get tickets to all the games and they pay ONLY for the games they attend, then fine. Announcing a new policy after students already paid full price for what they thought was a full suite of tickets, and then telling them to deal with it or you get a full refund, its 100% crap. Guarantee that this was in the works when they started selling them.
They can pass on the pop to someone else and buy a ticket to the msu game. When did this stuff become an inalienable right?
When they paid for it. That's generally how transactions work.
A) you have a receipt therefore you win? Sorry, offered refund is an out
B) it's always been that way? See every shift in increased popularity in sport
C) you only want to go to 1/3 the games but pay discounted rate by AMERICA? If its C, just be honest. You can't be bothered for body bags and want prime time. The problem is you, in several ways, hurt the program by doing so. And the program has chosen to stop that.
The argument that students "hurt the program" by not showing for every game is premised on the idea that the program, not the students is what Michigan sports is about.
There are plenty of sports franchises built around 'the program" already. Don't try to drag Michigan there.
And this has been the straw, for me. We need to get rid of Brandon and all those he has brought into the department.
Students seem to think sports is their bread and circuses. It's not. It was something for students to do together, and students started watching it to show their support. So the "program" was first in the chicken and the egg. Actually if you want something that caters to the fan it's actually pro sports that are designed that way.
Guaranteed that "when they paid for it" they entered into a contractual agreement... a contractual agreement that certainly in the fine print allowed for exactly this action.
That is generally how contracts with folks with lawyers on retainer works.
This will not solve the problem. 2000 more students are not going to attend the South Carolina States or even lesser Big Ten opponents because they oversold. It will still often be a mid-week game against a terrible opponent where the time could be better spent.
So then the new system would work perfectly. Not many students will claim that they will be at that game, tickets are then opened up for fans who want to see the games but can't go to other games for whatever reason.
I just don't think it will be enough students to justify booting kids from the marquee games where everyone will want to claim.
This doesn't seem as ridiculous as the initial reaction suggests. It seems that only 46% of the total number of student seats across all the games were filled last year, so hypothetically, overselling by 50% won't even compensate for half of that. This will definitely be an issue for a small number of popular games (maybe only one or two, frankly), but for the rest of the games, everyone that wants to go can go.
I actually really like this. I just graduated this year, and had tickets last year. I loved going to games, but it's very difficult to make them all. It showed in the student section too. It got to points where there were games where there were barely any studnets, to games like the OSU and Indiana games last year, where it seemed like half the upper bowl was filled with students. Essentially this makes it so you sign up for what games you are going to before hand, so they can alot seats accordingly. If you want to go to every game, you sign up for every game. Otherwise, you sign up for what games you make.
They have to add some sort of incentive or punishment to make people actually go to the games they claim. Otherwise, people could claim every game, and not show up to any of them, which would really screw the ADs numbers for how many seats to give students.
This is a much better system than other schools with popular basketball programs. For example, Duke uses a lottery system for its tickets, and you get what games you are drawn for. This way you could hypothetically go to all games, you just would need to claim them in advanced.
I don't see why it's a big issue. If you can't make a game, don't claim a ticket.
I'm assuming they'll have some system in place where you can give your ticket to someone else if you can't make it, or cancel your claim in advanced. It's essentially a way to punish no shows. Yes it sucks if you claim, and you can't make it, but barring an emergency, it would be really easy to avoid.
Even if you go to every other game there is a chance you can't go to a big game because you didn't "claim"a ticket. I would argue that by purchasing a season ticket you already "claimed" a ticket. Lets say they oversold the OSU football game by selling 165000 tickets. You don't get to go because ,although you already bought a ticket, you werenot quick enough to "claim" yours. The only way they think they can get away with this is because in their minds, "f*** them, they are just students.
Because I don't know my schedule for January yet...If I claim a ticket for a game in January and I can't go because of class or work (which I cannot know until November or so), then I'm totally screwed and can't claim any more tickets, and I miss out on the State game. All because Dave Brandon wants more money.
They promised 4500 students the right to see the MSU game. Now 3000 of us get to...seem fair?
You know how you guys were all pissed about the football GA policy? And remember how the old folks were all "deal with it, bro"?
I've spoken with the Old Guy Counsel, and we agree: NOW you can be pissed.
I am fully supportive of the new policy for football games. Hell, I even agree with reducing the student section. At least with that system, if you buy a ticket, you're getting a guaranteed seat. If I buy a ticket, I have the right to do whatever the fuck I want with it, because it's my money. To take away future season tickets, without a refund, because I failed to show up for another game is absolutely ridiculous and should not even be legal. This is either a greedy money grab, or another case of Dave Brandon attempting to test his limits, and piss students off enough that they'll get rid of them...whereupon they can sell those tickets to someone else. If you want to shrink the student section, shrink the student section. Don't pull this thinly veiled bullshit.
Everyone who is upset, make your anger known somehow. Twitter, email, phone, telling the Victors Club that your future donations are going elsewhere. I wish upvotes were back, some solid Dave Brandon jokes in this thread.
Was this a pure moneygrab or just complete ignorance by the athletic department? Which one is worse?
I'm still pissed about them moving hockey tickets to general admission.
In fairness, hockey was already mostly general admission for at least two years prior to that change.
It was for the most part, but at the lower parts of center ice I know that we stuck to our seats for the most part, as we had damn good seats and we lost those guarantees. I'm pretty sure with the new renovations, the nice seats we had ended up as not being part of the student section. Still very bitter.
Students don't get tickets to the OSU game this year for hockey so they can sell more premium seats because fuck students. And they made the student section smaller when it was packed every night...
As a victors club member, my frustration with Dave Brandon and his cronies have already affected my giving rate. I am 5050 at the moment if I am going to pay my PSL for 2014.
If you end up not paying your PSL, I hope you let the Victors Club and the Athletic Department know exactly why you're not paying. They need to know how their policies are affecting their customers and why people are making the decision not to renew.
Oh they will know...Dave Brandon's regime seems to be bent on screwing over the everyday fan in favor of the corporate donor.
I know people have listed Dave Brandon's email in the past, but I cannot find it (and of course he's hidden on the directory). Mary Sue Coleman's email is [email protected]. Hunter Lochmann's (Chief Marketing Officer, the one who broke the news to Central Student Goverment) is [email protected].
I've gotten through to Hunter on numerous occasions, just by calling the ticket office at 734-764-0247 and asking for him by name. The majority of the time you'll have to leave a voicemail, and he'll call back, but on the phone records it'll be the University switchboard so I can't give you his direct line.
You can contact the Development Office/Victors Club at (734) 764-7131 or [email protected].
Or you can raid your local Ann Arbor Torch and Pitchfork Co. /s
I had season tickets throughout the Ellerbe years and then they switched it to GA for my senior year. It was the opposite problem (not enough interest) but they still found a way to screw us.
The question is: given that 57% of season ticket holders attended any given game last year, what are the odds that students will actually be turned away? To make it even more specific, what percentage of the season ticket holders attended the marquee games last year? If they never got more than 66% (3000 of 4500) attendence at a non-MSU game, then it's not really a problem.
I don't see any difference between this policy and the airlines' policy of overbooking (although don't we all just love airline service?). Say they sold 3001 tickets for 3000 seats. Nobody would have a problem with it, because the odds that every single season ticket holder (or the person they sold it to) will show up is basically nil.
What people are enraged about, therefore, is the scale of the overbooking, not overbooking per se. I would hope that the AD has done some statistical analysis to ensure that 3000 seats is in fact above what we can reasonably expect student attendence to be, even for a marquee matchup.
If I'm wrong, however, I'll gladly raid Ann Arbor Torch and Pitchfork with everybody else.
When an airline overbooks it offers the person who got screwed a sweet deal. I don't see the athletic department offering free tickets in the future to make up for their screw up. Honestly I can't figure out how people can attempt to defend the athletic department on this.
Fun fact: it actually isn't required to offer you a sweet deal. They normally do so they can get volunteers and avoid an awkward situation. However, if nobody wants to bump, and they have to play "Uncle Sam wants you", you get nuthin.
The part I don't like is the fact that if you miss two games you said you'd go to, you forfeit the rest. Doesn't that seem a bit vindictive?
That's actually incorrect. What you're describing is Involuntary Denied Boarding situation and there is required compensation for that, which is actually a lot more than someone who volunteers in an overbooked situation (VDB).
The analogy would be that if they found you another seat in the arena, nearly as good as your student section seat than they wouldn't have to give you any compensation.
"No compensation is due if your airline finds alternate transportation that will get you to your next stopover point or final destination within one hour after the scheduled arrival time of your original flight. For flights getting you to your next point or destination more than one hour but less than two hours, cash compensation equivalent to 200% of the one-way fare on the flight you were bumped off to a maximum of $650. Flights getting you to your next point or destination more than two hours from the original time will net you cash compensation of 400% of the one-way fare to a maximum of $1,300."
I knew people who would purposely book popular flight times around the holidays for this reason. They were more flexible with their travel plans and about half the time would volunteerfor delayed boarding and either get an upgrade, a free ticket or some cash.
I'll concede both points.
I think, though, this reinforces the point that it's not the overbooking that is the problem, it's the way they're going about the overbooking.
The best part is that on April 23rd, they sent out an email that said that everyone who ordered by the May 3 deadline would be guaranteed a ticket. Does anyone have a screenshot of that mgoblue page (http://www.mgoblue.com/tickets/students-bkm.html) from then?
It looks like sometime between the deadline and May 22, they added this clause "Please note, due to potential demand and the very limited available seating in Crisler Center, there may be a limit on student tickets."
I'm not the best at this computer science stuff, so if it was there before the deadline, I'll eat my words. I hope someone has a screenshot though.
Loyal fans like me who went to all the games the last couple of years get fucked. Unreal.
Tis actually rewards your ilk....
everyone should just take up the AD on their refund offer, cause you know f them.
I don't really understand the outrage. As others have said, this is what a lot of big time basketball programs do, if you want a big time basketball program at Michigan you have to deal with the consequences of increased demand.
To take what A2 said a step further, Duke makes you camp out for 24 straight hours where anytime they blow an airhorn you need to run out of your tent and report for roll call. This is just to be entered into a lottery to get tickets and usually you get them for just a few games, and no guarantee what those games are.
Lets wait for the season to play out and see how many students are actually denied tickets to games they want to go to before we bemoan the total unfairness of the plan.
We made it to the title game. I get it. But we aren't Duke or even Indiana yet. Duke has been successful for a LONG time and Indiana has an insane fanbase in a basketball crazy state. Of course, as the team gets more popular and closer to elite status, ticket systems will have to adjust. But shit let's not be delusional and think we made the jump to elite that fast.
They oversold football in 1997 (my freshman year). Most of the freshman got 3 or 4 games. It sucked, but at least we got a refund for what we didn't get.
Do you still pay the full price regardless of how many games you claim?
Dave Brandon screwing students again. What a shock. Sell season tickets and then take them back? With no reduction in price? How the hell does it matter if the student goes or not? What on earth makes this maniac think this is OK?
I ordered 3 pizzas but they only delivered 2 since they don't think I'm hungry enough for 3. Well guess what I'm not paying for 3 f***i*** pizzas am I pizza boy?
Seriously, how can this stand?
Remember when Brandon hiked student ticket prices since "students needed to make more of an investment" and it wasn't "about money at all"? Well that worked for the Akron game, right? So where's the refund?
What can we do to get rid of this guy? Can you imagine what he'll "accomplish" over the course of 5 years? 10? When are we going to say enough is enough? Stop the madness!
So I've been going to nearly all the games for the past 3 years (which includes my freshman year, when we were projected to finish either last or second to last in the B1G) only to potentially not get a ticket because some dude that jumped on the bandwagon and probably can't name more than 3 players on the team clicked "claim" before me or something.
What a load of garbage.
My opinion of this is largely based on when the games are going to be available to claim. If they put the "start time" when I am in class, then I will be furious.
A positive aspect of this is that students who can't wait in line before the game (for instance, they could have class in the afternoon) will still be able to go to it. While it would have been better for them to stop selling tickets once they met capacity, this could have been a lot worse.
So I'm as anti-Dave Brandon money grab as anyone, but I really don't have a huge problem with it. If you go to the games (or make sure that someone scans your ticket) you say you will, you probably won't have an issue. If you say you aren't gonna go to games and don't go, you won't lose the ability to go to future ones, but you'll lose priority for the MSU game so you might miss that, which seems fair. Any student who is a big enough fan to be on mgoblog at 11 PM on a school night is probably not going to get screwed over by this policy.
If you're that irate about this, I'm sure you can ask for a refund, and probably they'll give it to you. It'll at least open up more seats.
Why is it a risk though? I feel like if your even halfway cognizant of what games you signed up for it really should not be a problem at all to avoid ever getting a strike against you. These are Michigan students, and this kind of organization isn't exactly rocket science. It should be pretty damn easy for any UofM student to handle.
And I can't make you see how this is right, but I won't put how I feel about it in such crass terms.
FWIW, I don't like a ton of what DB does. I think the general admission seating was poorly executed and could be better organized. I think that some people dislike change so much that they will flip out at any alteration in the world around them, even a necessary one. Something had to be done, plain and simple. No matter what happened people would have cried over it. If you're this pissed off about it, return your tickets and let someone else who wants to go have your seat, or stop whining.
Because it isn't right.
Invoking Bo while bitching about a policy that is in place bc too many of your peers only show up to bro up for big games is a joke. You look like a petulant child.
Consider changing your avatar to a maize and blue sheep or lemming.
If anyone disagrees with it Che they're just, you know, goin with The Man
Why you're standing up for ~1500 ppl/game who never show except for msu is beyond me. If you're a bball fan, this is perfect for you be you already go to games and you want your team benefiting from a full home crowd. You'd rather have no home student crowd advantage against an inevitable squeaker than god forbid your casual fan friend not getting a ticket
What about the student who didnt miss a single home game in 4 years of undergrad but is now in grad school so doesnt always have the time during the week to make every game? Should they be penalized and not able to go to the big games then?
I see ya, and I was in that boat of going to 5 years of games missing only 1 or 2 prior to grad school.
I was one of those 300 in the bleachers for every game of the Amaker-Beilein transition period. I still have ticket stubs to all those games - nearly a hundred.
You know what I did during grad school? I didn't buy basketball student tickets. It was tough, but that's life. I had to make a choice. Sure, I would have loved to go to Saturday morning games. But I knew I wasn't going to be able to make Wednesday 9pm games, so I didn't buy the tickets.
Sometimes you gotta make tough calls.
This post has nothing to do with this new policy, by the way, which I think is ok, but being handled poorly (late). However, I recognize that I was one of the undergrads that never missed a game and built my schedule around the MBB schedule so it would affect me the least.
And claimed any viewpoint not his was shitting on his grave. That's inherently a loyalty argument.
The core problem is the school could sell these prime tix for 4x the value they sell them to students and students a) don't use them, b) fail to provide a home court advantage as a result, c) resell them and/or d) don't reward the program with their attendance. This policy will affect who? Tom the guy who misses 5 games all season due to tests or Jeff, the guy who misses 15 but TOTALLY IS THERE FOR MSU DUDE BC FUCK THEM!
This is to avoid rampant StubHub/resale and gaping holes in the stands. Until the ticket office says the 1500 overage won't result in a refund of one game to 1500, I'm not seeing one issue.
No this is not to avoid rampant stubhub resale and gaping holes in the stands. Is about collecting 4500 ticket sales for 3000 seats. (and a policy to try to cover up this one - most important fact)
They didn't just oversell the bad games. They oversold all the games. They sold tickets for 4500 people to 3000 seats. People who bought tickets for the good games CAN'T go! I swear the ad office must be paying people to defend this policy because it makes no sense.
This is the major issue I see with this policy. I'm going to try to make sense of this with the car dealer metaphor that was being used elsewhere in the thread.
If you pay for your season tix, and you attend games, but the game you want to go to more than any other is MSU. For whatever reason, you are unable to secure a ticket for yourself for MSU. You receive a refund for the value of one student ticket, but the value of that particular ticket is in reality much greater than 1/17th of the total price of your ticket package.
Isn't this like paying for a car, but then you stand a chance of being told "Well, you can't drive during rush hour, but here's 1/24th of your money back since you can't drive for that one hour per day." If the primary reason for buying the car was so that you could drive home from work at five, it's nice that you can still take it to the store, but you are going to be pretty pissed that you can't drive at the time the car offers you the greatest subjective value.
Is my logic wrong? I'm happy to hear arguents to change my mind, but this is the primary issue I have with this policy.
Because even if you want to go to all the games - there is no guarantee that you can! It is a risk. Why are you missing this?
In theory, I agree 100%. However, if you went to most of the bball games last year, it's pretty clear that a huge number of students don't care about paying. I'm not even joking when I say that there were a serious number of unclaimed season tickets going into the Indiana game, which was the last home game of the season.
Not saying there won't be problems, but there is some logic behind it.
So you get a refund now on your tickets. If you don't use your tickets, then what does it matter that you already paid for them? What are you losing by not having the tickets for future games? If you do use your tickets, then you're getting your money's worth for them. Fact is I'm fairly certain we oversold tickets last year as well, it's just that since during a year where we spent the entire year in the top 10, we only had 46% student attendance. Other than the Arizona and maybe Indiana games, I doubt we'll see much problems with this policy.
That's a bad metaphor. I implies that whether or not you drive the car doesn't positively or negatively affect the dealership and other car owners. If you buy a ticket and you don't show up, then your wasting a seat that some other fan could have filled. It affects the other fans who are not students (or students who do not have season tickets). It affects the AD because it's money they could have made selling a different ticket and concessions/merch etc. It affect the fans and the team at the game, because people not showing up negatively affects the environment of Crisler Arena.
Furthermore, the last situation "I do everything I'm supposed to and get screwed over." is probably not going to happen. First priority is based on attendance and there just are not going to be 3000 students who attend every game. We can barely get that many to be there for kickoff for MAC football games, much less for South Carolina St basketball games on a weeknight.
Further, was it intended for regular use to take grandma to the store but instead used to taxi friends and take grandma when it was worth it?
See I can use weak metaphors too!
Just becuase you invested 40,000 in the car company doesn't mean the dealership has seen a penny, the dealership is an economically seperate entity than the car company.
(to break from the metaphor for a bit, I think student absolutely should be given free tickets. However, it should be noted that none of our tuition goes to the AD, rather it's its own economically seperate entity. However, if you would prefer our AD make less money, we could go with the Rutgers model, where almost everything their AD does is paid by the main university and tuition.)
Your right, because I wouldn't want to go to one of the best universities in the nation if I can't see every single basketball game. The sole reason why I attended UofM and paid my tuition was so I can get student tickets.
On a related note, why can't I watch an Olympics game for a discounted price or even? I just want to watch my fellow American citizens play for the country. I pay taxes, I should get cheap tickets.
Actually, you probably would if the Olympics were hosted in the US. I can't find anything about the 96 Olympics, but look at the 2014 World Cup. Brazilian citizens get a discount on tickets, and Brazilian students and senior citizens get a large discount on tickets. So yes, this does exist.
I really like that idea, but I don't think it's true. I remember looking up Salt Lake City Olympics tickets prices in 2002, and remembering them being super expensive (almost definitely no american discount). My guess is that Brazil is doing that so there are actually some Brazillian fans in the crowd, rather than having it be filled with fans from wealthier nations.
Also your 40k is for an education genius, not to act like a spoiled brat regarding sports entertainment. Does UM owe you a 12 pack of beer each Fri so you can capitalize on your 40k investment after classes.
Jesus do you make my degree look bad
A product that you've gotten at a severly discounted rate, that you could probably make up for in the investment by selling just three of the games next year.
What about alumni donors who've dropped your tuition plus 80k? Should they pay full price?
You're seriously throwing punches underwater man. Tuition is for a degree, not a discount card a la Sams Club
How about compared to me, a brand new alumnus? I just graduated this last year. I am as affiliated as can be and have contributed a ton of myself to our university in culture and tuition. I can't get student tickets for basketball this year, so if I want to go I have to pay full price, which to be honest, I can't really afford, as I plan on going to Med School, and will be swamped in debt without draining what little savings I have on full price tickets. I could afford a student ticket priced ticket, but as a student, I should not get one. And I agree with that.
However, if there is a game where a lot of students don't show up, I would much rather those empty seats be sold to fans like myself (I might be able to wing it to get a game or two if I can find cheap tickets).
So should kids on scholarship from the university be given the right to buy student tickets? They technically are not contributing financially to the school.
I should note, I whole heartedly think all students should get tickets at the same prices, and agree with your statement above. I was more just playing devils advocate to your prior comments.
That being said, I still think there is an overwhelming sense of entitlement (as Geaux Blue said, the bad kind) to your argument. As a student, you should get tickets at a cheap price, however, I think the fact that people feel that this is some sort of stone written contract that cannot be altered is silly. If you want to go to the games, then take 10 minutes and write your shit down, it wont be that hard and it will benefit everyone. If you want to play it by ear and risk losing your tickets, then yeah, that's your own fault for not acting in your best interest.
Once a year bc he cut a discounted check to a school his academics got him into
Uhhh that's how contracts generally work bro. You can't just unilaterally alter a contract and if you want to reneg on it and pull a fast one on me, I'm less likely to want to do business with you in the future.
OT, just want to see how small these comment boxes can go
I like where your head is at...
Also, Ghost is right.
College sports should revolve around the college students and every enrolled students who wants a ticket should get them well before alumni like my self... and all you wannabe wolverines, just be glad you have our school to follow, who never went here I don't even understand why you care...
People seem to be OK with setting the precedent of allowing Dave Brandon to STEAL from people. I imagine most people who are ok with that are not students. But just wait, he's coming for you. Until he gets every last dime...
You can't answer that still
It is easy if you will be honest.
People bought the tickets. There is no guarantee that they can go to all the games they bought tickets for. Their opportunity, and money, has been stolen.
So claim the tickets and go the games? I'm honestly not understanding the anger.
I mean the negative connotation, not that he's correct
4500 people bought tickets for 3000 spots. Just claiming a ticket will not guarantee me a seat. Just going to the games is not an option. What don't you understand about this?
And buy non-discounted game pack that includes MSU. Problem solved
You are obviously not the one getting screwed over. So you might as well say f*** the ones who are.
Your arguement has no empathy for the victims - yes victims. You should go into politics.
Are you seriously this dense?
Yes, yes he is. As is, inexplicably, the student government president.
Others, including Central Student Government President Michael Proppe, voiced support for the change.
Seriously, WTF. How in any way, shape or form is this good for the students? And this joker is supposed to represent them?
They should blame it on the SR Assoc AD, Chief Marketing Officer; Director of Ticket Operations, and Director of Marketing. They are the ones who made the decisions, not Dave Brandon.....
Dave Brandon is the head of the organization, so of course he'll get the brunt of the attention. If he didn't like what hte plan was he could've shot it down, he didn't.
But that's also why I included Hunter Lochmann (Chief Marketing Officer) in the blame and included his email. He is the one that broke the news to CSG, and I believe he was very responsible for this decision and many of the other student policies as of late.
Dave Brandon doesn't make the decision and most likely doesn't know about it because of his duties (Student ticket policy is not included in his duties, it's mostly up to the Director of Ticket Office and Director of Marketing). The final call is ultimately up to the Chief Marketing Officer which is Hunter Lochmann, not Dave Brandon.
Most likely not.
Every time you let the ticket office get away with something, they'll keep pushing the envelope. When you fight back, they give in.
MMB to Dallas, Giant Noodle, Advertising on Field Goal Nets.
I'm starting to believe that Dave Brandon just throws ideas out there and sees what kind of backlash he gets to see if he can go ahead with it.
The more he gets away with, the more brazen he gets. It's student tickets now, eventually he'll find a way to get more money out of the general public beyond the PSL, or the PSL will just keep going up.
Ugh. Michigan Difference indeed
I don't know how a student could know whehter he or she could attend a game when the game times haven't even been set yet and none of the students have schedules for winter term or know when exams are. Is there a separate 72 hour period for each game and when is it?
From my understanding, they'll be offered in pods and there will probably be game times announced by then. You won't have to say whether you can attend us vs Wisconsin right now when that's impossible to know based on schedule.
Ok now the reaction has gotten ridiculous. If you can't be bothered to even attempt to see the logic behind what the AD is doing here, your opinion is invalid. Sports are emotional by nature so I get that it attracts folks who express their emotions without thinking, but god damn, people. This is a good change.
Oh it's a wonderful change.
It's wonderful logic on the AD's side. We can sell something and then change terms post sale so we can make more money.
They can sell seats which have already been sold, and at a higher rate. So they get more money.
You clearly didn't read closely.
The arithmetic is not too hard here buddy. If you can't see what so many others here can, well, I give up. I'll leave it to somebody else to explain it to you.
The money doesn't exist until its fulfilled. They could also make less money conceptually by lowering student tickets or lowering admission or etc etc
You can't claim they're doing it to make more money when every student has an ability to fulfill the initial offering. They only make money when the students fail to fulfill the ticket offer - no strongarm or guaranteed gain exists. And again, short of the department not refunding student money for the 1500 for premium games, no gain takes place until students fail to claim their ticket
3000 claim tickets to Indiana
University gains nothing
The only gain comes from unclaimed tickets. If there's no refund process to cover gains made by general attendance, then this process begins. Until then, there's not.
There are guaranteed to be 1500 unuseable tickets for every game. This is a gain for every single game.
You are aware they did this anyway in prior years? The only difference is they never had a hard number of about how many people would show up, so there guesses were often innacurate.
If this is correct, then there will probably be less double selling not more. It's just making the double selling more transparent. I bet just about every ticket gets claimed though.
I'm confused by your last statement. Do you mean, every seat is taken? If so, thats what the AD is striving for, and thus they will have achiever their goal. If not, do you mean everyone will claim games that they do not attend? Thats what the AD is trying to prevent by giving the limit of two missed claims.
They have 3000 seats, but they're selling 4500 ($30,000). If any tickets are unclaimed by students, they'll be resold also. It's maximizing revenue by overselling with no penalty. If they wanted to be honest, they'd give all 4500 students that bought season ticket packages tickets, and get rid of 1500 single game tickets.
A) I'd be stunned if kids are forfeiting cash for unclaimed tickets or games they can't access because of sellouts
B) The severe discount provided by the University students removes all self righteousness behind it
The people left out are the ones who show up for 5 games. That's it. When people can show actual theft (non refunds for games students are forced not to attend), THEN it's the university "making more money."
I'll be stunned if I see the ticket office returning money for games that students don't claim, I can't see them giving money back. The discount is because this is COLLEGE ATHLETICS, this is originally a game played for the students, now it's being turned into a moneymaking opportunity.
And my point by saying them being honest is their quote from the April 23rd email guaranteeing students who ordered by the deadline "a seat." Not guaranteeing a seat if and only if you go to every previous game you submitted a claim for.
Theyve always oversold. It's why there's a random student section in the rafters sometimes. They're just expanding priority by they don't expect to be able to fit overflow anymore
Not following you. There have been 4+ sections in the upper bowl for students for at least two years now. That doesn't mean they've been overselling in years past.
This is 100% not true. There is absolutely no way the Athletic Department has "always oversold" student tickets. Put down the Kool-Aid.
Were you this pissed off about discounted student ticket prices when you were a student? Have you ever thought that maybe they're offered these prices because THEY'RE FUCKING YOUNG STUDENTS WITH NO REAL WORLD JOBS???
They're making more money by overselling the seats.
They can sell unfilled seats by students to other people. I don't really see this as a bad thing though, it gives more people a chance to go to the game.
I'm fine with the change (as you can see from my arguments above), but they will be making more money. Say only 2000 students sign up for Coppin St out of 4000 (bc 500 give back tix because of RAGE). total. Well the A.D still gets the revenue from all 4000 students who bought season tickets and then can sell the remainder to either non-season tix holder students or the general public. So total revenue is 4000 students + 500 new students + 500 general public (for the 3000 student section seats in the arena).
And if we're talking gains made by selling vacant, this works only to recoup potential value in those seats, which didn't even exist until a donation during the Amaker years that involved Athletic Dept flexibility.
But wait, they've never done anything! RABBLE!
No. They are forcing the fact that 1500 students who bought tickets for the MSU game can't go because they are not deserving. They are forcing 1500 students who bought tickets to sit at home because of some "test of fanhood". It is indefensible.
So what is priority seating based upon years of ticket purchases, or donations, or standing with athletic dept?
What would be better? First across the finish line? Then we'd hear that they're only in it for the money and how system was gamed by people looking to only go to 3-4 games. If the student section wasn't regularly half full, this wouldn't be a problem. Are you ok with a half-full, on avg, student section? Is that worth letting 50% never show up but get 3-8th row court side seats for premium matchups?
Are they overselling those tickets? If you can't oversell all of them - you can't oversell any of them.
Wtf does that even mean? They've already voluntarily sold the tickets for a price the AD unilaterally chose. There is no potential value to be "recouped" in those seats, which should be empty if the people who own the right to sit in them choose not to go. There should be no additional hoops to jump through for people who bought season tickets. The students did not buy a season pass to a website where they can click "claim" if they know they want to go far enough in advance.
If I decide not to use my season tickets, the seats will be empty, period. The guy who owns the seats next to mine, who sells every game but the big ones on stubhub in order to profit from his tickets, still gets to come to the big games. The students are supposed to have bought the same deal. They can't be retroactively treated as second-class citizens because the AD is unhappy it couldn't get away with charging them more to begin with. And fuck old Lochdog if he thinks otherwise.
The only reason they think they can do this is because f*** the students. If they oversold the OSU football game by 55000 and you bought a ticket - they aren't giving your money back. You are just screwed.
If you can't be bothered to look at the facts and say what the AD is doing is undefensible - your opinion is invalid.
Others have laid that out pretty clearly.
Are you mad because you hoped to leave an empty seat for 2/3 the season so you could go to 3-5 games?
Seriously - your arguements are tired. I am mad that I could go to all of the games but not the big games because they sold my ticket to someone else.
Ok I've seen this argument paraded several times, and I'll say it again. If you choose to go to all the games, you will get the big games. There are not going to be 3000 students who claim Coppin St or S Carolina St or whatever. If you go to every game, you will have top priority for the big games.
Aren't they only rewarding the students for the Michigan State game?
What happens for Arizona, Wisconsin, and Indiana?
The policy is not "if you go to every game, you will have top prority for the big games (that you already bought a ticket for)". It is not a carrot - it's a stick. Even if you go to all the games, there is no guarantee that you can go to the big games. Your argument is trying to deflect this basic truth.
The policy makes perfect sense and improves soemthing that is in inefficent (empty seats at games) except for the fact the ath. dept. is not refunding people for games they do not claim. If they are able to resell a ticket....in other words sell it *twice* then the student should recieve their X amount per game back. As it stands, they created quite the murky new revenue stream.
Fuck off, Hunter. (Obviously this was in response to only the first phrase of your post, but I'm leaving it here as a testament to how much that claim pisses me off.)
IU sold like 15000 student basketball tickets this year and they only seat 8000 students per game so I only get like half of the games. It could be worse for the students at UM.
Okay it could be worse but we were told we were getting guaranteed tickets for all the games.
If they tell us beforehand, much less outrage. When I buy a product, I better get the product I paid for, not 2/3 of it.
They told us we would get them all too. And they said it last year too and we got 2/3 of the tickets. The biggest benefit u have is that u can pick games u want. We get randomly assigned to the games we get. I didn't have tickets to the Michigan game in assembly hall last year and I didn't want to spend 400+ on one so I couldn't go.
I only received student tickets to half the football games in '97, so I say suck it up students.
I DO think students have a legitimate gripe if they are not refunded for games they cannot get tickets to. It doesn't explicitly say that students won't receive refunds to games not attended in that Daily article, so maybe they will.
Those who are complaining that they've attended every game since they started going to school 25 years ago and Brandon is screwing them over - it sounds like you're likely to get tickets to every game anyway, so stop whining.
Key issue...you weren't asked to pay up fron for 6 home games in 97 were you?
I think I did, and then I received a partial refund after the tickets were issued. I'm not sure why fronting the money is a "key issue"....
Because I'm willing to bet a substantial amount that students will not be offered a refund when they decline Coppin St. ticket.
If I'm wrong mea culpa...but we know this department far too well at this point right...
You received a refund for the games you weren't given a ticket to. Do you think the students will get a refund for the games they don't submit a claim for? I personally don't see the athletic department passing up that money by saying that they had a right to go to the games they just chose not to.
I can see students not submitting claims to games they're not sure if they can attend as they are scared of losing the privilege to go to games later in the season.
They have NEVER refunded students for unused tickets.
The questionable part of it that I see is the potential double selling of tickets.
They have always double sold tickets in prior years too. Students rarely fill up the student section (there was only a 46% attendence rate last year for students with season tickets), so in prior years they would estimate the number of students who would be there, and then sell the tickets. They never ran into problems with this until last year, when we started to get good and a lot more people showed up. If they didn't double sell tickets, then there would be about 1000-2000 empty student section seats at most non-major games.
Ok, I thought when you said "It doesn't explicitly say that students won't receive refunds to games not attended in that Daily article, so maybe they will." that you were talking about tickets they don't claim. I imagine a lot of games they will end up double selling those tickets as you say, and if it is to the general public, I imagine it will be at a higher cost (it has to be at least face value otherwise it hurts season ticket holders). The ticket office is just praying that there isn't a game where more than 3000 students claim a ticket.
P.S. John Navarre is the best.
I'll have to edit that. I meant if students are denied tickets they should receive a refund.
Until then these claims of not receiving X for Y are invalid
4500 people bought a ticket to the Michigan State game. 3000 people will actually get one. There will be no refunds for the other 1500. What, exactly, is unclear about that to you?
I think I know what the afterword for the paperback edition of John U. Bacon's Fourth and Long should be about...
Ironically enough, they undersold hockey tickets so they're still offering them to students.
In addition to obviously owing students who get denied tickets to the MSU game refunds. I don't see how it's conscionable otherwise.
Actually, I don't see how it's conscionable period, unless there are no single game ticket sales until students have a decent chance to make their claims.
Students who do not like the new policy can request a full refund, and the Athletic Department plans on emailing season ticket holders with an outline of the new process before the end of the week. If a student does not request a full refund, she will not receive a refund for games not attended during the season.
This is a mistake, at least a PR mistake. Due to the new policy EVERY ticket will be claimed and they'll have hundreds of students denied tickets to every game. If you think students are unhappy now, wait until they are shutout of every other Big Ten game without compensation.
Youre incorrectly tying unclaimed with unawarded. Tickets unclaimed are as good as stuck in your backpack. Unawarded demonstrates interest in game. Until the school says they're not compensating 1 game ticket $ for tickets claimed but unrewarded, you've got it wrong
Untrue. In previous years, you could sell the games you couldn't go to and recoup your cost for that game. Now that's a serious risk as the person you sell to can choose not to go to the game and affect your status.
If its a scalp effort or you're not actually making sure a quality ticket is used properly. Other schools kids take it as a grievous insult their student section isn't packed - UM students in this thread seem more concerned with getting their $16 back. I guess I'm in the crowd that doesn't actually believe this 2-3 claim error issue will become the apocalypse.
I can appreciate a measure of trying to make Crisler full, but I don't know if this is the right way to do it. It seems like more of a money grab, the way to make sure all students show up is to switch to a Breslin Center type setup. The situation doesn't really address (or maybe it does, I'm not sure about how it affects this system) waiting in line for over 8 hours for good seats to a marquee game and how much that sucks. As much as I love Michigan basketball, I don't particularly want to go to preseason cupcake matches, but now I am required too for the MSU game. Also, this in no way guarentees 3,000 strong turn out for South Carolina State. The overhand method of selling AND implemeneting the design afterward is pretty low.
Come and go. Consider the 20 mins to Crisler an investment of avoiding 8 hr lines and walk in, scan and bolt. That will expose the flaw of presumed enthusiasm in this policy
Not a bad idea, actually. The man is thinking. I worry I'll walk in and see a GR3 dunk and be drawn away from my homework, but I guess that's a risk I'll have to take.
Don't even bother walking. Just team up with a friend, and have one drive while the other goes in and scans both tickets.
DAVE BRANDON WORKING WITH AREA GAS STATIONS TO FIX PRICES, SCREW STUDENTS
If they really want to prove a point, they should do something like a silent protest that was done in the German Bundesliga last year. It would get people's attention. I wouldn't have a problem with it, as long as they were louder the rest of the game to make up for it.
Should they have just sold the first 3000 tix first come first serve and all you diehards could've fallen victim to not getting tix while casual fans, scalpers only showed up to 1/3 the game or would you prefer to guarantee a spot by being consistent fan. That's the split. It's not about anything else - I have no problem with the athletic dept getting fed up with seeing prime seats wasted bc kids wanted to go to 3 games and the idea they oopsed 1500 seats and this is their solution is idiotic.
Or I don't care. Your lack of a rational answer to a simple question you should be able to knock out of the park is telling. Or does your tuition bill exempt you from coherent discussion.
Rational is not selling 4500 tickets to MSU when only 3000 are available. Agains your "test of fanhood" sucks. Does your lack of tuition bill excempt you from thinking?
Your interest in severely discounted tickets intended for people who want to spend a season cheering on their team is non existent. Instead, you're interested in severely discounted tickets to key matchups you feel like going to bc others tell you they're a priority.
You are proving my point. (Just saying that does not mean anything)
By setting up straw arguements for what I will or will not attend, you are trying to paint every student as only showing up for four games. I attended every home game the past two years. Despite me buying the tickets - there is no guarantee that the ticket I bought will be honored.
Severely discounted? That has absolutely nothing to do with anything. I bought tickets to every game - I am not guaranteed a seat to every game.
We're a long way from the dark ages of the Amaker/early Beilein era. My senior year, there were less than 500 student basketball ticketholders. Like, far less than 500. The bleachers were sold to the general public. This is unbelievable.
Would 4500 students buy tickets or throw a fit if the seats were in their original location, pre-donation? I bet the Athletic Dept would love to reclaim those as a compromise and sell them at face value...
Ahh, Michigan Athletics taking a page out of American Airlines' playbook. Nice, can I get bumped up to a club seat @ a better game?
Not giving people what they paid for is not good. Not compensating them over and above what was initially promised (almost like saying sorry) is like a slap in the face saying we don't care. Especially to students. "College" basketball, right? I'd expect the AD to hear a ton of negative backlash and eventually spin this into some kind of positive. Maybe a lottery? Winners get their tickets as promised but those not picked get a sweeter deal to maybe a few select games (tickets/travel to Puerto Rico or NCAA Tournament)? and giveaways. Jerseys, basketballs, club seats - whatever, just not the M-Den Teddy Bear
I hope they remembered to reserve seating for the Band. Then again, I also heard it might be too expensive to transport the band from Reveli to Crisler. =)
People should get to go to Puerto Rico because they don't want to attend non-attractive opponent match ups?
The AD isn't screwing anybody but the students. If the same policy were in place for everyone - maybe the logic (or lack thereof) would be apparent to everyone.
Doesn't get $100+ tickets for, what, $20/game? They also tend to show up for what they paid for, which recent student attendance numbers show isn't happening
Tend to? Sorry students don't get to tend to anymore. The rest of the spectators do.
Paying more for the tickets should not entitle you to different rules about attendance. You have a ticket - you should have a guaranteed seat.
I am not sure it is accurate that the rest of the spectators are any more dedicated than the students are in their attendance. The student tickets carry restrictions that make it much more difficult to transfer the ticket than a non-student ticket. A student cannot send an email to everyone at her office and say "Free Basketball Tickets to South Carolina State - First Come First Serve" and give them away. Student tickets cannot be sold on StubHub and it would be extremely difficuilt if not impossible to sell them to someone on the street.
It would be interesting to see the reaction if non-student tickets could not be transferred and if the holder had to claim their attendance in advance and lose their tickets if they fail to show up.
I think the students are being picked on because they have nowhere else to go.
Aren't we supposed to be encouraging them to study rather than wait outside in cold weather to go to a basketball game?
There has to be a way to fill up the seats in a way that is more respectful to the students.
Tend to? Sorry students don't get to tend to anymore. The rest of the spectators do.
Paying more for the tickets should not entitle you to different rules about attendance. You have a ticket - you should have a guaranteed seat.
If you don't think students should be a part of the college game experience - become a Piston's fan.
Oh I'm sorry, did we all miss those 3 game packages to buy tickets? The only choice they give us is "all or nothing." If you wanted Notre Dame and Ohio State for less than $500 dollars this year, then you paid $300 for the rest of the shit games they'll play at home this year. If they want students to use every ticket, then sell game tickets individually.
DB loves the shitstorm. He doubt is relishing in this thread right now.
That sounds paranoid. First, this is hardly a "shitstorm" - 99% of the general public won't know or care. Second, why would he want bad publicity from students, who are current and potentially future customers?
It's far more likely that Brandon neither came up with this plan himself nor is personally monitoring the reaction. The man's got 27 sports programs to oversee. He's got a lot on his plate.
So when do tickets for the public go on sale?
Honestly, this is a good idea. Student attendance hovered around 57% for most games last year (barring the big ones, of course). So if that rate remains relatively stable, an assumption I know, that means that of the 4500 ticket-holders, roughly 2500-2600 would be in the stands during any given game. It's a smart way to increase student attendance.
It may be bad for big games (and probably really only against MSU).
It's a dirty way to make more money.
Honestly, this is a good idea. Student attendance hovered around 57% for most games last year (barring the big ones, of course). So if that rate remains relatively stable, an assumption I know, that means that of the 4500 ticket-holders, roughly 2500-2600 would be in the stands during any given game. It's a smart way to increase student attendance.
It may be bad for big games (and probably really only against MSU).
believes apathy is costing him money and is hell bent to make the students pay for it.
I was a student season ticket holder for BBall for the 1989-1993 seasons (yep, also went to the infamous "time out" Final Four). The Fab Five years they moved to general admission for students tickets (meaning in the middle of December we were camping out at Crisler Arena for reasonable seats to the Duke game) and still had so many people wanting tickets that my last season they split the season, so student season ticket holders actually only got half the games (either Indiana OR MSU - at that time OSU was *meh)
This new plan actually seems like a more reasonable alternative than what I experienced in the early 90s.
My guess is that they sold you tickets for half the games. Not that they sold tickets for all the games to you and then said that you could only attend half.
I know, the current students could get lucky and be able to go to all of the games that they bought tickets for. But they might not.
we originally thought we were buying for the whole season, but then we only got half the season - but the ticket package only cost 1/2 as much...
was not meh. They won the Big Ten one of the two years the fab five was together and lost to the Fab Five in a regional final.
What the president of CSG (Central Student Government) wrote about the policy: basically, he's in favor, as he sees it as a reasonable option given the issues and alternatives I happen to agree with him completely.
To everyone who is complaining, what is your solution to 4500 tickets being sold for only 3000 spots?
The only thing that really sucks about the whole thing is the way they sprung it on everyone, in the middle of September, only about a month before the season starts. It should have been communicated ahead of time, and it probably will be going forward. Then, they didn't know there was going to be any issue in April (five years ago they were selling 450 student season tickets, not 4500).
My solution - don't sell tickets that you don't have.
In addition - give all of the student's 1/3 of their money back. On average - it would be fair. Sitting on the money while saying "oops" is saying "sorry we screwed up but take it".
Don't misconstrue that by being fair it doesn't still suck.
So you think that turning away 1500 potential customers (now and in the future) from all games is better than turning away a far smaller number from a selected few games? Let's be real, I bet there will only be over 3,000 tickets claimed and used for a handful of the total number on the schedule. I'm honestly curious if you think that's better.
Remember, the goal isn't only to make money. They athletic department is trying to encourage student attendance and enthusiasm. Obviously just selling tickets isn't enough, as evidenced by the 46% attendance rate last year.
I think that collecting money for things that can't happen is wrong. I would be arrested for the same thing.
If the point is try to encourage student attendance and enthusiasm, listen to the students the next time Dave Brandon is introduced.
You didn't answer the question though. Is flat out denying 1500 students better than giving everyone who wants one a chance to go to the games?
Also, they do admit to breaking the contract, which is why they are offering an out. If anyone doesn't like it, they can get their money back. If they accept the new terms, then they accept them, end of story.
"So you think that turning away 1500 potential customers (now and in the future) from all games is better than turning away a far smaller number from a selected few games? Let's be real, I bet there will only be over 3,000 tickets claimed and used for a handful of the total number on the schedule. I'm honestly curious if you think that's better."
I will try to answer.
If only 3000 students had tickets and their was a demand for 4800 tickets, these tickets would be used if they could be easily transfered. Student tickets are not easily transferred.
There are no restrictions for non-student ticket transfers so they are easy to get rid of.
The solution should be to allow free flow of the tickets. The answer that was chosen maximizes revenue.
Can you explain that again? I don't follow at all. How did we jump from not having enough seats for students who want to go to transferring tickets to non students?
He's made no sense all thread. He wants 1/3 refund now
I do listen to the students, also when they boo the announcer who says the drinking age is 21, when they chant you suck toward the Air Force Academy, after being begged not to. I listen to what happens in Yost after Red told them not to swear so much, and who still didn't show up at games on time or at all even after Denard, Devin, or Brady asked them to. Pardon me for not really respecting the mob opinion of that group.
So - you hate students - I got it.
Down in Front!!!!
Become a Piston's fan if you don't want student interference!
I can understand people being upset about the timing; they probably should have made this clear last spring. However, they are offering refunds to students who are unhappy.
Let's give this a shot before we condemn it. Basketball honestly had even worse problems with student attendance than football did last year.
Offering refunds to unhappy students does not help the student who is unhappy but wants to go to all the games that he bought tickets for.
The policy should be condemned because the Athletic Department is sitting on money selling things that they have no intention of providing.
"but the Athletic Department’s policy assures that every student will be able to attend the games they want, as long as they purchased the season ticket package."
I'm torn. On the one hand student attendance was awful for basketball and keeping fans who want the tickets out. Not just awful games, but good games like Arkansas on a Saturday afternoon that had the whole student upper deck sections empty. Then the ticket office has to say they can't sell more seats for the games because they're claimed.
But I don't know if this is the right way to go about it. At the very least I'd flip flop it around that if you show up for those December baby seal games you get first priority for the MSU's of the world, and not keeping you from getting a ticket if you don't attend. Make sure the student who goes to every game gets in the good games first and for sure. And frankly in the age of computers it shouldn't be that hard to track and issue those people better seats You show up for East Hampton's School for the Blind (and the rest)? You're in the front row against Indiana.(And if you haven't shown up for a game before the Big Ten season? Good luck getting to see OSU this year; you'll need it.)
This should maybe be in a different place so it gets noticed...
Students (well, some, maybe) kinda knew something like this was coming. 4ish years ago I was in a meeting with various exec-types and Brian Townsend. Beilein stopped by to say thanks to us for our attendance and hard work in creating a great atmosphere. I was invited not just because I was a part of the Maize Rage but also because I attended many other non-profit sports. Many of the bigger Maize Rage people at the time were also invited.
They were talking about a claim system then. They knew this was giong to come up at some point and were studying how many other schools handled it. They've done their research. They were very specific in that they did not want any kind of tent-city Beilein-ville.
Now, I don't know how much I like this. I know it wouldn't have affected me since I was at every game. However, it should have been rolled out better. A slight change in tone changes everything
When you buy season tickets, you're buying for everything except MSU, IU. Then, 3000 tickets to those games will be distributed to the students who had the best attendance. If there are more than 3000 students that attend every game (ha), then single-game tickets are not sold and the students get them. Single game tickets can be hold and sold the first few days before anyway.
Bam, same policy, basically, just worded differently and given to the students with fair warning. That's the real problem here; the lack of transparency, not the policy itself.
I've waded through all of these posts and this is the most sensible, fair thing I have read so far. Too bad the actual policy is not this clear.
The subjective value of each ticket is not equal. Getting boxed out of the MSU game and getting a 1/17th refund is not an equal transaction to being unable to attend a non-con game because the value of that MSU ticket is much greater.
I'm an alum, but if I were a current student and I only got an equal fraction of the money I paid for my ticket package back for the game that makes up 1/4 of the reason I bought the package, I'm would not be happy.
Am I missing something that makes this argument fall apart? If so I'm interested in hearing it. But I think this is a major problem with the new policy.
This practice has been used by SEC schools for football for a long time. You only get marquee games if you've gotten tickets previous years and been to the games. I think it is a great way to make sure the students are there for more of the games. However, I think they should also give them the ability to get tickets in an upper bowl section if they end up with too many by the time the big games come around.
I just don't get why we need to find more and more ways to take student athletics away from the students while simultaniously insulting them for being lazy, or selfish, or whatever. College athletics should not be about treating the actual college people like garbage. Other schools that treat their students poorly in no way justifies treating our students poorly.
This is a University that claims to hold itself to a higher standard claiming to be "the leaders and best." Well, leaders and best don't race to the bottom just because others put together a couple nickels by setting up shop there.
This expediency for currency isn't just an attack on the students, it's an assault on all of us as alumni, because it tarnishes what the University is supposed to stand for. Our athletic department may not be hiding the type of bodies you'd expect to dig up in the SEC, but more and more they're dirtying their hands. We can't high five this behaviou and expect to keep clean ourselves.
Someone should develop an app that logs you in as soon as the 72 hour window opens and makes your selections. I could see my forgetful ass failing to log in quickly and be number 3,001.