Season Tickets ? - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 24, 2005

RE: RE: Season Tickets ?

Date: Mar 24, 2005

I have read on this board that your president goes to the football games. Does he go to the theatre productions and concerts?

Date: Mar 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Just an opinion
"I just thought of a possible solution to this whole mess. Here are some things Shelby wants: (1) mass adulation (2) extreme visibility (3) no contradiction or questioning while he is doing his job (4) a job that lets him jump up and down and yell a lot So . . . why not make him the mascot of the football team? "

I heard Notre Dame is looking for a new mascot.

Date: Mar 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Not on site
"I have read on this board that your president goes to the football games. Does he go to the theatre productions and concerts?"

I'd like to know the answer to this one. I never understood why attendance at football games is viewed as support for the university. I have always enjoyed other on- campus activities and I believe my attendance at those events is just as much indicative of my support of the university as attendance at a football game.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

The idea that not going to football games in some way "punishes" student athletes is ludicrous. No one, especially not faculty, is under any obligation to support university athletics--which is, despite what is claimed for it as a builder of character etc., nothing more nor less than entertainment. And USM is not the alma mater of most faculty members; hence, the "loyalty" that is invoked when faculty are pressured to purchase football tickets is illegitmate. Whatever "loyalty" faculty members might formerly have felt toward the school has been systematically destroyed by Shelby's unrelenting attacks on their dignity as human beings and professionals. There was a time when the atmosphere on campus was "we're all in this together, through thick and thin," and some kind of loyalty might have been a meaningful concept then. But is ain't now.

The political reason NOT to purchase tickets and attend the games is that it is the same crowd who become so rabid over football that are behind the organized effort to denigrate faculty members and turn USM into a technical institute. Good attendance (what is that, now, 14 or 15 thousand?) will simply become another flagged point on some list of how wonderful things are at USM, despite what the pinko professors say. (Bower is perhaps caught in the middle, as someone has said, but he's a grownup, and he has a choice as to what he'll do with his life and his career. In fact, since he's a millionaire many times over and doesn't need the job to keep the wolf away from the door, he actually has more economic freedom than most faculty do. He's a member of the university just as the faculty are. Why is he exempt from fighting the good fight against Shelby's depredations anymore than anyone else?)

And as for going around to their tailgate parties and discussing shared governance and academic excellence with them, what have you been smoking? The issues aren't discussable with most of these people in any venue whatsoever, and certainly not at a tailgate party. A Bible salesman would be more welcome.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Say What?
"The idea that not going to football games in some way "punishes" student athletes is ludicrous. No one, especially not faculty, is under any obligation to support university athletics--which is, despite what is claimed for it as a builder of character etc., nothing more nor less than entertainment. And USM is not the alma mater of most faculty members; hence, the "loyalty" that is invoked when faculty are pressured to purchase football tickets is illegitmate. Whatever "loyalty" faculty members might formerly have felt toward the school has been systematically destroyed by Shelby's unrelenting attacks on their dignity as human beings and professionals. There was a time when the atmosphere on campus was "we're all in this together, through thick and thin," and some kind of loyalty might have been a meaningful concept then. But is ain't now.

The political reason NOT to purchase tickets and attend the games is that it is the same crowd who become so rabid over football that are behind the organized effort to denigrate faculty members and turn USM into a technical institute. Good attendance (what is that, now, 14 or 15 thousand?) will simply become another flagged point on some list of how wonderful things are at USM, despite what the pinko professors say. (Bower is perhaps caught in the middle, as someone has said, but he's a grownup, and he has a choice as to what he'll do with his life and his career. In fact, since he's a millionaire many times over and doesn't need the job to keep the wolf away from the door, he actually has more economic freedom than most faculty do. He's a member of the university just as the faculty are. Why is he exempt from fighting the good fight against Shelby's depredations anymore than anyone else?)

And as for going around to their tailgate parties and discussing shared governance and academic excellence with them, what have you been smoking? The issues aren't discussable with most of these people in any venue whatsoever, and certainly not at a tailgate party. A Bible salesman would be more welcome."

The attitude expressed in this post is what has kept Thames in office moreso than whatever precieved support he has. The fact that many would rather alienate those who could help than try to reach them has doomed your plight from day one. This is the attitude that has led many to believe the faculty needs to reigned in, and put in their place.

Keep it up, give in, give up, and Thames will be here as long as he wants.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kudzu King
" The attitude expressed in this post is what has kept Thames in office moreso than whatever precieved support he has. The fact that many would rather alienate those who could help than try to reach them has doomed your plight from day one. This is the attitude that has led many to believe the faculty needs to reigned in, and put in their place. Keep it up, give in, give up, and Thames will be here as long as he wants."

I'd still like to know why buying a ticket to a football game is viewed as support for the university. Is attending other USM events treated accordingly? My question deserves a specific, not generic, response.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

Understanding the mind of Dr. Thames is a key to understanding the value he places on individual contributions to athletics. (1) Polymer Science is able to generate outside money without outside contributions. (2) The athletic department cannot generate outside money, can't make a new paint. (3) Since this is his frame of reference academics should be self supporting via outside money. This may be why he did not attend the ceremony at COB for the $1Mill. Contribution. He may have felt this contribution would have been better made to athletics, since they cannot help themselves, and that the faculty in COB could have all the money they want if they will do applied instead of ivory tower research.

Keep in mind Dr. Thames is a scientist first. A logical deduction from a flawed premise is still a logical deduction.

An historical question. Didn't faculty members at one time take up tickets at ballgames? When and why did that stop?

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kudzu King
" The attitude expressed in this post is what has kept Thames in office moreso than whatever precieved support he has. The fact that many would rather alienate those who could help than try to reach them has doomed your plight from day one. This is the attitude that has led many to believe the faculty needs to reigned in, and put in their place. Keep it up, give in, give up, and Thames will be here as long as he wants."

“K.K.” and “Say What?” are now getting to the heart of the matter for my wife and I. My wife is thinking like K.K. and I'm thinking like Say What? So I'm going to need some clarification to clear this up.

K.K., what do you mean by "The fact that many would rather alienate those who could help than try to reach them has doomed your plight from day one." ? How is my not attending football games "alienating" anyone? How do I "reach them" by attending games? It has already been pointed out that others and I won't feel comfortable bringing up "shared governance issues" at a tailgate party and ruining all the fun. If you could clear up these ideas for me it would help me understand your position.

K.K., your earlier post was very helpful, but when we look closer "the devil is in the details". Remember the goal is not to give SFT any support or numbers that he can use as PR. My only reservation is I don't want to hurt Bower also. This may be the deciding issue for me, but not the rational you provided.

Thanks again for you help, and all the posters.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: USM supporter
"I'd still like to know why buying a ticket to a football game is viewed as support for the university. Is attending other USM events treated accordingly? My question deserves a specific, not generic, response. "

Sure, any event or activity that you take part in is a show of support for the University. That is why I am a Pride Club member as well as an Eagle Club member. That's why I have tickets to Placido Domingo, and attend many arts events on campus.

But, if you can convince me that you will be more visible at one of those events than at a football game, with 28,000+ fans (not 15,000 as some uninformed individual mentioned), please do so.

Bottemline, even though you and I enjoy those arts events very much, it's evident that we are in the minority.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by: stephen judd
"I think we should be proud that our athletes are graduating at a relatively high rate . . . . . . .

Aren't all students expected to graduate at a relatively high rate? If not, then something is seriously wrong with our admissions criteria. Should an athletic program receive special commendation for this "accomplishment?" After all, this is an institution of higher education and not the NFL.

I think we should be proud that our programs have stayed pretty clean over the years . . . . . . ."

Aren't our academic programs expected to stay clean also? Should we give our academic programs special recognition for being "clean?" I'd say that remaining "clean" is something that is to be expected of all programs, not just the athletic programs. Special commendations for integrity are not necessary. Integrity is something that is expected.

Please understand that my remarks are not directed toward you. I am just trying to make a point and took the opportunity to use your comments (perhaps somewhat out of context) to do so.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

"I'd still like to know why buying a ticket to a football game is viewed as support for the university. Is attending other USM events treated accordingly? My question deserves a specific, not generic, response."

And to think that I became a USM football fan because of my experience in The Pride. I would bet that there are many others like me out there - I guarantee it. Some of us really do go to the games for the pre-game/halftime show. The football team is an added bonus!

And yes, it is just as important to support other USM events as athletics. However, in many cases that is a luxury that only those in Hattiesburg can enjoy frequently. I'm lucky to make ONE football game a year, and I'm darn sure going to enjoy it. I encourage you to have similar enthusiasm for symphony concerts, student theatre productions, etc.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kudzu King
" But, if you can convince me that you will be more visible at one of those events than at a football game, with 28,000+ fans . . . . . please do so."

I'm so glad you asked. Your questions can be readily answered.

The handful of faculty members attending a football game is hardly noticeable among the crowd of 28,000. A far smaller number of faculty members at a far less attended theatre production will stick out like a sore thumb. There is a principle derived from psychophysics that explains this phenomenon.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

TH and Others,

I am a football season ticket holder, and without a doubt will be one next year and the year after that, etc. notwithstanding who is president. USM may be a troubled university, but it's my troubled university, and I am going to stick with it and support it any way I can. And if attendance goes down any sporting event the coach gets the blame, Thames is to egotistical to accept the blame. (note: basketball and baseball are really not my thing therefore I don't by season tickets but do attend often)

However (and I would like comment if possible), it is my sincere belief that generally the genuine excitement that surrounded athletic games the last 4-5 years appears to be waning somewhat which may have to do with the F-ball team's performance, everyone getting tired of Thames' stupid rhetoric and mistakes, or just getting tired in general. I think its a combination of all. But there is no doubt that starting around 1999 the excitement on gameday became palpable and very real. However, and this is my opinion based on observations/conversations, the past couple of seasons haven't had the degree of gameday excitement. For instance, the campus didn't seem alive when Cal came to town although the game itself was great, and I don't think midweek games are the cause of this because we have had some great ones in the past. Personally, seeing Thames ride around in that ridiculous gold golf cart (paid for by Thames Research Group, aka the federal government, aka our tax dollars) is probably what bums me out on gameday. BTW, feel free to disagree with me on this.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Gatoreagle
"And to think that I became a USM football fan because of my experience in The Pride. I would bet that there are many others like me out there - I guarantee it. Some of us really do go to the games for the pre-game/halftime show. The football team is an added bonus!"

I also became interested in football because of the mandatory attendance at football games when I was a member of our high school's marching band. To this very day I sit in my seat at football pre-game and half-time in order to see band. I view the football game as only a "backup" to the band - like main-attraction musicans have a pre-show "backup" group preceeding their performance. I generally see the marching band as the main attraction and the football game as the back-up group.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Football forever
""

Football Forever -- I agree with you. I am speaking of oiur programs in relationship to other Div I programs. I think you could say the same things of other schools who have had problems or low grad rates -- the academic programs are expected to both graduate a high number of people and stay clean. But some of their athletic programs clearly don't. I don't want to overly romanticize our intercollegiate programs, but my point was that I believe there is a valid attempt to have them at least try to have our athletes live up to the expectations of all university students and programs.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Alum
"TH and Others, I am a football season ticket holder, and without a doubt will be one next year and the year after that, etc. notwithstanding who is president. USM may be a troubled university, but it's my troubled university, and I am going to stick with it and support it any way I can. And if attendance goes down any sporting event the coach gets the blame, Thames is to egotistical to accept the blame. (note: basketball and baseball are really not my thing therefore I don't by season tickets but do attend often) However (and I would like comment if possible), it is my sincere belief that generally the genuine excitement that surrounded athletic games the last 4-5 years appears to be waning somewhat which may have to do with the F-ball team's performance, everyone getting tired of Thames' stupid rhetoric and mistakes, or just getting tired in general. I think its a combination of all. But there is no doubt that starting around 1999 the excitement on gameday became palpable and very real. However, and this is my opinion based on observations/conversations, the past couple of seasons haven't had the degree of gameday excitement. For instance, the campus didn't seem alive when Cal came to town although the game itself was great, and I don't think midweek games are the cause of this because we have had some great ones in the past. Personally, seeing Thames ride around in that ridiculous gold golf cart (paid for by Thames Research Group, aka the federal government, aka our tax dollars) is probably what bums me out on gameday. BTW, feel free to disagree with me on this."

I had a great time at the Cal game but it came at a very difficult time in the semester (end of semester getting ready for exams) and during the period when some of us were swamped with the first news of the SACs mess and trying ot pick up the pieces and figure out what to do next. I think that the general state of morale among staff and faculty (which I think is generally pretty low); the growing workload, and the general decline in quality of life and in our relationship to the community (failed bond issue and the university's becoming very involved in city politics in a negative way and the attacks from segments of the communoty on professors) have sapped a lot of the "spirit" I felt when I got here (1998). You can't convince me that the situation on campus isn't affecting atttendance and spirit . . . . I have to say it is difficult for me to feel a "oneness" with community members and alumni who have sided with the Presdient against the faculty. I love watching the team but my cheering really becomes almost completely for THEM and not for the school right now because of my own ambivilence about how I feel faculty are viewed. Frankly, I don;t even feel welcome in MM Roberts -- I pretty much do everything to avoid identifying myself as a faculty member.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

And just how many convocations and graduations have we ever seen a football or any other athletic coach attend? Not a single one during my 30 years here. Obviously, the coaches don't value nor see the need to attend graduations, convocations, etc. yet the faculty are supposed to go to every athletic event. Forget it! I've gone to my last USM athletic event. Matter of fact, I refuse to even watch them on TV.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. Thank heavens for freedom of speech!

Date: Mar 25, 2005

Is attendance at football games going up or down? I've seen no reports of this.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"I love watching the team but my cheering really becomes almost completely for THEM and not for the school right now because of my own ambivilence about how I feel faculty are viewed."

Good for you, Stephen. You are supposed to cheer for the team. Football (or any other sport) is supposed to be about the kids that are playing it. When they do well, you cheer. When they don't do well, you're supposed to cheer louder. (I believe that's a custom at Texas A&M.) At USM, unfortunately, the fans boo when the kids don't do well.

Date: Mar 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"When they do well, you cheer. When they don't do well, you're supposed to cheer louder. (I believe that's a custom at Texas A&M.) At USM, unfortunately, the fans boo when the kids don't do well. "

So that's the difference between love and fear. Texas A&M = Love USM = ?

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Sold Out
"Is attendance at football games going up or down? I've seen no reports of this."

If attendance were going up, would you need to ask about it here?

RC

Date: Mar 26, 2005

Since you asked, here is the Southern Miss attendence numbers starting in 1997:

1997 - 23,923
1998 - 24,561
1999 - 25,834
2000 - 28,509
2001 - 25,649
2002 - 26,951
2003 - 28,645
2004 - 28,968*

* All time season attendence high.

Things look good attendence wise to me.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kudzu King
"Since you asked, here is the Southern Miss attendence numbers starting in 1997: 1997 - 23,923 1998 - 24,561 1999 - 25,834 2000 - 28,509 2001 - 25,649 2002 - 26,951 2003 - 28,645 2004 - 28,968* * All time season attendence high. Things look good attendence wise to me."

Kudzu, do those figures represent the actual attendance or the number of tickets sold?

Date: Mar 26, 2005

These are the attendece figures that the school provided to the NCAA. Starting in 2001, those figures had to be turnstile count, not tickets sold.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

KK,

I stand corrected on the attendance figures.

But what is the capacity of M. M. Roberts stadium?

Robert Campbell

PS. And why does anyone put up with the name that the IHL Board insisted on putting on the stadium?

Date: Mar 26, 2005

MM Roberts stadium is listed at 33,000 in most publications. But, in reality there are about 31,900 numbered seats in Roberts stadium, not counting the press box, handicap seating, ect.

If you use the 33k number USM is running about 87.7% capacity.

If you use the 31.9k number USM is running about 91% capacity.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kudzu King
" . . . . . attendece figures . . . . . those figures had to be turnstile count, not tickets sold."

Turnstiles? Kudzu, does USM have turnstiles? I've not seen them. Be assured I don't slip under the fence or jump the gates.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

For the nitpickers out there - Turnstile count = ticket stubs. You do give the nice attendent your ticket stub, right?

Date: Mar 26, 2005

KK, we specialize in nit-picking. It's an academic thing. It's also Saturday night and raining like the devil (or was) and we're in front of our computers without dates. Give us a break.