Attendance

[EC8CH]

I go to games to not hear Timmerman.

[blackdiamond2]

I was thinking a of things that would make football games better in person.

Some would include reasonable concessions with better food options.

Better games to watch in person. Our group has left at half time more than 1/2 the home games this year.

Better wifi and internet connection! Our group was trying to watch the end of JMU vs Colgate game on our phones but we did not have good enough connections.

For us in the younger generation with limited attention spans it would be awesome if we had some of the other games on played on some of the TVs inside the FargoDome. It would have been fun to watch NDSU and the the JMU collapse at the same time. This may be blasphemy but I would personally love to watch a different games during breaks.

[Stary2k11]

I was thinking a of things that would make football games better in person.

Some would include reasonable concessions with better food options.

Better games to watch in person. Our group has left at half time more than 1/2 the home games this year.

Better wifi and internet connection! Our group was trying to watch the end of JMU vs Colgate game on our phones but we did not have good enough connections.

For us in the younger generation with limited attention spans it would be awesome if we had some of the other games on played on some of the TVs inside the FargoDome. It would have been fun to watch NDSU and the the JMU collapse at the same time. This may be blasphemy but I would personally love to watch a different games during breaks.

Yes, yes it is.

[PlrbrBison]

I was thinking a of things that would make football games better in person.

Some would include reasonable concessions with better food options.

Better games to watch in person. Our group has left at half time more than 1/2 the home games this year.

Better wifi and internet connection! Our group was trying to watch the end of JMU vs Colgate game on our phones but we did not have good enough connections.

For us in the younger generation with limited attention spans it would be awesome if we had some of the other games on played on some of the TVs inside the FargoDome. It would have been fun to watch NDSU and the the JMU collapse at the same time. This may be blasphemy but I would personally love to watch a different games during breaks.

Hell yes!!! Have 2-3 games playing on the big boards during the Bison game so you're not missing anything. I have season tickets but had to stay home this weekend and had 2-3 games going at once. Fricken fun! Do the same in the dome. That and quit puntinig.

[PlrbrBison]

Hell yes!!! Have 2-3 games playing on the big boards during the Bison game so you're not missing anything. I have season tickets but had to stay home this weekend and had 2-3 games going at once. Fricken fun! Do the same in the dome. That and quit puntinig.

'Er puzziing

[PlrbrBison]

'Er puzziing

'Er puzzinting

[PlrbrBison]

'Er puzzinting

I meant punting. Gosh!

[56BISON73]

Yes, they do, but not from the standpoint you think. I am well above the 100 point mark so it's not personal. IMO it does not make good business sense. I would be going after the young ALUM who can afford to to give under a $100 to few extra hundred dollars a year. These folks don't have the $$$ to give $1K or more a year. In the current set up, there is no incentive for that demographic and I think we need those folks to go to the next level. So at this point I don't think the extra perk for the athelte is worth the loss. of course I dont know the books either so.....

So why would they give 50 to 200 when there is no incentive as you put it? Thats right they wont. But may be a former athlete will because of the perk. So in fact it does make better sense to recruit the former athlete. He has a vested interest to do so and along the line he will learn its all about giving back which helps open up the wallet also. So really you cant say its a loss when as you said they dont have the incentive especially if they are only donating 50-200.

So IMO tHATS not the demographic they Need to target. And may be the books show why they dont.

[MAKBison]

So why would they give 50 to 200 when there is no incentive as you put it? That's right they wont. But may be a former athlete will because of the perk. So, in fact, it does make better sense to recruit the former athlete. He has a vested interest to do so and along the line he will learn its all about giving back which helps open up the wallet also. So really you can't say its a loss when as you said they don't have the incentive especially if they are only donating 50-200.

So IMO that's not the demographic they Need to target. And maybe the books show why they dont.

Could be or it might be ass-backward thinking and an organization led by former players protecting themselves....

I agree with what your saying if the organization was new, but it's not its established.


1.You should not need to further incentivize a former athlete to support a future athlete....if you do then this entire we play for those who came before us mantra is all BS
2.a young alum nonathlete is less likely to give...agreed and that is why they should be incentivized.

If all thing were equal and TM comes to you and I and says give me $50. If the program as a whole is a good organization and did u right As a former player....You should be opening your wallet.

Me, I have no ties.all I want is to go watch a game. If they ask me to give an extra $50, I am way more likely to ask why....what do I get out of it. And, if it gives me priority for tickets, I.e., the thing I like. I am likely to give the extra $50.

The image the school puts out is we treat our players right, we do it right. If that's the case then it should be pretty easy to get past players to give back. If TM has to incentivize past players so much for them to consider giving then mike Houston, we have problems. If this is the case like u r suggesting, then I agree with you. we need to get that fixed cuz it costing TM $$$

[56BISON73]

That's ass-backward.....
1.you should not need to further incentivize a former athlete to support a future athlete....if you do then this entire we play for those who came before us mantra is all BS
2.a young alum non at is less likely to give if they are not incentivized. However, give them a chance to be on a level playing field they will.

1You are conflating 2 different things. But my point remains the same and your rhetoric doesnt change that.
2 You cannot guarantee they will.

Its only ass backwards because it doesnt fit your narrative.

Fact is many athletes when they finish school and their playing days they are finished. You payed me to play for you. I played for you. I full filled my contract as you did. They move on. Just like a student. I paid the school for an education. When they are done , they are done. They dont feel the need to give them anymore money.

Have you ever done any fund raising? If you have you should know better making the statements you have in it being easy to give back.

What ever image the school puts out has no bearing in giving back. Those two can be mutually exclusive. But nice try trying to tie the two together for the guilt factor in ---they should open their wallets just because they played. Thats BS..

Plus you making unfounded statements is very unseemly. There is no reason to continue if you are going to resort to this tact.