Rochester didn't even come close to this #......I'm gonna say we had 1000 or maybe less in actual attendance....you could count the seated fans easily. It was so bad it wasn't even reported in the paper or in the USL match wrap up. I have some pix I'll try to upload this weekend and even take some more at tonights game. And we can't use the "excuse" that it was a holiday ,vacations,picnics,we've been using the last 6yrs either, since 2 blocks away at the AAA Red Wings baseball game they had over 10k actual people in attendance. The people here caught on about the "D3 perception" our league has , and see how badly the Rhinos have played all season, and couple that with playing teams like Antigua (their so bad, even the Rhinos were able to look decent on the pitch) and Dayton tonight, doesn't do much to draw fans anymore, sorry to say.
7/7 Antigua @ Harrisburg: 1604 Richmond @ Wilmington:3903 Dayton @ Rochester: 5432 (although probably only a couple thousand actually showed up)
Rochester has a 13,000 set stadium, including an upperdeck. TV camera only shows the far side and endzone (least populated). It's fair to say the stadium was a third full, meaning about 4,000.
Indeed. Most people sit on the upper deck side, otherwise, you stare into the sun for half the game. I'll maintain that the poster here has some sour grapes for whatever reason. (You can see it from the sarcasm that drips regarding the USL with each and every post. The same poster claimed that the MLS reserves don't even try in the USOC -- as a response to some of the USL USOC runs.) You definitely need to see the upper deck side of the stadium to get a picture in regards to attendance. (The upper deck is sparsely populated, but the lower deck is not.) Saturday's crowd wasn't a bad crowd. The 4th of July game was a bad idea. The Red Wings have fireworks, the Rhinos didn't and are farther from the downtown fireworks. They should have scheduled the 3rd, which has been successful in the past.
Code: 62.1% complete Year Avg Median %<1K %>3k 2005 1681 1410 20.0% 12.7% 2006 1764 1472 18.2% 16.4% 2007 1573 1428 30.6% 6.5% 2008 1593 1629 25.8% 8.1% 2009 1579 1289 30.9% 5.5% 2010 1669 1373 37.8% 18.9% 2011 2319 1650 30.3% 32.6% 2012 2672 1572 34.1% 39.0% Median-33%: 1048 Median+33%: 2096 <MED-33%: 31 / 37.8% >MED+33%: 38 / 46.3% Code: Final Numbers Year Avg Median %<1K %>3k 2005 1680 1457 21.4% 11.9% 2006 1803 1703 14.1% 11.8% 2007 1575 1423 28.1% 6.3% 2008 1614 1629 26.0% 7.3% 2009 1602 1518 31.8% 7.1% 2010 1689 1385 35.1% 17.5% 2011 2269 1449 32.4% 31.0% There's that drop in median that I've been expecting for such a long time. Despite that, it looks likely that both median and average will finish above last season. Though its possible that the missing attendances would change that. Glad to hear from others that Rochester isn't necessarily as dire as reported by one person. And it's nice to see LA's numbers inching upward. But I still don't see how, even with a team in Phoenix, LA can survive very long. This week, we have Antigua (2), Wilmington, Harrisburg, Richmond, Charleston, Orlando City, and Charlotte. The Antigua games are the ones being held in Bradenton, right? Whether the median pushes back up again probably depends on Harrisburg. If for no other reason that they're the team that holds all the numbers around the current median. If they can top 1540, the number will go up.
Yes, I have pix from the Antigua game and the Dayton game I would be glad to post . However, they are from my cell phone and I sent them to my mac, and normally its easy to upload pix I want to insert or send to people, but when I click to "insert/edit image" here it needs me to enter a url addy....so I'm stuck since I just want to upload them into this post, and don't know how to proceed. If anyone has a suggestion on how I can upload/insert a few pix into this post, please let me know . It maybe something so simple to do , so my apologizes ahead of time.
If you could get them onto Flickr, I think it might be easier. I have my own webspace, so it's not a problem for me.
Ok here are a few images from Antigua (4th of July)....this is the side that more people sit on(bdaly from Rochester pointed this out in an earlier post) so the opposite side (the sunny side )is generally the side they have showing online/TV which has less people seated. I go to every game , so I've always been a supporter,no sour grapes here....and I went to Lancers games back when I was a kid. So I want the club to succeed and get fans back and enjoying the game.....alot of people got turned off for various reasons I've stated before , so I won't go into it again. Take the pix for what their worth,its just an honest view from the stands. I've always thought they should move the cameras to shoot into this view. People see the games all the time online, so this is just another view.
Thursday: @ Wilmington: 3,358 @ Bradenton: Likely not much Friday: @ Harrisburg: ??? (likely over 1,000) @ Richmond: 1,641 Saturday: @ Bradenton: Likely not much @ Charleston: 4,782 @ Orlando: 7,216 @ Charlotte: 1,084
This is not a rip or an attempt to troll, just honestly curious. Are the numbers that Wilmington and Charleston put up accurate? Both clubs have been around for years and have been able to grow their attendance. Both are in smaller markets. Honestly, those two teams along with the Silverbacks in the NASL are great success stories. Everyone can't be an Orlando or San Antonio, both leagues need the rest of the gang to be able to grow over time.
Those numbers are definitely accurate. Both teams draw well and are local attractions. They have made strong connections with the communities.
The Hammerheads and Battery really matter to their communities. They are also not in large enough communities for a move upward to be realistic (even though Charleston has played DII for years) or necessarily wanted. But they are prime examples of what can be done in the right situation with the right owner, and shining examples of how lower-level soccer can be in this country. Not everybody can replicate what they have (and Wilmington could use a home that's not a high school football stadium), but they're legit.
I don't know about Wilmington, but I think Charleston could support D-II if they wanted to. But they would be true poster children for what a D-III team should look like.
I would say both are acurate. The Battery have switched to a ticket scanning system this year and one of the issues was that the flex season tickets sold before a certain date (prior to the Carolina Challenge Cup), can not be read by the reader so there is a good chance that some of the numbers might be on the low side. Having a good ticket sales team are key and you would have thought most clubs would have figured that out by now. Instead too many rely on nostalgia, youth club to magically show up and people just to show up.
Way to go out on a limb, there. As DII continues to grow and evolve, a small market like Charleston would be less likely to be successful in it. Now? Certainly. They have a track record there. They have good ownership. They have longevity. They have a stadium. In 10 years? Not if DII grows up as many hope it will.
The Wilmington numbers are accurate. It was the result of hard work over a number of years and the love of the city for the team. Wilmington is too small for D-2 (population about 105,000) and probably wouldn't raise attendance numbers to pay for the massive increase in costs. Besides, Charlotte, Charleston and Richmond will always draw better here that Puerto Rico, Edmonton or Tampa Bay.
I wouldn't go that far with Charlotte and Richmond. Richmond is still well off its historic highs, and wavering in context of this season. Charlotte...really shouldn't be included at all these days. But the strength of the fan bases in Charleston and Wilmington is unimpugnable at this point. There's no doubt both of them draw well, and matter to their communities. Wilmington makes a model D-III franchise IMHO, in terms of support compared to size of market. What Wilmington achieves in its community is what other D-III franchises should strive for.