PennStateHoops.com Discussion Forum

Season Tickets on Sale; Student Fee Waived at Lady Lion Games

http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:(

[quote=“CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711”]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]
That’s the way it was in the late 90’s when I was there.

As long as the women’s games are free, I think it is a step in the right direction. The one line I don’t like from that press release…

She said the change is meant to spur more student involvement in Lady Lion basketball.

…so what is being done to spur more student involement in Men’s basketball, or is the current attendance and involvement acceptible?

Students free for Lady Lion games is GREAT!

Students should also be free for men’s game (for a few years atleast.)

How about a compromise. For every 2 ladies’ games you attend, you get in free to a men’s game.

Problem with this is, anyone willing to go to multiple women’s games probably already has men’s season tickets.

[quote=“CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711”]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

You conveniently overlook the cost factor involved.

What’s the cost of giving out free tickets to the women’s hoops games? Ans: They’ll no longer collect $5 a piece from the dozen or so kids that show up. That’s less $100 cost per game. That’s a pretty cost effective strategy.

Do the same for the men and you are giving up maybe a 100-fold times the revenue. That’s not so cost effective.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

That’s an unusual term. What is the difference between “ticket marketing” and “program marketing”?

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

That’s an unusual term. What is the difference between “ticket marketing” and “program marketing”?

horizontal vs vertical.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

. . . and they implemented the Code Blue program aimed specifically at students. That’s another change.

. . . and they bought Chambers a golf cart to drive around campus hyping the program. That’s another change.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

. . . and they implemented the Code Blue program aimed specifically at students. That’s another change.

. . . and they bought Chambers a golf cart to drive around campus hyping the program. That’s another change.

Is this supposed to be serious? You forgot your emoticons.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

. . . and they implemented the Code Blue program aimed specifically at students. That’s another change.

. . . and they bought Chambers a golf cart to drive around campus hyping the program. That’s another change.

Is this supposed to be serious? You forgot your emoticons.

The first one is dead on serious, the second is a bit tongue-in-cheek (but not entirely). I can assure you that there are undoubtedly tons of things being considered to get more students involved. Chambers reaching out to the students is very much a part of that with the golf cart thing simply being one piece of it.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

. . . and they implemented the Code Blue program aimed specifically at students. That’s another change.

. . . and they bought Chambers a golf cart to drive around campus hyping the program. That’s another change.

Is this supposed to be serious? You forgot your emoticons.

The first one is dead on serious, the second is a bit tongue-in-cheek (but not entirely). I can assure you that there are undoubtedly tons of things being considered to get more students involved. Chambers reaching out to the students is very much a part of that with the golf cart thing simply being one piece of it.

Then the response is off target.

The topic relates specifically to free tickets to WOMEN’S HOOPS. To “spur more student involvement” in WOMEN’S HOOPS.

So I ask about it being done for men’s hoops SPECIFICALLY.

  • Code Blue is not specific to any individual program. Moreover, it’s only for one game in each sport.

Like I said, they are either:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

The “Code Blue” does not count for Men’s Hoops, because it is also an initiative for women’s hoops (and all other sports). Women’s hoops, also going with the free ticket scheme, obviously felt that Code Blue was not enough. Does the Ath Dept feel that it is enough for the Men’s Progam?

[quote=“Skeeza, post:17, topic:2711”]Like I said, they are either:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops[/quote]

What about option 3…
They’d love to have more involvement in men’s hoops, but they aren’t willing to give up ~100k in potential revenue to make it happen.

Like I said, they are either: 1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men's hoops 2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men's hoops

What about option 3…
They’d love to have more involvement in men’s hoops, but they aren’t willing to give up ~100k in potential revenue to make it happen.

…that would qualify as option 1. If they are bringing in enough money that they do not want to by pass the revenue for further involvement, then they must be satisfied with current invovlement and revenue.

[quote="CAPPY, post:1, topic:2711"][url=http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/]http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/penn-state-basketball-season-tickets-on-sale-student-fee-waived-at-lady-lion-games-892003/[/url]

Does not seem fair to me that students get in free for the gal’s games but they have to pay to see the guys play. >:([/quote]

I think it’s time to get away from the us vs them mentality. It was counter-productive during the Rene era and it will be counter-productive during the Chambers era.

There’s no need to constantly compare the men vs the women to see who’s one upping whom. I’m happy that the students get to see the women play for free. That should have no bearing on whether they are charged for the men or not.

Lar, a parallel can be drawn per the REASON given for the free tickets.

I know I will be attacked for saying it, but they give the reason for doing so as “to spur more student involvement”.

That points to one of two perspectives as to the Men’s program:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

Or:

3.) They are unhappy with the current student involvement in women’s hoops.

Sure, they may have been unhappy with the current student involement in women’s hoops, so they made a change.

So, it goes back to my other statement, does that mean they are HAPPY with student involement in men’s hoops, or does it mean they just don’t want to bother making a change?

Well they brought in a new ticket marketing firm. That’s certainly a change.

. . . and they implemented the Code Blue program aimed specifically at students. That’s another change.

. . . and they bought Chambers a golf cart to drive around campus hyping the program. That’s another change.

Is this supposed to be serious? You forgot your emoticons.

The first one is dead on serious, the second is a bit tongue-in-cheek (but not entirely). I can assure you that there are undoubtedly tons of things being considered to get more students involved. Chambers reaching out to the students is very much a part of that with the golf cart thing simply being one piece of it.

Then the response is off target.

The topic relates specifically to free tickets to WOMEN’S HOOPS. To “spur more student involvement” in WOMEN’S HOOPS.

So I ask about it being done for men’s hoops SPECIFICALLY.

  • Code Blue is not specific to any individual program. Moreover, it’s only for one game in each sport.

Like I said, they are either:
1.) They are satisfied with the current student involvement in men’s hoops
2.) They think something else will spur student involvement in men’s hoops

The “Code Blue” does not count for Men’s Hoops, because it is also an initiative for women’s hoops (and all other sports). Women’s hoops, also going with the free ticket scheme, obviously felt that Code Blue was not enough. Does the Ath Dept feel that it is enough for the Men’s Progam?

The response is to your question (I made your question bold for you). You directed the conversation off target.