Charging for Soccer/Lacrosse Games

[awhom111]

For those of you who have not heard, this year Duke will be charging admission for non-students to Men's and Women's Soccer and Lacrosse games. I know that this has been discussed on here because these four sports get pretty decent attendance, but we can discuss it again now that it has actually happened.

From my point of view, it could be good because of the attendance that we currently draw. On the other hand, I liked that we kept many sports free to attend because it gave Duke the chance to market itself to the local community. I believe that one of those other schools around here has charged admission for games in these sports for a while and I believe that free admission is one of the reasons why Duke games are frequently attended by a large number of families with small children. Now that the games are not free, I could see some of those families going to whichever games are more convenient, which could include that other school. I think that this is an effective way of capturing some available revenue, but I am not sure if this will have a long-term impact on attendance, especially at non-conference games.

[GopherBlue]

I had heard rumor of this - thanks for confirming. We are among the locals that bring our kids to some of these games, and will now think twice.

Any idea what the charge will be? Is there a kids under 12 free, or something similar?

[Inonehand]

I had heard rumor of this - thanks for confirming. We are among the locals that bring our kids to some of these games, and will now think twice.

Any idea what the charge will be? Is there a kids under 12 free, or something similar?

Tickets are $5 for adults, $3 for 18 and under, free for 2 year olds and under. While I believe they SHOULD charge for the games, paying for a 3 year old to squirm around on the bleachers is something I feel approaches idiocy. Hopefully they will rethink the age groupings. I will not often take my 9 year old if I have to pay to do it.

[1Devil]

Tickets are $5 for adults, $3 for 18 and under, free for 2 year olds and under. While I believe they SHOULD charge for the games, paying for a 3 year old to squirm around on the bleachers is something I feel approaches idiocy. Hopefully they will rethink the age groupings. I will not often take my 9 year old if I have to pay to do it.

$3 is the difference between bringing and not bringing your 9 year-old?

[Johnboy]

Tickets are $5 for adults, $3 for 18 and under, free for 2 year olds and under. While I believe they SHOULD charge for the games, paying for a 3 year old to squirm around on the bleachers is something I feel approaches idiocy. Hopefully they will rethink the age groupings. I will not often take my 9 year old if I have to pay to do it.

We pay to watch our own kids play little league All-star games, and these ticket prices sound eerily familiar. It's well worth the money for a 9 year old.

[Inonehand]

$3 is the difference between bringing and not bringing your 9 year-old?

To the average 30 or more m/w soccer/lax games we attend every year, yes. I then pay for subpar hot dogs, stale popcorn, and over-iced sodas on top of it. No, it isn't a lot of money but it does add up. Will I bring him to some games? Yes. As many as before? No. I assure you, while I can afford it, I won't come as much. There are many who won't whether they can or not.

If you, or the poster after you are Duke Athletics employees, at least think about raising the age to 6 or 7. Paying for a 3 or 4 year olds for soccer and lacrosse is absolutely ridiculous. It makes sense for basketball because there is an issue with having enough seats. Hopefully football will create the same problem some day. It isn't, has never been, and most likely will not be, a space issue for the other sports. If it becomes one, charge away.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I think the prices are reasonable and shouldn't turn people away. Both programs are definately worthy of charging admission. It's a small fee to pay, on par with a movie matinee. I think it reflects that the university recognizes the value of the programs, it should be taken as a sign of respect for what they have accomplished. I do agree they might rethink the ages, but I would cut it off at 5 or 6. I think older children can appreciate the games.

[hughgs]

I think the prices are reasonable and shouldn't turn people away. Both programs are definately worthy of charging admission. It's a small fee to pay, on par with a movie matinee. I think it reflects that the university recognizes the value of the programs, it should be taken as a sign of respect for what they have accomplished. I do agree they might rethink the ages, but I would cut it off at 5 or 6. I think older children can appreciate the games.

It's not the appreciation of the game. I think my <3 year old can appreciate part of the game (he likes to kick the ball and watch things go far and high). The issue is whether they can sit through a majority of the game. And you have to add in the need for an adult to watch the kid, rather than watch the game.

So now, you have to pay for at least one adult and one child and neither watches the game for more than 10 - 15 minutes. We've been taking our son to games whenever we can and that will quickly stop. Which is too bad because being able to introduce him to different sports, even for a couple minutes at a time, is a good thing.

[orrnot]

At risk of starting an irresolvable off-topic argument, let me assert that there is no such thing as an over-iced coke, er, soda. Sometimes one has to speak up for what is good and true in this country.

[Indoor66]

Personally, I think charging for LAX and Soccer is a terrible idea. Those are not major sports and charging for them will, IMOH, result in a fall off of non-student attendance to no benefit to either the programs or the University.

[Verga3]

On Sunday, an adult would have paid only about 50 cents per goal as our women's team crushed Coastal Carolina, 9-0 (not a bad start as they try to get back to the Elite 8 or beyond this fall). I'd have paid to see that!

[Johnboy]

I completely agree that the age should be older than 2 for free admission - 7 or 8 seems reasonable to me. There are costs involved in putting on the games and having spectators, though. I would hope the price of admission would not exceed these costs. Soccer and lacrosse need not be revenue sports, but IMO it's reasonable for the University to recoup its costs.

[SmartDevil]

Do we gain more in this than we lose in terms of community relations?

Is someone familiar with the math about how much approximate net income this will yield?

[Inonehand]

At risk of starting an irresolvable off-topic argument, let me assert that there is no such thing as an over-iced coke, er, soda. Sometimes one has to speak up for what is good and true in this country.

At 2 or 3 bucks, the plastic Duke cup should have much less ice and a lot more Coke or Sprite, er soda, er chaser.

[GopherBlue]

I'm not sure if attempts have been made to track attendance, but I would not be a bit surprised if it drops by 50-75% this season with the cost of admission.

I also have to question the timing - at least for the men's soccer and lacrosse teams, this is a year of transition. Men's soccer has a new coach and a very young team, and might be expected to struggle a bit. Similarly, this past season the men's lacrosse team's visibility and popularity was likely at a historic peak - but that will change this year with the loss of several huge players and the associated lowered expectations.

Finally, $5 or $3 does not sound like a lot, but when you multiply by 5-6 (family plus a friend or two), $20 becomes a significant factor in the decision to go to a game.

[devilish]

I actually would have expected to pay to go to any intercollegiate event at a Div I school. I certainly have to pay to go to any local high school event.

I do agree about charging for young children. Cutoff at age 5 sounds reasonable.

[Inonehand]

I actually would have expected to pay to go to any intercollegiate event at a Div I school. I certainly have to pay to go to any local high school event.

I do agree about charging for young children. Cutoff at age 5 sounds reasonable.

This is the reaction most people have. I agree, these should be ticketed events. Quite firmly agree that the age for pay should be moved up.

[kexman]

Personally, I think Duke should be thrilled if they can convince people to show up for these games and charging money gets in the way of that (I might say the same thing about football with our recent success on the field and in the stands). Regardless, kids should be free to attend...we are building future fans! I would say maybe 12 or 16 could be the cutoff

[eran]

We went to many of these games last year - and often only for the first half of the evening games since the kids (now 5 and 3) need to get to bed. We routinely brought my son's friend. That means we just went from free to $19 for a night. We won't be back, we simply can't afford that.

We also brought kids and parents from the U5 soccer team I coach a few times, sort of a loosely organized get together. That is now dead too.

On the other hand, we'll have more time to go watch volleyball, wrestling and other sports. I am pretty dissapointed with the new policy.

[ugadevil]

We also brought kids and parents from the U5 soccer team I coach a few times, sort of a loosely organized get together. That is now dead too.

That would be the thing I'd worry about with soccer games in particular. I'm sure there are many younger rec league teams or club teams that probably try and get together and go to college games as a team a couple times a season. Maybe the university could establish a relationship with the local youth leagues where teams like that get in for free.