OT: UCLA Sets All-Time-Low Attendance Record at Rose Bowl

Submitted by BursleyHall82 on September 5th, 2022 at 11:36 AM

In their first game since being announced as a future member of the Big Ten, UCLA set an all-time-low attendance record for its game against Bowling Green at the Rose Bowl. Only 27,143 people purchased a ticket, but actual attendance was much lower than that. The photos of the crowd are comical. It looks like a COVID game, or when a high school plays in a college stadium.

STORY.

Yes, it was hot. Yes, the students hadn't started classes yet. And yes, the stadium is located a damn hour from campus. All those factors have been true in the past, too. I guess I didn't realize just how much this school's football fan base sucks.

Leatherstocking Blue

September 5th, 2022 at 12:04 PM ^

I attended the UCLA-Michigan game at the Rose Bowl in September of 1989  and was surprised that the stadium was half full at kick-off. Both teams were top 25 and a good third of the stadium seemed to be Michigan fans. By the middle of the second quarter the stadium was closer to capacity but before the end of the third quarter, the stadium started to empty. It was a great game won by Michigan coming back down 8 with 2 minutes to go. Those final 2 minutes included a Michigan touchdown, a missed 2-point conversion, a recovered on-side kick and a field goal with no time left.

I left amazed at how disinterseted the UCLA fans were in their ranked team playing another ranked team.

MaizeBlueA2

September 5th, 2022 at 12:24 PM ^

UCLA should find space closer to campus the Rose Bowl should just be the Rose Bowl.

Play big games (in the future, Michigan/OSU/etc.), play USC there and play the actual bowl game there.

Build a 40,000 seat stadium near campus for everything else.

Or better yet...LA has two MLS teams, just play in one of those stadiums. 

jmblue

September 5th, 2022 at 12:47 PM ^

The MLS stadiums wouldn't be the answer.  One is right by USC and the other is in Carson, further still.  Plus, they're pretty small for a Power 5 program.

UCLA really needed to build a stadium in Westwood 50-60 years ago.  They could have been a powerhouse.  

(EDIT: Apparently this was a real possibility in the 1960s, but UCLA students (!) rejected the idea of funding an expansion to their track stadium.)

MaizeBlueA2

September 5th, 2022 at 4:26 PM ^

Which is why I think you partner with an MLS team.

Its a holiday, but Google Maps puts the Rose Bowl and the MLS Stadium in Carson as the same drive time.

If that's typically the case, use that 1/4 money (that you'd use to build on campus) to expand the MLS stadium to 40,000 and split your time between Carson and Pasadena.

Not ideal, but neither is playing in an empty Rose Bowl. And if they're serious about football, playing in a smaller stadium and having a home field advantage over playing in a 2/3 full Rose Bowl and being outnumbered 2 to 1 might be the better play in some instances. 

...all I'm saying is try the college basketball model, where some teams play smaller games on campus and bigger games in NBA arenas. Except on-campus would be an expanded MLS stadium.

I get not playing at Banc of California, I didn't realize that is quite literally next door to the Coliseum.  Talk about little brother.

But if an NFL team can make Dignity Sports Park work for a temporary solution...UCLA can do it for 3-4 games/year.

kookie

September 5th, 2022 at 6:52 PM ^

Yep. UCLA is in the pricest zip code in the country. A new 40,000 person stadium would likely cost a billion when you include the cost to buy out the property owners. The only suitable (non-mountain) open areas near by are the LA Country Club or the national cemetery. Neither are going to be for sale.

Amazinblu

September 5th, 2022 at 12:28 PM ^

This isn’t just a UCLA issue - it’s a “California school” issue.  None of the four Cali schools draws well, unless it’s a rivalry game.  Washington and Oregon draw well - I believe Utah too.  

One thing that MAY happen with realignment is - B1G fans on the west coast will make those stadiums a lot more crowded - when their teams travel to the west coast, and it’s a relatively short trip to watch them play.  If PennState plays Cal, Stanford, UCLA, or USC - they drive six or ten hours one way for the game.

But, that is several years away.  (The heat out west was oppressive this weekend  - no question about that.  But, look at their attendance figures over the past five years - and - you won’t see a big difference.)

MaizeBlueA2

September 5th, 2022 at 12:33 PM ^

For everyone talking about the B1G...

They won't have a problem when they join the B1G, it'll be 80% away fans. But they're counting on that.

LA Rams, LA Chargers and Las Vegas Raiders crowds are the exact same way, those teams play 17 road games every year unless they're playing each other.

Amazinblu

September 5th, 2022 at 12:46 PM ^

Just think of how many “local (residing on the west coast)” fans from - Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, etc… - will turn out when their alma mater plays USC, UCLA, etc.

Classes not being in session has something to do with it too.  I think UCLA starts classes in two weeks.  And, of course - the bus ride from Westwood to Pasadena has to be something students really look forward to.  

MaizeBlueA2

September 5th, 2022 at 4:44 PM ^

Of course its not exactly 80% every game. But those teams, especially the 2 LA teams, are always outdrawn at home by the visitors.

You act like what I'm saying is controversial. 

Go to a Michigan game at Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Rutgers or Maryland.

It's all Michigan fans.

If you think Michigan, OSU...and at least early on Nebraska, Wisconsin and Penn St. won't do the same to UCLA...you've lost your mind.

If they have 5 home B1G games and they get

  1. Michigan or OSU
  2. Wisconsin 
  3. Nebraska 
  4. Penn St.
  5. USC

...they're filling that place. And it won't be with Bruins fans.

The B1G will do its best to send UCLA to Rutgers and Northwestern, not the other way around. Because UCLA becomes a draw for Rutgers,  Illinois and Northwestern...and now everyone is selling out football games.

They'll get the big dogs at home and the bottomfeeders of the B1G on the road.

BlueMk1690

September 5th, 2022 at 7:08 PM ^

Not sure why you would double down on such a questionable statement. I'm sorry to say, but if you think there were 80% or even close to 80% visiting fans at any LA Rams game the last year, you're a few cards shy of a full deck. The % of Michigan fans at NW, MD, Rutgers games are also much less than 80% to start the game even if quite sizable. Using words like "it's ALL Michigan fans" is the kind of thing a child would say, and I would let a child get away with it.

This is the kind of garbage where people claimed Michigan Stadium was mostly OSU fans at some of the games in the last decade (such as 2019) No it wasn't, no matter what Buckeyes like to say about 'taking over the stadium'.

If your stadium's crowd has 25% visiting fans it will feel brutal, if they have 40% it will feel like they've taken over. Why? Because they will be highly motivated and eager to show their presence while your 60% will include a ton of people who are quiet observers and not particularly active even when things go well. I go to baseball games in D.C., I know what a brutal visitor crowd looks like because it happens every time the Nats play a team with any sort of fan base. But even the Yankees, Cubs or Red Sox can't get 80% in the park, maybe 40% on a bad day. They'll look utterly dominant because they'll cluster behind their bench and get chants going, but you won't see all the sections in the park where there's 1 or 2 of them.

We see this phenomenon in the NHL too. Do you think it's 80% Wings fans or 'all Wings fans' in Florida or Arizona because you hear a few "Let's Go Wings' chants and see some red jerseys in the lower bowl? No, it's not. There's a lot of Wings fans at those games, but not that many.

TrueBlue2003

September 5th, 2022 at 8:46 PM ^

For one, the Rams were good and hence their own fans went to games (fewer tickets available for other fans), and two, Sofi is still only a 70,000 seat stadium.  Relatively small for college football.

Now, I agree that 80k Michigan or OSU fans aren't going to those UCLA games, but there will be 20-40k maybe even more for the first couple.  So that might outnumber UCLA fans. 

ST3

September 5th, 2022 at 12:33 PM ^

The game started at 11:30 AM. Four hours in the Pasadena sun during heat dome hell is not a draw for most sane people. That should have been a 7:30PM kickoff. The attendance still would have been poor, but not embarrassingly so.

MaizeBlueA2

September 5th, 2022 at 4:48 PM ^

This makes no sense.

If the players, who willingly signed up to play, 85 of whom are getting a free education and a shit ton of other stuff. 

If they're willing to do it...

The fans who have to drive out there, PAY MONEY, and sit in the hot ass sun should be able to do it?

 

If they gave away free 4-year scholarships, room and board, free meals for 4 years, and free UCLA clothes...and of course didn't charge for tickets (and shuttled everyone to/from the game).

...I'm willing to bet they would have had more people. Just a hunch.

WayOfTheRoad

September 5th, 2022 at 12:54 PM ^

That's awful but there were games in the Carroll USC years where even they had shockingly bad attendance. Team is undefeated with a roster full of Heisman caliber players and they'd struggle to hit 60% attendance. It's just the area for the most part and I think visiting B1G teams will help a lot with attendance. Michigan fans/alums will certainly pack those stadiums, as well as others like OSU & PSU.

NittanyFan

September 5th, 2022 at 1:02 PM ^

I live in the Valley - the heat the last two days has been like nothing else I’ve ever felt.  110 and the dew points were in the lower half of the 60s - dew points at that level and it’s not a “dry heat” anymore.

The temperature at Burbank airport yesterday was 102 at 10 AM and the morning lows have been in the low to mid 80s!

I considered going to the UCLA game Saturday …….. but nah.  There will be other days.

On a side note, it’s stupid for the PAC 12 network to air 3 games Saturday at 11:30, 3 and 6:30 Pacific and have the game in Pullman be the night game (against Idaho which is right next door) and the 2 SoCal games be the others.  TV didn’t help at all here.

LabattsBleu

September 5th, 2022 at 1:30 PM ^

to be fair UCLA has been struggling on the field for a long time now...yesterday's attendance is a culmination of that (as well as the logistical challenges mentioned).

West coast fans are pretty fickle - and there is a ton of other options in LA in particular. 

But all those programs struggle with attendance. Cal is in the tank (hard to imagine Aaron Rodgers ever playing there) Stanford's attendance is crappy again and USC is middling at best  (we'll see if Riley is able to get the city excited for USC again).

This is the reason UCLA jumped to the B1G in the first place... shitty product leading to shitty TV contract leading to shitty attendance...

WolverineHistorian

September 5th, 2022 at 1:31 PM ^

About 10 years ago, the Hurricanes played Bethune-Cookman and looked to maybe have 2,000 or so fans in the stands.  That's the smallest crowd I've ever seen for a major college football team (not counting the covid year).

And yet, Miami keeps scheduling these guys over and over.  They played them two days ago!! 

 

NittanyFan

September 5th, 2022 at 1:45 PM ^

Geographically closest FCS team (that gives out scholarships so exclude Stetson here) to Miami.  Plus they take a relatively cheap pay day.  And they are never good, so not even a remote threat to actually win (like a SoCo or OVC team might be).

Easy choice for Miami if they are going to schedule an FCS team.  

Miami, of course, has learned the hard way it’s better to go FCS then FIU.  Miami is STILL the last FBS level team that FIU has defeated, over 1000 days ago now!

ldevon1

September 5th, 2022 at 1:37 PM ^

Isn't this what we've always preached, if you don't like the product, show them with your discretionary dollars and things might change. UCLA hasn't been good in a minute, and I'm glad fanbase is letting them know they aren't just gonna show up and take it.

Michfan777

September 5th, 2022 at 1:40 PM ^

  • Hottest Heat Wave in at least the last year or two this weekend. Here 20 minutes away from the Rose Bowl it was 105° at 10:30 AM yesterday. The rose bowl offers zero shade either, so for anyone going to a game this weekend it was brutal.
  • Their stadium is over an hour from campus in traffic. It’s also not easy to get to from the highway and is mostly residential streets in that area not designed for huge traffic volume. Seriously, UCLA needs to look into leaving the Rose Bowl and either moving to SoFi Stadium or building an on-campus stadium.
  • They were playing nobodies…if I’m going to have to drive an hour or more 1 way to a shitty dilapidated stadium with no shade during the worst heatwave in a while, UCLA better be playing Alabama or Georgia and not a scrub. 

 

UCLA really needs to move to SoFi. The Rose Bowl is a venerable venue, but it’s really holding UCLA back IMO. It’s centrally located, plenty of parking and highway access, hundreds of large hotels within 2-3 miles, some of the coolest weather in the LA basin, and a shaded stadium that generates an amazing breeze all throughout. The stadium itself is the best stadium I’ve ever seen.

It might be a pain to switch fields every Saturday/Sunday for UCLA and the Rams/Chargers, but UCLA would thrive there. 

BigVig

September 5th, 2022 at 1:42 PM ^

It was the hottest weekend of the year (maybe several years) and people here aren't used to horrible heat and mugginess like in Michigan.  I live at the beach, which I'm sure was 15-20 degrees cooler and I only left my house briefly that day.  Would not have been willing to sit in the Rose Bowl for 4 hours.  I don't think this has anything to do with interest being different than last year or 4 years ago.  Bad opponent, horrific weather, and long holiday

 weekend meant people were going to find something else to do.

AngryAlum

September 5th, 2022 at 1:49 PM ^

While that attendance fact makes for a headline, I don't think it means anything.  There's been a heat wave in SoCal last few days, so in fairness to UCLA it wasn't just hot yesterday but over 100 in the baking sun.  Go sit in the sun and heat for a few hours?  It's no wonder the majority of people took a hard pass.

WestQuad

September 5th, 2022 at 2:22 PM ^

I saw Michigan play UCLA in the Rose Bowl pre-season in [2000?].  It was so damn hot it was unbearable.  You tried to move as little as possible.  No one going to the BG game means absolutely nothing.

Michfan777

September 5th, 2022 at 2:35 PM ^

I’m going it the angels and tigers game the next 3 days here. It’s gonna real very shitty. At least their stadium is only 50 feet from my apartment and not a 50 mile drive like UCLA. 

TonyinLA

September 5th, 2022 at 2:42 PM ^

I live close to the Rose Bowl.  It was 100+ degrees during the game.  UCLA has plenty of barriers to good attendance but that was probably the biggest one yesterday.