Marketing the 'big game': developing a student rewards program in college basketball.

Peetz, Ted B.

Nicholas was finally getting settled at his new job as assistant director of marketing at the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV). He believed his degree and internship experience with his alma mater's athletic department had prepared him well for his new position. During his interview he discovered that part of his job responsibilities would include working on a task force charged with developing marketing strategies to increase student attendance at the university's men's basketball games. The athletic department had recently noticed a pattern occurring with student attendance at home contests. They were having difficulty "selling" the allotment of free student tickets for games against weaker opponents and lesser known non-conference foes, which created a lackluster atmosphere and a decrease in revenue potential. In contrast, ticket allotments against strong conference opponents like Brigham Young University (BYU) and their long-time rival University of Nevada Reno (UNR) were taken quickly, causing many to be turned away because of the influx of student support. The problem facing Nicholas and the marketing department was how to generate an increased level of response for non-marquee games to help improve student attendance numbers throughout the season.

The situation presented in this example is becoming increasingly more common, especially in an era when colleges and universities face the realities of rising expenses and budget reductions. The recent economic climate has placed significant pressure on athletic departments to develop more creative ways to generate revenue. For example, in 2009 the state funds provided to UNLV athletics were reduced by $1.1 million, with each athletics team being forced to cut between 10 and 12 percent from their operating budgets (Anderson, 2009). The popular belief that all college athletic departments generate large profits for their institutions is misleading. The NCAA reported in 2008, only 19 of the 119 schools in Division I generated a profit. Of those 19 schools the median positive net revenue was $4.3 million compared to median negative net revenue of approximately $8.9 million for institutions not generating a profit (Fulks, 2008). In 2009, NCAA Division I men's basketball set record highs for the total number of teams competing and games played, yet total attendance figures decreased compared to the previous year. That same year, the extremely popular NCAA Men's Basketball Championship Tournament saw a total decline of over 50,000 spectators compared to the 2008 attendance figures (NCAA, 2009). A number of factors may have contributed to these declining numbers including an increase in media outlets available, the economy, and the availability of other entertainment options. Due to this dynamic situation, increasing the attractiveness of sporting events and maximizing revenues has become vital to an athletic department's financial well-being.

Historically, men's basketball at UNLV has been successful and the nickname "Runnin' Rebels" is a source of pride for many UNLV students, alumni, and community members. UNLV holds the fourth-best winning percentage all-time among Division I programs, including a national championship in 1990. ESPN.com ranked UNLV as the 8th most prestigious college basketball program in the modern era (Shelton, Loucks, & Fallica, 2008). Many of the accolades given to the team reflect the period of time when they were coached by Jerry Tarkanian. "Tark the Shark," as he was affectionately called, led the "Runnin' Rebels" from 1973-1992. After Tarkanian left in 1992 the Rebels struggled to continue their winning ways and went through a number of coaches before finally finding success with the hire of Lon Kruger in 2004. Kruger's basketball knowledge and personality fit well with UNLV and he soon reenergized a disgruntled fan base. With the increase of success on the court came an increase in attendance. UNLV's arena, the Thomas & Mack Center, has a capacity of 18,776, making it one of the largest college basketball arenas in the country. In fact, UNLV averaged more fans at its home conference games in 2009 (15,121) than any arena in the PAC-10 conference even holds ("UNLV Basketball," 2011). While those numbers are impressive, UNLV's athletic department realized that attracting more students to the games is important to the financial health of the athletic department.

Just as Nicholas was preparing his marketing research to help with the issue of increasing student attendance for next season a blow struck the marketing department that they believed would most likely affect the attendance forecasts for next season. In early April of 2011 Lon Kruger announced he would be leaving UNLV to take the head coaching job at the University of Oklahoma. The potential impact of this news made Nicholas's marketing goal even more difficult, so he decided to contact a friend at Kansas State University (K-State) who had helped to implement a student rewards program for men's basketball a few years earlier. K-State had dealt with similar issues involving fluctuations in student attendance and he felt his friend could provide helpful insight into developing a similar program during this transition time at UNLV. Nicholas was anxious to hear about the issues K-State faced in creating their student rewards program and the results it had in increasing attendance. He listened closely as his friend explained K-State's marketing strategy.

Kansas State Student Rewards Program

Prior to the start of the 2009-2010 men's basketball season, K-State's athletic department was approached by members of the student government association with an idea to help address issues surrounding the pre-game line-up procedures, especially for marquee games, such as the in-state rivalry game, known as the "Sunflower Showdown," against the University of Kansas (KU). In the past, a "first come, first serve" policy had been utilized for game admittance. Once fans were granted access into the arena and the gates where opened it frequently caused an unsafe environment with fans rushing to get prime seating in the general admission student area. While sport marketers dream of customers with this level of devotion and passion, the problem K-State faced was twofold: fan safety and how to sustain a consistently high number of students for non-marquee games. While student support and fan attendance historically created sell-out crowds for games against rival KU, the ticket sales for "lesser" games differed considerably at the box office. During the 2008 season a random lottery system was used as a way to improve entrance procedures for the KU game. This lottery system offended loyal students who had come early to ensure preferred seating. As a result, there was concern that the process compromised customer service and could impact loyalty.

A solution to this problem was the development of the men's basketball rewards program prior to the 2009-2010 season, which was "intended to encourage student attendance at all home games while creating a priority system for game-day lineup procedures at Bramlage Coliseum (K-State's home arena) for the Kansas game" (Kansas State, 2009). The concept of facilitating a rewards program is not unique to sports and has been used successfully in other industries to influence consumption and repeated use. The best known examples of businesses using reward programs include frequent-flier programs used by airlines, frequent guest promotions offered by hotels, and frequent-shopper programs offered by supermarkets (Kim, Shi, & Srinivasan 2001).

A number of schools have used reward programs in the past; however, it became apparent to the K-State athletic department that the significance of the game against Kansas could be used as a motivator to encourage students to attend the nine home games leading up to the KU game. While rewards programs are not always exclusive to a specific segment, such as a student body, K-State decided to offer the program only to students. The students were encouraged to sign-up in groups consisting of two to 10 people. The total program consisted of 999 groups with 3,324 students registered. It was the belief of the athletic department that having students register in groups would encourage the entire group to attend games. The students were rewarded a point for each home game they attended. The average number of games attended by the members of the registered groups determined their place in line for the historically sold-out KU contest. The announcement of this program was done through a campus-wide email. An initial email was sent in early November alerting students of the new program; then again in mid-November reminding students that registration was opening. A reminder email was sent two times during the season to encourage additional students to register. A press release was issued when the program was announced, accompanied by an article in the student newspaper describing how the program would work. Student ticket accounts were tied to the student's identification number. Students submitted their group name, names of group members, and student identification numbers of each student. Students needed to use their tickets and actually attend the game in order to receive credit. The information was stored in a Microsoft Access database and individual game information was tracked using Paciolan ticketing software. Following the game leading up to the KU game, the ticket office created a report of every student who had attended games and which games they attended. The Access database was then exported to Excel, and the average number of games per group was calculated. All the members of the groups that had attended all nine games were the first to be allowed access into the arena, followed by groups whose members had attended eight, and so on.

The K-State men's basketball student rewards program template became popular and the following year was expanded to other sports including women's basketball, volleyball and baseball. As for men's basketball, the initial season of using the rewards program successfully achieved the goal of increasing attendance for the nine games prior to the in-state "Sunflower Showdown" rivalry game. As shown in Table 1, the percentage of 2009-2010 student tickets used for the nine games leading up to the game with the Jayhawks, compared to 2008-2009 numbers, increased by an average of 18.2%. Kansas State also saw an average increase of 1,246 students per game for each of the nine home games leading up to the KU game. Table 2 shows this positive increase comparing the 2009-2010 season with the 2008-2009, which did not utilize a rewards program.

Nicholas was grateful to hear the background of a well-executed rewards program that is still being used. He hoped a similar idea would work at UNLV. He was intrigued by how K-State marketed their rivalry with KU as the cornerstone of the loyalty rewards program and wondered what other factors impact motivation to attend games. He also knew he would need to support his proposal with marketing research to convince the athletic department administration to move forward with the idea. Nicholas decided that in order to create a well-rounded proposal he would need to find more information on rivalries and factors that influence motivation to attend games.

Marketing a Rivalry

Before understanding the impact rivalries play in sport consumer motivation it is first necessary to distinguish the terms spectator and fan as they may be vital to the success of a marketing campaign (Trail, Robinson, Dick, & Gillentine, 2003). Many researchers have studied the factors that differentiate fans and spectators (Funk & James, 2001; Trail et al., 2003; Wann & Branscombe, 1990) including Sloan (1989), who explained that spectators merely observe or watch a game while fans do so because they are engaged on a deeper level. Marketing plans need to focus on maintaining positive connections with the highly identified fans as well as uncovering motivating factors for the less interested spectators (Trail et al., 2003). Promoting a rivalry is one way through which sport marketers can increase consumer interest and involvement among both fans and spectators (Rein, Kotler, & Shields, 2006).

The understanding of how a rivalry impacts a person's perception of an event is important because it can have an effect on sport consumption. As Armstrong (2007) explained, "it is therefore likely that the frequency in which an individual attends a particular sport event is dependent upon the manner in which the event is perceived to be a symbolic activity" (p. 115). Many collegiate team rivalry games are given unique titles (e.g., The Sunflower Showdown) to distinguish them from "just another game" and increase their symbolic meaning. It has also been suggested that rival teams' marketing departments may want to work together and promote upcoming matchups to increase the connections that each fan base has with the team (Luellen & Wann, 2010).

While rivalries traditionally grow and evolve over time, specific elements can be highlighted to promote or "manufacture" potential rivalries. Rein et al. (2006) explained a few rivalry features that can be exploited to encourage greater consumer involvement, "There are geographical (Florida-Florida State), personality (Shaquille O'Neal-Kobe Bryant), institutional (Midland Lee-Odessa Permian), historical (Auburn-Alabama), class (Lazio-Roma), and incident (Little Brown Jug, Michigan-Minnesota) rivalries" (p. 260). Using one or any combination of these rivalry features can assist an organization in highlighting rival salience [i.e., the awareness of a specific rival group or team, as defined by Wann (2006)] and encouraging greater involvement among both the spectator and fan base.

Mueller and Sutherland (2010) showed how another rival feature, heroes vs. villains, could improve marketing results. More specifically they believe that, "one of the most effective methods for achieving increased involvement is through the development of a sport as a landscape of heroes and villains, where fans can create meaning and attachment within the consumer experience" (p. 23). Basic conflict is easily positioned within the context of sport. The authors explain that both fans and spectators can easily relate to the traditional good vs. evil storyline. A rivalry creates distinct groups (us vs. them) which help to increase the value placed on a specific game. It would be wise for a marketing department to promote the us vs. them storylines in an attempt to encourage a rivalry situation.

Over its existence UNLV has had many heated contests with a number of schools but no university has played a more "villain" role than the UNR. There is a mutual dislike between the athletic programs of the two schools. In football, the rivalry game is called "The Battle of The Fremont Cannon," named after the famous Nevadan trailblazer, John Fremont. The winner of the game wins the rights to the cannon. The rivalry was originally established due to the geographic considerations of the schools and now encompasses many deeply rooted stereotypes based on the two cities and each university's culture. Adding to this rivalry is the fact that UNR will be joining the same conference as UNLV, the Mountain West Conference, starting in 2012.

Motivation

Although rivalry games can play an important role in creating an exciting atmosphere, there are many additional factors that need to be addressed in order to develop an effective marketing strategy. Extensive research has been done to explain the motives that influence sport consumption. Trail, Anderson and Fink (2000) explained that most motives occur based on social and psychological needs. According to Trail et al. (2000), motives for sport attendance can include achievement, acquisition of knowledge, aesthetics, social interaction, drama/eustress, escape, family, physical attractiveness of participants, and physical skill of participants.

An example of research focusing specifically on motivation and college student game attendance studied four individual psychological factors (Swanson, Gwinner, Larson, & Janda, 2003). The authors explored the influence of an individual's team identification, eustress, group affiliation, and self-esteem enhancement on college student attendance and word-of-mouth behavior. The study's findings suggested that "when motivated by team identification, group affiliation, and self-esteem enhancement, there was a significant, direct relationship with intent to attend sporting events for both men and women" (p. 160). Other research has examined spectator motivation for women's professional soccer and found five motivation characteristics of spectator support including; sport interest, team interest, vicarious achievement, role modeling, and entertainment value (Funk, Mahony, & Ridinger, 2002). James and Ross (2002) compared consumers of major and minor league baseball and discovered that the two groups had different motives for attending games. Major League Baseball consumers were interested in the drama of the games and the skill of the players while minor league attendees were motivated by the desire to spend time with friends. The same authors examined motives for non-revenue collegiate sports and found participants scored general sport attributes such as entertainment, skill, and drama higher than motives dealing with self-definition and personal benefits (James & Ross, 2004).

Personal Investment Theory

Maehr and Branskamp's (1986) personal investment theory presents a relevant platform to examine sport consumer motivation. Wann, Melnick, Russell, and Pease (2001) and Wann, Bayens, and Driver (2004) actually utilized personal investment theory to analyze sport consumption motives. Personal investment examines the course of action rather than a specific psychological state. The concept is one that can be reflected in the degree of attraction one has toward something, like attending a basketball game (Maehr & Branskamp, 1986). Using this theory the emphasis of the analysis is on something that is "observable, objective, and quantifiable" (Maehr & Branskamp, 1986, p. 9). A rewards program allows an organization to observe the attendance behaviors of a particular targeted demographic. Personal investment theory identifies three elements: perceived options, sense of self, and personal incentives that are needed to determine motivation and allows analysis of the factors that go into a person's decision-making process (Wann et al., 2001). Included in these three dimensions are a number of underlying motivational factors that influence how people spend their time, money, and energy. In order to apply these factors into marketing strategy it is important to further explore the three dimensions of personal investment theory.

Perceived Options

A person acts based on the options created or presented to them. The availability and acceptability of the option is a critical factor in determining action (Maehr & Branskamp, 1986). Therefore, in order to better understand the factors of motivation in personal investment theory, one first must start with understanding a person's perceived options. For a UNLV student, a number of different entertainment options abound. Las Vegas, Nevada, where UNLV is located, is an urban setting of roughly two million residents and is known as "The entertainment capital of the world," offering shows, clubs, restaurants, and a wide range of other activities. Sport events occur on a routine basis, ranging from highly visible professional sport events to small, less viable minor league and amateur contests. There are also many outlets available to consume sport indirectly, which can make the weighing of options even more difficult. Future availability also relates to the concept of perceived options. In the case of a student rewards program, not attending a game decreases the chances of being able to attend a rivalry game or receive some kind of reward. By connecting the student rewards program with the highly attractive game or reward it is possible to increase the perceived value of the contests leading up that game.

Another factor in the discussion of perceived options is the acceptability of the options. If an event is seen as acceptable by a particular reference group the option should appear as a more attractive alternative than one that is not seen as acceptable. Wakefield (1995) found that if an individual's reference group approves of going to a game, the game experience itself is perceived more favorably. Therefore, if a college student's reference group views attending a basketball game as an acceptable and attractive option it will receive precedence over less attractive opinions and be judged more favorably. A rewards program connects to this factor by strengthening the allure of the games as it connects them to a desirable outcome, such as attending a rivalry game or receiving some type of reward.

Sense of Self

Another component in personal investment theory is the sense of self or personal identity, which as Wann et al. (2001) note, relates mostly to the concept of team identification. Team identification is one of the most important psychological factors affecting attendance. A strong sense of self and connection to a team should make individuals more inclined toward investing themselves in attending games (Maehr & Branskamp, 1986). Fans or those who are more deeply engaged with a team than a less involved spectator will view the team as an extension of themselves (Wann et al., 2001). Team identification is often expressed by the phenomenon of basking in reflected glory (BIRG) or publicly announcing one's affiliation with a team. Connecting a rewards program as part of the "team experience" should help to strengthen team identification for those who are already fans as well as those with a lower degree of identification.

Personal Incentives

Personal incentives include the reasons for an individual to initially become a spectator/fan or decide to continue to attend sporting events. Task incentives relate to the certain aspect of the sport or contest that attracts students to games (Wann et al., 2001). UNLV fans express a strong preference to attend the UNR game because of the history between the two schools and the state "bragging rights" associated with the contest. Ego incentives are an intrinsic element that motivates fans to attend games. The student body at UNLV prides itself on creating an intimidating atmosphere for opposing teams, which may create a sense of pride for students who feel they play a role in causing an opposing team to perform below their potential.

The social factor of the personal incentive element may be the most important factor in the success of a student rewards program as it addresses fans'/spectators' desire to attend an event to socially engage with others. As suggested by Swanson et al. (2003), teams should provide opportunities for social interaction to increase camaraderie. Encouraging students to register in groups for the rewards program helps to emphasize attending sporting events because of their social nature. Reward programs are structured so that all members of the group must attend each game in order for the other members to receive credit and benefits for attending. This creates pressure on the students to organize and connect with members of the group for each of the games, creating social interaction that is often missing with other marketing strategies, such as promotional giveaways. The social aspect of attending games would also have an influence on less committed spectators who want to be involved in a group. This strategy supports the suggestion offered by Wakefield (1995), who noted, "from a more general marketing standpoint, if team and league managements are concerned about raising attendance levels, they must attempt to raise the levels of social acceptance of going to the game for various light-attending segments" (p. 348).

Conclusion

In order to execute a successful rewards program it is important to address the factors influencing motivation as well as the three dimensions of personal investment theory. Based on the information provided, three guidelines have been created to help in the development and implementation of a rewards program:

Guideline #1. Supplemental marketing strategies need to be designed and executed in order to increase the attractiveness of an event or reward program.

Having a rewards program in place is not enough to attract fans, especially if the outcome reward does not appeal to the customer segment you are targeting. Additional marketing activities need to be implemented to enhance appeal. Giveaways, half-time entertainment, and in-game promotions are some ways in which to strengthen the allure of a rewards program.

Guideline #2. Marketing activities should be aimed at developing stronger connections with the team.

When implementing marketing strategies in conjunction with a rewards program it is important to make sure they are used in a way to help form stronger connections to the team. A strong focus on customer service is essential to developing these bonds and building trust with consumers. Steps should be taken to make sure all customer service elements are given the highest priority. In addition, highlighting unique qualities of a team and promoting rivalries could also be used to strengthen fan-team connections.

Guideline #3. Marketing campaigns should emphasize the social aspects of attending an event.

The social aspect of a rewards program should be highlighted and promoted. People should be encouraged to come in groups and promotions aimed at unifying a fan base should be implemented. An example of the social element that has become more common at sporting events is "White Outs," where fans are encouraged to wear white t-shirts as a sign of unity.

Armed with a greater understanding of the motivation of sport consumers and personal investment theory, Nicholas realized he would need to answer some questions before he could successfully develop this rewards program. No issue was more pressing than figuring out how to structure the rewards program to make it most effective. In order to do that, he needed to find the best way to utilize UNLV's rivalry with UNR so as to maximize the appeal of this program to students. Would the notion of building upon a rivalry game work at UNLV? Another question he was contemplating was how to use personal investment theory to generate higher levels of commitment toward the rewards program. Also, besides the rewards program, what other strategies and tactics could he develop to increase the connection with the student fan base? Although the work involved with designing and implementing this student rewards program would be substantial, Nicholas couldn't wait to get the basketball season started.

Editor's Note: Teaching notes for this case study are available at www.fitinfotech.com.

References

Anderson, M. (2009, September 7). UNLV braces for more budget cuts. Las Vegas Review Journal. Retrieved from http://www.lvrj.com/sports/57642842.html

Armstrong, K. L. (2007). Self, situations, and sport consumption: An exploratory study of symbolic interactionism. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30, 111-129.

Fulks, D. L. (2008). 2004-2006 revenue and expenses of Division 1 intercollegiate athletic programs report. Report of the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Retrieved from http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/RE2008.pdf

Funk, D. C., & James, J. (2001). The psychological continuum model: A conceptual framework for understanding an individual's psychological connection to sport. Sport Management Review, 4, 119-150.

Funk, D. C., Mahony, D. F., & Ridinger, L. L. (2002). Characterizing consumer motivation as individual difference factors: Augmenting the sport interest inventory (SII) to explain level of sport. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 11, 33-43.

James, J. D., & Ross, S. D. (2002). The motives of sport consumers: A comparison of major and minor league baseball. International Journal of Sport Management, 3, 180-198.

James, J. D., & Ross, S. D. (2004). Comparing sport consumers motivations across multiple sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13, 17-24.

Kansas State University (2009). Student rewards program announced. Retrieved from http://www.kstatesports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=400&AT CLID=20482555

Kim, B. D., Shi, M., & Srinivasan, K. (2001). Reward programs and tacit collusion. Marketing Science, 20, 99-120.

Luellen, T. B., & Wann, D. L. (2010). Rival salience and sport team identification. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 19, 97-106.

Maehr, M. L., & Branskamp, L. A. (1986). The motivation factor: A theory of personal investment. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Mueller, T. S., & Sutherland, J. C. (2010). Heroes and villains: Increasing fan involvement in pursuit of "The Elusive Fan." Journal of Sport Administration and Supervision, 2, 20-29.

NCAA (2009). 2009 National college basketball attendance. Retrieved from http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/stats/m_basketball_RB/Reports/2009mb battend.pdf

Rein, I., Kotler, P., & Shields, B. (2006). The elusive fan: Reinventing sports in a crowded marketplace. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Shelton, H., Loucks, N., Fallica, C. (2008). Counting down the most prestigious programs since 1984-85. Retrieved from http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=3501739

Sloan, L. R. (1989). The motives of sport fans. In J. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games and play: Social and psychological viewpoints (2nd ed., pp. 175-240). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Swanson, S. R., Gwinner, K., Larson, B. V., & Janda, S. (2003). Motivations of college-student game attendance and word-of-mouth behavior: The impact of gender differences. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12, 151-162.

Trail, G. T., Anderson, D. F., & Fink, J. (2000). A theoretical model of sport consumption behavior. International Journal of Sport Management, 1, 154-180.

Trail, G. T., Robinson, M. J., Dick, R. J., & Gillentine, A. J. (2003). Motives and points of attachment: Fans versus spectators in intercollegiate athletics. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12, 217-227.

UNLV Basketball. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.coachkruger.com/Rebels/Default.aspx

Wakefield, K.L. (1995). The pervasive effects of social influence on sporting event attendance. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 19, 335-351.

Wann, D. L. (2006). The causes and consequences of sport team identification. In A. A. Raney & J. Bryant (Eds.), Handbook of sports media (pp. 331-352). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1990). Die-hard and fair-weather fans: Effects of identification on BIRGing and CORFing tendencies. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 14, 103-117.

Wann, D., Bayens, C., & Driver, A. (2004). Likelihood of attending a sporting event as a function of ticket scarcity and team identification. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13, 209-213.

Wann, D. L., Melnick, M. J., Russell, G. W., & Pease, D. G. (2001). Sport fans: The psychology and social impact of spectators. New York, NY: Routledge Press.

Ted B. Peetz is a doctoral student in Sport Education Leadership at the University of Nevada Las Vegas. His research interests include sport consumer behavior and the use and effectiveness of athlete endorsers. Table 1. Percentage of student ticket used 2008-2009 vs. 2009-2010 comparison 2008-2009 season 2009-2010 season % Student tickets % Student tickets % used used Difference Game 1 18.5% 40.9% 22.4% Game 2 46.0% 52.7% 6.7% Game 3 23.8% 39.6% 15.8% Game 4 32.3% 50.9% 18.6% Game 5 23.0% 53.8% 30.8% Game 6 44.5% 55.7% 11.2% Game 7 56.6% 60.8% 4.2% Game 8 54.5% 82.0% 27.5% Game 9 46.3% 72.6% 26.3% Game 10 52.2% NA NA Kansas Game 88.7% 78.2% -10.5% Averages 38.3% * 56.5% 18.2% Note: * In the 2008-2009 season 10 home games were played before the Kansas game compared to nine during the 2009-2010 year. The average calculation compared the first nine games from both seasons. (N. Warren, personal communication, March 29, 2010) Table 2. Average student attendance 2008-2009 vs. 2009-2010 comparison 2008-2009 season 2009-2010 season Student attendance Student attendance Difference Game 1 758 2040 1282 Game 2 1888 2629 741 Game 3 978 1976 998 Game 4 1328 2541 1213 Game 5 946 2685 1739 Game 6 1829 2777 948 Game 7 2324 3033 709 Game 8 2237 4091 1854 Game 9 1902 3623 1721 Game 10 2145 NA NA Kansas Game 3642 3900 258 Averages 1576 2822 1246 Note: * In the 2008-2009 season 10 home games were played before the Kansas game compared to nine dur-ing the 2009-2010 year. The student attendance comparison totals compared the first nine games from both seasons. (N. Warren, personal communication, March 29, 2010)