UNC Charlotte Football

[nowensone]

That is not the only way to interpret the voting results, otherwise we'd have to make the obvious parallel conclusion that a majority of Americans don't give a damn about this country since they don't vote in political elections. Most Americans likely do care about the country but don't vote for a variety of reasons that are probably similar to ones in the football vote. Except that here, football is obviously not of any true importance when compared to typical reasons to vote on issues. In that light, a turnout of greater than 1/3 is actually pretty good.

[monsoon]

That is not the only way to interpret the voting results, ..... In that light, a turnout of greater than 1/3 is actually pretty good.

It's the only way to interpret it in my book. This was an online poll that anybody in the school could have gotten too at any time over a period of weeks and still they could only get 1/3 to participate. I think comparing that to an election that lasts just one day where you have to travel to a polling location is again more spin in hopes of validating something that has failed to prove any interest in football at UNCC.

Furthermore we are also talking about voting for something that supporters are claiming will be a big social experience (unlike a governmental election) and you can't have a social experience if most of the people are not interested in participating.

[atlrvr]

If I was one of the organizers of this vote, I would do everything I could to hide the fact this vote shows the complete lack of interest in football at UNCC by the majority of the student population. Of course they are going to spin the results as something positive which was just done above, but anyone with any sense should conclude from these results that UNCC needs to put its priority on academic facilities and not a football team.

That's just a statistical fallacy.

That's akin to saying, Democrats recieved more votes than Republicans in 2006, but only 37% of the country's voting age population voted, so the vote shows the complete lack of interest in Democrats.

EDITED**** The time of the poll is meaningless. While is helped increase the sample size, it would be completely inaccurate to assume that it changed the results of those who voted. You also have to consider how this was marketed. Was just an email sent out? To compare that to a national election that have months of press coverage, people "getting out the vote", etc., then I would argue that this vote had a much lower profile, and therefore had a much lower participation rate than if it had enjoyed the same resources.

Lastly, it can be argued that 63% of the population didn't vote, because of the complete lack of interest in stopping football or rising fees. Again, its a huge statistical fallacy to assume people's motivation for not voting. You can't infer motivation into a statistically valid poll.

I don't understand why anyone should be opposed with continuing to study the idea? If the school imposes an extra $200-$400 dollars per year fee that a majority of the people elected (that cared enough about how the school spends their money to actually vote) on football, then what's the issue? There were plenty of amenities at UNCC that I never used, but I'm sure my tuition and fees helped cover.

[monsoon]

That's just a statistical fallacy.

That's akin to saying, Democrats recieved more votes than Republicans in 2006, but only 37% of the country's voting age population voted, so the vote shows the complete lack of interest in Democrats.....

I will say this again. Unlike an election for government we are talking an election for something that is being claimed to be a social experience. You can't have a social experience if you can't get people to participate. Also unlike a municipal election, this one in comparison was extremely easy to poll in. The statistics speak for themselves. 2/3rds of the participants did not participate in this very easy vote, and to me, if they won't vote in a poll like this, they are not likely to go to a football game.

If the need was there for something such as this the polling should have been much higher and I think it is fair to conclude the students are not interested in it.

[atlrvr]

^ I edited my previous post to address these points.

[monsoon]

^ I edited my previous post to address these points.

Well.... before you chatise me over jumping to conclusions, this is what the supporters of the vote are saying.

As the administration moves forward in the consideration of adding a college football team to the Charlotte 49er Athletic Department, the results of this poll will be held as the definitive opinion of the student body for 2007.

You should send them a letter stating they are making a statistical fallacy. If you judge me for my conclusions on this vote, I would hope you would hold them to the same standard. That is what I am doing.

[atlrvr]

I would only tell them that their poll is a statistically valid opinion of the student body....looking at the sample size and running the standard formula for polls, this means there is a 1.2% margin of error that this poll accurately reflected 99% of the population.

I understand your arguement that the lack of votes indicates lack of interest in football, but again, that defeats the whole purpose of polls. You can't speculate of what the remainder of the population would have selected or their reason for not voting. We do know that 37% or so cared enough about the issue one way or the other to vote, and of those people, an significant majority would be willing to pay more for football, and a significant minority do not want to pay more.

[RubberNecker]

Well.... before you chatise me over jumping to conclusions, this is what the supporters of the vote are saying.

As the administration moves forward in the consideration of adding a college football team to the Charlotte 49er Athletic Department, the results of this poll will be held as the definitive opinion of the student body for 2007.

You should send them a letter stating they are making a statistical fallacy. If you judge me for my conclusions on this vote, I would hope you would hold them to the same standard. That is what I am doing.

If people didn't want to pay for football...don't you think they would have voted against it? Just because 1/2 of the students didn't vote, doesn't mean they don't support it. If they didn't support it or didn't want to pay the fees, they could have voted against it.

All that it means when 1/2 of the student population didn't vote is...that 1/2 of the student population didn't vote. You can't make assumptions of what you believe non-voting people think.

[NCN8ive]

It's great news that almost 80% of voters say they would pay more for football. We're one step closer to getting football at UNCC. Sounds like the Board of Trustees wanted 25% turnout and 75% support. Both numbers were overwhelmingly exceeded...this is VERY good news!

[AuLukey]

I will leave the statistical argument to metro and atlrvr. This isn't about not voting for whatever reason. As it has been said, I would think that those opposed to paying extra fees for football would've been much more apt to fill out the poll to attempt to avoid such fees. The same can be said for not voting because you don't care. Well heck, if 1/3 of the current student population voted and they go to games, consider the forecasted population of UNCC in the next decade to be 35,000ish, one third of that (11,600) is enough to fill a small stadium (because let's face it, we're not getting a grand stadium, if any, anytime soon.)

It is now a wait and see. I can see this issue dying down until we hear updates from the committee organized to tackle this issue.

While many people wonder why we are willing to pay extra money to get a team, they aren't paying for it, so who cares? If having a team in Charlotte comes at little to no expense to tax payers, I say it is a win/win for Charlotte and should be hoped for. It brings increased tax revenue in the form of ticket sales to the public, parking fees at the park and rides accompanying the NELRT, the LRT itself will most likely benefit, as might the taxi industry and buses that run to and from the campus/stadium. Sure, the traffic will get bad six times a year. Oh no!! As if that doesn't happen all over town on weekends anyway: Panthers games clog the interstates for a couple hours, as do the yearly bowl game, the numerous concerts all at the various venues across our city, the seven bigger races at Lowes Motor Speedway, and any big high school games. I think that area can survive a couple hours of gridlock on the occasional saturday seeing as most of the spectators will live close enough that they won't be clogging up our highways for more than maybe an hour. I'd be surprised if the interstates were effected at all. Local restaurants and bars will see increased business those days as will grocers and gas stations. I cannot see how this is bad for the city. It is the equivalent of a giant concert (which Verizon Wireless Amphitheater is coincidentally right down the street.)

Maybe the student body's priorities are not 100% straight, but at least we are willing to pay for it. It will come as no cost to you at all and will help Charlotte in the long run, both the university and the city. Like I said, a win-win.

[soccer1guy_99]

I have to agree with metro on this point. This is not a scientific poll, so statistical significance cannot be stated. The result of this poll proves only that those motivated enough to vote, would support football at UNC-Charlotte. It says nothing of those that were not motivated enough to vote. Significance can only be proven if this was a random sample, which it was not. While this vote by the students shows some support, a properly designed and executed poll would be much more telling. Hopefully, the official study done by the Board of Trustees will provide a better idea of support on and around campus as well as financial feasibility!

[monsoon]

When results are reported as just statistics then that is a clear sign that a spin of a failed referendum is taking place. Assuming that UNCC's population is 21,000 then we have the following.

• 8170 voted (rounded)
  
• 1800 voted for no fees to pay for it
  
• 2120 voted for less than $200
  
• 4250 voted to pay more than $200 for it.
  
• 4820 voted to attend more than 5 games
  
• 4820 more interested because of football
  

So basically there are about 4500 people at UNCC that are interested enough in football to pay for it and would routinely attend games. This is 21% of the school population/. I would bet that when push came to shove and you make them actually start paying these fees, then support would drop even more.

Based on these real numbers, that is at best only 4500 people have said they would support football, that pretty much damns all the claims in my book why this should be a priority for the school. They could just use the football stadium at Vance High School if they really wanted to do this as this isn't anywhere close to enough people to warrant the building of a football stadium. I hope the people who make the decisions are keen enough to sort through the gibberish being reported by the student council about this vote. The student council should be ashamed of themselves for hiding behind the statistics they are reporting.

[Justadude]

I would have to assume that many of those who did not vote are commuters and adult students who would definitely not appreciate having several hundred dollars' worth of fees tacked onto their annual costs.

If having a team in Charlotte comes at little to no expense to tax payers, I say it is a win/win for Charlotte and should be hoped for.

Now, this I can definitely agree with. If UNCC can find a way to make this happen without a big public bill -- and without taking resources away from academic programs -- then more power to 'em. I seriously doubt that could happen, but I would be quite proud to see UNCC blaze a trail of cost-effectiveness in college sports.

[NLP]

I would have to assume that many of those who did not vote are commuters and adult students who would definitely not appreciate having several hundred dollars' worth of fees tacked onto their annual costs.

Now, this I can definitely agree with. If UNCC can find a way to make this happen without a big public bill -- and without taking resources away from academic programs -- then more power to 'em. I seriously doubt that could happen, but I would be quite proud to see UNCC blaze a trail of cost-effectiveness in college sports.

It HAS to happen this way by law. Education dollars (can not) and public dollars (yeah right, we're not NC State with the RBC Center) will never be used nor were they ever envisioned to be used.

This election DESTROYED any previous election turnout at UNC Charlotte. It was an outrageous success that more than doubled the expected voter turnout (the voter turnout for the prior SGA election was around 560 people). It's crazy to say that those who didn't vote are passively against football. Traditionally when one abstains from voting it's widely regarded as passive APPROVAL. But no need to go that route, the numbers speak volumes. 80% of those who voted are willing to pay a fee that is believed to be in the range necessary to support football at UNC Charlotte. Spin it however you want, try to deconstruct it however you want. The PR people at UNC Charlotte went so far as to issue a statement saying the BOT will consider the vote reflective of the wishes of the students.

Does anyone really believe that voter turnout would have to be higher? How many people turned out for the Arena vote in Charlotte? Good grief.

[monsoon]

^Relative turnout is irrelevant and it is, as I said earlier, a spin on the results to hide the fact that so few care about football at UNCC that even an effortless online poll yields bad numbers.

The only number that matters is the 4,500 who indicated some positives on either attending games or spending their money for it.

The fact of the matter is that since about 4,500 people attending UNCC care about football to go online and answer a poll pretty much crushes the claims being made that it would be a great social experience that would bond the school together. And since 4500 isn't even close to being just a majority, I would say that it also indicates that most people attending UNCC would be against spending any public money on football as they are there to get an education and not attend sports games.

And if you can't get the students to support football at UNCC there isn't a snowball's chance in hell the at large community would. Charlotte isn't a backwash college town and there is more going on here than one large university.

[NCN8ive]

I really think some of you are trying to explain the football experience to some people who will never get it. The BOT and the school will do what they think is right. I certainly know that I'd love for them to create a football team. As for trying to justify or explain the concept to others who are against it no matter what...you're probably wasting your breath.

[AuLukey]

I really think some of you are trying to explain the football experience to some people who will never get it. The BOT and the school will do what they think is right. I certainly know that I'd love for them to create a football team. As for trying to justify or explain the concept to others who are against it no matter what...you're probably wasting your breath.

That is the very reason why I have let this thread be. Just like with other things, it is impossible to convince every person out there, especially those with the mindset that money for things like this could be used elsewhere, that any fact is true. There will always be at least one person out there to argue even facts of nature (although I'd love to meet the guy who argues gravity.)

Simple fact of the matter is that money being proposed for football can't be used elsewhere because that money does not yet exist. The tuition increase, ticket and merchandise sales, and private donations towards football are the only things that will pay for this program and/or stadium (a la student union.) This is nothing that would otherwise exist if not for these other sources of money. This has nothing to do with unelected tuition increases or public money being used to fund this, it is the idea that if somebody wants something bad enough, they'll just have to pay for it themselves.

As I have said before, I'm not going to go into a great spiel about how a 1/4 voter turnout for any kind of mass population poll is nothing short of amazing, but I will leave it at that. George Bush is president, we're still in Iraq, illegal immigrants are here to stay, the arena was built, students at UNCC are willing to pay for football themselves, and the world will continue spinning at least another day.

Edited March 27, 2007 by aussie luke

[NCN8ive]

Well said...

[monsoon]

That is the very reason why I have let this thread be. Just like with other things, it is impossible to convince every person out there, especially those with the mindset that money for things like this could be used elsewhere, that any fact is true. There will always be at least one person out there to argue even facts of nature (although I'd love to meet the guy who argues gravity.) ...

Oh stop being disingenuous. The reason you have stopped posting in this thread is because there aren't any rebuttal to the facts at hand. So instead you choose to question the credibility of those you disagree with. Next time you decide to create a post only to inform us that you are not posting in a thread anymore, why don't you spare us the trouble and not bother at all. If you ask me, its a bunch of sour grapes.

The fact of the matter is they had the vote, a majority of the students did not vote in support of it, case closed. It's time to move on.

[swh1972]

By using the same argument, you can dismiss the validity of the Arena Vote, as there was not an overwhelming turnout for that either. Fact is, the best case scenario for large public votes is a 50% turnout. We can elect a President with about 25% of the population behind them, and can probably elect someone to Congress with 10-15% support.

[NLP]

I was a little wrong in my numbers. The election turnout was 20 times greater than the previous and also the highest EVER in any school in the state.

Niner Online story

These numbers may not have impressed you, monsoon, but they have impressed the Board of Trustees at the University. Personally I have no problem with you not being for football. I expect opposition. I'm just suprised at your suggestion of dismissal of the topic as if there was no support.

[monsoon]

For the moment lets forget that you are comparing an online poll that lasted for weeks to a real election that lasts one day and which requires people to go travel somewhere to vote.

I don't disagree at all about the effects of eligible people not voting. This is why the United States finds itself in a war that nobody wants. Elections have consequences and the consequence of this football poll was that it shows all of the arguments being made for football, that is football will create some king of big social utopia at UNCC where one doesn't exist today and where people will donate lots of money because of it, just are not true.

[AuLukey]

For the moment lets forget that you are comparing an online poll that lasted for weeks to a real election that lasts one day and which requires people to go travel somewhere to vote.

I don't disagree at all about the effects of eligible people not voting. This is why the United States finds itself in a war that nobody wants. Elections have consequences and the consequence of this football poll was that it shows all of the arguments being made for football, that is football will create some king of big social utopia at UNCC where one doesn't exist today and where people will donate lots of money because of it, just are not true.

And no met, that's not what anybody has said. I may have to repeat what I have said time and time again on here but we KNOW it won't fix UNCC's lack of identity and surrounding area support. That isn't the idea behind it. OMG somebody might want to watch football!! Somebody get a camera!!

[monsoon]

And no met, that's not what anybody has said. I may have to repeat what I have said time and time again on here but we KNOW it won't fix UNCC's lack of identity and surrounding area support. That isn't the idea behind it. OMG somebody might want to watch football!! Somebody get a camera!!

Don't even try it. There are dozens of posts from you here in this thread where you lament the lack of something to do at UNCC outside of classtimes and the weekend. Your answer for this was football.

[AuLukey]

Don't even try it. There are dozens of posts from you here in this thread where you lament the lack of something to do at UNCC outside of classtimes and the weekend. Your answer for this was football.

We need to stop going back and forth like this, this isn't supposed to be an argument. I'll say it one more time. Football by itself is not going to fix UNCC's identity, connectivity, attachment, or involvement issues. There, I said it. That is my opinion, don't change it. If I have said something before that counters that same notion, I take those statements back. Stop turning it into "oh but you said."

Now, as to what football COULD change. It could change the number of students who stay in town on weekends. It could change the level of school spirit at the school. It could have at least a small impact on the economy of the surrounding area of whatever stadium they ultimately decide to use. It will be fun. That's the idea. College is about education, but you have to at least have some fun along the way.