CU Athletics Final Copy-2

CU Athletics
Communication Strategies and Fan Engagement Initiatives
University of Colorado, Boulder

University of Colorado Athletics 2
Executive Summary
The research collected and analyzed for this project is specifically related to
communication strategies and fan engagement initiatives for the University of Colorado’s
athletic department. The University of Colorado identified a steep decrease in attendance during
the past decade as a significant problem. The objective of this research paper is to identify
effective ways to communicate to college students through social media in order to enhance the
gameday experience and increase attendance for the University of Colorado’s athletic teams.
Three studies were conducted to analyze several forms of communication and establish
the criteria of a successful communication strategy. The first study involved contacting
comparable universities to discuss communication strategies. The second study aimed to gather
statistical evidence of the best strategies for communicating with the University of Colorado’s
student body and the reasoning behind attending sporting events through an online Qualtrics
survey. In the final study, a focus group of eight CU students was held with the objective of
gaining students’ perspectives on what factors contribute to attending sporting events and which
forms of communication best resonate with the student body.
Evidence from our research showed students identified Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
and Snapchat as the best methods of social media communication channels. The social scene of
the game, stadium atmosphere, fan-to-fan interactions, and basking in reflected glory (BIRGing)
are all key components in creating the best gameday experience. Therefore, it is recommended
that CU Athletics implement a student ambassador program to increase student attendance
through an organized student walk to the stadium. Furthermore, a student driven social media
page dedicated to CU Athletics that sends out mass texts to the student body and bridges the gap
between students and athletes through creative social media accounts is recommended.

Table of Contents
Introduction page 5
Purpose Statement page 6
Research Questions page 7
Literature Review page 8
Effective Ways to Communicate with College Students page 8
Psychology of a college sport consumer page 8
Email effectiveness page 12
Communicating through Social Media page 13
Exposure through social media page 18
Enhancing the Gameday Experience page 19
Fan gameday engagement/experience page 21
Why college students attend sport events page 29
Best Practices page 36
Effective Ways to Communicate with College Students page 36
Communicating through Social Media page 39
Enhancing Game Day Experience page 44
Methods page 45
Student Survey page 45
Phone Interviews page 46
Focus Group page 49
Results page 51
Student Survey page 51

Phone Interviews page 62
Focus Group page 69
Discussion page 73
Research Question 1 page 73
Recommendations page 81
Student Ambassador Program and “Student Stampede” page 81
Implementing a Social Media Team page 82
Enhancing Student Gameday Experience page 84
Communicating with Students through Mass Texting page 87
Creating Personal Connections between Students and Athletes page 87
Conclusion page 90
References page 92
Appendix page 99
Appendix A: Student Survey page 99
Appendix B: Phone Interviews page 107
Appendix C: Focus Group page 136

Ticket sales and attendance at major college athletic events have declined at alarming
rates in recent years for college athletic programs. “Average student attendance at college
football games is down 7.1% since 2009, according to an analysis by The Wall Street Journal of
stadium turnstile records from about 50 public colleges with top-division I football teams. The
decline was 5.6% at colleges in the five richest conferences.” (Cohen, 2014, para. 3). Part of the
reason fans love college sports is enjoying the atmosphere of the game. The chants from the
student section after a questionable call, the singing of the fight song after a touchdown; it’s an
experience unlike any other. However, the loss of fandom especially within the student sections
of major universities is reason for concern. This poses a major short-term problem, as the lack of
student attendance hurts revenue, game day experience, school pride, and player
motivation. Poor attendance also poses an even larger potential long term problem, as future
alumni will not have fond memories of college football games they attended as students, which
may prevent them from returning in future years to visit as alumni:
Today's uninterested students, athletic directors worry, could easily become tomorrow's
uninterested alumni. ‘Current students are not that important [to ticket sales], per se,’
Dan Rascher, a sports management professor at the University of San Francisco,
said. ‘But you're trying to turn those current students into former students who are still
fans decades later. You want students, when they become alumni, to have that
attachment and come back for the games, and that's what's concerning athletic
departments.’ (New, 2014, para. 8-9).
The plummeting ticket sales and attendance have become a problem throughout the
nation, but in particular the University of Colorado faces an intensified dilemma as Cohen (2014)
mentions that ticket sales from 2009-2014 declined by 53%. “CU has drawn fewer than 40,000

fans at Folsom Field four times this year for the first time since 1985. Only six teams in the five
major BCS conferences are averaging fewer fans than CU” (Henderson, 2013, para. 10). To
counteract this poor record and lack of fan engagement, the athletic department has dropped their
student season ticket prices for an all sport pass from $175 to $99, a 40% discounted price. In
comparison to other Division I power five conference teams, this price is an absolute bargain.
According to the University of Oregon Athletic website (“Student Ticket Info”, 2016), season
tickets for students are $367 for football alone.
This brings up the perplexing question of how to effectively communicate with a student
body in order to get them to attend sporting events for their university. The research that follows
concerns the strategies other college athletic programs find effective and seeks to understand
how the top programs communicate with their students successfully. The research includes an
overview of the incentives offered to get students to attend college athletic events as well as a
review of how other athletic programs communicate with their students to encourage them to
attend sporting events.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this research project is to determine the best communication strategies and
mediums to reach CU college students in an effort to increase ticket sales, fan attendance and
college student engagement with a specific focus on the 2016 University of Colorado football
season. A secondary purpose is to identify amenities and benefits that resonate with students,
and will influence them to attend football games, as well as other CU athletic events. This is an
important and relevant topic to the University of Colorado as student ticket sales and attendance
at sporting events have declined at an alarming rate in the last decade.

Research Questions
RQ1: What are the most effective ways for CU athletics to communicate with the
University of Colorado student body?
RQ2: What communication strategies and mediums will resonate with college students
and result in an increase in ticket sales for the University of Colorado’s athletic program?
RQ3: What communication strategies and mediums will influence CU students to attend
more University of Colorado football games and athletic events?
RQ4: What will incentivize students to stay the entire duration of each football game?

Literature Review
Effective Ways to Communicate with College Students
Psychology of a college sports consumer. Attracting people to a sporting event is a
more complicated procedure than one might imagine. Apart from the usual topics of team
success and effective promotions, it is essential to delve into the psychology of the sport
consumer in general before focusing on college students specifically. By doing this, we can
discover what drives a person to support a team and show their support by attending the
games. As a result, the most effective communication strategies will become apparent once we
understand the psychological attributes common among sports fans. Like any other business
sector, consumer behavior is an integral part of tailoring marketing efforts. The sports world is
no different, and by exploring this topic we believe that the right opportunities will present
themselves in terms of drawing more fans to CU sporting events. Rick Grieve, a psychologist at
Western Kentucky University, states the goal very simply:
It is important to take a look at why people attend, not just what kind of people attend.
Aspects of different sports are going to be appealing to different people. If you can
understand what is appealing about your sport, you can market it in a way that people
will be most likely to respond positively to it (cited in King, 2010, para. 29).
It is important to understand what is appealing about the sport of college football and how to
communicate that message to the multitude of students attending the school. Dan Wann,
Professor at Murray State, has studied factors that motivate sports fans for over 20 years. He
came up with eight basic motives that drive people to follow sports, which include the following:
entertainment, escape, economics, aesthetics, family, group affiliation, self-esteem, and eustress
(King, 2010). The first six of these factors are fairly self-explanatory, with self-esteem referring

to the positive feeling of supporting a winning team while eustress refers to the uncertainty of the
outcome of a game. Wann found group affiliation and family mainly drove college sports fans to
attend games. Fans were more likely to attend an event based on images of others gathered at
the stadium than images of the players. These findings support the notion that the social aspect
of a college football game is the main driving force for attendance. Wann sums up his research
by saying, “Let’s find a few things you think might matter about these people and let’s get on
those” (King, 2010, para. 39).
Merrill Melnick took a slightly different approach to see what draws a consumer to a
sporting event. Melnick (1993) identified the three basic needs of humankind as the following:
community, engagement, and dependency. These are the traits that fans also look for when
attending a game. Melnick goes on to discuss how the draw of casual sociability (stranger to
stranger) entices people to attend a sporting event (1993). This is especially relevant for the
topic of college sports, as the effort and willingness to meet and connect with new people is
important for the student demographic. Furthermore, Melnick talks about how essential
spectators are to the game when addressing the topic of sociability:
They recognize, from the moment they pass through the turnstiles, that they are crucial to
the event. Without their physical presence, there can be no contest. Thus, spectators
share in the collective knowledge that they are vital, important, and integral to the action.
The role behaviors associated with the status/position of "spectator" are also known and
understood. It is expected that spectators will clap, boo, yell, scream, hiss, or "do the
wave," as their moods and passions dictate. (Melnick, 1993, p. 50)
Fans attending a sporting event that are in a similar mindset as other fans are likely to act in the
same manner as the game goes on. It is the aforementioned commonalities between spectators

that spurs casual sociability. It is essential for a communal atmosphere to be present, brought
about by joint cheers for the team while simultaneously celebrating oneself. A sporting event
creates a party-like atmosphere that demands interaction with like-minded individuals seated
around each other. This differs from non-sport experiences, where the mood is completely
different and neighbors may not share the same love for the team that most fans do. Melnick
cites the ecological setting of a game, the absence of temporal restraints, and a genuine openness
on the part of most fans to interact with each other as the reasons that make a sporting event a
great place to initiate conversations with strangers and satisfy the need for social interaction
(Melnick, 1993). It is much easier and more enjoyable to socially interact at a sporting event.
The architecture of the stadium can also play a major role in attracting fans to a
game. Each of the following contribute to creating a positive experience for spectators:
comfortable seats, air conditioning, good sight lines, non-glare lighting, numerous easily
accessible rest rooms, food and drink concession areas, walk ramps, and exits. This research
strongly suggests that legroom and elbowroom, width of seats, aisle space, and ambient
temperature inside the stadium are essential aspects that an administrator must recognize and act
upon (Melnick, 1993). The Toledo Mud Hens of the International Baseball League implemented
‘blind date night’ as a successful tool to draw fans to the stadium and take advantage of the close
quarters that sporting events offer. On Saturdays, the Mud Hens encourage people to sit next to
others of the opposite sex. The fan response found to be incredibly positive, spurring
management to contemplate enlarging the idea in coming seasons. Melnick suggests several
ideas such as setting aside sections for particular age groups, neighborhoods, widows and
widowers, divorced people, tall people, short people, gays, lesbians (1993).

In contrast, the tailgating experience is one that often draws fans away from the game
itself. Melnick states that many fans find that “the party inside the stadium is not nearly as fun as
the one outside” (Melnick, 1993, p. 97). Tailgaters often come to a sporting event hours, or even
days before game start time to set up camp, cook food, and partake in activities such as frisbee,
football, watching television, and socializing with other fans. The social scene is an ideal
location for interacting with friends, old and new. Because of this social scene, only a few
tailgaters feel it is necessary to continue on to the game and leave the fun of the tailgate
behind. “It's major league partying, bearing as much resemblance to ordinary picnicking as a
station wagon does to a Winnebago” (Johnson, 1985, p. 4). In order to achieve optimal success,
sport managers must cater to tailgaters by providing amenities, including special sections in the
parking lot for recreational vehicles, paved roads and play areas, picnic benches, restrooms,
shuttle rides to the game, and flexible lengths of stay (Melnick, 1993).
Food and drink is another aspect of the fan experience that heavily influences whether a
potential spectator attends a game. Options at concession stands are expected to be tasty,
attractive, and reasonably priced, served by clean and courteous handlers. This eases one’s
initial skepticism of the stigma attached to typical stadium food. Additionally, well-positioned
television monitors allow for all fans to keep up with the game even if stuck in a long concession
line. Another tactic to provide the best game experience is to change up the menu every two-to-
three weeks to provide variety and keep customers interested and wondering about what new
food choices may be available. As Melnick puts it, “Creative, well-researched additions to the
stadium or arena menu would add an exciting, unexpected dimension to the eating experience,
which may be the major reason for many spectators' attendance” (1993).

Email effectiveness. Related to the psychological makeup of fans is how teams
communicate most effectively with their fans. Currently, institutions such as the University of
Colorado use a school wide mass email to inform students of game times, news, and promotions
regarding the athletic department. Although this communication strategy reaches out to the
entire target market of Colorado students, whether this is successful or not is unclear. Rubin
(2013) explains how students tend to associate email with school and that relates to boring class
material. “Email has never really been a fun thing to use,” said Ms. Judge, age 19. “It’s always
like, ‘This is something you have to do.’ School is a boring thing. Email is a boring thing. It
goes together.’” (Rubin, 2013, para. 10). Athletic events are fun, exciting, and an escape from
school and work and should not be associated with the word “boring”. This negative perception
of email does not excite and motivate students to attend games as they already have an
unfavorable association between email and academics.
Another con of using email when communicating with college students is the short
amount of time students check and use their email. “Just how little are students using email
these days? Six minutes a day, according to an experiment done earlier this year by Reynol
Junco, an Associate Professor of Library Science at Purdue” (Rubin, 2013, para. 19). With
students using email only six minutes a day on average, there is a high possibility that students
will not see the email for a long period of time. With sports having set game times, the timing
behind informing fans is necessary and important.
Since email is used only six minutes a day by college students, the remaining 23 hours
and 54 minutes of the day is often spent on other forms of technology. Goodrich (2014)
references a study of Baylor University students that revealed on average women spend nearly
ten hours a day on their phone, while men are on their phone for nearly eight hours a day. A

majority of this time is split between text messaging and social media. This provides an
incredible marketing opportunity for companies. While social media communication continues
to become exponentially more popular, a new trend in communication is mass text messaging
due to the accessibility and simplicity. Rubin (2013) states that a new management system
called Canvas provides users with the option to be informed of news via email, text, Facebook
and Twitter. This can be translated and used by athletic departments to better inform fans of
game times and news in a timely manner.
Communicating Through Social Media
Out of the ten hours women college students spend on their phone a day and the eight
hours male college students spend on their phone, a large amount of that time is spent on social
media. Whether through Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Snapchat, people rely on these
interactive applications as sources of news for sports, entertainment, and politics. According to
Urban (2016), nearly 87% of 13-24 year olds use social media to regularly consume sports
related content. That is almost twice as much as those who use mainstream sports media through
websites and applications. With nearly every professional and Division I athletic team having an
official team page or username for all of the four major social media platforms, fans rely on
teams to provide information and entertainment to the public. Andrew Guerra of the University
of Oregon’s Warsaw Sports Marketing Center looked into the impact of social media on student
attendance of collegiate sporting events and the impact of social media. As seen in figure 1,
Guerra (2015) states that of the students of college programs within the Power 5 conferences,
56% of college students follow their University athletics’ on Facebook, 51% follow on Twitter,
31% follow on Instagram, 6% follow on Snapchat, and 25% of students don’t follow their
University athletics’ on any social media outlets.

In a more in depth study of social media’s impact on attendance, the attendance of those
who follow the teams’ social media are compared to those who do not follow any social media to
find any correlation in attendance. Through this study, Guerra (2015) found information on
students who follow their school's football team social media outlet compared to those who do
not. Figure 2 depicts the likelihood of fans attending sporting events based on whether or not
they follow their team on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Snapchat. Students who follow their
team’s Facebook page are much more likely to attend at least three football games than those
students who do not follow the Facebook page. Guerra (2015) found that 72.2% of the Facebook
followers attended at least three football games. Consequently, only 44.2% of non-followers
attended at least three games, resulting in a 28% difference in attendance, or approximately
1,500 students (based on average attendance around 6,000 for students). Similarly, those
students who follow the team’s Twitter page are more likely to attend games, which is supported
by the evidence that 74% of students who follow their team’s Twitter page attend at least three
football games, while 46.3% of non-followers attended at least three of the games. Instagram
had the highest percent of followers attend games, with 86% of followers attending at least three
games and 58.2% of non-followers attending at least three games. Instagram likely leads this

category because of the association Instagram has with socialization, such as posting pictures at
the tailgate or the game itself. Snapchat barely surpassed Twitter in the number of followers
who attend football games with 77% of followers attending at least three football games and
52.3% of non-followers attending at least three football games. These findings provide insight
that a large majority of followers will attend multiple games in a season, where as those who do
not follow the social media sites of teams tend to attend fewer games. Guerra notes that, “from
the logistic regression analysis we find that users of Facebook are 2.1 times more likely to attend
at least three games; Twitter 1.9; Instagram 1.7; Snapchat 1.6. The strong association of each
social media with attendance is likely due to the notion that people following on Facebook are
also following on Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat” (Guerra, 2015, p. 7). The simple
explanation for why followers are more likely to attend games is because those who follow a
team’s page are more involved in that team. More so, a student who has no intention of
attending games likely would not attribute him or herself as a sports fan and consequently would
not follow that team’s official social media pages. However, the findings show students who
follow official social media pages are more likely to identify as a sports fan and attend games.

A similar trend can be seen in basketball as shown in figure 3. Figure 3 shows that while
the percentage isn’t nearly as high, there is still a positive correlation supporting the notion that
those who follow the basketball team's’ social media will attend games more often than those
who do not.
As seen in figure 4, Postano (2013), a social platform by TigerLogic Corporation,
provides Universities and Colleges with a convenient and easy-to-use system consisting of social
media command centers, social displays on campuses and in stadiums, and social hubs for
websites. “The University of Virginia, University of Oregon, and Arizona State University,
among others, are using the Postano platform to see, connect, and engage with fan-centric social
media messages, images, and videos during college football games and throughout the season”
(Postano, 2013, para. 1). Social media plays a particularly important role in communicating with
fans because social media allows fans to engage, celebrate, and share game day moments with

their peers. Craig Pintens, Senior Associate Athletic Director of the University of Oregon, states
that by using Postano’s technology:
We were able to enhance the QuackCave, our social media command center. It enables
us to aggregate posts from coaches, players, teams and fans. The ability to project content
from social media into physical locations helps us keep conversation going around the
campus, engage the fans, and strengthen our community (Postano, 2013, para. 5).
A total of 616 professional athletes’ Twitter accounts were examined using
sportsin140.com. These randomly selected tweets were analyzed and broken down into six
different categories: interactivity, diversion, information, sharing, content, fanship, and
promotional. Interactivity, or professionals who communicate directly with fans and fellow
athletes, was found to have the largest percentage of Tweets at 34%. Diversion, or non-sports
related Tweets, was the second highest percentage at 28%. Information sharing, a ‘behind-the-
scenes’ look at the athletes’ careers came out to be 15%. Content, links, pictures, videos, etc,
accounted for 13% of tweets. Fanship, tweets from athletes about other athletes or teams, came

out to be 5%. Lastly, promotional, sponsorships, upcoming games, giveaways, etc., represented
5% of tweets. The findings of this research supports the gratification theory: the more
opportunities fans have to connect with the team, the more likely it is that they will continue to
identify with the team (Hambrick M., Simmons J., Greenhalgh G., Greenwell C., 2010, p. 463).
Exposure through social media. Not only can social media help provide strategies to
communicate with current fans, but social media can also foster a relationship with new fans by
exposing them to a team. In social media platforms such as Instagram and Twitter, acquiring
followers allows users to interact with one another. Fan-to-fan interaction is a great way to
spread awareness of a team and increase a fan base. Ideally, fans post pictures on Instagram or
Twitter and their followers see these pictures and either ‘like’ or comment, leading to a
conversation about the team that helps bridge the gap among sports fans.
Social media is unique in that it can unite fans all across the globe. A successful way to
engage fans is the “follow back” concept. What the “follow back” concept entails is when one
person follows another user first, and after the second user sees that they have been followed,
will pay back the action by following the first user back. The “follow back” concept is effective
in bringing people together because “following back also means that you’re making a new
connection that could benefit you and your work. You are expanding your network and sources
of information; using social media to get your finger on the pulse” (Coley, 2015. para 4). This
connection helps establish a feeling of involvement between fans and athletes. When a student
sees that several football players “follow back” or followed the individual first, it could lead to a
deeper affiliation with not just the team, but individual players, leading to greater fan
involvement and attendance.

Coley (2015) states that a follower on social media often helps disseminate your content
(ie. retweeting and sharing). This further expands your network and spreads the word to more
viewers than your individual followers. Urban (2016) also states that when respondents watch
sports-related content, respondents have a higher purchase intent for brands that use social
influencers. This context infers that the use of social media may directly influence the revenue
of a sports team whether it be from merchandise, ticket sales, or sponsors.
One of the best ways to achieve the goal of successfully communicating with college
students through social media is to excite students about collegiate sporting events and capitalize
on their passion and school spirit. According to Kirk Wakefield’s study at Baylor University,
“Passion had the strongest influences on social media activity related to the team. Passion
significantly influenced Facebook usage (.535, t = 4.70, p < .001) and Twitter usage (.521, t =
4.35, p < .001) related to the focal team. Social identification also had strong effects on
Facebook (.435, t = 4.62, p < .001) and Twitter (.388, t = 3.67, p < .001)” (Wakefield,
2016). Since the p values are less than .001 and the t values are relatively high, there is good
indication that the relationship between passion and social media usage is statistically significant
and not due to random chance. In fact, according to Wakefield, “[Regarding] the extent to which
individuals reported reading, posting, and exchanging social media content through the team’s
official Facebook or Twitter accounts, passion is the strongest predictor of social media usage
among all variables in the studies” (Wakefield, 2016, p. 7).
Enhancing the Gameday Experience.
The lack of attendance at sporting events not only hurts ticket sales and revenue, but also
greatly impacts the overall game day experience. It is hard enough to get fans to attend the
game, but it is another thing getting them to stay the entire duration of the game. Home field

advantage is a great asset for sport teams because teams often look to their fans late in games to
give them the needed energy to win the game. As Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross said,
“Fans are the most valuable members of our team.” Players feed off of the fans noise, energy,
and engagement and use it to their advantage. If fans leave games early, there is a potential drop
off in morale from the players and the home field advantage is eliminated.
Promotions can also be a valuable strategy to incentivize fans to stay the entirety of the
game. As seen in figure 5, Guerra (2015) notes that 70% of Power 5 college student fans will
stay the duration of the game if a free tee shirt is given at the end of the game, 36% of students
will stay for major concession discounts, 36% will stay for a seat upgrade at the next game, 43%
of students will stay for a loyalty point program in order to win prizes, 30% of students will wait
for a chance to meet players and coaches, 9% will stay for mobile interaction experiences, 29%
of students will stay for live music or a DJ, and finally, 48% of students will stay the duration of
a game if there is a sponsored post game party provided. Promotions are particularly effective in
incentivizing students because they enhance the gameday experience. For example, a fan
looking back at their time at the game would likely hold a higher value perception of the game if
they met a player or coach or upgraded their seat for next game. A young child meeting their
favorite player could create a lifelong loyal fan because of the positive affiliation with that
experience. Free t-shirts could spread awareness of the team around the community by students
continuing to wear the shirts outside of the stadium. Promotions are practical, strong incentives
commonly used to capitalize on student attendance.

Fan gameday engagement/ experience. Being actively engaged in the gameday
experience is one of, if not the most, influential factor when it comes to fans deciding to stay for
the entire duration of a sporting event. Insights from the college football gameday experience
found that “students indicated their favorite parts of the gameday experience were watching live
game action (23%), in stadium atmosphere (17%), and tailgating (15%)” (Guerra, 2015).
However, what is “fan engagement”, and how do we do it? Two perception studies were
conducted to confirm the proposed three-dimensional fan-engagement scale: management

cooperation, prosocial behavior, and performance tolerance (Masayuki, Y., Gordon, B., Makoto,
N., & Biscaia, R. 2014). Management cooperation was defined as:
A sport consumer’s collaborative, constructive participation in the value creation and
service delivery process at sporting events (e.g., providing constructive feedback to event
personnel to ensure the safety of spectators at the event site, and abiding by the
organization's’ policies regarding ethical fan conduct). (Auh, Bell, McLeod, & Shih,
2007; Bettencourt, 1997)
Additionally, according to Brodie, Hollebeek, & Ilic (2011), prosocial behavior is the act of sport
consumers engaging in network development, such as interpersonal or computer-mediated fan-
to-fan behaviors on behalf of the team. Finally, De Ruyter & Wetzels (2000) describe
performance tolerance as reflecting a sport consumers’ engagement by the display of team-
related products seen during unsuccessful team performance. Customer engagement captures a
variety of non-transactional consumer behaviors (Verhoef, Reinartz, & Krafft, 2010) and can be
useful for explaining how consumers and firms co-create new value propositions in non-
transactional buyer-seller exchanges (Hoyer, Chandy, Dorotic, Krafft, & Singh, 2010). The first
study examined what factors comprise fan engagement and how to validate the fan engagement
three-factor model. The second study judged validity by examining predecessors and
ramifications of fan engagement.
Despite numerous studies conducted, there is still confusion on how to conceptualize
customer engagement. Based on previous research, there are three divergent conceptualizations
apparent: cognitive, behavioral and cognitive/affective/behavioral (Masayuki et al., 2014, p.
400). The behavioral approach to customer engagement is measured on a behavioral-based
model. Engaged consumers’ behavior typically includes a number of non-transactional

behaviors, such as consumer-to-consumer interactions, blogging, writing reviews,
recommendations, or word-of-mouth activity. Based on these criteria, “customer engagement
reflects a consumer’s non-transactional behavior and is a significant route for creating, building,
and enhancing consumer-firm relationships” (Hoyer, et al., 2010, p. 402). On the contrary,
another view of customer engagement is based on insight and perception. Sprott, Czellar, and
Spangenberg (2009) note that consumers’ tend to incorporate their own favorite brands into the
self-concept of customer engagement.
Three main streams of research are relevant to this study: customer engagement in non-
transactional behaviors, customer engagement in transactional behaviors, and customer
engagement in long-term relationships with a sport team (Masayuki et al., 2014, p. 401). In
regards to sports, engaged consumers’ non-transactional behaviors include:
Self-enhancement by basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure, displays
of sport fandom, social interaction, play and rituals, fan community-related behavior,
performance tolerance, pregame tailgating parties, sharing knowledge of a game/team,
supportive word-of-mouth behavior, basking in spite of reflected failure, cutting off
reflected success, and participating in memorable marketing programs. (Masayuki et al.
2014, p. 401-402)
The second theme was customer engagement in transactional behaviors. Researchers have
focused on transactional behaviors such as, “attending games, watching games on television,
buying team products, purchasing peripheral game-related products, and participating in fantasy
sports” (Masayuki et al. 2014, p. 402). Finally, the third theme discussed states that several
researchers suggest sport consumers often maintain a long-term relationship with a sport team
(James, Kolbe & Trail, 2002). James et al. (2002) suggested that fans form an emotional and

subjective attachment to sport teams. Additionally, Jowdy and McDonald (2002) mentioned that
sport fans who are highly engaged have a strong desire for long-term relations with their favorite
teams, and often actively participate in building that relationship through fan loyalty programs,
season tickets, and booster memberships. The findings above justify the notion that sport
consumers engage in various behaviors, including “sport-related behaviors (e.g., attend, read,
watch, listen, and purchase), impression-management behaviors, relationship-building behaviors
(e.g., loyalty programs, season tickets, and booster memberships), and non-transactional extra-
role behaviors (e.g., social interaction, word-of-mouth, and participating in marketing
programs)” (Masayuki et al., 2014, p. 403). In the following section, we address how fan
engagement is conceptualized and measured in spectator sport.
“Before we conducted our main study, we first pretested the proposed fan-engagement
instrument with undergraduate students at a private university in Japan” (Masayuki et al., 2014,
p. 404). The main purpose of this pilot study was to create a reference point and a reliable scale
to compare results to. A total of 53 students rated their engagement levels in management
cooperation, prosocial behavior, and performance tolerance on a seven point Likert scale ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
For the main study, data was collected from a survey that was deployed with spectators at
a professional soccer game in east Japan. Out of the 431 surveys that were deployed to the
spectators, 99.3% were returned (428). An additional 26 surveys were thrown out for being
ineligible. This left a final remainder of 402 good responses, representing 93.3% of the original
431 surveys deployed. The goal of this study was to define and develop a conceptual model of
fan engagement, generate a survey, and determine the validity of the proposed fan engagement
scale with college student and sport consumer samples.

For the purpose of this study, fan engagement was defined as “a sport consumer’s extra-
role behavior in non-transactional exchanges to benefit his or her favorite sports team, the team’s
management, and other fans” (Masayuki et al., 2014, p. 403). Conceptually, the three-
dimensional model reflects the professional sport context, because professional sporting events
can create an environment in which sport consumers interact with other fans (Oliver, 1999),
create unique experiences (Decrop & Derbaix, 2010), and follow both successful and
unsuccessful teams (Mahony et al., 2000). The emerging customer engagement theory in
marketing, as described by Brodie et al. (2013), is the concept that “the customer is the co-
creator of value,” further proving the point that value is created by the interactive nature between
buyers and sellers. This emerging customer engagement theory is vital in management
cooperation and prosocial behavior, since value needs to be created for an exchange to occur and
for relationships to be made. In addition, performance tolerance is believed to be a captious
factor in fan engagement. The results from study 1 support the multidimensional concept
(cognitive, behavioral and cognitive/affective/behavioral), but additional efforts are necessary to
further prove the three dimensions of fan engagement are distinct.
The main purpose of the second study was to “provide further evidence of construct
validity of the fan-engagement scale and to assess its nomological validity by investigating the
antecedents and consequences of fan engagement” (Masayuki et al., 2014, p. 406). In addition to
the previous study, this study was focused on examining three precursors: team identification,
positive affect, and basking in reflected glory (BIRGing), as well as two ramifications: purchase
intention and referral intention (Masayuki et al., 2014, p. 406). Because of the three fan
engagement dimensions, (management cooperation, prosocial behavior, and performance
tolerance), Masayuki (2014) proposed the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: (a) Team identification has positive effects on management cooperation,
(b) prosocial behavior, (c) and performance tolerance.
Hypothesis 2: (a) Positive affect has positive effects on management cooperation, (b)
prosocial behavior, (c) and performance tolerance.
Hypothesis 3: (a) BIRGing has positive effects on management cooperation, (b) prosocial
behavior, (c) and performance tolerance.
Hypothesis 4: (a) Management cooperation has positive effects on purchase intention and
(b) referral intention.
Hypothesis 5: (a) Prosocial behavior has positive effects on purchase intention and (b)
referral intention.
Hypothesis 6: (a) Performance tolerance has positive effects on purchase intention and
(b) referral intention.
The methods used in study 1 were directed to study 2. Team identification, positive
affect, purchase intention, and referral intention were all adapted from previous research. Fan
engagement, team identification, positive affect, BIRGing, and purchase intention were
measured on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
Referral intention was measured with a single-item scale by asking respondents how many
individuals they intend to invite to future games in the current season (Masayuki et al., 2014).
Similar to study 1, study 2’s data was collected from spectators attending a professional
soccer game in western Japan. Like study 1, study 2 distributed questionnaires in the stands at
the start of the game. Prior to the questionnaires being handed out, 17 surveyors estimated the
percent of each gender and age group among spectators. Out of the 500 questionnaires handed
out, 493 were returned for a response rate of 98.6%. Accounting for the 21 rejected for

ineligibility, the final remainder of 472 good responses represented 94.4% of the original 500
questionnaires. Regarding the results from study 2, 64% of respondents were male (303) and
the average age was 40.77 years old, with one-third of subjects between ages 40-49, 26.7% 50
years or older, 18.9% 30-39 years old, and 18% 20-29 years old.
The results for H1a, H1b, and H1c indicated that there is a positive correlation between
team identification and management cooperation, prosocial behavior, and performance
tolerance. “Team identification is an important precursor of all the dimensions of fan
engagement” (Masayuki et. al., 2014, p. 409). When fans have a positive identification with
their team, they are more likely to participate in creating value, support their team through fan-
to-fan interactions, and continue to purchase team-related products even during unsuccessful
team performance. H2a, H2b, and H2c show the positive effect was statistically significant in
determining management cooperation and performance tolerance, but prosocial behavior is not
statistically relevant. The results from hypothesis H3a and H3b support the theory that basking
in reflected glory (BIRGing) can be used to predict management cooperation and social behavior
because fans participate in creating value by engaging in network development through
communicating with other fans. H3c, however, was not supported because fans are not likely to
go out and buy a modern day jersey just because that team won the championship fifteen years
ago, similar to how a random sample audience may not enjoy music that was popular a decade
ago. Hypothesis H4a supports the theory that management cooperation is correlated with
purchase intention. When fans intend to purchase products such as jerseys, t-shirts, hats, or
pictures, they increase their constructive participation in creating value at sporting
events. Consequently, the findings for hypothesis H4b did not support the theory that
management cooperation is correlated with referral intention. Hypothesis H5a does not support

the theory that prosocial behavior is correlated with purchase intention because there is no
evidence that engaging in fan-to-fan interactions leads to greater purchase intention. However,
on the contrary, there is a statistical correlation between prosocial behavior and referral intention
(H5b). This supports the theory that fans are more likely to bring friends and communicate with
people about sports if they are engaging in network development and fan-to-fan online
interactions. Hypothesis 6a supports the theory that performance tolerance leads to greater
purchase intention because the more tolerance a fan has for their respected teams performance,
the more likely that fan will be in continuing to support their teams by purchasing team
merchandise. Similar to hypothesis H4b, hypothesis H6b does not support the theory that
performance tolerance leads to greater referral intention.
This study showed how a “consumer's purchase intention is influenced by the three fan-
engagement dimensions and other predictor variables” (Masayuki et al., 2014, p. 409). Based on
our findings, we can conclude that team identification is correlated with the three dimensions of
fan engagement (management cooperation, prosocial behavior, and performance
tolerance). Masayuki (2014) notes that positive affect is a statistically significant antecedent of
management cooperation and performance tolerance, but not prosocial behavior. Additionally,
there is evidence that basking in reflected glory (BIRGing) can be used to predict management
cooperation and prosocial behavior, but not performance tolerance. In summation, the results
from study 2 show that purchase intention can be correlated with team identification, positive
affect, basking in reflected glory (BIRGing), and the three fan-engagement dimensions, but holds
little significance in determining the effect of referral intention.

Why college students attend games. Curi, Dart, & Giesemann (2014) discuss what
factors influence students to attend college sporting events in their case study at Northern
Arizona University (NAU) as seen in figure 6. The study raised several questions regarding
what motivates fans to attend college games, as well as examining the legitimacy behind the
common gender stereotype that men are more likely to attend games than women, determine any
correlation between growing up a fan of a team and student attendance at games, validate the
proposed theory that in-state students are more likely to attend games than out-of-state students,
and identify what involvement, if any, the Greek system has in attending sporting events? To go
into further detail, the commonly portrayed University experience in the United States includes
an energetic and passionate community centered around the University's athletics. While many
Universities do have a very involved and engaged community simply because of the relevance of
the University’s sport teams, other communities lack this sport culture. This brings up a very
important question, what motivates fans to engage and support sport teams where the traditional
culture of sports is not prevalent?
To answer this question, “a random
sample of 4,000 (out of 22,670) residential
undergraduate Northern Arizona
University students ages 18 years and
older were invited to participate in an
online survey” (Curi et al., 2014, p.
3). The survey was created using Qualtrics survey software, and was reviewed and approved by
the NAU Institutional Review Board. Students were offered incentives for completing the

survey, including a chance to win a $100 gift card or free pizza. A total of 544 students
completed the survey, for a response rate of 13.6% and a margin of error of +/- 4.15 percent.
Kim, Trail, and Magnusen (2013) argue that the stronger identity one holds with a sports
team, the more likely they are to attend that teams sporting event. Sport fans that feel a sense of
belonging and a positive attitude towards the sport are more likely to identify with a sports team.
The results from the NAU study show that of the 544 respondents, 75.3% (410) of respondents
reported that they have attended a NAU sporting event at least once, with the average respondent
attending 7.3 events (2 for each semester at NAU). Of the 544 respondents, twenty-nine percent
(158) described themselves as “fans” of NAU Football, while 13.6 percent (74) described
themselves as “fans” of NAU Basketball. Of the approximately 158 students who identify as fans
of Football, seventy-one percent (113) have attended a NAU football game. Similarly, of the
roughly seventy-four students who identify as fans of men’s basketball, 38.6% (29) have
attended a men’s basketball game. The data retrieved from this study was not sufficient to
determine whether the stronger identity one holds with a sports team leads to more games
attended, however Kim, Trail, and Magnusen (2013) argue that the stronger identity one holds
with a sports team, the more likely they are to attend that teams sporting event. Sport fans that
feel a sense of belonging and a positive attitude towards the sport are more likely to identify with
a sports team.
Spaaij and Anderson (2010) describe two major reasons for team identification:
compulsion and sanctions. Many participants feel that they have no choice but to support the
team that they grew up supporting or their family supported. Children, for example, reported
sanctions or negative consequences if they chose to support other teams than their family and
peers. Consequently, teams that participants enjoyed the most were associated with their own

class status, and area of origin. The NAU research supported Spaaij and Anderson’s theory that
growing up a fan of a specific sports team leads to greater involvement in the team. A positive
correlation was found between growing up a fan of college sports and college sports attendance,
r(540)=.16 p<.001, as well as a negative correlation between not having a relationship to sports
growing up and attendance, r(540)= -.17, p <.001. “Childhood socialization and exposure to
athletics in the family certainly seem to have an impact on sporting event attendance during
college” (Curi et al., 2014, p. 4).
Based on our findings above, it is safe to say that growing up a fan of a particular sports
team leads to greater fan involvement. In addition, the average sports fan could reasonably
believe that in-state students have greater fan engagement with their sports team than out-of-state
students due to growing up near that sports team. However, the findings from NAU did
not support the hypothesis that more in-state students attend sporting events than out-of-state
students. In fact, 87% out-of-state students reported attending at least one NAU sporting event
compared to 70.3% in-state students attending at least one game. Additionally, more out-of-state
students attended more events per semester (2.72) than in-state students (1.70). The most logical
reasoning for these findings were that out-of-state students travel, sacrifice greater amounts, and
often pay more money to attend schools in different states, causing the students to feel “more
inclined to take advantage of all that is part of a traditional college experience” (Curi et al., 2014.
p. 4).
Many people hold the belief that men like sports more than women, and therefore will
attend more games. To dive into this conception, Hall and O’Mahony (2006) studied the
motivations behind attending sporting events for men and women, and found cogent differences.
Primarily, the theory that men value the emotional aspect of the game and a sense of belonging

related to being a “true fan” is apparent. Meanwhile, women often place a higher threshold on
the social factors that are attributed with sporting events, including spending quality time with
friends and the physical act of attending a large-scale event. However, the study at NAU did not
show any statistical correlation that men are more likely to attend sporting events than
women. In fact, the results showed quite the opposite. Female students (77.2%) were more
likely than male students (72.6%) to have attended a NAU sporting event. Additionally, women
attended more games per semester (2.05) than men (1.92). This relates back to Hall and
O’Mahony’s (2006) idea that women value the social aspect of sporting events and “being with
friends” while men are more interested in “watching the game.” This same attitude towards
sporting events may differ depending on the team, however. For example, the University of
Alabama has always had very strong support from fans, despite the success of the team. This
data is particularly related to teams who are not as successful. Essentially, when teams are not as
skilled or successful, the motivation for attending sports games often switches from attending to
watch and enjoy the game as a fan to a social scene for friends to be able to spend time together
at a common event.
To discuss the point that attending games is a social scene for friends in more detail,
Krohn, Clarke, Preston, McDonald, and Preston (1998) identified several motivating factors for
attending sporting events, including “personal objective (attendance as a symbol of status), the
desire of fans to be included in the overall game atmosphere, and excitement and escape as a
break from everyday monotony” (Curi et al., 2014. p. 5). A strong correlation was found
between having an organizational membership and sport attendance, such as being a member of
a fraternity or sorority [r (541) =.12, p=.004]. Attending games as a large group (such as a
fraternity or sorority) increases the feeling of involvement and connection with friends. Perhaps

even more of a factor in the correlation between attending games and organizations, is what is
known as FOMO, or “fear of missing out.” NAU reported that 93.3% of the students who have
attended an NAU game have attended the game with their friends. More so, 58.6% of those who
have attended games say the primary reason for enjoying sporting events is because they enjoy
“being with friends”. These findings further support the point that students do not always attend
games for enjoying the sport or team spirit, but instead because of the sense of involvement and
socializing with friends.
After reviewing Northern Arizona University’s case study regarding motivations behind
college students attending college games, it is apparent that there are several reasons behind a
student's’ decision to attend sporting events. While it is important to keep in mind that the
culture around sporting events may differ depending on the university, a number of the findings
can relate directly to both contemporary and traditional universities. Based on our findings, it
would be safe to say that students with a personal history of participating or characterizing
themselves as sports fans while growing up are more likely to attend sporting events. The
findings did not support the hypothesis that in-state students are more likely to attend games than
out-of-state students, and instead showed that out-of-state students are more likely to attend
games due to the distance traveled, money paid and sacrifices given up that leads students to feel
more inclined to attend games. The NAU study debunked a common gender stereotype that men
are more likely to attend games than women, leading us to identify sporting events as a great
social scene for friends to spend time together. It was also noted that students who are involved
in organizations, such as fraternities and sororities, are more likely to attend sporting events
because of the sense of belonging and fear of missing out on memories with friends.

In summary, the most effective ways to communicate with College students to attend
games involve group affiliation, family, the architecture of the facility, tailgates, food and drinks,
and email. Fans are typically more likely to attend games if there is a group of people to share
the social experience with. Additionally, meeting new people and creating relationships are
important for the student demographic. The relationships created at sporting events contribute to
the atmosphere of the game, including fans cheering or chanting fight songs. Game settings,
weather, and the atmosphere of game are all factors that influence fan-to-fan interactions and
relationships. The architecture of the facility, such as comfortable seats, air conditioning, good
sight lines, non-glare lighting, numerous easily accessible rest rooms, food and drink concession
areas, walk ramps, and exits, can have a significant impact on communication and
attendance. Tailgates are a respectable method to suit the social scene that sports fans demand,
but in truth, doing so can decrease attendance because fans are too engaged in the social scene to
leave. Food and drink inside the venue are useful incentives used to increase fan
attendance. Attending sporting events often consumes an entire day, especially with tailgating
parties beforehand, so fans regularly scavenge the concession stands at half time to quench their
hunger.
Surprisingly, email has proved to be very ineffective when communicating to college
students. This is because students often associate email with school, and find email
“boring”. More so, college students rarely use email for anything beside school, and are only on
email for an average of six hours per day. The most effective ways to communicate to college
students through social media include Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat. Those who
follow the social media pages of teams are more likely to attend games than those who do not
because they typically have greater affiliation with that team. Sport teams who utilize the

“follow back” method commonly have stronger relationships with followers because it gives the
social media pages a personality rather than throwing facts at followers. The most proven
methods used to enhance the gameday experience consist of promotions, incorporating the social
scene in the stadium, and the need to feel included. Promotions are often useful to get fans to
stay the entire span of the game. Particularly, handing out free t-shirts, chances to meet players
or coaches, or sponsored parties are the most effective strategies. Live game action, stadium
atmosphere, and tailgating are all vital in creating the best gameday experience. There is
significant evidence to prove that many attend sporting events in fear of missing out or not
feeling included. Fans frequently attend games, even if they do not consider themselves a sports
fan, because their friends are going and they want to feel included. Basking in reflected glory
(BIRGing) greatly increases fans affiliation with a team. Notably, there is no statistical evidence
to support the common stereotype that men are more likely to attend games than women. In fact,
a reasonable argument can be made that women are more likely to attend game than men because
women value the social scene of the game greater than the game itself. In conclusion, the most
effective ways to get fans to attend games must include effective communication methods
through social media and creative strategies to enhance the gameday experience.

Best Practices
Effective Ways to Communicate with College Students
Social Media is an effective platform for communicating to college students and should
be utilized to maximum capacity. According to Mangold & Faulds (2009):
The nine ways that businesses use social media successfully are to; (1) provide
networking platforms, (2) use blogs and other social media tools to engage customers, (3)
use both traditional and Internet-based promotional tools to engage customers, (4)
provide information, (5) be outrageous, (6) provide exclusivity, (7) design products with
talking points and consumers’ desired self-images in mind, (8) supports causes that are
important to consumers, and (9) utilize the power of stories (as cited by Wysocki, 2012,
p. 7).
The University of Colorado has a lot of opportunity in social media use with these nine goals in
mind. YouTube channels centered around collegiate sports are an effective strategy when
communicating with college students. Grand Valley State University is one example of a college
that has successfully implemented this YouTube technique. According to Mike Scott (2011),
“[Grand Valley State University] has an active YouTube channel with more than 300 videos that
have received tens of thousands of views.” Another professional at the Grand Valley State
University, Dave Poortvliet, had this to say about their interactive website and YouTube
channels, ”’It’s part of an effort to get more dynamic content there so others can share the
experiences that people who have been to our campus or know the university had’” (Scott, 2011,
p. 3). YouTube is a unique niche due to the unlimited number of videos and content that can be
created. Specifically related to college sports, YouTube videos bring the social scene and
excitement of sporting events to a computer screen. An effective tactic to build that relationship

with college sports fans is to share memorable moments from that team, such as the thrill of an
overtime win or a game changing play. Sharing memorable moments on social media carries the
gameday experience throughout the week when there are no games to be played.
Additionally, videos can be used to build up the anticipation of big games. For example,
the Dallas Mavericks have had a history of effective sports marketing videos. The four tactics of
the Mavericks are centered on getting the fans to feel as if they are a part of the action through up
close and personal shots of players and in-game action. The 4 elements of an exciting sports
marketing video (2016) include “putting the viewer in the game.” Fans enjoy feeling as if they
are making a difference for their team, and this fulfillment can be accomplished through a
number of mediums. Not only do sport teams love fans being loud and supportive because it
increases morale for the team, but supportive fans also promote the brand and increases ticket
sales. Examples of how fans can feel that they are “in the game” include being shown on the
jumbotron or are invited to the field, court, or rink. The jumbotron is a useful tool for increasing
fan engagement because jumbotrons are “entertaining, gets lots of reactions from other fans and
breaks up the monotony of the game itself” (4 elements, 2016, para. 4). Inviting fans to the field
is a simple yet efficient method to connect with fans and provide some unique
excitement. Additionally, the Mavericks noted the two groups of fans that are “integrated in the
game experience” (4 elements, 2016. para. 5), the “Mavs ManiACCS” and the “Dallas
Mavericks Drumline”. The “Mavs ManiACCS” are a group of diehard fans who are known for
their extreme energy at games, while the “Dallas Mavericks Drumline” combine “drumming
talent, a unique sense of rhythm, and fanatical dress” (4 elements, 2016, para. 6).
The second element of an exciting marketing video is to “set yourself apart from the
many other types of videos that cover the game” (4 elements, 2016, para 8). The technology and

video angels’ we have today are no doubt memorizing, but that isn’t “unique”. An aerial shot of
the fans at a football game or a GoPro attached to the chest of a player during warm ups are
examples of camera angles that viewers do not see everyday. Figure 7 (above) is a good
example of how the “Dallas Mavericks Drumline” use unique camera angles and offer an
exciting perspective at sporting events. While these videos can prove to be adequate, it is
important to note that these videos can be easily overdone and lose the excitement factor, so the
selection of these videos need to be looked at closely.
Innovative websites with exciting and interactive content that stay up to date work well as
an effective way to communicate with students. According to Dave Poortvliet, the web page
manager at Grand Valley State University, “The departments are making updates every day, so
some of the more specific information changes quite a bit” (Scott, 2011, p. 1, para. 7). Websites
and mobile apps that are exciting, yet informative are effective in attracting all students and fans
to college sporting events.

When attending sporting events, there are often two types of sports fans apparent. The
first type of fan being the professional, proper and executive type, and the second being the wild,
loud, and entertaining type. From a fan perspective, both are equally important. From a video
perspective, those fans that tend to lean towards the loud type are preferred (4 elements, 2016,
para. 10). Simply put, these fans are more entertaining to watch. The elaborate apparel and
lively chants adds passion to the video, and helps fans feel like a family. Look at the common
“wave”, for example. Note that the “wave” typically starts in the nosebleed sections where the
fans are loud and rowdy, not the executives sitting in box seats or courtside. This is because the
fans are more engaged in the game-day experience.
Each sport has a unique personality, and the DJ music choices at these games often
reflect those personalities. In an effective video, there must be an appropriate soundtrack that
reflects the personality of the sport you are portraying. For example, “for an NBA basketball
team, that would be in the genre of Rap, somewhat progressive and current” (4 elements, 2016,
para. 12). European soccer, on the other hand, could be focused around popular sing-a-longs
while the NFL could focus on rock songs.
Communicating Through Social Media
Clavio (2011) conducted study with a group of 18-29 year old millennials and found that
age was a significant factor when discussing usage of social media. Millennials use newspaper,
radio, and the athletic site significantly less than older generations. While all age groups tend to
check email at least once a day, millennials typically use email far less than Facebook or other
social media accounts. Podcasts generally do not see a lot of traffic among all age groups, along
with Twitter. Although YouTube was found to be just shy of Facebook, YouTube is a great
platform to utilize for athletic departments that are pursuing expansion in their connection

strategies with millennials because of YouTube’s capability for embedding links from third party
sources. This is specifically important with Facebook and Twitter, as users share videos with
their peers and increase fan-to-fan interactions. In fact, Facebook and Twitter users are more
likely to watch the entire length of a video is less than 30 seconds. According to a study
conducted by Chris Savage (2009) of Wistia, a professional video production company, the
average 30-second video was viewed 85% of the way through, while a two-minute video was
viewed only 50% of the way through. This information can be used to load important
information up front to effectively communicate with an audience. Since an overwhelming
number of millennials regularly use Facebook, short videos loaded with information acts as a
very effective way to engage users and create awareness of an event since users often share
videos with their friends.
According to O'Hallarn, Morehead, & Pribesh, (2016), social media allows for an
interactive way to communicate and create a relationship between fans and team
personnel. Athletes often times give news, which makes social media more personable. Now,
athletes can connect with fans more than ever before. The Social Marketing Theory seeks to find
the most “effective, efficient, equitable, and sustainable marketing tactics.” Many institutions
are having a hard time running social media platforms on a day-to-day basis. More often than
not, athletic communication departments are running social media rather than the marketing
departments. A study was conducted at Old Dominion University using the idea of “STEAM” or
steal, team, engagement, analytics, and mavens. Prior to 2014, the coaches and other site
administrators were the only ones involved in using social media at Old Dominion
University. However, during the 2014 year, Old Dominion implemented a team dedicated to
social media and has taken the time to analyze followers and their behavior. An efficient tactic

they used was stealing ideas from other schools. For example, using a catchy hashtag on twitter
to market the team or similar social media posts.
Snapchat, a form of social media, is on the rise. In a study conducted of 1,600 college
students, by Sumpto, a college-centric marketing company, 77% of these students use Snapchat
daily. As of August 1, 2014, Snapchat was allowed by the NCAA to be used as a recruiting
tool. At the University of Kansas, a junior journalism major runs the account. One of the most
successful means of marketing to the student body is giving students an inside look on athletes
(Axelrod, 2014). This often includes players taking the Snapchat account for a day to show fans
what the day-to-day life of an athlete is like, including attending classes, eating lunch or going to
the gym. This medium works to break down the barrier between students and student athletes.
Enhancing the Gameday Experience
Engagement entails the idea that pictures are worth a thousand words. Fans like to be
engaged with what is going on with the team. Old Dominion University conducted a focus
group of their fans and concluded that fans love when the team interacts with them personally
including “liking” photos or tweets. Some even claimed that they wished the pages had more of
a personality rather than just spitting out information. The researchers suggest that social media
be used to be more “intimate” with fans. Tailgate parties and pre-game activities are great ways
to encourage the student body to attend games, and engage in the inclusive atmosphere
experienced at sporting events. Incentives like these can prove to be extremely successful at
Universities that are not predominantly well known as sports schools, and where team
performance is typically subpar, similar to the current characteristics at the University of
Colorado. According to Jayson Blair, a writer for the New York Times, “Because of the
tailgating parties and other efforts, Kent State, which had the worst attendance in 2001 with only

6,595 fans per home game, has seen attendance at its Dix Stadium rise 87 percent this season, to
about 11,447 per game” (Blair, 2002, p. 1).
Another attractive incentive that has been proven to increase student attendance is
refunding the price students pay for their student season pass tickets if they attend a certain
number of games. One athletic program that has utilized this strategy well to capitalize on
increasing student attendance is the University of Oklahoma. According to Andrea Cohen and
John Helsley, staff writers for The Oklahoman, “The Sooners will refund students the $130
season ticket cost if they attend 16 or more games. As a result OU has sold more than 1,300 of
its 1,400 student season tickets. That’s more than double what the Sooners sold last season”
(Cohen & Helsley, 2008, p. 1). This strategy went over particularly well with regards to
achieving the objective of attracting college students who are on the fence of purchasing a
student season pass. According to Kyle Hansel, a sophomore student at OU, “I was on the edge
on whether I was going to come to all of the games or not… but the whole, get-your-money-back
thing was definitely a deciding factor in whether I was going to come to all of them and buy
student tickets” (Cohen & Helsley, 2008, p. 1).
The University of Southern California took a large step toward enhancing gameday
experience by partnering with Brand Affinity Technologies, Inc. Brand Affinity is the expert in
engaging, activating, and monetizing fans and already possesses partnerships with over a dozen
marquee NCAA institutions. The FanPhotos activation platform provides an authentic
experience at every home game that captures everything to love about college football. Roving
photographers interact with the crowd throughout the game, allowing fans to view the photos
afterward and customize them with USC logos to be purchased later. Brand Affinity also added
the Fanoramic, a giant multibillion-pixel photograph taken at a selected game that fans can view

online afterwards and find themselves in the crowd. Apart from college partnerships, teams from
the MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL also have deals with Brand Affinity (Brand Affinity, 2013).
In summary, YouTube channels centered around collegiate sports are an effective
strategy to communicate to college students. Grand Valley State University is an excellent
example of how a school can connect with their student body through social media. Grand
Valley State University utilizes this tactic by creating a YouTube channel with over 300 videos
uploaded and tens of thousands of views per video that captures and brings the excitement of the
social scene to a computer screen. These videos increase relationships with fans and bring the
community closer together by sharing memorable moments. The Dallas Mavericks have an
exceptional sports marketing strategy, which includes placing the viewer in the game to integrate
the game experience, differentiating content from the countless strains of sports marketing
videos, selling the “true” fan, and incorporating inventive and original DJ content. In 2014, Old
Dominion University implemented a team dedicated to social media to take the time to analyze
followers and their behavior using the “STEAM” (steal teams engagement, analytics, and
mavens) tactic. An effective strategy Old Dominion incorporated using the “STEAM” method
was using catchy hashtags, such as #GoBlue to resonate with fans on social media. The
University of Kansas has integrated a Snapchat account to give followers an inside look at the
lives of athletes. The page is run by a Journalism student, and often shows athletes taking over
the account for a day to post pictures or videos showing what the typical day of an athlete is
like. The University of Oklahoma has shown that refunding student season passes if students
attend a certain number of games contributes to greater attendance. This tactic sold more than
1,300 of the 1,400 student tickets offered, and more than doubled attendance from the previous
year by reaching those students who were unsure about purchasing a season pass or not. The

University of Southern California partnered with Brand Affinity Technologies to enhance the
gameday experience by providing an authentic experience at every home game. Photographers
interacting with fans throughout the game by taking pictures of them and selling them at the
conclusion of the game or giant multibillion-pixel photograph taken at a selected game that fans
can view online afterwards and find themselves in the crowd are capable examples of enhancing
the gameday experience for fans. In conclusion, YouTube and Snapchat are effective ways to
communicate to fans through social media by fostering stronger relationships with fans. Well
executed sports marketing videos can be used to increase anticipation of big games and
photographers and other social media platforms can be utilized at games to enhance the gameday
experience.

Methods
The purpose of this study was to seek quantitative and qualitative evidence to support
effective communication strategies with College students, and the objective of increasing
attendance at sporting events. This study looks to identify specific examples of valid
communication strategies by targeting comparable Universities and College students, and
directly communicating with those parties. The following section will include three meaningful
studies used to determine effective communication strategies. The first study targets contacting
similar, complementary Universities to discuss what forms of communication strategies they find
useful for their organization. The second study deployed was a student survey targeted at
University of Colorado students to gain quantitative data about demographics, age, attendance,
and forms of social media. The final study conducted was a focus group of eight students held at
the University of Colorado.
Method 1: Student Survey
Participants. Since all schools differ from one another, we conducted and sent out a
Qualtrics survey to the University of Colorado student body in order to receive quantitative and
qualitative feedback from the student’s perspective. Our target number of participants for this
survey was 200. After the Qualtrics survey was deployed for five days, we exceeded our target
number of respondents by 50, for a total of 250 respondents. Each participant was a volunteer.
Materials and Apparatus. The materials required to conduct this survey include a
computer or mobile device, Qualtrics software, and a set of clear, relevant questions.

Data Collection Procedure. Through great deliberation and effort, we conducted a
survey and sent it out via social media and text messaging. We used snowball sampling with the
belief that by sending the survey and telling others to spread the word, we would receive a large
amount of responses. In order to avoid the problem of survey abandonment, we eliminated and
conjoined questions to decrease the time it would take to complete the survey. We also provided
an incentive to those taking the survey, which was the possibility of winning University of
Colorado merchandise such as jerseys, hats, shirts, or other memorabilia. We deployed this
survey on June 27th and kept it open for five days until July 1st. The full survey can be found in
Appendix A, where the questions are also followed by the rationale behind asking each
question. Listed below are a few of the more relevant questions asked:
1. For games you did not attend, what was your reasoning for missing the game? (Select all
that apply)
2. How do you find out about events/hear about game times?
3. Do you open emails from CU Athletics? Why or why not?
4. Why do you attend sporting events?
5. When leaving the game early, what is the reasoning?
Method 2: Phone Interviews
Participants. After conducting our literature review, we wanted to see what
communication strategies other athletic programs have utilized to get students to attend games
when they have similar characteristics as the University of Colorado. We chose to contact six
different schools all with specific attributes that are similar to the University of Colorado’s. The
six schools we chose to contact are the University of Tennessee, University of Arizona,

University of Oregon, University of Washington, Grand Valley State University, and North
Dakota State University.
Materials and Apparatus. To complete the phone interviews, the interviewer must
bring a computer to take notes, a mobile device to communicate, a set of prepared questions, and
a recording device. The interview must take place in a controlled environment. After the
interviews were completed, the conversations will be transcribed onto a computer.
Data Collection Procedures. The first contact to be made was with the University of
Tennessee’s Associate Athletics Director for Sales and Marketing, Jimmy Delaney. We chose to
contact Tennessee because they are in a similar situation as the University of Colorado. In 2008,
the football team went 3-5 in the SEC and fired their head coach. In 2009, the football team
increased their student ticket football price from free to $99 and managed to go 4-4 in the SEC,
but still increase attendance at games. Although Tennessee did not have a winning season and
raised the price of tickets, Tennessee still maintained a good attendance record.
The next three Universities to be contacted were the University of Arizona, the
University of Oregon, and the University of Washington. We chose to contact these universities
because all are similar in size, schedule difficulty, and are in the same conference as the
University of Colorado. We called the Assistant Director of Marketing for Athletics at the
University of Arizona, Ben Chulick. We also contacted the University of Oregon’s Senior
Associate Athletic Director and head of Marketing, Craig Pintens. Lastly, we called the
Assistant Director of Marketing and Executive Director of gameday experience for the
University of Washington, Ryan Madayag. All phone numbers were found on their respective
Universities athletic directories.

The final two contacts to be made were North Dakota State University and Grand Valley
State University. We chose to contact these two schools because they continue to have great
attendance at sporting events even though they are smaller in student population and city
population. We contacted Justin Swanson, the Assistant Athletic Director and head of Marketing
and Fan Engagement at North Dakota State University. We then contacted Erin Kuester, Grand
Valley State University’s Marketing Promotions Director.
Over the phone we sought insight on each athletic programs tactics by asking the
following questions: (all conversations were recorded and transcribed in the appendices)
1. What communication strategies are most effective in communicating with students
(Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat)?
2. What is your social media strategy for communicating and engaging college students?
3. Is there one strategy you've found to be more effective with underclassmen especially
freshmen?
4. Is there one strategy you've found to be more effective with upperclassmen?
5. How do you use these methods to communicate with your fans?
6. How do you make them work together?
7. Who runs your social media? (For example is there an intern, team, or department
dedicated to this?)
8. How do you communicate with millennials compared to other age groups?
9. Do you promote the team as a whole or individual players on social media?
10. Do you have any suggestions for the University of Colorado moving forward?

Method 3: Focus Group
Participants. Our final study conducted was a focus group consisting of eight University
of Colorado students, held at a classroom on campus. These eight students varied from incoming
sophomores to graduate students. We chose these eight students from personal connections with
a base background, including one social female fan, one avid female fan, one female who is not a
fan, two avid male sports fans, two male mediocre sports fans, and one uninterested male sports
fan.
Materials and Apparatus. The materials required to conduct the focus group include a
recording device and a set of clear, relevant questions. This study must be held in a controlled
environment. After the focus group was completed after about 90 minutes, all conversations
were transcribed onto a computer.
Data Collection Procedure. We chose these students because of their different
perspectives on sports to eliminate bias and to get a variety of perspectives. We held this focus
group to further gain more in depth insight on students’ perspectives while giving them the
opportunity to explain their reasoning. The focus group was held in a study room on campus at
University of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business. There, we asked the following questions in
a free response type of manner with structure provided by our group. The questions include but
are not limited to: (all questions were recorded and transcribed in the appendices)
1. What form of communication do you utilize most?
2. What do you use most when it comes to sports?
3. What do you use when it comes to CU Athletics if any?
4. Would you use an app to find out about game information?

5. What would you want the app look like?
6. How do you hear about news and events at CU?
7. How many football games do you attend?
8. Why do you attend football games?
9. Why do you attend basketball games?
10. Would you be more likely to attend football or basketball games? Why?
11. Do you typically tailgate before football games?
12. What do you do before games? After games? Why?
13. Would you be more willing to go to games if they had sponsored parties/tailgates/events?
14. When you do not attend games what are the reasons?
15. Why do you attend the games?
16. Why do you think CU has poor attendance at games? (Besides team performance)
17. What strategies/ suggestions do you have to help the CU athletics department with
attendance?
18. What strategies/suggestions do you have to help the CU athletics department with
communicating to students/engaging students?
19. How has the experience differed from year to year?

Results
Student Survey
The first two questions we asked were to obtain the general knowledge necessary to
understand the pool of 250 students who took our survey. Of the 250 students that took our
survey, 59% were men, while 41% were women. As seen in figure 8, 12% of respondents were
incoming sophomores, 42% were incoming juniors, 38% were incoming seniors, and 9% were
either graduates or fifth year students.

The next three questions asked pertained to the students’ past involvement with CU
athletics. Our third question addressed whether students purchased a season sports pass last year
or not. Of the 250 students, 45% purchased sports passes last year, while 55% did not.
The fourth and fifth questions were how many CU football and men’s basketball games
did people attend last school year. As seen in figure 9, the blue represents football and the red
represents basketball. For football, 21% of students did not attend a single game, 30% attended
less than three games, 22% attended three to five games, and 27% of students attended more than
five football games. For basketball, 37% of students did not attend a single game, 29% attended
less than three games, 21% attended three to ten games, and 13% attended more than ten
basketball games last season.

Questions six through ten focused on the thought process of students regarding CU
athletic events. Our sixth question asked what sport was most influential when purchasing a
student sports pass. Responses showed that 71% of students buy the sports pass primarily for
football, while 25% said basketball, and another 3% were primarily influenced by other sports
such as women's basketball, volleyball, lacrosse, etc.
The seventh question, regarding why students attend sporting events at the University of
Colorado, provided six options, as well as a dialogue box to describe another scenario that was
not provided. In response, as shown in figure 10, of the 250 participants, only 12% said they do
not attend sporting events, 38% of students attend for the social scene of the game, 4% go to see
Ralphie run, 2% go to support their friends who play on the team, 1% attend for the promotional
giveaways, and 35% attend because they love the game. The final 9% (22 people) answered
“other” and wrote their reasoning. Of responses, a majority attended because they were
obligated to, such as being in the band, working the game, or being a cheerleader. Other
responses contained elements of strong personal connections to CU specifically, such as, “I bleed
black and gold” and “pride and tradition”.

The next question asked was for games you did not attend, what was your reasoning for
missing the game (allowing them to select all options that apply to them)? The results, as shown
in figure 11, were as followed. 48% of responses said they did not attend games due to
scheduling conflicts, 26% were already preoccupied with a tailgate or viewing party, 32% were
disinterested in the game, 50% did not attend because peers and friends were not attending the
game, 5% said the distance to the stadium was too far, 8% wanted to watch other football games
on television, 4% watched the Buffs game on TV because the experience is better than that in the
stadium, and 14% selected other. Of the open responses for other, the majority were not in town,
whether they were studying abroad or out of town doing things such as snowboarding. Others
said things such as the games were not competitive enough, tickets were too expensive, and other
personal reasons such as poor weather.

The ninth question we asked was why students leave games early, meaning they attend
the game, but do not stay the entire duration. As seen in figure 12, 24% said they do actually
stay the entire game, 21% leave to beat traffic before it gets too packed later in the game, 22%
left due to bad weather that they did not want to sit in, 62% left because of poor team
performance or a game that was not competitive, 27% said the social scene was better outside of
the stadium so they left, 7% left due to cell phone issues such as bad Wi-Fi or low battery life,
13% left due to other commitments, and 6% chose other.

The tenth question we asked had to deal with promotional giveaways to see what students
like the best in terms of incentives to attend games. As seen in figure 13, 38% liked concession
discounts the most, 75% wanted a free tee shirt, 21% liked the idea of a possibility of loyalty
points to earn a prize, 15% were interested in a meet and greet with players and coaches, 4%
liked a possible interactive mobile experience, 17% would come for a chance to participate in
game promotions such as a halftime show, 27% said they liked live music or a DJ, 34% enjoy
halftime performances from outside entertainment, 30% were interested in a sponsored post
game party, and 10% said none, with a please explain box, which mostly consisted of responses
regarding better team performance.

Questions eleven and twelve were asked in order to understand the fans’ use of CU
athletics social media. Question eleven asked which of CU athletics’ official social media
accounts students followed. Of respondents, 77% followed CU athletics Facebook page, 51%
followed Twitter, 55% followed Instagram, 25% followed Snapchat, and 4% followed the
official YouTube account for CU athletics.
Question twelve asked a similar question, but regarding the unofficial accounts, meaning
players and coaches of CU athletics. The question was whether students followed any coaches
or players of the Buffaloes and if so, how many. The results showed that 38% of respondents
followed 2 or more, 9% only followed one athlete of coach, and 53% did not follow any.
Questions thirteen through nineteen asked students how they are informed about games
and events, as well as what platforms work well and which ones do not. These were the most
intriguing questions we asked, as it gave us true insight on how to communicate to
students. Question thirteen asked students how they find out about events or hear about game
times for CU athletics. As seen in figure 14, 47% said emails from the CU athletics department,
64% use the word of mouth from hearing from their friends, 34% said they’ll just internet search
it, 5% use the official gameday app, 34% find out from promotions around campus, and 6% said
other. Of those who answered other, responses varied with answers such as social media of
Twitter and Instagram feed as well as students who were given a small paper schedule before the
season started.

Question fourteen asked whether students read CU athletics emails or not. This currently
is the number one way students are communicated to for athletic events at CU. The data found
was split very evenly as 25% said yes; I use them as info for when games are, 25% said yes; but I
don’t really read them, 29% said sometimes; depends on whether there’s an upcoming game or
not, and 21% said no; I delete them before I open them.
Question fifteen elaborated off of the prior question, as it asked why people don’t read
them if they answered yes to option two, three, or four on the prior question. The data
found 12% said they’re too time consuming, 50% said they are unimportant to them, 26% said
they receive too many emails from the department, and 12% said other.
The next question asked whether students had the official gameday app for CU athletics
on their phone. Results showed that only 2% had the app and use it all the time, 10% said they

have the app, but hardly ever use it on their phone, 21% said they don’t have the app because
they have no interest, and a large 68% were unaware there was an official gameday app for CU.
Question seventeen asked students when they would like to be informed of game times
and events. As seen in figure 15, 34% said they’d like to be informed a week before the event,
48% would like to know three to four days before, 14% want to know the day before the event,
and only 5% want to know the day of the event or game.
Question eighteen asked students about what social media platforms they check most
often. This informed us about which social media platform should be focused on the most in
order to effectively communicate to students. As seen in figure 16, 38% said Facebook, 19%
said Twitter, 24% voted Instagram, 17% said Snapchat, no students voted for Vine, and only 1%
said other, which they described was Reddit.

Question nineteen asked students which medium they’d prefer to receive information on
collegiate sporting events through. In response, a relatively large 52% said social media, 27%
said email, 17% preferred through friends, 2% said apps on phones, and 1% said other.
The survey was wrapped up by asking some qualifying questions. We asked the
question, “now that season ticket prices have dropped from $175 to $99, are you more likely to
buy a student season pass?” As seen in figure 17, 59% of our 250 students said yes; it’s more
affordable now. 23% said they were unphased; I would’ve purchased it regardless of price, 9%
said no; still too much money, and another 9% said no; disinterest in team or sport. Of the 250
survey respondents, 133 did not buy the student sports pass last year, but after hearing the drop
in price, of these 133, 61% now say that they will purchase the pass due to the affordability.

Question 21 asked students if they have anything else they’d like to share about CU
athletics. There was an opportunity to provide open responses to this question, and we got 199
of the 250 survey takers to give us feedback. Answers varied, but the following particular
responses were found to be important and noteworthy for the marketing team. Some students
said that they would love to attend more games as they did freshman year, but due to the harder
academic curriculum that comes with maturity in school, finding time to attend games becomes
much harder. Another student suggests that students should be able to get into any game for free
like some schools around the nation. One student brings up an intriguing observation that the PA
announcer at Folsom Field needs to be more engaging and energetic, so that fans can feed off the
enthusiasm, creating a better fan experience at the games. The last suggestion given by a student
suggests that the process of purchasing individual game tickets for students who aren’t able to

make it to every game should be made easier and more convenient. Finally, our last question
was asking for students’ emails in order to give away prizes to students as we used the prizes as
incentives for people to actually take the survey.
Phone Interviews with Universities
After conducting numerous phone interviews with various universities around the
country, our team has developed several valuable insights through analyzing the information
collected during our phone interviews. We were able to get in touch with four out of the six total
universities we attempted to contact. We successfully reached out to the University of
Washington, the University of Arizona, Grand Valley State University, and North Dakota State
University. We compiled a list of key topics and crucial questions that we wanted to be sure to
address in each of our phone calls with these particular universities. Although each university
we spoke with has their own set of unique characteristics that they utilize to accomplish their
marketing and fan engagement objectives, there are common themes that each of these
universities share that can be identified as contributing factors to their success. This section of
the results will address the common themes, primary insights, and main objectives each of these
universities use to achieve success with their marketing and student engagement goals. For more
expansive information on the specific strategies that are unique to each university, see Appendix
B in the Appendices section.
Regarding the social media aspect, one of the most important common themes we
discovered is that designating a team, or even a single person, to be in charge of running the
social media responsibilities is essential in creating and executing successful marketing and
student engagement strategies. Including students and interns within the social media teams has
proved to be essential, due to the inside student perception that the social media team gains. The

CU Athletics Final Copy-2

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to CU Athletics Final Copy-2

Similar to CU Athletics Final Copy-2 (20)

CU Athletics Final Copy-2