If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SeattlePI)   Seattle Seahawks to fans: "Hey thanks for supporting us on our Super Bowl run. Oh yeah, have fun with the 12% ticket price increase this year, mmmmmmkay?"   (blog.seattlepi.com) divider line 56
    More: Dumbass, Seahawks, Super Bowl, Seattle, season tickets, Steven Cohen, tickets, NFC  
•       •       •

507 clicks; posted to Sports » on 15 Mar 2014 at 6:38 PM (39 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-15 06:06:03 PM  
While there are plenty of teams that will jack prices without a performance to justify it.  I would think they feel even with the increase they will have no issues filling their stadium.  Supply and demand.
 
2014-03-15 06:26:50 PM  
The 'Hawks sure are giving the fans the middle finger after winning the Game Which Cannot Be Named.

On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.
 
2014-03-15 06:26:50 PM  
"Dumbass", subby?

Was the "Obvious" tag on vacation?
 
2014-03-15 06:36:09 PM  
My favorite was when I lived in Tampa, back when the Bucs played in Tampa Stadium, "The Big Sombrero".  One year they announced that they added 3000 seats to the stadium.

But, Tampa Stadium was just benches, no seats, how did they add more seats?

Simple, they just painted the numbers on the benches closer together.
 
2014-03-15 06:44:17 PM  

TheCheese: The 'Hawks sure are giving the fans the middle finger after winning the Game Which Cannot Be Named.

On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.


Can you name one of the players they traded that would've made that large of an impact?  The only ones that comes to my mind is Tate or Rice.  With Harvin and Kearse still around with Baldwin likely staying, they can manage investing in less experienced receivers.  Their main reacquisition was Bennett and that's already done.
 
2014-03-15 06:53:14 PM  
Part of the additional revenue will be used to upgrade the sound system that pumps out the fake crowd noise.
 
2014-03-15 06:54:08 PM  

TheCheese: The 'Hawks sure are giving the fans the middle finger after winning the Game Which Cannot Be Named.

On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.


Da fuq u say?
 
2014-03-15 07:14:00 PM  

TheCheese: The 'Hawks sure are giving the fans the middle finger after winning the Game Which Cannot Be Named.

On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.


Another one-season dynasty?  That's pretty harsh.  They'll probably make the playoffs unless the Cardinals jump up next season.
 
2014-03-15 07:19:26 PM  
Don't worry Seahawks fans, you only have to room to biatch if your team builds a billion dollar stadium and sends a C- level team to compete every year.

It's the cost of being good.
 
2014-03-15 07:35:34 PM  

Summoner101: TheCheese: The 'Hawks sure are giving the fans the middle finger after winning the Game Which Cannot Be Named.

On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.

Can you name one of the players they traded that would've made that large of an impact?  The only ones that comes to my mind is Tate or Rice.  With Harvin and Kearse still around with Baldwin likely staying, they can manage investing in less experienced receivers.  Their main reacquisition was Bennett and that's already done.


They need to keep Hauschka too, but I agree, Tate is the only surprise to me so far, and yet it isn't too devastating. He deserves more money than we can reasonably pay him, and I think he'll do well for the Lions. I liked Giacomini but only because of how efficiently he pissed off opposing players. Losing him will probably cut our penalties in half! I'll miss Red Bryant and Chris Clemons, but I think letting them go was the right move. And I would have been very surprised and probably annoyed had we kept Browner. Schneider and Carroll have definitely proven they know what they're doing. My only wish going into next season is a decent offensive line.
 
2014-03-15 07:40:18 PM  
It's almost as if they are actually a business...
 
2014-03-15 07:42:17 PM  
They did it in honor of their fans. Now the 12th man can pay 12% more for those season tickets they just bought this year after the Super Bowl.
 
2014-03-15 07:47:55 PM  
Going to and winning the Superbowl usually costs the team owners quite a bit in the short term.  They make it up by being able to charge more for "quality" product over the long term.
 
2014-03-15 07:59:08 PM  
I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?
 
2014-03-15 08:01:30 PM  
Let's ask the fans of the other 31 teams if they'd be ok with a ticket price increase after winning a Super Bowl.
 
2014-03-15 08:02:29 PM  

interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?


You got me. I'm a Browns fan, we haven't had a game blacked out in almost twenty years.
 
2014-03-15 08:08:55 PM  

interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?


Well would you really want to see your own shiatty team? Especiay Jacksonville, I don't see them getting better till they move to LA.
 
2014-03-15 08:12:36 PM  

CavalierEternal: interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?

You got me. I'm a Browns fan, we haven't had a game blacked out in almost twenty years.


Wow, I guess Browns fans are like Cubs fans and will get the same level of success.
 
2014-03-15 08:28:02 PM  

interstellar_tedium: CavalierEternal: interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?

You got me. I'm a Browns fan, we haven't had a game blacked out in almost twenty years.

Wow, I guess Browns fans are like Cubs fans and will get the same level of success.



I've had this debate here too many times.

If we show up, then we're just blindly supporting the ownership and not giving them any reason to improve the team, and thus it's our fault that they suck.

If we don't show up, then we're fairweather fans and we don't support our team and they should've never given us another team in the first place and we should move to LA.

There's no winning that argument, so I'm not even going to bother getting involved in it.
 
2014-03-15 08:32:15 PM  
The 12th percent.
 
2014-03-15 08:48:36 PM  
Don't ticket prices usually increase every year? So I don't think a person who was paying $99 for a ticket last year is going to have much of a problem paying $111 this season.
 
2014-03-15 08:54:05 PM  

CavalierEternal: interstellar_tedium: CavalierEternal: interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?

You got me. I'm a Browns fan, we haven't had a game blacked out in almost twenty years.

Wow, I guess Browns fans are like Cubs fans and will get the same level of success.


I've had this debate here too many times.

If we show up, then we're just blindly supporting the ownership and not giving them any reason to improve the team, and thus it's our fault that they suck.

If we don't show up, then we're fairweather fans and we don't support our team and they should've never given us another team in the first place and we should move to LA.

There's no winning that argument, so I'm not even going to bother getting involved in it.


I understand, but think the whole LA thing is just the biggest con the NFL has, by holding LA over every ones heads they get new stadiums, sellouts etc while if LA (or anywhere else like London) was really a market they would just add another team.  But it too valuable as a threat where they can just make everyone support crap with their dollars and taxpayer funds to line the pockets of a bunch of rich SOBs, many of whom don't care to try and put a winning team on the field.
 
2014-03-15 09:19:42 PM  

ongbok: Don't ticket prices usually increase every year? So I don't think a person who was paying $99 for a ticket last year is going to have much of a problem paying $111 this season.


Pretty much. I have had my season tix for 12 years and they have gone up all but 3 or 4 times. Granted this is probably the biggest jump. At least on par with the post XL increase.
 
2014-03-15 09:48:40 PM  
A Seahawks thread without a post from Shame Us or IamRight? Guess they can't glorify this one...
 
2014-03-15 10:08:12 PM  

interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?


who says blacking out the jags is punishment
 
2014-03-15 10:11:14 PM  

interstellar_tedium: But it too valuable as a threat where they can just make everyone support crap with their dollars and taxpayer funds to line the pockets of a bunch of rich SOBs, many of whom don't care to try and put a winning team on the field.


Do you really believe that any NFL owner is uninterested in putting a winning team on the field?
 
2014-03-15 10:29:26 PM  

CavalierEternal: interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?

You got me. I'm a Browns fan, we haven't had a game blacked out in almost twenty years.


Hmm.  I thought Browns fans were blacked out by the end of every game.
 
2014-03-15 10:35:56 PM  

Summoner101: Can you name one of the players they traded that would've made that large of an impact? The only ones that comes to my mind is Tate or Rice. With Harvin and Kearse still around with Baldwin likely staying, they can manage investing in less experienced receivers. Their main reacquisition was Bennett and that's already done.


Yes, I don't get the sky is falling media narrative.  In Seattle, they have very successfully built a next man up philosophy and are one of the rare teams with the depth to do so.  I was surprised that Tate didn't stay, and that Bennett got so much, but, still, if you look at the WRs, they aren't hurting.  They will most likely re-sign Rice (unless the 49ers stick it to 'em), and have Harvin, Kearse, Lockette, Walters, and then the new guy, Price, who may be a bust or may be awesome.  They may pick up a big WR later in the draft (there's a guy out of WI that used to play with Wilson, but I can't remember his name).

I do worry about the OL.  Giacomini was a bit of a turnstile, but he was a grumpy turnstile, and he usually aggravated the holy hell out of opponents.  Still, with Browner and Giacomini elsewhere, goodness, the team will hardly get a penalty now.

\dammit, Tate.  Sucks that you left
\\one of the toughest WRs in the league
 
2014-03-15 11:14:13 PM  
I'd laugh if Cooks fell to the Seahawks, and they pick him up in the first round.

Get a big receiver in there, and holy hell they'd be scary.
 
2014-03-15 11:32:33 PM  
They put a quality product out on the field. They're the best in the NFL. A 12% increase is cheap.

/Bronco fan
 
2014-03-15 11:34:37 PM  

Di Atribe: interstellar_tedium: But it too valuable as a threat where they can just make everyone support crap with their dollars and taxpayer funds to line the pockets of a bunch of rich SOBs, many of whom don't care to try and put a winning team on the field.

Do you really believe that any NFL owner is uninterested in putting a winning team on the field?


yes.  many.

/raiders, cowboys, jags, dolphins, bills, bengals, etc ...
 
2014-03-15 11:45:43 PM  

A Fark Handle: yes. many.

/raiders, cowboys, jags, dolphins, bills, bengals, etc ...


OK so you honestly believe that those owners don't care about winning a Super Bowl? Because I think that's an outrageous thing to assume about those people. They may be misguided, but putting a winning team on the field is certainly in their best interests. And that's not a mystery in need of unraveling.
 
2014-03-15 11:51:50 PM  
Welp, we got our weekly Seahawks haters thread in. Go about your business, Fark.
 
2014-03-16 12:40:59 AM  

CavalierEternal: I've had this debate here too many times.

If we show up, then we're just blindly supporting the ownership and not giving them any reason to improve the team, and thus it's our fault that they suck.

If we don't show up, then we're fairweather fans and we don't support our team and they should've never given us another team in the first place and we should move to LA.

There's no winning that argument, so I'm not even going to bother getting involved in it.


Horseshiat. Nobody says you're "fair weather" after a decade or more of failure by the team.
 
2014-03-16 12:56:03 AM  

TheCheese: On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.


The fact that you think anyone at all has been traded argues against you having any thoughts worth listening to about their chances of making the playoffs next year
 
2014-03-16 12:58:12 AM  
Oh no! Those jerk Seahawks, going outside of the norm and raising prices! I can't believe that. No one else EVER raises their prices, especially in a year where the salary cap is going up.

/news is when someone actually reduces prices
 
2014-03-16 01:19:35 AM  

IAmRight: Oh no! Those jerk Seahawks, going outside of the norm and raising prices! I can't believe that. No one else EVER raises their prices, especially in a year where the salary cap is going up.

/news is when someone actually reduces prices


You're kind of up there in Seahawk country. Have you heard anyone complaining about the ticket prices?
 
2014-03-16 02:02:44 AM  

Di Atribe: IAmRight: Oh no! Those jerk Seahawks, going outside of the norm and raising prices! I can't believe that. No one else EVER raises their prices, especially in a year where the salary cap is going up.

/news is when someone actually reduces prices

You're kind of up there in Seahawk country. Have you heard anyone complaining about the ticket prices?


I am as well, and no. Seahawk football has been fun to watch for a long time (Whitehurst games excepted) and their season ticket waiting list has been lengthy for a long time. People aren't going to blink
 
2014-03-16 02:06:05 AM  

CavalierEternal: interstellar_tedium: I can understand raising prices because of success, just wondering why failure (and I am looking at you Cleveland, Jacksonville and Oakland) never leads to price reductions but instead blackouts punishing fans twice?

You got me. I'm a Browns fan, we haven't had a game blacked out in almost twenty years.


And also, the Browns have had the cheapest ticket in the league for a few years now.
 
2014-03-16 02:16:04 AM  

Di Atribe: interstellar_tedium: But it too valuable as a threat where they can just make everyone support crap with their dollars and taxpayer funds to line the pockets of a bunch of rich SOBs, many of whom don't care to try and put a winning team on the field.

Do you really believe that any NFL owner is uninterested in putting a winning team on the field?


If their last name is Brown, Ford, Bidwell or Richardson, yes.
 
2014-03-16 02:18:58 AM  

A Fark Handle: Di Atribe: interstellar_tedium: But it too valuable as a threat where they can just make everyone support crap with their dollars and taxpayer funds to line the pockets of a bunch of rich SOBs, many of whom don't care to try and put a winning team on the field.

Do you really believe that any NFL owner is uninterested in putting a winning team on the field?

yes.  many.

/raiders, cowboys, jags, dolphins, bills, bengals, etc ...


I'd disagree on the Cowboys (and I'm a Redskins fan). Jerry Jones the owner deeply cares about putting a winning team on the field. Fortunately, Jerry Jones the Cowboys GM has no idea how to achieve that goal.
 
2014-03-16 02:43:45 AM  

Di Atribe: You're kind of up there in Seahawk country. Have you heard anyone complaining about the ticket prices?


I dunno. Haven't been paying attention. Have my team's season opener on Monday and have been working 12+ hour days to try to get that ready.
 
2014-03-16 03:43:45 AM  

Mark Ratner: Part of the additional revenue will be used to upgrade the sound system that pumps out the fake crowd noise.


It's ok, forty whiner fan.  Maybe Kaepernick will learn to silent count this year.  He'll need it, because he'll be passing lots with your defense fleeing for the $$$.
 
2014-03-16 03:54:20 AM  

Fade2black: Mark Ratner: Part of the additional revenue will be used to upgrade the sound system that pumps out the fake crowd noise.

It's ok, forty whiner fan.  Maybe Kaepernick will learn to silent count this year.  He'll need it, because he'll be passing lots with your defense fleeing for the $$$.


Hahahaha...not a 49er fan. Do you know how to click on a user name, and see where they might be from, if they tell the truth? Sadly enough, I'm a Rams fan, but I've heard more than a few rumors that they enhance the crowd noise. I have to grudgingly admit that I really like Russell Wilson....impossible not to, when you see the way he is in interviews and what not. A class act all the way. Richard Sherman, on the other hand, I don't care for, but he knows what he's doing.
 
2014-03-16 06:06:53 AM  
Bronco tickets went up 7% overall and we lost.  They did a kinda cool thing where the best seats went up at a higher rate and the cheap seats had little or no change so our 3rd level behind the goalpost seats didn't get increased.  In 20-30 more years we might get down to the first level.
 
2014-03-16 08:24:45 AM  
$3 - $11 per ticket? My god that place will be a ghost town.  No one can afford that
 
2014-03-16 08:41:38 AM  

TheCheese: The 'Hawks sure are giving the fans the middle finger after winning the Game Which Cannot Be Named.

On one hand you have the 12% ticket price increase, and on the other you have a likelihood that they won't even get to the playoffs next year because of all the players that they've traded away since the end of the season.


who did they trade away? lost to free agency, sure, yeah, that happened. traded? Not so much.
 
2014-03-16 08:57:02 AM  
And every super bowl winner has to deal with losing people after the season. Free agents who contributed a lot to the super bowl run are gonna want more money. Look at the Ravens, they lost a bunch of people after they beat the Niners. But they also paid Flacco way too much money.

I swear to fark, people will find any reason to hate on Seattle.
 
2014-03-16 09:05:07 AM  

CavalierEternal: I've had this debate here too many times.
If we show up, then we're just blindly supporting the ownership and not giving them any reason to improve the team, and thus it's our fault that they suck.
If we don't show up, then we're fairweather fans and we don't support our team and they should've never given us another team in the first place and we should move to LA.
There's no winning that argument, so I'm not even going to bother getting involved in it.


Here's what you do when a team sucks hard:

You follow the team, read them in the papers, talk about them on Internet forums, listen to sports talk radio, do all that jazz. You stay in the loop. You ARE STILL a fan! You watch every game to the last second even though they lose most of them.

BUT

You stop buying tickets, stop buying merchandise, cancel the team's TV channel package and website subscription, no more souvenirs and gift shop crap, no more paying for anything. You effectively stop giving the team money until they improve.

This is how you show your devotion as a hardcore fan via the only thing that matters to the league and the ownership: With your wallet.

When the team gets good again, goes on a championship run or two, and the whole city is excited, for sure, go nuts: Splurge on that rare third jersey, buy some posters for your little cousins, get a new ballcap, purchase the team's TV channel package and website subscription again, buy some playoff tickets. You aren't jumping on the bandwagon because you never got off it. The only thing that's changed is your support now involves paying for it.

There is an ebb and flow that comes with every team's success, and as a fan you have to decide whether the team is worth that financial level of involvement. When they win, you're happy so you don't mind the expense, but when they lose, there's a bright side to it: You get to save some money.

Works pretty well.
 
2014-03-16 11:19:46 AM  

funktilious_j: And every super bowl winner has to deal with losing people after the season. Free agents who contributed a lot to the super bowl run are gonna want more money. Look at the Ravens, they lost a bunch of people after they beat the Niners. But they also paid Flacco way too much money.

I swear to fark, people will find any reason to hate on Seattle.


Flacco isn't even a top 10 cap hit. He's not even the biggest hit on the Ravens.

He signed a 3 year deal that was structured to look like 6.

There were big numbers thrown around be he won't see them. - and that was half the point of the contract from BOTH sides.

Flacco was paid like a QB that's good enough to win a Super Bowl. Nothing more.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report