Finally the construction sign is up and drawings released. This is probably not to exciting to most but definitely bumped.

Here is a Maroon Musket article.
MaroonMusket


Don't expect the back building but it could be new rest rooms and concessions. (Kind of doubt it will happen for 2014.)

So you are not planning on adding seats per the MACs requirement for being a member?





The endzone athletic facility looks nice but I thought you guys had to get your stadium capacity in the 20s.

No immediate plans beyond the 17k. The new football facilities will have a seating section that overlooks the field. There was talk of lowering the field two feet and adding seats in the front, which would bring it up to 20K.

For the immediate future, I think 17,000 is okay for UMass, seeing how they will draw only in the tens of thousands for minor games in the present football landscape. For big games, Gillette is always an option, so switching between their intimate home environment and big NFL stadium could be a good strategy. If they end up having BE intentions, an upgrade will be necessary for sure, and even then, they should think about expanding in the long run. If their capacity is in the twenty's and they're selling out often down the road, then that'll help raise revenue through increased prices and it looks good on TV. As it stands now, most MAC schools struggle to draw 17,000 consistently, so it's not like they have a high school facility.

What MAC requirement for stadium capacity? I'm not aware of any such rule, and in fact many MAC schools (like Miami) have actually down-sized (or should I say "right-sized") their stadiums in recent years now that having 30K seats is meaningless. Most here will recall that during one phase of the NCAA trying to impose DIA attendance requirements you had to average 17K per year or 17K once every four years if you had a 30K capacity stadium. That rule is long gone.

(01-17-2013 08:28 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  What MAC requirement for stadium capacity? I'm not aware of any such rule, and in fact many MAC schools (like Miami) have actually down-sized (or should I say "right-sized") their stadiums in recent years now that having 30K seats is meaningless. Most here will recall that during one phase of the NCAA trying to impose DIA attendance requirements you had to average 17K per year or 17K once every four years if you had a 30K capacity stadium. That rule is long gone.

I believe there was a requirement some years back, but it's not in place anymore as far as I know.

(01-17-2013 04:37 PM)HuskieJohn Wrote:  So you are not planning on adding seats per the MACs requirement for being a member?

The endzone athletic facility looks nice but I thought you guys had to get your stadium capacity in the 20s.

No such requirement in UMass's contract with the MAC. The only MAC requirement was that UMass upgrade the pressbox, which will be done in time for the 2014 season. Keep in mind that the MAC contract also required UMass to execute the 8 year agreement with Gillette Stadium, which will prevent UMass from playing more than 1 or 2 games per season in its on-campus stadium. UMass does have the designs completed for expanding the stadium should they be needed after the lease with Gillette ends.

Funny that MAC makes UMass play in Gillette. UMass should demand EMU book the Palace because of the big crowd that might show up.

I like the UMASS draw ups. It looks nice, the stadium will always look full, and it will probably be rowdy! It reminds me of Buffalo, only Buffalo has huge bleachers in the endzones that no one sits in. If only EMU could downsize a little bit. Rynearson is cool, but a high school stadium would suffice for them as of late.

(01-17-2013 11:52 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  Funny that MAC makes UMass play in Gillette. UMass should demand EMU book the Palace because of the big crowd that might show up.

Sorry EMU fans but that was funny.

EDIT: BTW, the same sort of thing can be said about the MAC requiring UMass to upgrade their pressbox. Have they seen Doyt Perry?

(01-17-2013 10:14 PM)LastMinuteman Wrote:  Keep in mind that the MAC contract also required UMass to execute the 8 year agreement with Gillette Stadium, which will prevent UMass from playing more than 1 or 2 games per season in its on-campus stadium. UMass does have the designs completed for expanding the stadium should they be needed after the lease with Gillette ends.

I thought it was 5 years?

(01-18-2013 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  I like the UMASS draw ups. It looks nice, the stadium will always look full, and it will probably be rowdy! It reminds me of Buffalo, only Buffalo has huge bleachers in the endzones that no one sits in. If only EMU could downsize a little bit. Rynearson is cool, but a high school stadium would suffice for them as of late.

I think we all know how Rynearson grew to 30K (NCAA mandated it over 20 years ago).

I wish EMU would block out sections in both Rynearson and even the banner end of the upper deck at the Convo.

As many know, no matter who good the EMU crowd might be the visitor side of Rynearson will always be nearly empty.

Parking for Rynearson is adjacent to the press box side so there is no need to sit on the visitor side.

I assume there are limited concessions too. (I have never sat there. It is completely isolated from the rest of the stadium/parking).

(01-18-2013 05:13 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(01-18-2013 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  I like the UMASS draw ups. It looks nice, the stadium will always look full, and it will probably be rowdy! It reminds me of Buffalo, only Buffalo has huge bleachers in the endzones that no one sits in. If only EMU could downsize a little bit. Rynearson is cool, but a high school stadium would suffice for them as of late.

I think we all know how Rynearson grew to 30K (NCAA mandated it over 20 years ago).

I wish EMU would block out sections in both Rynearson and even the banner end of the upper deck at the Convo.

As many know, no matter who good the EMU crowd might be the visitor side of Rynearson will always be nearly empty.

Parking for Rynearson is adjacent to the press box side so there is no need to sit on the visitor side.

I assume there are limited concessions too. (I have never sat there. It is completely isolated from the rest of the stadium/parking).

Speaking of this, we as a conference need to do a better job as a conference facilitating pressbox and camera angles during ESPN broadcast or just MACDN streams. We all need to build small press boxes on the smaller visitor's side to accomodate camera crews. I see the same thing when I watch games broadcast at EMU, Kent, Miami, Central, etc. The camera crew mount their cameras in the main pressbox and all is shown on TV is the much smaller, less impressive visitor stands and they have less fans in the stands. Ive been to these stadiums so I know how much better they'd look from the angle, but casual viewers would never know that and see a smaller visitor side that is half empty and no press box.

How the cameras portray the game is a marketing tool and our stadiums and courts are studios and should be optimized as such to best showcase the product. This cant be overly expensive to do and should be a conference-wide initiative.

.

Are the plans to lower the field still on the board? I think 17k is a good size for UMass right now. How does scheduling games on campus vs. off work? Do the Patriots get to pick what 2 games they don't want or does UMass decide which games are on campus?

(01-17-2013 04:49 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  No immediate plans beyond the 17k. The new football facilities will have a seating section that overlooks the field. There was talk of lowering the field two feet and adding seats in the front, which would bring it up to 20K.

With having 1 game at home in 2014 and 2015 it looks to be good enough. Hopefully you can add a few hundred permanent seats in the endzone by 2016.

Honestly a smaller capacity will help with the atmosphere of a MAC game. Especially since those games in 14/15 will likely be on a weeknight in November.

(01-18-2013 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  I like the UMASS draw ups. It looks nice, the stadium will always look full, and it will probably be rowdy! It reminds me of Buffalo, only Buffalo has huge bleachers in the endzones that no one sits in. If only EMU could downsize a little bit. Rynearson is cool, but a high school stadium would suffice for them as of late.

What MAC program is filling up it's stadium at this point or averaging 75% of capacity. When NIU had endzone bleachers the seating capacity was at or near 30K but hardly anyone sat in them. Present seating is 24K and top attendance this year was 18-19K. Rynearson would look fuller if visiting MAC fans showed up to the games also. If NIU ever got a date other than the Friday after Tday, I'd make the trip.

(01-18-2013 12:59 AM)Campbell4President Wrote:  

(01-17-2013 11:52 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  Funny that MAC makes UMass play in Gillette. UMass should demand EMU book the Palace because of the big crowd that might show up.

Sorry EMU fans but that was funny.

EDIT: BTW, the same sort of thing can be said about the MAC requiring UMass to upgrade their pressbox. Have they seen Doyt Perry?

Or Huskie Stadium? I have to go to a road game to see what a modern press box looks like.

I mentioned this in my earlier comments but the NCAA never mandated a 30K seat stadium as a DIA requirement. There was a push to expand or build new stadiums to that minimum capacity because it made it much easier to achieve the attendance requirements that were then in place, which was 17K every year if your stadium was less than 30K and 17K once every four years if you had a 30K stadium. Obviously a ridiculous and arbitrary rule that caused many non-BCS type schools like those in the MAC to expend money for needless expansions.

At Miami we brought in what were essentially temporary bleachers and stuck them in the 4 corners of the stadium to get our capacity of 25,183 up to 30K. It looked stupid and those stands were of course normally empty although we did fill them up in a few big games like Marshall. When other MAC schools renovated their stadiums in that timeframe, they aimed for 30K. As soon as the that rule was wiped out, the impetus for having 30K seats was eliminated as well. Now it's supposedly averaging 15K every year but that rule isn't really being enforced, either to my knowledge...

(01-18-2013 09:04 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(01-18-2013 12:49 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  I like the UMASS draw ups. It looks nice, the stadium will always look full, and it will probably be rowdy! It reminds me of Buffalo, only Buffalo has huge bleachers in the endzones that no one sits in. If only EMU could downsize a little bit. Rynearson is cool, but a high school stadium would suffice for them as of late.

What MAC program is filling up it's stadium at this point or averaging 75% of capacity. When NIU had endzone bleachers the seating capacity was at or near 30K but hardly anyone sat in them. Present seating is 24K and top attendance this year was 18-19K. Rynearson would look fuller if visiting MAC fans showed up to the games also. If NIU ever got a date other than the Friday after Tday, I'd make the trip.

Toledo was at 84.5% of capacity in 2011 and 78.3% in 2012(I'm sure OU was above 75%). BGSUX@UT drew 28,115 this season to the GB. Toledo also had 24,124 for UCinn Bearcats. Coastal Carolina(4th game of the season} was attended as well or better than any of the other MAC schools on the Rocket home schedule(Late season game with Akron was an attendance killer-14,589. Otherwise attendance would have been about 83% capacity vs 78.3%). Besides BGSUX, opponents that historically draw well in the GB are OU and Miami U. Average FBS home attendance is around 45,000-46,000 and FCS is about 9,000-10,000.

(01-18-2013 10:13 AM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  I mentioned this in my earlier comments but the NCAA never mandated a 30K seat stadium as a DIA requirement.

That may be, but I'm pretty sure the MAC instituted a mandate that said a certain percentage of their schools had to have at least a 30K seat stadium......not everyone, just a percentage.

Also, the NCAA did de-classify most, if not all of the MAC to I-AA for one year.....think it was 1982. I honestly cannot remember what bylaw they used to do this, and I believe most MAC schools refused to recognize the de-classification. Do you remember the details surrounding that one eCK?