Yes, it was between Northwestern and Illinois. The one end zone was right against the brick wall in the outfield and it was deemed too dangerous. Every time the possession changed they placed the ball so they only went one way. Both teams were on the same sideline so the coaches held sheets between them so the other team couldn't get the other team's signals.

The Bears used to play at Wrigley. I don't know how that field was arranged.

(06-29-2013 08:13 AM)chatcat Wrote:  

(06-29-2013 07:55 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 04:35 PM)Overrated Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 03:52 PM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 03:20 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Not implying anything and never said it was his responsibility. You want to win the argument by inserting words, that I never used, to bolster your position.

There is one venue that works for UC during Nippert renovation, PBS, not thousands of them on the market (like homes for sale). It isn't like UC can go to market and secure 5 proposals from 5 venue operators who want to UC to rent their stadium.

Mike Brown has no debt to service at PBS, no lease payments whatsoever,
and he even is not responsible for facility maintenance, the County-Taxpayers are.

I think GABP should be evaluated as an option.

Football field wont fit.

Then why did Babcock say he was talking to them about playing football games there? Must have some plan to wedge in at GABP.

Wasn't there a BIG game a couple of years ago at Wrigley where only half the field was used and the teams switched positions on every change of possession?

(06-30-2013 02:45 PM)bcat80 Wrote:  The Bears used to play at Wrigley. I don't know how that field was arranged.

It ran from the first base dugout to left field. It was a tight squeeze as well. The addition of some seats made that impossible when Northwestern and Illinois played. That field ran from the third base dugout to right field.

(06-28-2013 03:02 PM)UC KMF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 02:38 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 02:08 PM)UC KMF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 01:39 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:51 PM)UC KMF Wrote:  I must be missing the part where UC is forced to play games at PBS.

You lost the first bet about the practice facility, I don't care. You could have asked me about my thoughts as opposed to assuming what I think. And on this post you didn't even try to debate my points.

Do you want UC to lose money playing at PBS or do you think they should play 2014 home game at Elder?

You are missing the point. Why is it Mike Brown's reponsibility to make sure that UC gets what you think is a fair deal? If you think UC got an awful deal then your complaint should be with Whit Babcock. Brown is doing whats best for him and his business and Whit is doing the same. If there goals happen to intersect then you make a deal.

I'd be all for them playing games at Elder if they figured out a way for it to be more profitable then playing at PBS. I trust that part of the stadium expansion homework figured in the cost/profit of moving 2014 games to PBS. The fact that they looked into playing at GABP makes me confident that UC is looking at all options.

Where did get responsibility from? Who has suggested that it is his responsibility to give UC a great deal? I know I never suggested that.

Playing home games at a high school? UC would be the biggest joke in the country.

You are implying it by saying you think he charges UC too much. He obviously is not charging too much if UC is agreeing to the deals. It is simple economics. If your house is on the market and worth 200k and someone offers you 500k for it, are you going to turn them down because you don't want to charge them to much? I know I wouldn't have a problem with them overpaying me. If you think UC is getting a bad deal then your issue should be with UC.

My contingency on the high school idea was IF they could make a bigger profit from playing at Elder. I seriously doubt that could ever happen, but I'd be more then willing to endure the jokes when the extra money was spent on building the program.

You are applying market economics, pricing and deal making to a venue that the public pays for in sales tax with each and every dollar they spend.

The central problem is with the completely fraudulent unilarteral lease that was created via a person that is now a Bengal employee.

As long as the public is paying essentially ALL the bills for the stadium - Mike Brown shouldn't even be a party to the negotiation.

I'll be the first to admit I don't know anything about stadium construction, but for what we're shown in the preliminary plans, it seems like 12/2013 to 9/2015 is an awfully long time to get this done. I wonder if there is a way to stage the project so that we can keep the games at PBS to a minimum. Maybe backload the schedule in 2014 and get the press box and concourses done first so we could play a few games at Nippert in the tail end of the 2014 campaign.