(09-03-2013 05:19 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 04:04 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:40 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote:  I agree you could play them there and it would be a great game and loud as all get out. But you would probably sell out PBS also. It would be a great thing to have to try and figure out which we wanted to do compared to the old years we could not even sell out the Nip.

I can't imagine the Bearcats will be eager to move any games -- for any reason -- to PBS once their contributors / boosters get moved into their luxury suites and loge boxes.

You don't add (and sell) high-dollar premium seating only to relocate marquee games at the first opportunity. You want those games to be the draw that convinces boosters to upgrade to top-tier seats.

Whit has mentioned the possibility of moving high level games to PBS. If we were to go to PBS for a game, they more than likely would make accomodations for premium seating at PBS.

I would like to see one regional neutral site PBS game a year while keeping six home games at Nippert. Miami-Ohio (instead of going to Oxford), Louisville, Indiana, WVU, Ohio State, or Kentucky would work for me. Split the tickets and expenses with the those schools. I also wouldn't mind seeing UC play a game in Indianapolis, Chicago or Cleveland against a Big Ten school annually if we could swing it.

(09-03-2013 05:38 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:19 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 04:04 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:40 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote:  I agree you could play them there and it would be a great game and loud as all get out. But you would probably sell out PBS also. It would be a great thing to have to try and figure out which we wanted to do compared to the old years we could not even sell out the Nip.

I can't imagine the Bearcats will be eager to move any games -- for any reason -- to PBS once their contributors / boosters get moved into their luxury suites and loge boxes.

You don't add (and sell) high-dollar premium seating only to relocate marquee games at the first opportunity. You want those games to be the draw that convinces boosters to upgrade to top-tier seats.

Whit has mentioned the possibility of moving high level games to PBS. If we were to go to PBS for a game, they more than likely would make accomodations for premium seating at PBS.

I would like to see one regional neutral site PBS game a year while keeping six home games at Nippert. Miami-Ohio (instead of going to Oxford), Louisville, Indiana, WVU, Ohio State, or Kentucky would work for me. Split the tickets and expenses with the those schools. I also wouldn't mind seeing UC play a game in Indianapolis, Chicago or Cleveland against a Big Ten school annually if we could swing it.

This...

I always wondering why we hadn't done this in the past, especially after the Miami-UK game a few years back.

(09-03-2013 05:38 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:19 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 04:04 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:40 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote:  I agree you could play them there and it would be a great game and loud as all get out. But you would probably sell out PBS also. It would be a great thing to have to try and figure out which we wanted to do compared to the old years we could not even sell out the Nip.

I can't imagine the Bearcats will be eager to move any games -- for any reason -- to PBS once their contributors / boosters get moved into their luxury suites and loge boxes.

You don't add (and sell) high-dollar premium seating only to relocate marquee games at the first opportunity. You want those games to be the draw that convinces boosters to upgrade to top-tier seats.

Whit has mentioned the possibility of moving high level games to PBS. If we were to go to PBS for a game, they more than likely would make accomodations for premium seating at PBS.

I would like to see one regional neutral site PBS game a year while keeping six home games at Nippert. Miami-Ohio (instead of going to Oxford), Louisville, Indiana, WVU, Ohio State, or Kentucky would work for me. Split the tickets and expenses with the those schools. I also wouldn't mind seeing UC play a game in Indianapolis, Chicago or Cleveland against a Big Ten school annually if we could swing it.

Wasn't the Illinois game originally supposed to be played at Soldier Field? I was bummed when that was changed, especially with the Bengals playing there the next day, could have made a full weekend of it in Chicago.

(09-03-2013 05:42 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:38 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:19 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 04:04 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:40 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote:  I agree you could play them there and it would be a great game and loud as all get out. But you would probably sell out PBS also. It would be a great thing to have to try and figure out which we wanted to do compared to the old years we could not even sell out the Nip.

I can't imagine the Bearcats will be eager to move any games -- for any reason -- to PBS once their contributors / boosters get moved into their luxury suites and loge boxes.

You don't add (and sell) high-dollar premium seating only to relocate marquee games at the first opportunity. You want those games to be the draw that convinces boosters to upgrade to top-tier seats.

Whit has mentioned the possibility of moving high level games to PBS. If we were to go to PBS for a game, they more than likely would make accomodations for premium seating at PBS.

I would like to see one regional neutral site PBS game a year while keeping six home games at Nippert. Miami-Ohio (instead of going to Oxford), Louisville, Indiana, WVU, Ohio State, or Kentucky would work for me. Split the tickets and expenses with the those schools. I also wouldn't mind seeing UC play a game in Indianapolis, Chicago or Cleveland against a Big Ten school annually if we could swing it.

This...

I always wondering why we hadn't done this in the past, especially after the Miami-UK game a few years back.

Money is the obvious reason, especially with regard to an ongoing series like Miami. Financially the only advantage PBS or similar sites provide (unless tv gets involved) is if you can attract crowds there that exceed the capacity of what you could attract at the individual home sites. And not just exceed, but exceed by enough that you bring in sufficient additional revenues to overcome the additional rent costs AND other potential lost revenue (e.g. parking). Add in advertising/seating issues etc. and that's a tall order as we saw with the WVU and UL (iirc) games at PBS.

After the renovation, there aren't many more than a handful of opponents that imo would make UC look hard at playing at PBS rather than Nippert. ND and OSU are 2. Probably UM too. Maybe Alabama, Tenn., Texas, Oklahoma and perhaps a few others.

(09-03-2013 06:25 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:42 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:38 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 05:19 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 04:04 PM)#41 Wrote:  I can't imagine the Bearcats will be eager to move any games -- for any reason -- to PBS once their contributors / boosters get moved into their luxury suites and loge boxes.

You don't add (and sell) high-dollar premium seating only to relocate marquee games at the first opportunity. You want those games to be the draw that convinces boosters to upgrade to top-tier seats.

Whit has mentioned the possibility of moving high level games to PBS. If we were to go to PBS for a game, they more than likely would make accomodations for premium seating at PBS.

I would like to see one regional neutral site PBS game a year while keeping six home games at Nippert. Miami-Ohio (instead of going to Oxford), Louisville, Indiana, WVU, Ohio State, or Kentucky would work for me. Split the tickets and expenses with the those schools. I also wouldn't mind seeing UC play a game in Indianapolis, Chicago or Cleveland against a Big Ten school annually if we could swing it.

This...

I always wondering why we hadn't done this in the past, especially after the Miami-UK game a few years back.

Money is the obvious reason, especially with regard to an ongoing series like Miami. Financially the only advantage PBS or similar sites provide (unless tv gets involved) is if you can attract crowds there that exceed the capacity of what you could attract at the individual home sites. And not just exceed, but exceed by enough that you bring in sufficient additional revenues to overcome the additional rent costs AND other potential lost revenue (e.g. parking). Add in advertising/seating issues etc. and that's a tall order as we saw with the WVU and UL (iirc) games at PBS.

After the renovation, there aren't many more than a handful of opponents that imo would make UC look hard at playing at PBS rather than Nippert. ND and OSU are 2. Probably UM too. Maybe Alabama, Tenn., Texas, Oklahoma and perhaps a few others.

Even if the Cats never play in PBS again in 2014. I would love for the Cats to play a neutral site/road game game in Indy, Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago, Nashville or Pittsburgh. I would rather play a MAC school like Ohio in Cleveland than in Athens. Its good for UC to get regional exposure.

I could argue the game thing for the basketball team too which is why I never understood why this team doesn't play Dayton, Miami, or Wright State ever season. UC should have one game every year in Dayton and another game in northern Ohio every season.

Some Bog Ten, SEC teams get 8 home games. We need 7 a year.

(09-03-2013 03:23 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:20 PM)kyucat Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 02:13 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 01:21 PM)kyucat Wrote:  It will send a message to the Big 12 that are capacity is on power with several of their current members.

The primary message they care about is money - like all schools and conferences. So I doubt stadium size is their biggest concern as it has zero impact on their revenues. As long as the facilities are of high quality (e.g. visitor's locker room), I don't see why so many fans seem to think going from 40-50K in stadium size would be a major sticking point for the Big 12.

Oklahoma and Texas will not play at Nippert with it's current capacity. So the number of seats is a factor.

We would move those to PBS more than likely. We did in the past for OK. By the way - where is your info coming from that OK and TX will not play at Nippert? Just curious.

It comes from someone inside the UC Athletic department. But all you have to do is look at the future schedules and see that there are limited P5 schools who will play UC at Nippert and for that matter even at PBS. Right now we have BYU and Nebraska and that is it. And I understand that Bob Arkeilpane can get anyone to schedule football home and home. That is why you saw the email which was sent to ESPN asking for help in scheduling the first game at the new Nippert in 2014.

(09-04-2013 11:58 AM)kyucat Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:23 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:20 PM)kyucat Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 02:13 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 01:21 PM)kyucat Wrote:  It will send a message to the Big 12 that are capacity is on power with several of their current members.

The primary message they care about is money - like all schools and conferences. So I doubt stadium size is their biggest concern as it has zero impact on their revenues. As long as the facilities are of high quality (e.g. visitor's locker room), I don't see why so many fans seem to think going from 40-50K in stadium size would be a major sticking point for the Big 12.

Oklahoma and Texas will not play at Nippert with it's current capacity. So the number of seats is a factor.

We would move those to PBS more than likely. We did in the past for OK. By the way - where is your info coming from that OK and TX will not play at Nippert? Just curious.

It comes from someone inside the UC Athletic department. But all you have to do is look at the future schedules and see that there are limited P5 schools who will play UC at Nippert and for that matter even at PBS. Right now we have BYU and Nebraska and that is it. And I understand that Bob Arkeilpane can get anyone to schedule football home and home. That is why you saw the email which was sent to ESPN asking for help in scheduling the first game at the new Nippert in 2014.

Are you talking about in conference or OOC?

(09-04-2013 12:02 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 11:58 AM)kyucat Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:23 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:20 PM)kyucat Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 02:13 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  The primary message they care about is money - like all schools and conferences. So I doubt stadium size is their biggest concern as it has zero impact on their revenues. As long as the facilities are of high quality (e.g. visitor's locker room), I don't see why so many fans seem to think going from 40-50K in stadium size would be a major sticking point for the Big 12.

Oklahoma and Texas will not play at Nippert with it's current capacity. So the number of seats is a factor.

We would move those to PBS more than likely. We did in the past for OK. By the way - where is your info coming from that OK and TX will not play at Nippert? Just curious.

It comes from someone inside the UC Athletic department. But all you have to do is look at the future schedules and see that there are limited P5 schools who will play UC at Nippert and for that matter even at PBS. Right now we have BYU and Nebraska and that is it. And I understand that Bob Arkeilpane can get anyone to schedule football home and home. That is why you saw the email which was sent to ESPN asking for help in scheduling the first game at the new Nippert in 2014.

Are you talking about in conference or OOC?

HUGE Difference. Sure when negotiating OOC games, $ at the gate, etc. comes in to play and UT et. al. will only play in PBS. IN conference is a completely different circumstance. UT gets paid when we play there. Sure we could move it to PBS to make more $ for ourselves, but UT is not a factor for an IN conference game.

Baylor is in the middle of a brand spanking new stadium that only seats 45K including standing room, TCU just finished an addition to get to 45K, KSU was in the 40s until an add in the 1990s. I would feel safe in assuming we have spoken to the powers that be in great detail, as to where we need to be for inclusion. This stadium expansion plan is the right one.

Quote:Whit Babcock ‏@WhitBabcock 16h Looking fwd to releasing some updated, close-to-final Nippert Stadium renovation concepts & floor plans tomo. #22months #Bearcats

Quote:Whit Babcock ‏@WhitBabcock 16h Tomo's renderings/concepts will focus on west side (pressbox/suites). East side concepts to follow. Design phase thru Nov. Construct in Dec.

Quote:New Nippert Stadium Scholarship Club Seats can be reserved by calling 877-CATS-TIX. Going fast. #Bearcats

https://twitter.com/WhitBabcock

UC Releases New Nippert Stadium Renderings
Premium seat selection deadline set for Dec. 2, 2013




Football |
Oct. 3, 2013




CINCINNATI – Proposed additions to the University of Cincinnati’s Nippert Stadium are a step closer to reality following the release of new renderings and floor plans for the Nippert Stadium Renovation & Expansion, director of athletics Whit Babcock announced Tuesday.

Construction on the $86-millon, privately funded project, is scheduled to begin in mid-December 2013 and be completed in August of 2015.

“As we promised back in June we wanted to share with the Bearcat Family the exciting progress being made in the stadium design,” Babcock said. “As these renderings demonstrate, Nippert Stadium will add another signature facility in the heart of our beautiful campus. There will be some more tweaks and changes regarding design in the coming months. These renderings are close to final but still conceptual at this point.”

The expanded renovation focuses on both the east and west side of the stadium and will increase the stadium’s capacity to approximately 40,000. On the west side, a new press box structure will be built, adding suites, scholarship club seats and loge boxes/patio suites. The west concourse will also be renovated, including concession stands and restrooms. Changes on the east side include expanded concessions and restroom offerings, including the building of skywalks to connect the upper deck with the gameday plaza on O’Varsity Way.

The new west-side structure would be approximately one and one-half stories taller than the current press box and approximately 130 yards long. The curvature of the facility would match that of the upper deck on the east side of the stadium and contain four levels; a press and operations level, suite level, scholarship club level, and patio suites mezzanine level.

The allotment of founders’ suites was sold out during the silent phase of the campaign however premium seating options in the Scholarship Club Seats are still available to all fans. All Scholarship Club Seat donors who place 10% down payment paid in full by Dec. 2, 2013 will be eligible to personally select seating locations in the new premium areas of Nippert Stadium as early as January, 2014. For more information, please see http://www.gobearcats.com/nippert.

Design work for the project is ongoing and final renderings, including projected concepts for the east side changes, will be released as they become available.

Patrons interested in seating in the Scholarship Club should contact the UCATS office at 877-55-UCATS.

Entering its 112th season, Nippert Stadium is the venerable home of the University of Cincinnati football team and provides the Bearcats with one of the best home-field environments in college football.

USA Today recently named Nippert as the best home-field venue in the former BIG EAST Conference and ESPN's Scott Van Pelt cited Nippert as a ‘one of the gems of college football.’

Construction began on Nippert Stadium in 1915 and was completed in 1924. UC has used the Nippert site as a playing field since 1901, making it the second-oldest playing site in the nation for college football behind Penn's Franklin Field (1895).

Nippert Stadium’s current press box was built in 1992 and since that time, approximately 72 of the 76 BCS schools have made major renovations to their football stadiums or premium seating areas.

UC will play the 2014 season downtown at Paul Brown Stadium and return to NIppert for the 2015 season, the 100th anniversary of original construction on the facility.

Working in conjunction with the University of Cincinnati Office of Planning, Design and Construction, the Architect of Record for the project is Heery International. Heery’s sports facilities specialists have completed more than 220 stadium and arena projects worth more than $3 billion. Heery’s broad sports portfolio includes colleges and universities of all sizes for whom the firm has completed arenas, team facilities, tennis and soccer stadiums, natatoriums and practice fields and arenas. Among the firm’s clients are Big Ten, MAC, ACC, SEC, Big 12, Pac 12 and Big East conference teams. Signature sports facilities in Heery’s portfolio include Darrell K Royal–Texas Memorial Stadium (University of Texas), Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium (University of Arkansas), the 1996 Olympic Stadium/Turner Field and the Georgia Dome.

Architecture Research Office will serve as the design architect. Architecture Research Office (ARO) is the New York City firm whose work includes projects at the University of Michigan, Brown University and Princeton University.

The construction manager will be Turner Construction Company, a North America-based, international company, whose work includes projects at the University of Florida, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Yale University.

For more information about the project and to access the updated renderings, please click here: http://www.gobearcats.com/nippert.


http://www.gobearcats.com/sports/m-footb...13aac.html

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/cinn...ab00a4b2b6

21 pages

Has anyone heard what the final numbers are for the renovated Nippert are?

The presentation says 40,000+

I like the use of all of the glass. It should help to prevent the stadium from looking too closed in.

I am excited to see this get done...very cool.

Any idea if there are plans to renovate or modernize the scoreboard, video board and sound system? I have spent a lot of time in Nippert and the more that I am there the more I think of how out dated that whole set-up is becoming. With new technologies in video and sound, it seems very outdated and my fear is that the stadium gets this big make-over and improvements are made...but the scoreboard and such remain dated. Just a question and just my 2cents. Let's just hope that with all of this good coming, we get a P5 invite and this team and staff perform to the level to make this all worth it.

I really like the architectural styling of the addition. It should look really spectacular once complete. But I think you will all be disappointed with the final capacity number, although I fully expect that UC leadership did their homework and it meets their needs for a P5 invite.

I don't think the expansion will get us to 40,000. First, the article says "approximately 40,000" and not "40,000+" even with Purduesque ticket policies that gives us an extra 1,000 seats for free. If you count the number of seats in the renderings, there's 1132 club seats (minus what I presume to be handicap areas at the top of some of the seating sections). There are 209 seats in the patio suites.There are 329 outside seats for the suites, although each of the suites should have more capacity than the number of outside seats.

So at a minimum, the expansion will add 1670 seats to Nippert and probably closer to 2000 on game days. Final capacity will be closer to 38,000 than it will 40,000. Had seating been utilized along the entirety of the overall structure and an extra two rows of club seats added, the expansion capacity would roughly double and get us to 40,000.

Edit: the brochure does indeed say "40,000+" but the article states "approximately 40,000".

(10-03-2013 01:38 PM)daap_bearcat97 Wrote:  I am excited to see this get done...very cool.

Any idea if there are plans to renovate or modernize the scoreboard, video board and sound system? I have spent a lot of time in Nippert and the more that I am there the more I think of how out dated that whole set-up is becoming. With new technologies in video and sound, it seems very outdated and my fear is that the stadium gets this big make-over and improvements are made...but the scoreboard and such remain dated. Just a question and just my 2cents. Let's just hope that with all of this good coming, we get a P5 invite and this team and staff perform to the level to make this all worth it.

Whit said a few months back that they were planning a red-do of the scoreboard as well as adding ribbon boards along both decks. He said one problem will be to find a place for the names of former players along Herschede-Shank.

(10-03-2013 01:38 PM)daap_bearcat97 Wrote:  I am excited to see this get done...very cool.

Any idea if there are plans to renovate or modernize the scoreboard, video board and sound system? I have spent a lot of time in Nippert and the more that I am there the more I think of how out dated that whole set-up is becoming. With new technologies in video and sound, it seems very outdated and my fear is that the stadium gets this big make-over and improvements are made...but the scoreboard and such remain dated. Just a question and just my 2cents. Let's just hope that with all of this good coming, we get a P5 invite and this team and staff perform to the level to make this all worth it.

I haven't heard anything about a new scoreboard, but I imagine that the soundsystem will be upgraded. It has to be

(10-03-2013 01:50 PM)pmr07 Wrote:  So at a minimum, the expansion will add 1670 seats to Nippert and probably closer to 2000 on game days. Final capacity will be closer to 38,000 than it will 40,000. Had seating been utilized along the entirety of the overall structure and an extra two rows of club seats added, the expansion capacity would roughly double and get us to 40,000.

I like the overall design very much, but I am disappointed by the number of club seats. Look at the rendering on page 4. There is easily room to add 3-4 more rows of club seats without coming close to obstructing any views.