Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
No Longer the Smallest
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
rabidTU2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,934
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Tulsa Univ
Location:
Post: #11
RE: No Longer the Smallest
The university's original problem was its location in the middle of the city with very little opportunity to expand outward until the area got rundown enough to warrant that. If you drive around the area just outside the campus to the west, it is substandard and I think its obvious most of those houses are going to be demolished at some point - mainly because of their foundations. If you look closely, almost all those houses have severe foundation cracking and are either already razed, abandoned or rented out. If you have that kind of house, its almost impossible to save it inexpensively. Its going to cost more to fix than the houses are worth.

What TU needs to do is lobby the city to open up the land they already own to the east of Harvard (a designated "setback") and pave it for university use such as for events and overflow. I'm not a big fan of parking garages (often mentioned as a solution) because they will never pay for themselves and most people use ground level parking anyway. That funding needs to go toward athletic and academic buildings, not expensive parking structures IMO.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I actually found an old centennial edition college FB guide (put out by the NCAA). It was written in 1969 which was the centennial of CFB (first game was played between Rutgers and Princeton in 1869). That "guide" listed a lot of info on all the four year schools playing CFB at the time and it also listed enrollment size.


Enrollment:

University of Tulsa - 4,396 men/2,564 women = 6,960 total

So TU has reduced its enrollment over the years by about 2,500. I think it was done when it changed itself to a more residential campus from an urban one and became more academically exclusive. Now the demand may be back to a university that needs to serve more students. No matter what, TU will always have that name - TULSA. Kids want that on their resume'.
02-01-2015 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
invisiblehand Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,410
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 106
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #12
RE: No Longer the Smallest
(02-01-2015 12:27 PM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  The university's original problem was its location in the middle of the city with very little opportunity to expand outward until the area got rundown enough to warrant that. If you drive around the area just outside the campus to the west, it is substandard and I think its obvious most of those houses are going to be demolished at some point - mainly because of their foundations. If you look closely, almost all those houses have severe foundation cracking and are either already razed, abandoned or rented out. If you have that kind of house, its almost impossible to save it inexpensively. Its going to cost more to fix than the houses are worth.

What TU needs to do is lobby the city to open up the land they already own to the east of Harvard (a designated "setback") and pave it for university use such as for events and overflow. I'm not a big fan of parking garages (often mentioned as a solution) because they will never pay for themselves and most people use ground level parking anyway. That funding needs to go toward athletic and academic buildings, not expensive parking structures IMO.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I actually found an old centennial edition college FB guide (put out by the NCAA). It was written in 1969 which was the centennial of CFB (first game was played between Rutgers and Princeton in 1869). That "guide" listed a lot of info on all the four year schools playing CFB at the time and it also listed enrollment size.


Enrollment:

University of Tulsa - 4,396 men/2,564 women = 6,960 total

So TU has reduced its enrollment over the years by about 2,500. I think it was done when it changed itself to a more residential campus from an urban one and became more academically exclusive. Now the demand may be back to a university that needs to serve more students. No matter what, TU will always have that name - TULSA. Kids want that on their resume'.

I don't agree with the parking garage. Parking is a huge hassle for TU fans... Think about how much better it would be during times of success like we're having now, if we had available parking in the vein of the Mabee Center across town. Any parking structure would pay for itself by increased attendance and the prestige that that tends to bring.
02-04-2015 11:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rabidTU2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,934
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Tulsa Univ
Location:
Post: #13
RE: No Longer the Smallest
(02-04-2015 11:25 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  
(02-01-2015 12:27 PM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  The university's original problem was its location in the middle of the city with very little opportunity to expand outward until the area got rundown enough to warrant that. If you drive around the area just outside the campus to the west, it is substandard and I think its obvious most of those houses are going to be demolished at some point - mainly because of their foundations. If you look closely, almost all those houses have severe foundation cracking and are either already razed, abandoned or rented out. If you have that kind of house, its almost impossible to save it inexpensively. Its going to cost more to fix than the houses are worth.

What TU needs to do is lobby the city to open up the land they already own to the east of Harvard (a designated "setback") and pave it for university use such as for events and overflow. I'm not a big fan of parking garages (often mentioned as a solution) because they will never pay for themselves and most people use ground level parking anyway. That funding needs to go toward athletic and academic buildings, not expensive parking structures IMO.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I actually found an old centennial edition college FB guide (put out by the NCAA). It was written in 1969 which was the centennial of CFB (first game was played between Rutgers and Princeton in 1869). That "guide" listed a lot of info on all the four year schools playing CFB at the time and it also listed enrollment size.


Enrollment:

University of Tulsa - 4,396 men/2,564 women = 6,960 total

So TU has reduced its enrollment over the years by about 2,500. I think it was done when it changed itself to a more residential campus from an urban one and became more academically exclusive. Now the demand may be back to a university that needs to serve more students. No matter what, TU will always have that name - TULSA. Kids want that on their resume'.

I don't agree with the parking garage. Parking is a huge hassle for TU fans... Think about how much better it would be during times of success like we're having now, if we had available parking in the vein of the Mabee Center across town. Any parking structure would pay for itself by increased attendance and the prestige that that tends to bring.

I didn't know the Mabee Center had a parking garage. My bad.

My main concern is that TU, if it grows as we discussed, will need student parking on campus and a parking garage is not conducive to that imo. Also, a multi-million dollar parking building wouldn't pay for itself unless the fees to park there were very expensive. That cuts down the casual donor and alum that may have a hard time donating.

Also, ground level parking can be inexpensively converted to campus use if the need arises at some future point. If a PG existed there, an expensive building would have to be demolished to provide the space where ground level parking is just "land". Also I think PG's tend to be barriers to the general public in the same way "distance" is. Its a hassle to wait in line on game day and "search" for a PG space and if you find one, you are stuck with a flight of stairs to negotiate.

A four or five story building will cost millions we probably don't have, but we already have the land and will cost vitually nothing to throw pavement over. It would also be a pickup point where those gameday buses could pickup fans and transport to the front door of the stadium/arena.

I certainly don't want to have to choose at some point, whether TU should fund a parking garage or a new set of suites or boxes on the eastside of Chapman. I'd rather have the suites. We can't watch the game from a parked car.

I guess we'll see how that plays out and I'm sure TU will do whats best for all concerned.
02-05-2015 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
invisiblehand Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,410
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 106
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #14
RE: No Longer the Smallest
(02-05-2015 11:02 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  
(02-04-2015 11:25 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  
(02-01-2015 12:27 PM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  The university's original problem was its location in the middle of the city with very little opportunity to expand outward until the area got rundown enough to warrant that. If you drive around the area just outside the campus to the west, it is substandard and I think its obvious most of those houses are going to be demolished at some point - mainly because of their foundations. If you look closely, almost all those houses have severe foundation cracking and are either already razed, abandoned or rented out. If you have that kind of house, its almost impossible to save it inexpensively. Its going to cost more to fix than the houses are worth.

What TU needs to do is lobby the city to open up the land they already own to the east of Harvard (a designated "setback") and pave it for university use such as for events and overflow. I'm not a big fan of parking garages (often mentioned as a solution) because they will never pay for themselves and most people use ground level parking anyway. That funding needs to go toward athletic and academic buildings, not expensive parking structures IMO.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I actually found an old centennial edition college FB guide (put out by the NCAA). It was written in 1969 which was the centennial of CFB (first game was played between Rutgers and Princeton in 1869). That "guide" listed a lot of info on all the four year schools playing CFB at the time and it also listed enrollment size.


Enrollment:

University of Tulsa - 4,396 men/2,564 women = 6,960 total

So TU has reduced its enrollment over the years by about 2,500. I think it was done when it changed itself to a more residential campus from an urban one and became more academically exclusive. Now the demand may be back to a university that needs to serve more students. No matter what, TU will always have that name - TULSA. Kids want that on their resume'.

I don't agree with the parking garage. Parking is a huge hassle for TU fans... Think about how much better it would be during times of success like we're having now, if we had available parking in the vein of the Mabee Center across town. Any parking structure would pay for itself by increased attendance and the prestige that that tends to bring.

I didn't know the Mabee Center had a parking garage. My bad.

My main concern is that TU, if it grows as we discussed, will need student parking on campus and a parking garage is not conducive to that imo. Also, a multi-million dollar parking building wouldn't pay for itself unless the fees to park there were very expensive. That cuts down the casual donor and alum that may have a hard time donating.

Also, ground level parking can be inexpensively converted to campus use if the need arises at some future point. If a PG existed there, an expensive building would have to be demolished to provide the space where ground level parking is just "land". Also I think PG's tend to be barriers to the general public in the same way "distance" is. Its a hassle to wait in line on game day and "search" for a PG space and if you find one, you are stuck with a flight of stairs to negotiate.

A four or five story building will cost millions we probably don't have, but we already have the land and will cost vitually nothing to throw pavement over. It would also be a pickup point where those gameday buses could pickup fans and transport to the front door of the stadium/arena.

I certainly don't want to have to choose at some point, whether TU should fund a parking garage or a new set of suites or boxes on the eastside of Chapman. I'd rather have the suites. We can't watch the game from a parked car.

I guess we'll see how that plays out and I'm sure TU will do whats best for all concerned.
Mabee center doesn't have a parking garage, they just have a massive Parkin lot surrounding the center.

The problem with parking at the moment is multifaceted... Students get kicked out of their own lots during game days to assuage the parking for donors. There is absolutely no parking on campus during game day that doesn't require a season / semester pass. All we would have to do is build a 3 level garage on the site where the south Harvard lot is now. Heck, we could even build the bottom level at subsurface to reduce the eyesore.

No buildings would be razed.
02-06-2015 04:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rabidTU2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,934
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Tulsa Univ
Location:
Post: #15
RE: No Longer the Smallest
When you refer to the south Harvard lot, is that the one by the Don and borders Harvard? The one used for high dollar donors?

And would you be in favor of parking "spaces" on the other side of Harvard to the east? I've always envisioned that as an area where the university could sell spaces for game day tailgaters. It would be hard to tailgate in a parking structure/garage - at least something I've never seen done before. I've even enivsioned a couple of picnic areas on that side (east) of Harvard that could be used by the community when not used for athletic visitors and could also be used by the students - small parks with outdoor grills and restroom "facilities" prior to games.

If TU could ever come up with the money to do all that and have more suites, I'm on board. I just wonder where the money would come from and how far in the future it would be. I think our next project is an IPF and then more additions to Chapman, but all this fits together and has to be prioritized into a facilities package. The AD and President will obviously have to make decisions on that and which comes first.

I know a lot of fans use the excuse of parking to not show up and a lot of us long timers have always belittled that, but I think we have to nurture those folks and cater to their needs so they will come back again and again. I suppose I look at it like Walmart does. If the land is there, the destination is the store and the parking is free. Free parking nearby the destination wherever possible. I think if Walmart charged "casual" shoppers to park, their business would dry up pretty fast.

IMO
02-06-2015 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JesseTU Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 414
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 27
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #16
RE: No Longer the Smallest
I have no pass of any kind. I'm not very early.

I usually park 6 blocks away for football, and 4 blocks for Bball. On sold put football games I park maybe 8-10 blocks away, maybe. While I understand some people are immobile for a variety of reason - but 90% can walk 10 blocks.

How many millions is a 10 block walk 6 times a year worth?
02-06-2015 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
invisiblehand Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,410
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 106
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #17
RE: No Longer the Smallest
(02-06-2015 10:45 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  When you refer to the south Harvard lot, is that the one by the Don and borders Harvard? The one used for high dollar donors?

And would you be in favor of parking "spaces" on the other side of Harvard to the east? I've always envisioned that as an area where the university could sell spaces for game day tailgaters. It would be hard to tailgate in a parking structure/garage - at least something I've never seen done before. I've even enivsioned a couple of picnic areas on that side (east) of Harvard that could be used by the community when not used for athletic visitors and could also be used by the students - small parks with outdoor grills and restroom "facilities" prior to games.

If TU could ever come up with the money to do all that and have more suites, I'm on board. I just wonder where the money would come from and how far in the future it would be. I think our next project is an IPF and then more additions to Chapman, but all this fits together and has to be prioritized into a facilities package. The AD and President will obviously have to make decisions on that and which comes first.

I know a lot of fans use the excuse of parking to not show up and a lot of us long timers have always belittled that, but I think we have to nurture those folks and cater to their needs so they will come back again and again. I suppose I look at it like Walmart does. If the land is there, the destination is the store and the parking is free. Free parking nearby the destination wherever possible. I think if Walmart charged "casual" shoppers to park, their business would dry up pretty fast.

IMO

The parking lot I'm referring to is the one east of the Sigma Chi house. It's a general use lot anyways and no one tailgates there (some do tailgate in the commons area to the north, right next to the new performing arts center, but I'm sure those 3-4 parties could find other tailgating spots) really, the campus has enough green space that tailgating shouldn't be an issue if it became a large enough event.

I'm not really in favor of parking in the areas east of Harvard because I think those areas might be better served with room for more classrooms / dorms.

Certainly an indoor facility is first on the list. Though I sincerely hope it isn't built on Harwell Field. Mabee Gym is an absolute dump of a facility and needs to be torn down... That's where it should be. I mean the athletic media office is in there currently and they're having to store a good deal of TU's archival material in an old gym shower room.

I'd love to see TU getting enough attendance numbers in football to warrant additions to the football stadium... But that certainly won't happen until the parking problem is fixed.

But, the biggest "fix" TU needs is beer at games. It would increase attendance by I'm guessing 15-20% and add extra revenue. It's ridiculous to let the snobs in the boxes have it and not the common man, or the students who are of age.
02-17-2015 05:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rabidTU2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,934
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Tulsa Univ
Location:
Post: #18
RE: No Longer the Smallest
If we tear down MG, then would we replace all the facilities that would go away with it? We have a lot of expensive stuff in there that I'm not sure we could afford to lose completely from the program. Would we have to drop rowing for instance? Volleyball with their dressing facilities, practice area etc would then have to go somewhere else. Golf would have nowhere close to putt/chip in the winter. Band would lose their indoor band room. I think even the cheerleaders, pep squads have facilities in there somewhere. Athletic offices and storage. On and on. If we are going to replace an entire building and demolish it, wouldn't we need to have something else and what would be the cost of it? Where would we then put it? Also, I think at some point if TU FB is going to grow, we need to slap on more suites (in the future) for more revenue. Those seats and space are always sold and don't even have to be occupied but TU still gets the money (like the vacant seats in the Don) - businesses provide the revenue but seldom attend. Luxury seats are always in demand and one luxury seat provides as much revenue as 5-10 outdoor stadium seats.

I'm for beer at the games as long as there are sections in the stadium that are "beer free" zones so the kiddies can enjoy and their parents won't sit by a fan that throws up on them - just kidding.

The parking situation is easily remedied if they open up the setback. TU owns the land already and it is inexplicably chained up where noone can park. That has enough open area for hundreds of spaces. One space doesn't just equal one fan, on average, about 3 fans to a car.
If TU is going to grow as we've discussed, then they need more of that. Students use it during the weekdays and the rest is deginated for night/weekend "events". To grow as both a college and an athletic program, TU needs to provide the parking, the facilties, the infrastructure and the entertainment. Its that simple.

Sorry about the long post, but I'm going back to my college classes on "athletic facilities". I actually had a class on design and made renederings on just this sort of thing. Its always been a hobby. Oh, I made an A+.
(This post was last modified: 02-17-2015 12:12 PM by rabidTU2.)
02-17-2015 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
invisiblehand Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,410
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 106
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #19
RE: No Longer the Smallest
(02-17-2015 12:07 PM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  If we tear down MG, then would we replace all the facilities that would go away with it? We have a lot of expensive stuff in there that I'm not sure we could afford to lose completely from the program. Would we have to drop rowing for instance? Volleyball with their dressing facilities, practice area etc would then have to go somewhere else. Golf would have nowhere close to putt/chip in the winter. Band would lose their indoor band room. I think even the cheerleaders, pep squads have facilities in there somewhere. Athletic offices and storage. On and on. If we are going to replace an entire building and demolish it, wouldn't we need to have something else and what would be the cost of it? Where would we then put it? Also, I think at some point if TU FB is going to grow, we need to slap on more suites (in the future) for more revenue. Those seats and space are always sold and don't even have to be occupied but TU still gets the money (like the vacant seats in the Don) - businesses provide the revenue but seldom attend. Luxury seats are always in demand and one luxury seat provides as much revenue as 5-10 outdoor stadium seats.

I'm for beer at the games as long as there are sections in the stadium that are "beer free" zones so the kiddies can enjoy and their parents won't sit by a fan that throws up on them - just kidding.

The parking situation is easily remedied if they open up the setback. TU owns the land already and it is inexplicably chained up where noone can park. That has enough open area for hundreds of spaces. One space doesn't just equal one fan, on average, about 3 fans to a car.
If TU is going to grow as we've discussed, then they need more of that. Students use it during the weekdays and the rest is deginated for night/weekend "events". To grow as both a college and an athletic program, TU needs to provide the parking, the facilties, the infrastructure and the entertainment. Its that simple.

Sorry about the long post, but I'm going back to my college classes on "athletic facilities". I actually had a class on design and made renederings on just this sort of thing. Its always been a hobby. Oh, I made an A+.

In the case of tearing down MG, I think most of the occupants could make temporary arrangements.

The toughest replacements would be rowing and the security offices.

Volleyball could use the Basketball practice gym or the real Reynolds center court.
The band can be moved to TUPAC. Golf would have to make off campus arrangements. All the athletic offices could be moved to temporary facilities around campus (KEP actually has tons of open office space after the construction of Razor and Stephenson) also temporary mobile offices could be used for the Media relations / Marketing.

We might be able to use the building that the school rented as a temporary bookstore over on Harvard for the rowing Facilities

Hopefully the IPC could be completed sectionaly so some facilities could be opened up sooner than others, letting certain departments back in sooner than others.
02-20-2015 06:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goldenhurricane2 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 860
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Tulsa
Location: Tulsa
Post: #20
No Longer the Smallest
Kind of related to this conversation, but I just saw an article on another board that shows up to date endowments - TU sitting at $1.015 billion. Great news for the university!
02-23-2015 09:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.