(12-09-2015 01:24 AM)Philly Brian Wrote:  Just some background. I have been following Temple football since I was a child. I am one of the few Temple fans to ever attend games at the former Temple Stadium. Yes, Temple used to have it's own stadium. It was small and far from campus. But it had the collegiate feel to it.
We then moved in to Veterans Stadium which the city owned, rent free.
Then it was the Linc which is owned by the Eagles.
The Eagles were in many ways forced to take Temple in as a tenant.

The Eagles attitude seems to be ... OK, Temple we never wanted you here but since you are here ... you need to chip in your fair share ...

So the rent started at $1 mil per year plus Eagles keep parking and concessions.

Now they propose a 30 year lease at $3 mil per year plus a $12 mil stadium improvement fee. Yes, that's $102 million. Let's say we bargain hard and cut that annual fee to $2 mil. Our total is still $72 mil. And yes they would keep the parking and concessions which would be a whopping amount over 30 years.

I would say to the new mayor. We can take that $72 mil and add $28 of our own and we have a $100 mil stadium.

Phillybrian is a great fan. He has posted on the scout board how he was the one who told the Temple AD at the time to schedule Notre Dame and that he discussed coaching strategies on a regular basis with our former coach Bobby Wallace (who presided over one of the worst tenures in college football history during an 8 year period in the late 90s and early 2000s).

But he is no insider. Just keep that in mind with his posts.

The Eagles are running a business. From what I have seen, they seem to have set the price of the new lease just under the cost of building a stadium - plus they keep parking and concessions. Trying hard to keep you as a tenant, but make you pay as much as possible.

Based on the attitudes of fans on here, it also looks like they overplayed their hand and Temple wants to build.

The Mayor could certainly influence zoning, special permits, and any eminent domain use that is required.

(12-09-2015 09:31 AM)JesseTU Wrote:  The Eagles are running a business. From what I have seen, they seem to have set the price of the new lease just under the cost of building a stadium - plus they keep parking and concessions. Trying hard to keep you as a tenant, but make you pay as much as possible.

Based on the attitudes of fans on here, it also looks like they overplayed their hand and Temple wants to build.

The Mayor could certainly influence zoning, special permits, and any eminent domain use that is required.

Tax payers paid for half the stadium, though the cost will be much higher because it was bonded out. Yet the Eagles make all the money and control all the contractual negotiations. Seems reasonable to choke the major Philly University which educates 35k students and is without a doubt is one of the largest employer in the city.

I like what the mayor is doing here.

This reminds me of Tulane's situation. A bunch of NIMBY's that surround the University don't want the University to have a football stadium for its football team. But they love living next to the University (the only reason the neighborhood is even tolerable).

This is really simple. Temple should be able to do what it wants with its land as long as it supports the Collegiate Model. Its a University with what...THIRTY THOUSAND STUDENTS? The neighbors cant tell Temple what to do. Being in the American requires Temple to compete at FBS football. Unless those folks want to pay the rent so they can have their say about what Temple does with its own land, they need to back off. And BTW, the Mayor is an idiot. Look at Pitt's attendance, using that as a model is a bad idea. The old Pitt Stadium was RIGHT ON CAMPUS...in a great spot, spitting distance from some dorms. Pitt made a mistake.

What this is really about is mitigating effects. Parking, Noise, etc. Is it going to be the same as it is now. No. But get used to it. Everything doesn't remain the same. And lets not overvalue the neighborhood here.

(12-09-2015 10:16 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  This reminds me of Tulane's situation. A bunch of NIMBY's that surround the University don't want the University to have a football stadium for its football team. But they love living next to the University (the only reason the neighborhood is even tolerable).

This is really simple. Temple should be able to do what it wants with its land as long as it supports the Collegiate Model. Its a University with what...THIRTY THOUSAND STUDENTS? The neighbors cant tell Temple what to do. Being in the American requires Temple to compete at FBS football. Unless those folks want to pay the rent so they can have their say about what Temple does with its own land, they need to back off. And BTW, the Mayor is an idiot. Look at Pitt's attendance, using that as a model is a bad idea. The old Pitt Stadium was RIGHT ON CAMPUS...in a great spot, spitting distance from some dorms. Pitt made a mistake.

What this is really about is mitigating effects. Parking, Noise, etc. Is it going to be the same as it is now. No. But get used to it. Everything doesn't remain the same. And lets not overvalue the neighborhood here.

Tulane's issue was with the neighborhood being scared of big noisy things. They had to limit the design because of their concerns, but the project wasn't really in jeopardy of not being built.

Tulane has a LOT of political pull in the city due to its status as NOLA's #1 employer (I'm not kidding with this). Tulane tends to get what it wants - and it has offended other people from time to time. NOLA people tend to either really like Tulane or loathe it.

(12-09-2015 01:24 AM)Philly Brian Wrote:  Just some background. I have been following Temple football since I was a child. I am one of the few Temple fans to ever attend games at the former Temple Stadium. Yes, Temple used to have it's own stadium. It was small and far from campus. But it had the collegiate feel to it.
We then moved in to Veterans Stadium which the city owned, rent free.
Then it was the Linc which is owned by the Eagles.
The Eagles were in many ways forced to take Temple in as a tenant.

The Eagles attitude seems to be ... OK, Temple we never wanted you here but since you are here ... you need to chip in your fair share ...

So the rent started at $1 mil per year plus Eagles keep parking and concessions.

Now they propose a 30 year lease at $3 mil per year plus a $12 mil stadium improvement fee. Yes, that's $102 million. Let's say we bargain hard and cut that annual fee to $2 mil. Our total is still $72 mil. And yes they would keep the parking and concessions which would be a whopping amount over 30 years.

I would say to the new mayor. We can take that $72 mil and add $28 of our own and we have a $100 mil stadium.

Didn't Temple play at JFK for several seasons?

For comparison, the UofMemphis pays the City $35k per game to use the Liberty Bowl. That is $210,000 for 6 games.

Obviously, the stadium in Philly is nicer, but not THAT much nicer.

(12-09-2015 11:39 AM)3601 Wrote:  For comparison, the UofMemphis pays the City $35k per game to use the Liberty Bowl. That is $210,000 for 6 games.

Obviously, the stadium in Philly is nicer, but not THAT much nicer.

Who keeps parking and concessions? For Temple and Memphis, who pays for security etc?

Tulane paid the state $12k per game. I do not think they paid to operate the stadium, did not keep parking/concessions but did keep ticket sales (no jokes please).

(12-09-2015 11:39 AM)3601 Wrote:  For comparison, the UofMemphis pays the City $35k per game to use the Liberty Bowl. That is $210,000 for 6 games.

Obviously, the stadium in Philly is nicer, but not THAT much nicer.

But it is....as the Linc is still considered a top NFL Stadium with amenities galore...while the Liberty Bowl is still an old and mostly bleacher style municipal stadium, no where near the level of a NFL Stadium but fine for a local college team. (I might be in the minority but I like smaller, bleacher style stadiums for college football...as almost all of them put fans much closer to the action vs "NFL" stadiums).

Perhaps it's the history, perhaps it's just home, perhaps I'll admit to an unashamed personal love/preference/bias; but I love the Liberty Bowl stadium.

Rare for anyone here to admit to person bias, but I'm not ashamed to.

Yeah the Linc is a nice facility...but that's still a lot of money.

And, IMO, this is not about the Eagles (as the Mayor said), this is about Temple having an on campus football facility, just as it has an on campus basketball facility. Temple has put it off long enough.

I'm betting Pitt would like to have that decision back. We know that USF would like an on campus stadium. We know that Tulane built one. Cincinnati upgraded theirs rather than go to the Bengals. Look at Miami's attendance issues. The model for college football is an on campus stadium and 50 protesters and an idiot angry Mayor should not stop that progress.

Looking at how Houston is doing with a new OC stadium (to replace Robertson) after decades of playing in the Astrodome, I think we know that an OC Stadium is exactly what Temple needs.

The Championship game was electric. I think a similar stadium would be great for the Temple community (and good for N. Philly, where other events would have a nice venue).

so sad. NIMBY's in Philly are very powerful. Tis is like a BLM issue to some of Temple's neighbors....

they need to really hang strong on this one. IF SMU can drop our stadium into the middle of the park cities, temple should be able to do an on campus. If rent was free at the off campus they should still do an on campus. It makes everything about your university better. Don't let outsiders rob your future students of a real collegiate experience.

The mayor is already softening his tone and is reminding people that his daughter is about to enroll at Temple. Mayor-elect elaborates on stadium

I think that if Temple wants to build a stadium it will get built despite the opposition of nearby residents. There'll be a lot of negotiating to get it done though.

I appreciate that Kenney is taking the Eagles to task over the way that they've gouged Temple and taxpayers along with their violating the implied agreement that came with public funds in the first place. It's long overdue for a local elected official to do so. Unfortunately, Kenney has only the bully pulpit from which to negotiate with the Eagles and I don't foresee that leading to any change on the Eagles part.

(12-09-2015 01:24 AM)Philly Brian Wrote:  So the rent started at $1 mil per year plus Eagles keep parking and concessions.

Now they propose a 30 year lease at $3 mil per year plus a $12 mil stadium improvement fee. Yes, that's $102 million. Let's say we bargain hard and cut that annual fee to $2 mil. Our total is still $72 mil. And yes they would keep the parking and concessions which would be a whopping amount over 30 years.

I would say to the new mayor. We can take that $72 mil and add $28 of our own and we have a $100 mil stadium.

Under the new proposal, who gets the parking? Concessions? Signage?

Is there an inflation adjuster so the rent is tied to CPI?

How is the tailgating at the Eagles stadium? Any green space? All parking lot? Restricted hours?

Those lease terms are outrageous. $430-500K per game? This is why it's critical to move to campus and invest in your program. Alumni coming back to campus to tailgate instead of a parking lot will increase your alumni donations. You control the signage. You control the parking. You control the concessions.

The rent dollars are irrelevant. Free is not cheap enough. Life is short. Get your stadium on campus. It changes everything.

Currently the Eagles get to keep parking and concessions. I would expect that to continue. At best they might get Temple a small cut.
The tailgating is very good at the games. The parking lots are large and there is plenty of room for everything. The alcohol rules are lax and grills can be lit. The lots open 5 hours before games. The price is around $20. It took some time to develop but the tailgate scene is now excellent.
It took some doing but the Eagles have improved the use of Temple signage. The field logos for Temple this year were very nice. At the PSU and ND games, the stadium looked like Temple's.
If we could replicate the PSU and ND games every week with 70k crowds and free rent at the stadium, I would say that we should stay.
But the reality is that 99% of our games will be more like the Memphis and UConn games with crowds around 30k or less. Less is possible because the 30k is for a ranked Temple team. More like 20k to 25k for a 6-6 Temple team.

I don't fault the Eagles. If we drew 50k to 70k per game like big time programs do, the rent would not be an issue.
It's like being in an expensive apartment building we can't afford. We would be better off taking that rent money and buying a modest house with it.

The Eagles keep all concessions and parking? OMG

By signage, I am talking about marketing. Can Temple sell signs to its corporate sponsors at the game? You can if you play on campus.

(12-09-2015 11:00 PM)Philly Brian Wrote:  Currently the Eagles get to keep parking and concessions. I would expect that to continue. At best they might get Temple a small cut.
The tailgating is very good at the games. The parking lots are large and there is plenty of room for everything. The alcohol rules are lax and grills can be lit. The lots open 5 hours before games. The price is around $20. It took some time to develop but the tailgate scene is now excellent.
It took some doing but the Eagles have improved the use of Temple signage. The field logos for Temple this year were very nice. At the PSU and ND games, the stadium looked like Temple's.
If we could replicate the PSU and ND games every week with 70k crowds and free rent at the stadium, I would say that we should stay.
But the reality is that 99% of our games will be more like the Memphis and UConn games with crowds around 30k or less. Less is possible because the 30k is for a ranked Temple team. More like 20k to 25k for a 6-6 Temple team.

I don't fault the Eagles. If we drew 50k to 70k per game like big time programs do, the rent would not be an issue.
It's like being in an expensive apartment building we can't afford. We would be better off taking that rent money and buying a modest house with it.

But that's not realistic...as you never plan for a stadium just for seasons when the moon and sun align and 2 biggest programs you could ever host end up coming to the Linc in the same year, during your best season ever.

You plan a stadium for normal crowds and hopefully at a capacity that helps make season tix rare (helps bring in booster $$ and season tix revenue).

Thats the challenge Temple and obviously USF (who only averaged 17,798 fans during a GOOD season in the 65,000 plus seat NFL stadium) is that capacity far outweighs the need for a huge portion of your home games.

I hope Temple can end up with their own right size college football stadiums on/near their campus in the coming years.