(12-24-2015 09:45 AM)panama Wrote:  As a city school guy you better than anyone know that if you lose nobody shows up, period. Miles entered this season 1-23. Started out 2-6 this year. Then he wins the last 4 and gets to a bowl to which 7k or 8k GSU fans showed up to. We have the same pressures your school, Memphis, USF and Temple have. We are the downtown school in a pro sports and P5 town. You have to win and you have to have meaningful opponents at home. We also suffered through 5 years of the worst AD in America which did not help attendance and game day experience. I think that is changing and its a big help that we have turned the corner competition wise.

Winning guarantees nothing also. In the decade of the 80's, Houston went to 3 straight memorable Final Fours, 2 Cotton Bowls and had a Heisman Trophy winner yet got demoted to a mid-major shortly thereafter. And there are no P5 teams in Houston, and only one nearby (A&M). UCLA basketball and all of it's history, struggles to sell out their arena.

I don't mean to sound discouraging but it's hard being an urban school in a pro sports and P5 market.

(12-24-2015 10:41 AM)panama Wrote:  1-23 dude. Look at Temple this year. Winning solves a lot. And Eastern Michigan does not play in the Georgia Dome. The Dome is not the reason for sparse crowds.

Temple also had two big time and regionally important opponents stop by to artificially boost attendance. Like I said, good luck but it's an uphill climb.

(12-24-2015 09:38 AM)panama Wrote:  Um, we have a physical location downtown..about 40 square blocks of it in fact. This will extend that and allow all sports to be located on the same property along with more student housing which is needed badly. As for MLS, Blank owns it. It will be at MBS and I am fine with that. I want a GSU football only jewel.

You and I both know what I mean by campus. Few of those 40 blocks are contiguous for GSU and the closet thing to a central quad is the is near Underground Atlanta. Also, if GSU needed housing, why did they give back the Olympic Village?

And I understand where MLS will be, but GSU's new facility will create mean four 25K facilities within 2 miles of Downtown Atlanta. It is just inefficient IMO.

(12-24-2015 09:25 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(12-24-2015 09:38 AM)panama Wrote:  Um, we have a physical location downtown..about 40 square blocks of it in fact. This will extend that and allow all sports to be located on the same property along with more student housing which is needed badly. As for MLS, Blank owns it. It will be at MBS and I am fine with that. I want a GSU football only jewel.

You and I both know what I mean by campus. Few of those 40 blocks are contiguous for GSU and the closet thing to a central quad is the is near Underground Atlanta. Also, if GSU needed housing, why did they give back the Olympic Village?

And I understand where MLS will be, but GSU's new facility will create mean four 25K facilities within 2 miles of Downtown Atlanta. It is just inefficient IMO.

You know to walk around downtown sometime, it's not 1992 anymore.

(12-24-2015 08:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(12-24-2015 09:45 AM)panama Wrote:  As a city school guy you better than anyone know that if you lose nobody shows up, period. Miles entered this season 1-23. Started out 2-6 this year. Then he wins the last 4 and gets to a bowl to which 7k or 8k GSU fans showed up to. We have the same pressures your school, Memphis, USF and Temple have. We are the downtown school in a pro sports and P5 town. You have to win and you have to have meaningful opponents at home. We also suffered through 5 years of the worst AD in America which did not help attendance and game day experience. I think that is changing and its a big help that we have turned the corner competition wise.

Winning guarantees nothing also. In the decade of the 80's, Houston went to 3 straight memorable Final Fours, 2 Cotton Bowls and had a Heisman Trophy winner yet got demoted to a mid-major shortly thereafter. And there are no P5 teams in Houston, and only one nearby (A&M). UCLA basketball and all of it's history, struggles to sell out their arena.

I don't mean to sound discouraging but it's hard being an urban school in a pro sports and P5 market.

(12-24-2015 10:41 AM)panama Wrote:  1-23 dude. Look at Temple this year. Winning solves a lot. And Eastern Michigan does not play in the Georgia Dome. The Dome is not the reason for sparse crowds.

Temple also had two big time and regionally important opponents stop by to artificially boost attendance. Like I said, good luck but it's an uphill climb.

What is artificial attendance? Did they draw 5k in their other home games? Look at any GT or Miami season and then tell me about artificial boosting. We will be fine. Use the beginning,

(12-24-2015 09:55 PM)panama Wrote:  

(12-24-2015 08:41 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  Temple also had two big time and regionally important opponents stop by to artificially boost attendance. Like I said, good luck but it's an uphill climb.

What is artificial attendance? Did they draw 5k in their other home games? Look at any GT or Miami season and then tell me about artificial boosting. We will be fine. Use the beginning,

What he is referring to is two 72,000 game sellouts vs. ND and Penn St, artificially bumping up the "average" attenedance for their, I think, 6 or 7 home games.

Kudos to Temple for landing the games at home, but when talking how their attendance went up due to winning, you have to take that into account.

(12-24-2015 09:55 PM)panama Wrote:  What is artificial attendance? Did they draw 5k in their other home games? Look at any GT or Miami season and then tell me about artificial boosting. We will be fine. Use the beginning,

The fact is the Temple attendance rose mostly because of two opponents games. The winning helped but wasn't the reason attendance rose so sharply (they'd have drawn 50K even if Temple was 1-6 going into that game).

I can't think of a single urban school that draws well in an NFL market besides giant and incumbent state institutions (Arizona State, Minnesota).

(12-25-2015 12:26 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  I can't think of a single urban school that draws well in an NFL market besides giant and incumbent state institutions (Arizona State, Minnesota).

The list is small, but Michigan is more or less in the Detroit market, and Washington does well in Seattle. USC and UCLA drew well even when the NFL was in LA. Columbia is an hour or so from Charlotte. Kansas St does well as well as Stanford and Rutgers some years, such as this year (over 50k).

(12-25-2015 12:26 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(12-24-2015 09:55 PM)panama Wrote:  What is artificial attendance? Did they draw 5k in their other home games? Look at any GT or Miami season and then tell me about artificial boosting. We will be fine. Use the beginning,

The fact is the Temple attendance rose mostly because of two opponents games. The winning helped but wasn't the reason attendance rose so sharply (they'd have drawn 50K even if Temple was 1-6 going into that game).

I can't think of a single urban school that draws well in an NFL market besides giant and incumbent state institutions (Arizona State, Minnesota).

What I am saying is that if they had 25k to 35k for those other home games then that is not "artificially" boosting attendance any more than GT when they have Clemson and FSU at home. I think a lot of G5 schools dream of having two P5 schools at home in the same season and get jealous.

Sent from my BlackBerry Z30 using Tapatalk

What's your point? 99% of all teams in any high level sport are gonna see a rise in attendance if they win more. I suppose that is your point but my point is that even if GSU becomes a BCS buster, they have a ceiling. You will never see 60,000 go to a GSU game unless UGA, GT, Florida, Florida State, South Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee or Notre Dame is playing them. That's actually a lot of schools though, so don't feel bad.

I don't need us to get 60k to a game. LOL. I don't feel bad and amazingly not a novice fan. I think some people think 6 seasons of football means our fans started watching football in 2010. Back to the original point. I think stadium size wise 40k is the sweet spot. The Southern game will sell that many tickets when both teams are competitive. Also any P5 will come close to that. And 25k - 30k will not look bad in a 40k seat stadium.

Sent from my BlackBerry Z30 using Tapatalk.

(12-24-2015 09:25 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(12-24-2015 09:38 AM)panama Wrote:  Um, we have a physical location downtown..about 40 square blocks of it in fact. This will extend that and allow all sports to be located on the same property along with more student housing which is needed badly. As for MLS, Blank owns it. It will be at MBS and I am fine with that. I want a GSU football only jewel.

You and I both know what I mean by campus. Few of those 40 blocks are contiguous for GSU and the closet thing to a central quad is the is near Underground Atlanta. Also, if GSU needed housing, why did they give back the Olympic Village?

And I understand where MLS will be, but GSU's new facility will create mean four 25K facilities within 2 miles of Downtown Atlanta. It is just inefficient IMO.

AUFC won't have their own 25k seat stadium as much as I wish we would and while GSU playing in the ~27k seat MLS set up at the new stadium would be better than at the dome, their best chance at growing is in their own stadium.

GA St needs 40000 seats to make it attractive for prospective home games. As a Toledo fan, it is hard to get home and home games at times when the other school cannot get enough tickets for the fans that travel

In my view the university would be better suited in making minimal renovations to Turner field initially and build from there. I would even consider using the RF structure as a beginning of a Indoor practice facility with a small seating and TV infrastructure so that the existing stadium could be the TV back drop


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does anyone happen to have renderings of what GSU is hoping to turn Turner Field into??? I was very pleased to hear that GSU was awarded the property for that stadium was built on a whim for the Olympic's at the time, and should stay as a reminder regardless of what sport will be played there.

I would like to see it converted to a 40-45thousand seat stadium which should be plenty of seating etc for future growth. I just hope they don't go and throw a bunch of bleachers in there and call it a day, but like I mentioned would there be any renderings of what Turner Field could look like in the next few years???

(12-25-2015 03:50 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  GA St needs 40000 seats to make it attractive for prospective home games. As a Toledo fan, it is hard to get home and home games at times when the other school cannot get enough tickets for the fans that travel

In my view the university would be better suited in making minimal renovations to Turner field initially and build from there. I would even consider using the RF structure as a beginning of a Indoor practice facility with a small seating and TV infrastructure so that the existing stadium could be the TV back drop


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the only reason to target 40k seats is for potential home games, there's no reason they couldn't just make some arrangement with the Falcons to use MCB stadium on an as needed basis.

Building in excess of 30k seats at GSU would be a mistake.

We've hosted UVA, Maryland, Miss State, Minnesota, Georgia Tech, BYU and Vandy with only ~31k seats and there are fans among us that support taking some seats out.

Lol! Thanks Terrance Moore

(12-25-2015 04:37 PM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  I would like to see it converted to a 40-45thousand seat stadium which should be plenty of seating etc for future growth. I just hope they don't go and throw a bunch of bleachers in there and call it a day, but like I mentioned would there be any renderings of what Turner Field could look like in the next few years???

Why would they throw bleachers in there to get it to 40-45, when it already seats 50,000? and keep in mind as the design was for the olympics, unlike some modern baseball stadiums, you can fit a football field in there with little reconfiguration (granted they will do some, but what I mean is the field is already big enough to host football).

(12-25-2015 10:03 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-25-2015 04:37 PM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  I would like to see it converted to a 40-45thousand seat stadium which should be plenty of seating etc for future growth. I just hope they don't go and throw a bunch of bleachers in there and call it a day, but like I mentioned would there be any renderings of what Turner Field could look like in the next few years???

Why would they throw bleachers in there to get it to 40-45, when it already seats 50,000? and keep in mind as the design was for the olympics, unlike some modern baseball stadiums, you can fit a football field in there with little reconfiguration (granted they will do some, but what I mean is the field is already big enough to host football).

I am assuming with the reconfiguration of the stadium will bring the seating capacity down from what it is. I don't think Turner Field has a seating capacity of 50K, but then again I'm not a Braves fan either. Yes the field can handle the change for like you said there is plenty of room for they played soccer there during the Olympics if I am not mistaken. I just hope they are able to convert it to where it is state if the art facility even if it is 20 yrs old.

Do it right the first time GaSt.

Agreed. The cost to add even 5k to 10k is huge. Better to get it right once and not have to look I'm seat cushions for dimes in 10 years.

(12-25-2015 11:34 PM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  

(12-25-2015 10:03 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-25-2015 04:37 PM)BigOwensboroCard Wrote:  I would like to see it converted to a 40-45thousand seat stadium which should be plenty of seating etc for future growth. I just hope they don't go and throw a bunch of bleachers in there and call it a day, but like I mentioned would there be any renderings of what Turner Field could look like in the next few years???

Why would they throw bleachers in there to get it to 40-45, when it already seats 50,000? and keep in mind as the design was for the olympics, unlike some modern baseball stadiums, you can fit a football field in there with little reconfiguration (granted they will do some, but what I mean is the field is already big enough to host football).

I am assuming with the reconfiguration of the stadium will bring the seating capacity down from what it is. I don't think Turner Field has a seating capacity of 50K, but then again I'm not a Braves fan either. Yes the field can handle the change for like you said there is plenty of room for they played soccer there during the Olympics if I am not mistaken. I just hope they are able to convert it to where it is state if the art facility even if it is 20 yrs old.

Turner Field does in fact seat 50k for baseball, 4th largest in baseball. We're cutting about 10k seats in our new stadium.

You're also mistaken about what it was used for, track and field, opening and closing ceremonies. Soccer was played at Sanford stadium in Athens.