The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(06-13-2014 09:09 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 09:01 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 04:11 PM)Smaug Wrote:  UAB has land it doesn't know what to do with, now. Land contiguous to the current campus.

This is true - as soon as we demolish the buildings now on the sites UAB owns and may be collecting rent for their use. The park land I am talking about is largely vacant and can be built on as soon as UAB receives the title to it. When the MPF is finally built, the city will have little use for the park and UAB can probably cut a good deal since the city wants UAB to grow - perhaps into a major national university in fields other than medicine.

It is also true that as long as UAB continues the small town university model that AU and UA have followed from the 20th century, and under the cover of "high academic standards" keeps its enrollment below 20,000, we probably don't need more land. If I am correct and the 21st century is the time of the big urban universities (USF and UCF for instance), UAB will run short of space even if it razes every building it owns on the southside..

Tell you what: If UAB buys the land Legion Field currently occupies, I'll buy you a Coke.

And if I'm still around, I'll drink it with you. This aspect of its future is not just what happens to UAB's physical expansion. If the state should continue its present static population growth through 2020, the state may lose another House seat and it may be Birmingham's 6th district as seven is carved down to six or maybe to five.

If UAB remains a small university, it may lose its numerous grants to more aggressive state universities (in states who are gaining House seats) and thereby be thrown onto the "tender mercies" of the state's ETF. Under the present state leadership, the SETF may self-destruct later in this and / or the next decade under pressure from the many state tax credits legislators are handing out to their benefactors.

(06-13-2014 02:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 12:56 PM)mobileblazer Wrote:  What a HUGE recruiting advantage we could have playing in a new dome vs Legion Field. Plus, many more of the 'warm weather' fans would attend late November and December games in a climate controlled environment.

Sucking the enjoyment of watching football by putting it into a cavernous indoor facility is too high a price to make it comfortable for literal fair weather fans to be comfortable for any possible December games

Ask UTSA how the Alamodome is working out for them. They seem to be doing okay.

(06-13-2014 09:50 PM)thebernreuter Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 02:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 12:56 PM)mobileblazer Wrote:  What a HUGE recruiting advantage we could have playing in a new dome vs Legion Field. Plus, many more of the 'warm weather' fans would attend late November and December games in a climate controlled environment.

Sucking the enjoyment of watching football by putting it into a cavernous indoor facility is too high a price to make it comfortable for literal fair weather fans to be comfortable for any possible December games

Ask UTSA how the Alamodome is working out for them. They seem to be doing okay.

There are three situations that hamper good practices and its conditioning - Too hot, too cold, too wet. Until UAB can afford an indoor facility like its sister school to the west, a city MPF is our best bet to help UAB teams improve. Legion Field is only helpful for the last problem.

(06-13-2014 06:31 AM)Smaug Wrote:  

(06-12-2014 10:08 PM)Grammar-Nazi Wrote:  History says a dome will never be built in Birmingham. Nor will UAB ever get an OCS.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'll believe it when I sit it in.

So far, I've been proven right every time.

History also said we'd never fly, walk on the moon, elected a black president...

None of those events had to deal with the incompetence of Birmingham's leadership or the UAB Board of Trustees.

(06-13-2014 06:56 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 02:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 12:56 PM)mobileblazer Wrote:  What a HUGE recruiting advantage we could have playing in a new dome vs Legion Field. Plus, many more of the 'warm weather' fans would attend late November and December games in a climate controlled environment.

Sucking the enjoyment of watching football by putting it into a cavernous indoor facility is too high a price to make it comfortable for literal fair weather fans to be comfortable for any possible December games

a dome would increase attendance and improve recruiting. better recruiting leads to more wins. that leads to even better attendance. if we can start drawing 25-30k fans we have a much better chance of making money on sports and moving up the conference food chain.

UAB can still make money off parking by providing parking and busing from campus to the dome. they can even set up on campus tailgating areas by the soccer field for a fee which includes parking in the nearby lot and bus service to and from the game. you get alums back on campus and income. you set up a family fun zone on the campus green. you charge for the off campus parking and have buses running from the parking area to the campus green, the tailgate area, and then the dome.

A dome isn't necessarily going to get UAB instantly to 25-30k attendance, and even then that's only halfway filling up the proposed facility. I'm not going to be any more inclined to come to a BJCC dome game than I am a Legion Field game. If UAB is going to have college sports, they need to be held in a college atmosphere at the university. Not in a pro sized indoor stadium two miles away.

A dome completely, 1000% kills the on campus stadium. I don't know if you guys read the stories on al.com today about the UA Board of Trustees meeting, but they are starting to talk about "tough choices" and living within means and all that type of stuff, and that's with the economy recovering. Whatever minute, insignificant chance of UAB getting an on-campus stadium exists today will be completely and permanently eliminated should this stadium be built. And if that happens UAB football will always be a sub-par experience compared with anything else you could do on a Saturday in the fall. A big, cavernous, half empty stadium will still look bad on the one TV game we get, it will still suck to sit in there even if there is hot water and paper towels in the bathroom, and riding the bus from your tailgate across town takes all the fun and excitement out of it.

Do it right or don't do it.

(06-13-2014 12:56 PM)mobileblazer Wrote:  What a HUGE recruiting advantage we could have playing in a new dome vs Legion Field. Plus, many more of the 'warm weather' fans would attend late November and December games in a climate controlled environment.

This was my thinking. Recruits see the nice and shiny new Dome and want to play there. OCS would do the same, but that's not happening until at least after Jr's death. So I'm all in favor of the Dome/MPS. Maybe it will also help Bham land the 2020 Democratic National Convention. Ha

(06-14-2014 12:25 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 06:56 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 02:20 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-13-2014 12:56 PM)mobileblazer Wrote:  What a HUGE recruiting advantage we could have playing in a new dome vs Legion Field. Plus, many more of the 'warm weather' fans would attend late November and December games in a climate controlled environment.

Sucking the enjoyment of watching football by putting it into a cavernous indoor facility is too high a price to make it comfortable for literal fair weather fans to be comfortable for any possible December games

a dome would increase attendance and improve recruiting. better recruiting leads to more wins. that leads to even better attendance. if we can start drawing 25-30k fans we have a much better chance of making money on sports and moving up the conference food chain.

UAB can still make money off parking by providing parking and busing from campus to the dome. they can even set up on campus tailgating areas by the soccer field for a fee which includes parking in the nearby lot and bus service to and from the game. you get alums back on campus and income. you set up a family fun zone on the campus green. you charge for the off campus parking and have buses running from the parking area to the campus green, the tailgate area, and then the dome.

A dome isn't necessarily going to get UAB instantly to 25-30k attendance, and even then that's only halfway filling up the proposed facility. I'm not going to be any more inclined to come to a BJCC dome game than I am a Legion Field game. If UAB is going to have college sports, they need to be held in a college atmosphere at the university. Not in a pro sized indoor stadium two miles away.

A dome completely, 1000% kills the on campus stadium. I don't know if you guys read the stories on al.com today about the UA Board of Trustees meeting, but they are starting to talk about "tough choices" and living within means and all that type of stuff, and that's with the economy recovering. Whatever minute, insignificant chance of UAB getting an on-campus stadium exists today will be completely and permanently eliminated should this stadium be built. And if that happens UAB football will always be a sub-par experience compared with anything else you could do on a Saturday in the fall. A big, cavernous, half empty stadium will still look bad on the one TV game we get, it will still suck to sit in there even if there is hot water and paper towels in the bathroom, and riding the bus from your tailgate across town takes all the fun and excitement out of it.

Do it right or don't do it.

we were getting an average of 20k a game before the wheels came off under Watson. its reasonable to conclude we could average 25-30k in a dome. look at some pictures of UTSA football games played in a dome larger than the one proposed in Birmingham. you close off the upper level and you can get something close to the feel of a packed stadium when its half full. when you a Mississippi state type team show up and you can sell 40K tickets you open up the entire venue.

the simple fact is that UAB is not going to get an OCS before the next round of conference realignment. UAB needs to move up the food chain and a new place to play would greatly increase the odds of that happening. for that reason alone we should be for the dome

Build it. Do it now. It will be a shot in the arm for UAB.

(06-14-2014 05:41 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Build it. Do it now. It will be a shot in the arm for UAB.

our fans would rather complain than improve our situation.

(06-12-2014 05:44 PM)blazerwkr Wrote:  The ASU/AAM will be moving to their campus...

Not true. I've talked to the SWAC Commissioners about this and they said they don't anticipate either campus being able to sustain the game and don't plan on it moving to the campuses.

Regardless of whether it is our OCS or not, you can't deny that the game day atmosphere would be much better than at Legion Field. Better sound system, better video boards, better concessions (one would think), climate controlled, and it will have the "new car smell" that will bring out the casual fan or maybe even non fan.

If this things really flies this time, the timing might be really good, too. If Bill Clark can turn this team around in the next 3-4 years and this thing is legitimate, then we could be looking at going into a new facility right off the heels of a couple of better than ever seasons for UAB. I could see this thing really being a shot in the arm for Birmingham and UAB. However, I can see this whole thing flopping, too. I prefer to take the optimist's stance though.

A dome would be an upgrade that is light years better than Legion Field for us. It's not everything we want, but dang, we aren't exactly in a position to demand all or nothing.

With all the downside to a dome, and there are many legit reasons to dislike the idea, it will be a huge upgrade from Legion Field.

At the risk of stating the obvious, that is where we are currently condemned to play.

(06-13-2014 09:22 PM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  So this is my question, do you think there is a chance that birmingham could get both the MPF and a new stadium for UAB or do you guys think its a one or the other type deal?

The city needs the MPF of competitive size for conventions regardless of what UAB does about an OCS.

If I understand the NCAA recruiting regulations on playing at a neutral site (MPF) instead of an EXISTING home field (OCS), it can't use the former for official recruiting visits. In the ABSENCE of an OCS, the MPF can be used for official recruiting visits as the school's "home field". After it was adopted by the NCAA, this rule was cited by Bama as an additional reason (excuse?) for ending all major games in B'ham.

UAB could still play important games at the MPF for the money involved, but it would be a trade off on recruiting.

The important thing to remember here is that the city is not building this for UAB. Whether UAB or we as fans want to have home football games in this new facility likely means very little to the city.

(06-14-2014 12:47 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  The important thing to remember here is that the city is not building this for UAB. Whether UAB or we as fans want to have home football games in this new facility likely means very little to the city.

That is not necessarily so. If UAB contracts to play its home games there, that is six or seven days annually automatically booked and paid for. It is something that will bring people down there to see it and result in word of mouth publicity.

Just as someone who is building a mall wants three or four large department stores as "anchor tenants", so too do the managers of a stadium want sports teams to commit to their schedule there. Having multiple dates prebooked annually is a large thing budget wise.


new article

http://www.alabamas13.com/story/25773967...t-up-again

(06-14-2014 12:47 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  The important thing to remember here is that the city is not building this for UAB. Whether UAB or we as fans want to have home football games in this new facility likely means very little to the city.

That was part of the problem the first time around, or at least why UAB didn't throw its weight behind it.

My understanding is that the city did not want to commit to giving our home game schedule booking priority, so we told them to take a hike. As we should have. If we are going to be an anchor tenant and commit to them, they need to not reserve the right to treat us as a second class citizen on our home field. It's bad enough that we'll back in the same old not getting the concessions or parking nonsense without getting that kind of treatment.

Brian Mackin needs to stick to his guns on this. If they won't respect our schedule and honor it, work around it, they can go pee up a rope.

(06-14-2014 02:44 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  My understanding is that the city did not want to commit to giving our home game schedule booking priority, so we told them to take a hike. As we should have. If we are going to be an anchor tenant and commit to them, they need to not reserve the right to treat us as a second class citizen on our home field. It's bad enough that we'll back in the same old not getting the concessions or parking nonsense without getting that kind of treatment.

Brian Mackin needs to stick to his guns on this. If they won't respect our schedule and honor it, work around it, they can go pee up a rope.

I can see it both ways. UAB needs to be able to schedule and not work around other events. Im pretty sure that this practice puts you guys at an extreme disadvantage from time to time. I can also see it from the city's point of view. The city has to make money, and part of that is bringing in events that will bring in the money. Hopefully the two sides can reach some type of agreement if or when this thing is built.

(06-14-2014 02:58 PM)GreenHornet33 Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 02:44 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  My understanding is that the city did not want to commit to giving our home game schedule booking priority, so we told them to take a hike. As we should have. If we are going to be an anchor tenant and commit to them, they need to not reserve the right to treat us as a second class citizen on our home field. It's bad enough that we'll back in the same old not getting the concessions or parking nonsense without getting that kind of treatment.

Brian Mackin needs to stick to his guns on this. If they won't respect our schedule and honor it, work around it, they can go pee up a rope.

I can see it both ways. UAB needs to be able to schedule and not work around other events. Im pretty sure that this practice puts you guys at an extreme disadvantage from time to time. I can also see it from the city's point of view. The city has to make money, and part of that is bringing in events that will bring in the money. Hopefully the two sides can reach some type of agreement if or when this thing is built.

Mackin needs to bargain but the city has the upper hand here. They could build it without our support and guarantee us nothing. We desperately need out of Legion Field. Maybe some attendance-based deal or some sort of partial priority for the Dome. I could understand if the city doesn't want to give us complete priority while we are sucking so bad.

Scheduling for UAB football is done by the conference for those games. Then there are the OOC games each year worked into the conference schedule. Which games today are granted priority when UAB is finalizing its full schedule? Working with the city and the MPF should be no different.

What if, for instance, in April UAB has a game scheduled for a Saturday in Oct. for the MPF, but ESPN comes along in the summer and offers a Thursday slot on national TV if we will agree to move from that Sat.? We would want the city to help us by making whatever possible accommodations needed to do this. That is what PARTNERS IN PROGRESS do to help each other.

If B'ham has a major national convention scheduled for a particular weekend? UAB would be expected to work around that weekend by scheduling an away game. Aren't such major conventions scheduled at least a year in advance? It would seem to me to be a workable problem if UAB & B'ham are speaking with respect to each other regularly.