(12-15-2016 02:50 PM)Westhoff123 Wrote:  I wish UH had a stupid amount of money to burn....

FSU added some smaller version of this. My cousin, who goes there, sent me a video of it and was laughing at what an absolute waste of money it was. I interned there, and didn't even recognize the spaces I watched FSU players training for the combine. He said FSU did it just to do it. It had no practical purpose.

This has to be the biggest waste of money I have seen out of a football program. If you are generating that kind of revenue you should be spinning it off to students for non-athlete scholarships or something. Tuition in the State of South Carolina is not cheap. People have their motivation in the wrong places. I am beginning to dislike college football.

(12-15-2016 03:01 PM)StatueKnight Wrote:  This has to be the biggest waste of money I have seen out of a football program. If you are generating that kind of revenue you should be spinning it off to students for non-athlete scholarships or something. Tuition in the State of South Carolina is not cheap. People have their motivation in the wrong places. I am beginning to dislike college football.

I agree. They shouldn't charge tuition for awhile or subsidize tuition if you're just going to spend money for the sake of spending money.

It will also include a special Wake Forest film room.

(12-15-2016 04:23 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 03:01 PM)StatueKnight Wrote:  This has to be the biggest waste of money I have seen out of a football program. If you are generating that kind of revenue you should be spinning it off to students for non-athlete scholarships or something. Tuition in the State of South Carolina is not cheap. People have their motivation in the wrong places. I am beginning to dislike college football.

I agree. They shouldn't charge tuition for awhile or subsidize tuition if you're just going to spend money for the sake of spending money.

For the sake of argument, I actually did a little math here instead of just saying something. For reference, I did not factor in their discount rate, which stands at roughly 24%:

18,016 undergraduates at Clemson with a roughly 70/30 split for in-state vs. out of state.

$14,882 in-state tuition and $32,800 out of state tuition.

So Clemson brings in roughly $364,957,300/year from tuition, which means that Clemson is spending around 14% of a single year's tuition intake on a Football facility. Not a crazy amount of money if you ask me, especially considering that it is likely that football is at least a tertiary and potentially a primary reason why most of those roughly 6,000 out-of-staters come to Clemson at a $32,800 clip per year (which equates to roughly $180,000,000/year). They pull in more than enough to justify this considering their debt service will probably be 15 years, which moves that percentage of yearly tuition revenue down to roughly 1%/year.

Effectively, shoveling that $55,000,000 to the coffers normally filled with tuition funds in order to lower that tuition over the same 15 years would lower tuition for the average student by right about $267 for all in-state students per year...big savings there.

The cost of college being increased at a ridiculous rate is not based on athletics spending, it's based on a lack of support from the government. On average, a school has lost just under 40% of per student funding from state and federal government over the past 20 years....got to be made up somewhere, and unfortunately it's tuition. Guess the governments care more about losing 1300 jobs instead of 2000 and paying for planes and ships they don't use instead of supporting the educational system in America. But that is a whole other can of worms that I wish to close here and now.

(12-15-2016 02:56 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 02:50 PM)Westhoff123 Wrote:  I wish UH had a stupid amount of money to burn....

FSU added some smaller version of this. My cousin, who goes there, sent me a video of it and was laughing at what an absolute waste of money it was. I interned there, and didn't even recognize the spaces I watched FSU players training for the combine. He said FSU did it just to do it. It had no practical purpose.

Obscene. I wonder when regular students are gonna get sick of this shite.

Architecture grad here currently in a firm.

The project went cheap on the design. The exterior ideas are uninspiring, and it looks like something that just slapped boxes together with very little thought or consideration of context or composition.

Will it help Clemson football? Yes. Is it all that it could have been? No. It's more of a missed opportunity than anything else. It should have looked better than this.

Oregon did a lot better with their setup - and they sort of wrote the blueprint on this type of work.

My biggest complaint of the building was how they kind of shoved very sensitive outdoor uses on top of each other as to say "oh look we can do X, Y, Z...". It should be saying "we'll offer Y with a little Z, and we'll do it great".

(12-15-2016 01:47 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  You need it when there's nothing else in Clemson, South Carolina.

Pretty much. Clemson is possibly the most boring city out of all the P5 schools or any school for that matter.

(12-15-2016 10:31 PM)SUisBigEast4ever Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 01:47 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  You need it when there's nothing else in Clemson, South Carolina.

Pretty much. Clemson is probably the most boring city out of all the P5 schools.

I see your Clemson, SC and I raise you Pullman, WA.

Waco, Texas lol

(12-15-2016 09:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  This new $55 Million 140,000 sq ft Football Building to open within the next 2 months and will include: (here are just some of the features)

1) Death Valley Hill Replica
2) Leadership & Development Center
3) Players Lounge (Ping Pong, Pool, Arcade, TV's, Video Games)
4) Golf Simulator
5) Outdoor Putt-Putt Course
6) Outdoor Fire Pit & BBQ Kitchen Area
7) Bowling Alley
8) Barber Shop
9) Players' Personal Laundry Room
10) Cleat Drying Room
11) Lap Pool
12) 60 Person Cold Tub
13) Nap Room
14) Locker Room
15) Largest Football Only Weight Room in the Country (over 20,000 sq ft)
16) Sauna
17) New HC & Assistant Coaching Offices
18) Movie Theater
19) Nutrition Area (Shakes, Smoothies, Snacks)
20) Training Room
21) Football Only Cafeteria
22) Cardio Balcony Area
23) Family Lounge/Balcony
24) 4 Hydrotherapy Pools
25) Outdoor Covered Basketball Court
26) Whiffle Ball Field
27) Virtual Reality Room/Laser Tag
28) Slide down to the first floor
29) Recruiting War Room
30) Social Media Studio
31) Nike Gear Room

unreal....so these P5 teams have so much money they are basically inventing stupid crap to do with it while the rest of us struggle to keep the lights on....that's awesome

SMH

The whole point of this is to win key high-end recruiting battles. Top football programs do this to ensure they win enough of those battles going forward.

With that said, there are diminishing returns in all of this. $100 million doesn't get you 2x the results of $50 million. There is a breaking point to all of the spending. NFL teams don't do all of this because they know that some of these things are a poor use of limited funds.

(12-15-2016 10:35 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 10:31 PM)SUisBigEast4ever Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 01:47 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  You need it when there's nothing else in Clemson, South Carolina.

Pretty much. Clemson is probably the most boring city out of all the P5 schools.

I see your Clemson, SC and I raise you Pullman, WA.

Starkville MS.....Call

(12-16-2016 12:13 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 10:35 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 10:31 PM)SUisBigEast4ever Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 01:47 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  You need it when there's nothing else in Clemson, South Carolina.

Pretty much. Clemson is probably the most boring city out of all the P5 schools.

I see your Clemson, SC and I raise you Pullman, WA.

Starkville MS.....Call

(12-15-2016 04:47 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 04:23 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 03:01 PM)StatueKnight Wrote:  This has to be the biggest waste of money I have seen out of a football program. If you are generating that kind of revenue you should be spinning it off to students for non-athlete scholarships or something. Tuition in the State of South Carolina is not cheap. People have their motivation in the wrong places. I am beginning to dislike college football.

I agree. They shouldn't charge tuition for awhile or subsidize tuition if you're just going to spend money for the sake of spending money.

For the sake of argument, I actually did a little math here instead of just saying something. For reference, I did not factor in their discount rate, which stands at roughly 24%:

18,016 undergraduates at Clemson with a roughly 70/30 split for in-state vs. out of state.

$14,882 in-state tuition and $32,800 out of state tuition.

So Clemson brings in roughly $364,957,300/year from tuition, which means that Clemson is spending around 14% of a single year's tuition intake on a Football facility. Not a crazy amount of money if you ask me, especially considering that it is likely that football is at least a tertiary and potentially a primary reason why most of those roughly 6,000 out-of-staters come to Clemson at a $32,800 clip per year (which equates to roughly $180,000,000/year). They pull in more than enough to justify this considering their debt service will probably be 15 years, which moves that percentage of yearly tuition revenue down to roughly 1%/year.

Effectively, shoveling that $55,000,000 to the coffers normally filled with tuition funds in order to lower that tuition over the same 15 years would lower tuition for the average student by right about $267 for all in-state students per year...big savings there.

The cost of college being increased at a ridiculous rate is not based on athletics spending, it's based on a lack of support from the government. On average, a school has lost just under 40% of per student funding from state and federal government over the past 20 years....got to be made up somewhere, and unfortunately it's tuition. Guess the governments care more about losing 1300 jobs instead of 2000 and paying for planes and ships they don't use instead of supporting the educational system in America. But that is a whole other can of worms that I wish to close here and now.

You forget to add the $9,000 a year for room and board. But you really miss the point. If football is generating that type of revenue why not offset that costs for some students rather than building an unnecessary and over bloated playroom for the football players.

The cost of tuition increase is also linked to 2 other factors. First is the increase of administration costs. Too many upper management positions at Universities. The second and more important is availability of government backed student loans. While in theory the loans are to enable students who could not otherwise go to college an opportunity, in fact they just allow the colleges to increase the cost of college and pass it on to the students. If not for the government backing no college student could ever get a loan for $5,000 let alone $100,000. So the banks loan the money knowing that the govt. will pay if the student fails to pay. The college know that if they increase tuition the loan amounts will go up to cover it. This is a false economy. The cost of tuition is not relative the the market because it is subsidized by the govt. The poor students are socked with the burden of student loans which they cannot get out of even in bankruptcy. This bubble will soon burst.

(12-16-2016 09:59 AM)StatueKnight Wrote:  You forget to add the $9,000 a year for room and board. But you really miss the point. If football is generating that type of revenue why not offset that costs for some students rather than building an unnecessary and over bloated playroom for the football players.

Actually, it isn't missing the point. I specifically said that this general cost was offset, it would only drop tuition costs by roughly $270 a year. The argument you'll never truly be able to win is why the entity that generates the revenue shouldn't be able to use it. Every college within an institution doesn't share grant funding, singular professors don't share appointments/publications with other academics who weren't involved in developments, so why should the athletic department be forced to share their revenue? At the end of the day, if they aren't an anchor on the school's bottom line and still abide by the national non-profit laws that they must adhere to, I see no issue with them spending this money. I completely agree with you that there are some athletic departments who need a complete reassessment (hell...many of ours are in that boat), but Clemson is not one of them.

Quote:This bubble will soon burst.

The single biggest thing that no one is actually talking about, everyone is too worried about a damn wall or a pipeline in North Dakota. Currently the AVERAGE American college student graduating with an undergraduate degree in June (not even counting all those soon to be out of work lawyers with a six-figure debt) has roughly $26,000 in student loan debt. When this market goes belly up, nearly every student who has graduated since about the year 2000 will be affected in some capacity, and every major lending entity will have some serious recourse. It's an ass-backwards system that needs reform more than just about any other, and no one gives a **** at the moment. You want to look at something really crazy, look at the fine print with regard to application/acceptance of primary loans (mortgage, small business, car, etc) if you still have a balance on any student loans.

And Clemson announced it's raising tuition. http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/ne.../86291404/

(12-15-2016 12:01 PM)templefan1 Wrote:   LOL, no you aren't. Your new facility will be 80K sq. ft. Clemson's is almost double the size at 140K sq ft. The Houston cost, $20M, Clemson's $55M...

Come on...

In football, we just built or are building:

1. $128M football stadium that opened in 2014
2. $1M football locker room upgrade that opened in 2016
3. $20M indoor practice facility opening in 2017
4. $40M football operatons building (similar to Clemson) opening in 2020

In basketball, we just built or are building:

1. $25M development center that opened in 2015
2. $60M arena renovation opening in 2018

In baseball, we've done numerous upgrades to the stadium including:

1. Replacing the field with field turf
2. Installing the largest scoreboard in college baseball ($1M)
3. Building a new clubhouse opening in 2017 ($7M)

We've recently completed other projects as well (Track, Golf).

Wake me up when Temple spends $300M on their athletic facilities over 10 years.

(12-16-2016 11:36 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(12-15-2016 12:01 PM)templefan1 Wrote:   LOL, no you aren't. Your new facility will be 80K sq. ft. Clemson's is almost double the size at 140K sq ft. The Houston cost, $20M, Clemson's $55M...

Come on...

In football, we just built or are building:

1. $128M football stadium that opened in 2014
2. $1M football locker room upgrade that opened in 2016
3. $20M indoor practice facility opening in 2017
4. $40M football operatons building (similar to Clemson) opening in 2020

In basketball, we just built or are building:

1. $25M development center that opened in 2015
2. $60M arena renovation opening in 2018

In baseball, we've done numerous upgrades to the stadium including:

1. Replacing the field with field turf
2. Installing the largest scoreboard in college baseball ($1M)
3. Building a new clubhouse opening in 2017 ($7M)

We've recently completed other projects as well (Track, Golf).

Wake me up when Temple spends $300M on their athletic facilities over 10 years.

LOL, man you guys are butt-hurt. The poster said they were building something comparable. I said, it is not really comparable when you actually look at it when the comparison is to a building double the size and double the cost.

Relax bro, wasn't saying you weren't committed to athletics or even comparing you to Temple.

But if I were I'd say Temple minus the stadium (still in the works) is doing just fine.
1. Just completed new outdoor sports facility and fields for $15M
2. 2 year old basketball practice facilities and athletic office/non-revenue facilities $48M
3. $5.5M renovation of rowing boathouse.
4. New $28M campus indoor turf facility that will be utilized by football etc. http://campusoperations.temple.edu/campu...ess-center

I hope you can keep competing with Temple for conference championships with your new facilities #Temple2016AACbballFballChamps

(12-15-2016 11:21 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  The whole point of this is to win key high-end recruiting battles. Top football programs do this to ensure they win enough of those battles going forward.

With that said, there are diminishing returns in all of this. $100 million doesn't get you 2x the results of $50 million. There is a breaking point to all of the spending. NFL teams don't do all of this because they know that some of these things are a poor use of limited funds.

nfl teams have labor costs.