(02-24-2017 07:12 AM)jarr Wrote: I'm sure the spin doctors will be out on this, but Nipper is basically the coolest, most unique thing about our football program, and we sell it out like cheap whore to soccer hipster millenials.
Yep, I thought Bohn sounded really defensive about it too. The player safety thing is a huge dodge. No one has ever gotten hurt and the distance to the walls was not significantly different from many other college stadiums. If, as earlier stated, portable seats are placed in the cut outs, how does this enhance safety? Funny that there was not a peep about a new scoreboard and sound system.
I know this sounds like a broke record, but I still don't understand why this had to be done. I don't mind at all that soccer is played there, it's screwing up the stadium for no clear reason that bothers me. They played fine there last year to big crowds with the old configuration. Why fix what ain't broke?
(02-24-2017 08:10 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote: Yep, I thought Bohn sounded really defensive about it too. The player safety thing is a huge dodge. No one has ever gotten hurt and the distance to the walls was not significantly different from many other college stadiums. If, as earlier stated, portable seats are placed in the cut outs, how does this enhance safety? Funny that there was not a peep about a new scoreboard and sound system.
I know this sounds like a broke record, but I still don't understand why this had to be done. I don't mind at all that soccer is played there, it's screwing up the stadium for no clear reason that bothers me. They played fine there last year to big crowds with the old configuration. Why fix what ain't broke?
"I don't think Dr. Bombay understand the 'amounts' involved here.
(02-24-2017 08:10 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote: Why fix what ain't broke?
1. Because FCC wants an MLS franchise and they want to play in Nippert Stadium so they don't have to invest millions of dollars in their own new stadium and stadium property.
2. Because the Lindners have been very generous to UC in the past and UC doesn't want to hamper that relationship and hope that they will continue to contribute financially to UC once they get their MLS franchise.
I like what they did along the sidelines. They should have done it years ago (Move the wall back so the first row of benches are actually on the sideline.0
The end zone isn't terrible as long as Mike Bohn does something in the cutouts. Leaving them empty during football games is the worse possible thing you can do.
(02-24-2017 08:10 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote: Why fix what ain't broke?
1. Because FCC wants an MLS franchise and they want to play in Nippert Stadium so they don't have to invest millions of dollars in their own new stadium and stadium property.
2. Because the Lindners have been very generous to UC in the past and UC doesn't want to hamper that relationship and hope that they will continue to contribute financially to UC once they get their MLS franchise.
3. Because the University and Athletic Department are tapping into new revenue streams.
4. It's an amazing marketing opportunity for the University, partnering with a local sport franchise and getting 15K+ down to your campus 18 times a summer.
5. It's good for the local businesses that are part of what makes UC a desirable place to go to school and also make it more desire to get back down to campus.
(02-24-2017 08:10 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote: Why fix what ain't broke?
1. Because FCC wants an MLS franchise and they want to play in Nippert Stadium so they don't have to invest millions of dollars in their own new stadium and stadium property.
2. Because the Lindners have been very generous to UC in the past and UC doesn't want to hamper that relationship and hope that they will continue to contribute financially to UC once they get their MLS franchise.
1. Well, it looks like if they get an MLS franchise they're going to have to build their own dedicated facility anyway, that's why they've been scouting locations in the area for a new stadium. So much for your first point.
2. I would hope the Lindners wouldn't attach charitable support of the university to a requirement of having to do a bend over for one of their private business ventures.
Once again, why change the configuration of the stadium when things went fine the way it was this past season? Still waiting for someone to describe to me how the fan experience was completely ruined watching soccer there last year because of the way the stadium was. They had big crowds, filled local establishments, UC got paid for parking, people came to campus, etc...all benefits proponents raved about, and no one seemed to care about the size of the field. Makes zero sense.
(02-24-2017 08:46 AM)MercerCo_BearCat Wrote: I like what they did along the sidelines. They should have done it years ago (Move the wall back so the first row of benches are actually on the sideline.0
The end zone isn't terrible as long as Mike Bohn does something in the cutouts. Leaving them empty during football games is the worse possible thing you can do.
Call me crazy, but couldn't they add some temporary bleachers or seating for football games and have that be the designated place for the band?
OR
Find some furniture store to be the "official furniture sponsor" of bearcat football. Add then throw in a sectional or just some couches and call it premium upgraded seating for a contest winner?
(02-24-2017 09:14 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote: 1. Well, it looks like if they get an MLS franchise they're going to have to build their own dedicated facility anyway, that's why they've been scouting locations in the area for a new stadium. So much for your first point.
2. I would hope the Lindners wouldn't attach charitable support of the university to a requirement of having to do a bend over for one of their private business ventures.
Once again, why change the configuration of the stadium when things went fine the way it was this past season? Still waiting for someone to describe to me how the fan experience was completely ruined watching soccer there last year because of the way the stadium was. They had big crowds, filled local establishments, UC got paid for parking, people came to campus, etc...all benefits proponents raved about, and no one seemed to care about the size of the field. Makes zero sense.
If you have read any articles about FCC and Nippert it is pretty clear they are pushing to play in the MLS in Nippert Stadium. They may be looking at other sites but I think their hope is they won't have to.
I don't think the Lindners are holding UC hostage based on past contributions. They may have taken advantage of it though. Imagine if they asked UC "Can we play soccer in Nippert Stadium and make some changes?" and UC told them no. I don't think that would have gone over too well.
Maybe the speculation about temporary seating for football will happen and it will help with the aesthetics - it remains to be seen.
If there is even a remote possibility that there could be an MLS franchise playing on campus at UC, anyone who can't see how gigantic of a benefit that would be to UC is simply being obtuse. You may not enjoy soccer, but the future students at UC do and if they could attend MLS games on their campus that would be amazing.
IF FCC gets into the MLS, the contract states the numbers will be re-figured. Atlanta United is paying Georgia Tech $45,000 rent per game, a $275,000 fee for the locker rooms, $350,000 to alter the field, giving GT $2 from all ticket sales and splitting concessions.
(02-24-2017 08:46 AM)MercerCo_BearCat Wrote: I like what they did along the sidelines. They should have done it years ago (Move the wall back so the first row of benches are actually on the sideline.0
The end zone isn't terrible as long as Mike Bohn does something in the cutouts. Leaving them empty during football games is the worse possible thing you can do.
Call me crazy, but couldn't they add some temporary bleachers or seating for football games and have that be the designated place for the band?
OR
Find some furniture store to be the "official furniture sponsor" of bearcat football. Add then throw in a sectional or just some couches and call it premium upgraded seating for a contest winner?
Have you looked at the cut outs? Sitting on a sofa in that space would likely give a great view of a brick wall next to you when you look toward the north end of the stadium. I guess you can put portable stands in those spaces, but that blows the ruse of player safety.
(02-24-2017 09:29 AM)BeerCat Wrote: If there is even a remote possibility that there could be an MLS franchise playing on campus at UC, anyone who can't see how gigantic of a benefit that would be to UC is simply being obtuse. You may not enjoy soccer, but the future students at UC do and if they could attend MLS games on their campus that would be amazing.
Exactly. I think the benefits from the arrangement as is are incredibly obvious and compelling but if they end up in MLS and play at Nippert that would be an enormous get for the University.
(02-24-2017 09:38 AM)CliftonAve Wrote: IF FCC gets into the MLS, the contract states the numbers will be re-figured. Atlanta United is paying Georgia Tech $45,000 rent per game, a $275,000 fee for the locker rooms, $350,000 to alter the field, giving GT $2 from all ticket sales and splitting concessions.
Money is one thing, but like Mark and others continue to point out, exposure is something that is tough to measure, but it would be immense by any measure IF FC Cincy were to make it to the MLS. The same way that sports serve to keep alumni engaged and donating dollars, FC Cincinnati gives people, government and business another huge reason to care about the university.
Again, yes it is still a big IF as far as FC Cincy going to the MLS and still playing in Nippert, but when you really look at what UC is facing as far as all of the realignment BS goes, it is a real possibility that UC football won't be around in a decade or two. It's a great gamble with huge upside and very little downside.
(02-24-2017 10:00 AM)BeerCat Wrote: Again, yes it is still a big IF as far as FC Cincy going to the MLS and still playing in Nippert, but when you really look at what UC is facing as far as all of the realignment BS goes, it is a real possibility that UC football won't be around in a decade or two. It's a great gamble with huge upside and very little downside.
If it's such a huge "if", again, why not wait until they get in and see if they can actually play at Nippert long term before messing with the stadium?
(02-24-2017 10:00 AM)BeerCat Wrote: Again, yes it is still a big IF as far as FC Cincy going to the MLS and still playing in Nippert, but when you really look at what UC is facing as far as all of the realignment BS goes, it is a real possibility that UC football won't be around in a decade or two. It's a great gamble with huge upside and very little downside.
(02-24-2017 08:46 AM)MercerCo_BearCat Wrote: I like what they did along the sidelines. They should have done it years ago (Move the wall back so the first row of benches are actually on the sideline.0
The end zone isn't terrible as long as Mike Bohn does something in the cutouts. Leaving them empty during football games is the worse possible thing you can do.
Call me crazy, but couldn't they add some temporary bleachers or seating for football games and have that be the designated place for the band?
They would have to keep the band together, but it isn't a bad idea. You'd have half of the band before the wall, and half above. Still leaves the other side open though.
(02-24-2017 09:38 AM)CliftonAve Wrote: IF FCC gets into the MLS, the contract states the numbers will be re-figured. Atlanta United is paying Georgia Tech $45,000 rent per game, a $275,000 fee for the locker rooms, $350,000 to alter the field, giving GT $2 from all ticket sales and splitting concessions.
Interesting, how do these numbers compare to UC's deal with FCC?