(05-20-2022 03:21 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 08:34 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 09:55 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 02:31 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Listened to a joint interview with Stickland/Hardgrave and 2 other interviews with Veatch...

CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT
They were all pretty adamant that they are trying to get something done by 2025. They all mentioned conference alignment and positioning for big-time football for the future, etc. Big 12 was mentioned by name by Hardgrave, then he quickly said "or whoever" might come looking at us.

ON CAMPUS STADIUM
Veatch made a point to say the OCS was looked at very closely and very seriously. And he said - contrary to what many say here - that it is feasible. The problem is that additional land would have to be purchased and there would be demolition involved - both of which would approximately double the costs and would extend the timeline way past 2025. He made the point that in the end, with costs and timing - this is the best option. GP asked if Veatch wished one of his predecessors had done the OCS thing a decade ago, and Veatch laughed in basic agreement.

MISC
Veatch said that ideally, capacity would be in the low 40's. But with this project - due to current configuraton, the bowl game, possibility of future growth - capacity will be 50ish.

GP and Veatch (I think it was) talked concert venues a bit. They said one of the limiting factors to stadium concerts in Memphis (besides Nashville becoming a default stop on tour) is that equipment trucks have gotten bigger with bigger show setups these days. And they can no longer fit through the LBMS north tunnel with equipment for setup. This renovation will open that up, and will put us back in the game for at least consideration of the big shows.

Veatch talked a lot about the stadium "halo" - that area just outside of the concourses, but within stadium grounds. That is currently wasted space. The thought (I think) is to move the ticket gates out to the edge of the stadium footprint, then utilize the halo "inside" the stadium proper - for larger open concourses, concessions, game day experiences, etc.

...I think they seriously considered the OCS and it just couldn't work within these next few crucial years. So we are getting the next best thing. I'm on board.

[posting this in the LBS thread too]

Good stuff thanks -----he also said at the presser at around the 23:00 mark --that the university was not set on low 40K if they had built the OCS

What do you want him to say? That they wanted the same type of stadium as Colorado State (which he did) and that 50k isn't optimal? His recap of the study specifically mentions it and the costs associated with it. He didn't talk stupidities about a brand new 50,000 stadium that would have cost $550 million.

Btw, they are shrinking it by 10,000 seats so as usual, you are wrong.

Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

So now, we’ll just have 20k empty seats instead of 30k.

Still too big for us, especially considering that everyone else dealing in common sense is between 38,000 and 45,000. Baylor had been at 45,000 forever and they built their new stadium the same size.

The amenities will be great and the next best thing is 10,000 less empty seats.

(05-20-2022 09:29 AM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 08:31 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 01:29 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 01:08 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 10:18 AM)Claw Wrote:  Other legitimate educational things that could be done :
- Video/audio production and technical training for large stadium venues.
- Cell phone and wi-fi coverage for large venues
- Other infrastructure

If you had a facility on campus, the opportunity exists to partner with companies in these businesses to use the stadium as a laboratory. This type of arrangement could allow us to get equipment for no/reduced cost and allow us to develop a unique career development area for our students and faculty.

So much potential just pissed away by a complete lack of vision and imagination. Instead of breaking new ground in education we are rebuilding a 60 year old stadium on the cheap. The saddest thing about it is our students, faculty, and school will get zero educational benefit from the project. The players and fans will have a nicer place, but we as an educational institution have completely missed an incredible opportunity.

Oh well.

Quote:a complete lack of vision and imagination.

The only complete lack of vision and imagination here is you refusing to understand the simple reality, that nobody wanted to, and/or could afford to pay for it. I have the vision and imagination to see how much benefit I would get from buying a 200FT yacht.

Do you (finally) see what the deal is?

Stammers and I don't often see eye to eye, but he's right. Blaming the decision to renovate the LB vs. building an OCS on a "lack of vision and imagination" demonstrates your lack of understanding of the reality of what the university administration is facing.

U of M simply can't get enough donations or secure enough private funding to pursue the OCS and manage all the challenges that would come along with it. If you think adding a music or educational element would solve for that, then I'd love for you to chime in on achieving world peace and ending world hunger. I think you know something others do not.

We also agree on the golf bag overdoing it along with wearing some form of Memphis gear. I got the head covers as a compromise. Not expensive at all and they look great.

Ha touche. I have a friend with a Tiger (animal Tiger) headcover. Non-Memphis fans likely see it as a nod to Tiger Woods, but it holds dual meaning for me. I need to get one.

Got one I'll sell you. It looks great, but is too top heavy - particularly for my driver.

(05-18-2022 01:55 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 01:29 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 01:08 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 10:18 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-18-2022 10:03 AM)gusrob Wrote:  Dreamers. Thinkers. Doers.

Other legitimate educational things that could be done :
- Video/audio production and technical training for large stadium venues.
- Cell phone and wi-fi coverage for large venues
- Other infrastructure

If you had a facility on campus, the opportunity exists to partner with companies in these businesses to use the stadium as a laboratory. This type of arrangement could allow us to get equipment for no/reduced cost and allow us to develop a unique career development area for our students and faculty.

So much potential just pissed away by a complete lack of vision and imagination. Instead of breaking new ground in education we are rebuilding a 60 year old stadium on the cheap. The saddest thing about it is our students, faculty, and school will get zero educational benefit from the project. The players and fans will have a nicer place, but we as an educational institution have completely missed an incredible opportunity.

Oh well.

Quote:a complete lack of vision and imagination.

The only complete lack of vision and imagination here is you refusing to understand the simple reality, that nobody wanted to, and/or could afford to pay for it. I have the vision and imagination to see how much benefit I would get from buying a 200FT yacht.

Do you (finally) see what the deal is?

Stammers and I don't often see eye to eye, but he's right. Blaming the decision to renovate the LB vs. building an OCS on a "lack of vision and imagination" demonstrates your lack of understanding of the reality of what the university administration is facing.

U of M simply can't get enough donations or secure enough private funding to pursue the OCS and manage all the challenges that would come along with it. If you think adding a music or educational element would solve for that, then I'd love for you to chime in on achieving world peace and ending world hunger. I think you know something others do not.

My "lack of vision and imagination" applies to the last 20 years when they KNEW this day was coming, DID have the time to develop a solution, and didn't do a damn thing on-campus or off-campus.

Bottom line - we are dealing with the here and now and with today’s reality. Complaining about would of, could of, should of is wasted energy. If, if and buts were candy and nuts, what a merry Christmas it would be! You are just beating a dead horse with nothing to add to our current situation. Like many others, I believe we are going forward with the best solution to the current circumstances and I am excited. Hope you can eventually derive some joy and positive feelings about the future. You are freaking exhausting with your negativity.

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

Not at all. Laird clearly said he thought optimum was low 40's. Just let it go and move on.

(05-20-2022 03:14 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 02:37 PM)Hernando Hills Tiger Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 02:31 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Listened to a joint interview with Stickland/Hardgrave and 2 other interviews with Veatch...

CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT
They were all pretty adamant that they are trying to get something done by 2025. They all mentioned conference alignment and positioning for big-time football for the future, etc. Big 12 was mentioned by name by Hardgrave, then he quickly said "or whoever" might come looking at us.

ON CAMPUS STADIUM
Veatch made a point to say the OCS was looked at very closely and very seriously. And he said - contrary to what many say here - that it is feasible. The problem is that additional land would have to be purchased and there would be demolition involved - both of which would approximately double the costs and would extend the timeline way past 2025. He made the point that in the end, with costs and timing - this is the best option. GP asked if Veatch wished one of his predecessors had done the OCS thing a decade ago, and Veatch laughed in basic agreement.

MISC
Veatch said that ideally, capacity would be in the low 40's. But with this project - due to current configuraton, the bowl game, possibility of future growth - capacity will be 50ish.

GP and Veatch (I think it was) talked concert venues a bit. They said one of the limiting factors to stadium concerts in Memphis (besides Nashville becoming a default stop on tour) is that equipment trucks have gotten bigger with bigger show setups these days. And they can no longer fit through the LBMS north tunnel with equipment for setup. This renovation will open that up, and will put us back in the game for at least consideration of the big shows.

Veatch talked a lot about the stadium "halo" - that area just outside of the concourses, but within stadium grounds. That is currently wasted space. The thought (I think) is to move the ticket gates out to the edge of the stadium footprint, then utilize the halo "inside" the stadium proper - for larger open concourses, concessions, game day experiences, etc.

...I think they seriously considered the OCS and it just couldn't work within these next few crucial years. So we are getting the next best thing. I'm on board.

[posting this in the LBS thread too]

But the FXF has a none compete. Good to know the university will be making the stadium available for the city to make money. Wish it was the other way around.

FedEx Forum's non-compete does not apply to stadium-sized shows. Only facilities with a capacity going up to FXF's and below.

Thanks. I did no know that.

(05-20-2022 03:27 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 03:21 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 08:34 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 09:55 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  Good stuff thanks -----he also said at the presser at around the 23:00 mark --that the university was not set on low 40K if they had built the OCS

What do you want him to say? That they wanted the same type of stadium as Colorado State (which he did) and that 50k isn't optimal? His recap of the study specifically mentions it and the costs associated with it. He didn't talk stupidities about a brand new 50,000 stadium that would have cost $550 million.

Btw, they are shrinking it by 10,000 seats so as usual, you are wrong.

Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

So now, we’ll just have 20k empty seats instead of 30k.

Still too big for us, especially considering that everyone else dealing in common sense is between 38,000 and 45,000. Baylor had been at 45,000 forever and they built their new stadium the same size.

The amenities will be great and the next best thing is 10,000 less empty seats.

The size of the stadium will again keep us from increasing cost per ticket which the university desperately needs to be able to do.

(05-20-2022 03:21 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 08:34 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 09:55 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 02:31 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Listened to a joint interview with Stickland/Hardgrave and 2 other interviews with Veatch...

CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT
They were all pretty adamant that they are trying to get something done by 2025. They all mentioned conference alignment and positioning for big-time football for the future, etc. Big 12 was mentioned by name by Hardgrave, then he quickly said "or whoever" might come looking at us.

ON CAMPUS STADIUM
Veatch made a point to say the OCS was looked at very closely and very seriously. And he said - contrary to what many say here - that it is feasible. The problem is that additional land would have to be purchased and there would be demolition involved - both of which would approximately double the costs and would extend the timeline way past 2025. He made the point that in the end, with costs and timing - this is the best option. GP asked if Veatch wished one of his predecessors had done the OCS thing a decade ago, and Veatch laughed in basic agreement.

MISC
Veatch said that ideally, capacity would be in the low 40's. But with this project - due to current configuraton, the bowl game, possibility of future growth - capacity will be 50ish.

GP and Veatch (I think it was) talked concert venues a bit. They said one of the limiting factors to stadium concerts in Memphis (besides Nashville becoming a default stop on tour) is that equipment trucks have gotten bigger with bigger show setups these days. And they can no longer fit through the LBMS north tunnel with equipment for setup. This renovation will open that up, and will put us back in the game for at least consideration of the big shows.

Veatch talked a lot about the stadium "halo" - that area just outside of the concourses, but within stadium grounds. That is currently wasted space. The thought (I think) is to move the ticket gates out to the edge of the stadium footprint, then utilize the halo "inside" the stadium proper - for larger open concourses, concessions, game day experiences, etc.

...I think they seriously considered the OCS and it just couldn't work within these next few crucial years. So we are getting the next best thing. I'm on board.

[posting this in the LBS thread too]

Good stuff thanks -----he also said at the presser at around the 23:00 mark --that the university was not set on low 40K if they had built the OCS

What do you want him to say? That they wanted the same type of stadium as Colorado State (which he did) and that 50k isn't optimal? His recap of the study specifically mentions it and the costs associated with it. He didn't talk stupidities about a brand new 50,000 stadium that would have cost $550 million.

Btw, they are shrinking it by 10,000 seats so as usual, you are wrong.

Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

So now, we’ll just have 20k empty seats instead of 30k.

.....and 10K less at some

(05-20-2022 03:24 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 08:34 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 09:55 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-19-2022 02:31 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Listened to a joint interview with Stickland/Hardgrave and 2 other interviews with Veatch...

CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT
They were all pretty adamant that they are trying to get something done by 2025. They all mentioned conference alignment and positioning for big-time football for the future, etc. Big 12 was mentioned by name by Hardgrave, then he quickly said "or whoever" might come looking at us.

ON CAMPUS STADIUM
Veatch made a point to say the OCS was looked at very closely and very seriously. And he said - contrary to what many say here - that it is feasible. The problem is that additional land would have to be purchased and there would be demolition involved - both of which would approximately double the costs and would extend the timeline way past 2025. He made the point that in the end, with costs and timing - this is the best option. GP asked if Veatch wished one of his predecessors had done the OCS thing a decade ago, and Veatch laughed in basic agreement.

MISC
Veatch said that ideally, capacity would be in the low 40's. But with this project - due to current configuraton, the bowl game, possibility of future growth - capacity will be 50ish.

GP and Veatch (I think it was) talked concert venues a bit. They said one of the limiting factors to stadium concerts in Memphis (besides Nashville becoming a default stop on tour) is that equipment trucks have gotten bigger with bigger show setups these days. And they can no longer fit through the LBMS north tunnel with equipment for setup. This renovation will open that up, and will put us back in the game for at least consideration of the big shows.

Veatch talked a lot about the stadium "halo" - that area just outside of the concourses, but within stadium grounds. That is currently wasted space. The thought (I think) is to move the ticket gates out to the edge of the stadium footprint, then utilize the halo "inside" the stadium proper - for larger open concourses, concessions, game day experiences, etc.

...I think they seriously considered the OCS and it just couldn't work within these next few crucial years. So we are getting the next best thing. I'm on board.

[posting this in the LBS thread too]

Good stuff thanks -----he also said at the presser at around the 23:00 mark --that the university was not set on low 40K if they had built the OCS

What do you want him to say? That they wanted the same type of stadium as Colorado State (which he did) and that 50k isn't optimal? His recap of the study specifically mentions it and the costs associated with it. He didn't talk stupidities about a brand new 50,000 stadium that would have cost $550 million.

Btw, they are shrinking it by 10,000 seats so as usual, you are wrong.

Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

They reduced seating by 10,000 and would have reduced it to 41,000 if there was an OCS. The study backed up what the admin and 94% on this board said, that 38,000 - 44,000 was optimal.

Wrong again.

The AD clearly stated that 40K was not set in stone.

(05-20-2022 03:48 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

Not at all. Laird clearly said he thought optimum was low 40's. Just let it go and move on.

I will post when and what I want thank you----Laird clearly stated at the 23:00 mark that low 40s was not set in stone/agreed upon/finalized/------the university had the brains to stay at MEMPHIS MEMORIAL STADIUM without alienating many fans ---plus they were not stupid enough to build a tiny mickey mouse at todays mega cost ----and then later have to add thousands more seats at even higher mega mega cost

(05-21-2022 10:59 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 03:48 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(05-20-2022 11:05 AM)jsw3ent Wrote:  Its over 50K just like I said it should be --and the university agreed ---they too thought the suggestion of less fans at the games ludicrous

Not at all. Laird clearly said he thought optimum was low 40's. Just let it go and move on.

I will post when and what I want thank you----Laird clearly stated at the 23:00 mark that low 40s was not set in stone/agreed upon/finalized/------the university had the brains to stay at MEMPHIS MEMORIAL STADIUM without alienating many fans ---plus they were not stupid enough to build a tiny mickey mouse at todays mega cost ----and then later have to add thousands more seats at even higher mega mega cost

The model from the studies and the consensus was Colorado State at 41,000. Laird wasn't stupid enough to say that the school didn't get what they want, so Plan B was the next best thing. 38,000 - 44,000 was ideal.

Quote:they were not stupid enough to build a tiny mickey mouse at todays mega cost

Signed...

40,000 Houston
38,000 Cincinnati
41,000 Colorado State
44,000 UCF
45,000 Baylor
45,000 TCU

Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

(05-22-2022 01:11 PM)micman Wrote:  Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

that's the plan

(05-22-2022 01:11 PM)micman Wrote:  Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

I wouldn't be shocked if everyone involved is "surprised" when adding chairbacks decreases the final capacity to 44,000 - 48,000.

(05-23-2022 12:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-22-2022 01:11 PM)micman Wrote:  Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

I wouldn't be shocked if everyone involved is "surprised" when adding chairbacks decreases the final capacity to 44,000 - 48,000.

Granted we haven't seen detailed plans, but I got the impression that the west side seating would probably stay like it is for this phase.

(05-23-2022 07:52 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-23-2022 12:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-22-2022 01:11 PM)micman Wrote:  Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

I wouldn't be shocked if everyone involved is "surprised" when adding chairbacks decreases the final capacity to 44,000 - 48,000.

Granted we haven't seen detailed plans, but I got the impression that the west side seating would probably stay like it is for this phase.

I don't see how you can have an upgrade without including chairbacks.

(05-23-2022 08:33 AM)SouthernBlue Wrote:  

(05-23-2022 07:52 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-23-2022 12:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-22-2022 01:11 PM)micman Wrote:  Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

I wouldn't be shocked if everyone involved is "surprised" when adding chairbacks decreases the final capacity to 44,000 - 48,000.

Granted we haven't seen detailed plans, but I got the impression that the west side seating would probably stay like it is for this phase.

I don't see how you can have an upgrade without including chairbacks.

Is it an upgrade if half the stadium gets chairbacks?

(05-23-2022 08:40 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-23-2022 08:33 AM)SouthernBlue Wrote:  

(05-23-2022 07:52 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(05-23-2022 12:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(05-22-2022 01:11 PM)micman Wrote:  Need more chair backs. UNC reduced from around 61k to around 48k just by chair backing their stadium.

I wouldn't be shocked if everyone involved is "surprised" when adding chairbacks decreases the final capacity to 44,000 - 48,000.

Granted we haven't seen detailed plans, but I got the impression that the west side seating would probably stay like it is for this phase.

I don't see how you can have an upgrade without including chairbacks.

Is it an upgrade if half the stadium gets chairbacks?

They already added chairbacks. And yes it was an upgrade.

Maybe we can remove the 1986 expansion.

(05-23-2022 04:51 PM)micman Wrote:  Maybe we can remove the 1986 expansion.

36 years later.
Hard to believe we’re still trying to make this stadium work…

(05-17-2022 03:06 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  

(05-17-2022 03:01 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-17-2022 02:59 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  

(05-17-2022 02:43 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(05-17-2022 01:12 PM)Claw Wrote:  I invite you to share with the group ANY copy of a campus master plan that has ever designated a site for an on campus stadium. I've followed the plans for years via this board. I assure you, it was never planned, and that was not an oversight.

^^ This ^^
It was never in the master plan & its never been seriously considered. Rudd passed this sandwich onto Hardgrave & took a sabbatical.

And why do you think that is? Here's a hint: The University can't fund it.

If I had to guess, the majority of the of the LB renovations will be funded by tax dollars, with some private donations made.

If it was an OCS, it would be twice the cost and would likely need to be paid for by private donations, which the University can't get. Not enough big $$$ boosters around willing to do it. Not to mention the obstacles involved with acquiring land and finding parking all that.

Embrace what we're getting, not what you wish we'd get.

If we can’t fund it, then how can we compete for P5 membership with others who can?

It's a great question. Probably a big reason why the Houston's and Cincinnati's of the world have passed us by.

Our lack of $$$ issues will be exacerbated in this new NIL world, especially in football.

And why do you people think we have a lack of donor money? It couldn't possibly be because we don't play on campus, therefore there is no alumni Connection to the university, right?