(07-01-2016 12:09 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 10:50 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I edited my post, after doing a bit of looking. Thanks for the info, though.

Can you answer the other part of my edited post?

"I also see that Whipple was re-hired in 2014. UMass had a decent amount of success under him from 1998 - 2003. How do fans perceive it's going so far in his second run?" Thanks!

There is still a good amount of goodwill left, but he will need to start producing some more wins in 2017, else the seat will begin to get warm. Even then do not feel it will get hot, just warm for the first time. Expecting good thing in the future that includes Whipple at the helm.

Regarding McGuirk, it's looking like some temporary seating added for 2017. We'll have to see about major upgrades.
Do think it's ironic that our AD mentions 25-30k for Gillette games. The irony is we can easily get to 25k by 2020 if a few things start happening. Like what, winning games and building the base with good drawing home games. Love to see the Army game played on campus with a nicely upgraded McGuirk.

Quote:All six home games in 2017 are scheduled for McGuirk with only a smattering of future games set for Foxborough.

“We only want to play games at Gillette where we can get 25,000 to 30,000-plus people,” Bamford said. “We’d put games like Mississippi State, BYU or Boston College there.”

Bamford said UMass was already exploring temporary additional seats at McGuirk for the 2017 season, but hoped for more permanent solutions long term.

“There’s a lot of talk right now. I wouldn’t say there’s anything moving in that direction,” Bamford said. “Looking at what our options are, it’s anything from enhancing the bathrooms and concessions, which is not a considerable cost, to adding seats. We haven’t had any real high level conversations about it. I’ve probably done more homework than anything. I need to know what our options are, to be able to go back to our leadership and say this is where I think we need to be.”

Bamford would like to have some improvement in place for the 2017 season.

“I do know we could get (capacity) from 17 to maybe 20,000 pretty easily with some temporary seating options and some (standing room) and feel good about that if we have to for 2017,” he said. “More than that, if we’re bringing 20,000 people here we have to figure out a way to not have them going into Porta-Johns to use the bathroom and not using the makeshift stands for concessions.

“We’ve made the best of the situation with a 50-year old stadium,” Bamford continued. “But in order to act like and FBS and do things at a level where we’re going to bring people here, we’ve got to be better. Now we have to figure out what better looks like.”
..
“I think we can get to 20,000 if we’re playing good football and good teams that people want to come see,” he said.

He hoped any temporary fixes could be a bridge to something more permanent.

“We’re going to have to make some decisions in the next three to five years about what the stadium is, what it looks like and how it acts for is,” he said. “We’re trying to evaluate all our options and see what’s fiscally responsible.”

UMass should just add permanent seats at the end zone opposite the new Football Center and up grade the other facilities like concessions and more permanent bathrooms for now. Forming the horse shoe should add approximately another 8 thousand seats getting McGuirk to 25k until they can get into a conference again. When the stadium is sold out at 25k on a regular basis they can expand it again when the school determines the next capacity level to strive for. (Personally I think they should have stayed in the MAC until the conference they are zeroed in on came calling but that is a discussion for another day.)