Because the stadium isnt the problem. Rice has 4000 people in attendance because the product is terrible, not because the stadium is old, the concessions are pop ups or the press box requires hieroglyphic style walking to pass each other.

Budget unlimited, the above makes sense. But given that we have very little revenue and a small current and projected fan base, all $$$ has to be towards developing a quality product.
[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------
It's true that the product on the field is the biggest variable with attendance. At the same time, you want fans to be as comfortable as possible. They have to enjoy themselves.

The aesthetics and amenities are very, very important these days. It's crucial. Our competition are NRG and TDECU Stadiums. Rice is losing out on ancillary income at HRS. The XFL and MLS weren't interested. Concerts aren't held anymore. The high school football playoffs are gone. HRS isn't nearly developed enough. In fact, it looks neglected. The ticket booths are obsolete. The restrooms are small and antiquated. There are no luxury boxes. When you walk in, it's 75% empty. It's a dull place, and it makes Rice look like it isn't committed.

The stadium has to be perfect. When a conference is looking at Rice as an expansion candidate, the first thing officials will do is tour the facilities. Rice has to find a way to raise the money to make the renovation happen.

(12-08-2018 05:12 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-08-2018 04:31 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Because the stadium isnt the problem. Rice has 4000 people in attendance because the product is terrible, not because the stadium is old, the concessions are pop ups or the press box requires hieroglyphic style walking to pass each other.

Budget unlimited, the above makes sense. But given that we have very little revenue and a small current and projected fan base, all $$$ has to be towards developing a quality product.

I agree with statement 1.... but there is no reason we can't multi-task.

The biggest advantage of my concept is that it involves the Rice Historical Society who would likely essentially fund the 'museum' portion. We could solve the east concessions and restrooms for VERY little money on top of what the 'museum' would cost. Luxury boxes would be at least somewhat self-funding.

OF COURSE the product needs to improve... but facilities improvements can still happen. Money for things like luxury boxes and museums wouldn't come from the general athletics budget.

That's why the museum/visitors center idea makes so much sense.

What if we invested the money into making our video product better? Our revenue from TV is basically zero. So partner or launch a streaming service (with games like Rice vs WKU free as it's a near zero demand game) with high quality video.

The current intern-on-an-iphone performance by ESPN3 is appalling.

The above could help grow a brand wider than just the alums who care. The stadium would only serve the 4000 people who show up anyways.

(12-10-2018 05:16 PM)Antarius Wrote:  What if we invested the money into making our video product better? Our revenue from TV is basically zero. So partner or launch a streaming service (with games like Rice vs WKU free as it's a near zero demand game) with high quality video.

The current intern-on-an-iphone performance by ESPN3 is appalling.

The above could help grow a brand wider than just the alums who care. The stadium would only serve the 4000 people who show up anyways.

This is where KTRU comes in. The problem is that although our TV revenue is near zero... we have sold content control to the conference. This is my biggest complaint about CUSA. We give up a lot of media control... and thus we market 'evenly' with schools like UTEP on 'academic quality'. It's insane for us to sell out our brand so cheaply.

How many tennis or soccer or swimming or x-country meets have any of us seen, not in person? Why couldn't it be streamed? Want to expand our reach in Olympic sports? Let their families who don't live here watch them.

KTRU/Rice Media could fund this.

Again, the idea is to work across the various lines and not try and make athletics stand alone.

(12-10-2018 07:03 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-10-2018 05:16 PM)Antarius Wrote:  What if we invested the money into making our video product better? Our revenue from TV is basically zero. So partner or launch a streaming service (with games like Rice vs WKU free as it's a near zero demand game) with high quality video.

The current intern-on-an-iphone performance by ESPN3 is appalling.

The above could help grow a brand wider than just the alums who care. The stadium would only serve the 4000 people who show up anyways.

This is where KTRU comes in. The problem is that although our TV revenue is near zero... we have sold content control to the conference. This is my biggest complaint about CUSA. We give up a lot of media control... and thus we market 'evenly' with schools like UTEP on 'academic quality'. It's insane for us to sell out our brand so cheaply.

How many tennis or soccer or swimming or x-country meets have any of us seen, not in person? Why couldn't it be streamed? Want to expand our reach in Olympic sports? Let their families who don't live here watch them.

KTRU/Rice Media could fund this.

Again, the idea is to work across the various lines and not try and make athletics stand alone.

This isn’t an issue with the conference. This is an issue with our athletic department. Through WatchESPN and ESPN+, our department has the ability to stream any event that it wants to through that distribution platform. However, it has to meet a certain production standard which we often don’t meet.. You can see plenty of SEC or Texas Soccer games on their respective networks.

It all comes back to funding the department properly. KTRU is not the answer. Rice Athletics living in the 21st century is...

(12-10-2018 04:06 PM)Ourland Wrote:  

(12-07-2018 02:24 PM)75src Wrote:  I would think taking out part of the stadium is giving up on ever having a chance of being a first rank football program. I do not think we can maintain fan interest playing schools that no one at Rice cares about.
We either have to improve football or get rid of it.

I can appreciate this sentiment. I used to feel the same way. For me, it has become more about what would be gained than what would be lost.
If the deck were gone, someone could do something creative with the lower east concourse.

A canopy could finally be built over all the seating and concession areas on the east side to shade fans from the sun. The early kickoffs in September and October are scorchers. Install giant fans. Turn those into premium seats for hot and sunny days. Maybe install chair backs. Spoil the fans as much as possible, but make them pay for it.

To make up for seats lost by removing the deck, reinstall seating throughout the lower bowl. About 15k lower seats have no benches or chair backs, and they all provide great views of the field, even in the end zone. That's seating we would need. If the lower seating were reinstalled, you may only be losing a total of 10-12k seats by removing the deck. That would bring capacity to about 33k. Just right for Rice.

The upper east deck isn't needed. It sucks the energy from the stadium. If it were gone, I think the game day experience could improve dramatically. Fans could be sitting in the shade, instead of standing on the concourse. The view of the campus and medical center would be incredible.
[/quote]

I don't believe any of the biggest programs are ever coming back to Rice Stadium. The only way we can afford them is to continue to sell these games to NRG. Rice Stadium will never be able to make enough money to compensate LSU, Texas, A&M, or Oklahoma. However, we aren't so removed from the rest of college football that we can't afford Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, etc. Rice Stadium should be reconfigured to accommodate the crowds that it can realistically attract (20-30k), not the crowds that it wishes it could attract. It needs to be a more comfortable, functional, and attractive place to watch football.

(12-10-2018 07:25 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(12-10-2018 07:03 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-10-2018 05:16 PM)Antarius Wrote:  What if we invested the money into making our video product better? Our revenue from TV is basically zero. So partner or launch a streaming service (with games like Rice vs WKU free as it's a near zero demand game) with high quality video.

The current intern-on-an-iphone performance by ESPN3 is appalling.

The above could help grow a brand wider than just the alums who care. The stadium would only serve the 4000 people who show up anyways.

This is where KTRU comes in. The problem is that although our TV revenue is near zero... we have sold content control to the conference. This is my biggest complaint about CUSA. We give up a lot of media control... and thus we market 'evenly' with schools like UTEP on 'academic quality'. It's insane for us to sell out our brand so cheaply.

How many tennis or soccer or swimming or x-country meets have any of us seen, not in person? Why couldn't it be streamed? Want to expand our reach in Olympic sports? Let their families who don't live here watch them.

KTRU/Rice Media could fund this.

Again, the idea is to work across the various lines and not try and make athletics stand alone.

This isn’t an issue with the conference. This is an issue with our athletic department. Through WatchESPN and ESPN+, our department has the ability to stream any event that it wants to through that distribution platform. However, it has to meet a certain production standard which we often don’t meet.. You can see plenty of SEC or Texas Soccer games on their respective networks.

It all comes back to funding the department properly. KTRU is not the answer. Rice Athletics living in the 21st century is...

Responding to Hambone first

IMO, KTRU isn't the answer. They proved themselves to be even worse than the athletics department at brand management, value building and long term support. Rice Athletics and KTRU are very similar in terms of historical management, the caveat being the athletics 25(0) and ilk are more powerful than the KTRU ones, the latter having the 2.50 instead.

Media growth needs to be done professionally. We can't survive doing it on the cheap. So while I agree we could and should market the non-major sports, KTRU is not the answer.

Responding to ExcitedOwl

I agree - we need to spend the $$$ to make the broadcast infrastructure better. The camerawork is atrocious.

Responding in general

Rice needs to work on its exposure. We used to have guys like MK Bower and Saltzman and now we don't. Our radio show is content free. Riceowls.com reads like a zealot putting spin on some dystopian verison of reality.

Fix the ability to watch, listen and connect to Rice Athletics. All of this opens the pool of potential fans.

(12-10-2018 09:32 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-10-2018 07:25 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(12-10-2018 07:03 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-10-2018 05:16 PM)Antarius Wrote:  What if we invested the money into making our video product better? Our revenue from TV is basically zero. So partner or launch a streaming service (with games like Rice vs WKU free as it's a near zero demand game) with high quality video.

The current intern-on-an-iphone performance by ESPN3 is appalling.

The above could help grow a brand wider than just the alums who care. The stadium would only serve the 4000 people who show up anyways.

This is where KTRU comes in. The problem is that although our TV revenue is near zero... we have sold content control to the conference. This is my biggest complaint about CUSA. We give up a lot of media control... and thus we market 'evenly' with schools like UTEP on 'academic quality'. It's insane for us to sell out our brand so cheaply.

How many tennis or soccer or swimming or x-country meets have any of us seen, not in person? Why couldn't it be streamed? Want to expand our reach in Olympic sports? Let their families who don't live here watch them.

KTRU/Rice Media could fund this.

Again, the idea is to work across the various lines and not try and make athletics stand alone.

This isn’t an issue with the conference. This is an issue with our athletic department. Through WatchESPN and ESPN+, our department has the ability to stream any event that it wants to through that distribution platform. However, it has to meet a certain production standard which we often don’t meet.. You can see plenty of SEC or Texas Soccer games on their respective networks.

It all comes back to funding the department properly. KTRU is not the answer. Rice Athletics living in the 21st century is...

Responding to Hambone first

IMO, KTRU isn't the answer. They proved themselves to be even worse than the athletics department at brand management, value building and long term support. Rice Athletics and KTRU are very similar in terms of historical management, the caveat being the athletics 25(0) and ilk are more powerful than the KTRU ones, the latter having the 2.50 instead.

Media growth needs to be done professionally. We can't survive doing it on the cheap. So while I agree we could and should market the non-major sports, KTRU is not the answer.

Responding to ExcitedOwl

I agree - we need to spend the $$$ to make the broadcast infrastructure better. The camerawork is atrocious.

Responding in general

Rice needs to work on its exposure. We used to have guys like MK Bower and Saltzman and now we don't. Our radio show is content free. Riceowls.com reads like a zealot putting spin on some dystopian verison of reality.

Fix the ability to watch, listen and connect to Rice Athletics. All of this opens the pool of potential fans.

I don’t know if that’s true about us just needing to meet their quality requirements. Our conference has the rights to our media. That’s why a lot of our basketball games are on CUSAtv instead of espn3. It’s not like the quality changes for the games espn3 picks up. AAC has a deal with ESPN so all of their games are on espn3. Same with every other conference that’s not the Big 10 or CUSA or Pac 12(they have their own network now right? Does anyone pay attention to the Pac 12?)

yeah... I'm not sure about who controls the broadcasts.... That's only part of the issue. The bigger issue is that we are 'on equal footing' in our branding of our academics. We get a commercial, our opponent gets a commercial, the conference gets a commercial. We're all the same

As far as the professionalism of the broadcast, you miss my point....

People like us will watch the game wherever it is. Sure, I'd like professional announcers... but I'm watching the game because I'm a Rice fan... and we're not attracting the guy looking for a great broadcast. I want our commercials to feature things that Rice people, and people who might connect with Rice (Ivy leaguers, foreign MDs and Engineers) care about... and I want Rice Students to watch it, which means it has to feature 'Rice People'.

And we DO have a 'media center'. They should be able to produce quality broadcasts of arts events which could be marketed with our athletics, including showing the entire MOB halftime.

You seem to want us to look big time and I get that... but to me it's like putting a bow tie on a bum. I want to 'connect' people to Rice... and athletics is only one of those avenues. When we are putting a product on the field that 'average sports fans' want to watch, we can worry about the quality of the production.

I think the reason we get unprofessional production today is the same reason none/few of the Shepherd School are part of the Mob.

(12-08-2018 04:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I don't understand why we would have to tear down a deck in order to improve the experience. That seems like a) a waste of money and b) something not easily reversed Worst of all, they are mostly great seats.

The VASTLY easier solution that accomplishes the same thing is to build a new press box and suites IN FRONT of the existing press box and suites on the west side. Build new elevator banks that are also support structures as well as concession and 'power' hubs.

Can do the same on the East, though not the press box obviously. The seats you lose are 'the worst' of the great seats (furthest from the field) and again, the elevator banks can double as hubs for concessions.

The biggest advantage is that you aren't having to make a 10,000 seat decision with 5,000 of them being pretty prime, but we can instead make perhaps a 3,000 seat decision and keep the 7,000 'prime' seats.

On the east side (facing the university) I would change the facade to mirror Lovett Hall.... build a Rice Historical Society Museum there in a building that mirrors Lovett. I think that would be pretty powerful, improve and extend the experience, integrate athletics more strongly into our history and every visit to the school, and create vastly more activity at the stadium rather than being essentially unused for months per year.

That just seems so obvious I can't understand why it doesn't happen.

You know, I'd even support "Potemkin Luxury Suites" on the side that shows on TV. Maybe keep a few rows in front that we could plausibly fill, and maybe one day we could actually sell the suites.

In general, seems like wider, more comfy chairs could reduce capacity while making the stadium look fuller. Maybe keep the one upper deck all bleachers but only open for games where we need to?

20,000 mannequins