(08-21-2020 10:15 AM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 09:49 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 11:12 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 10:51 PM)CRM114 Wrote:  I can't see the point of replacing a stadium that's 2 miles from campus with one that's 1 mile from campus. That's still not an OCS. You can't just buy some land somewhere and call it "on campus"; otherwise we could acquire the fairgrounds for much less than a new stadium and bingo - we have an OCS. Nor do I like the idea of an OCS on the South Campus. Most alums have no real connection to that site.

I also disagree that LBMS is beyond economical upgrades. Most college stadiums are upgraded incrementally. I think the place has improved greatly in the past ten years with Tiger Lane, renovated restrooms, chair backs, new video board, etc. More can be done and for far less than starting over. Some people may think the single-tier design is obsolete, but that hasn't caused Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc. to build all-new stadiums.

If an university buys up land and develops facilities on it, it becomes a campus. Just like the Park Ave. is the south campus.

The golf course location would be the new mid campus.

The LBS has reached its peak. It's nice now, but we're talking 5-10 years from now where it will be. Out of date as newer technology for modern stadiums are passing up UofM and the LBS by miles.

Seriously, the LBS recent upgrades are nice, but they're a decade late.

Another thing, college football is changing yearly. Times are changing. No major programs are playing in city owned facilities. Temple and USF do but are making plans for OCS'.

What UofM has done and even gotten away with over the years by cutting corners in upgrades in the past won't work in the near future.

Otherwise we can start planning to downgrade to D2 level.

And I know Tiger Nation never wants to see that. Then we really would be "Tiger High".

So your argument is that if we don't get an OCS that you want, then we might as well shut down football?

Someone had better inform:
Miami
UCLA
Washington
Pittsburgh
Baylor
Navy
Georgia State
Oregon

+ NC State, South Carolina, Northwestern & the football program formerly known as UCONN

The article I found had like 18... I just included P5 and Navy

(08-21-2020 10:19 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 10:15 AM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 09:49 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 11:12 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 10:51 PM)CRM114 Wrote:  I can't see the point of replacing a stadium that's 2 miles from campus with one that's 1 mile from campus. That's still not an OCS. You can't just buy some land somewhere and call it "on campus"; otherwise we could acquire the fairgrounds for much less than a new stadium and bingo - we have an OCS. Nor do I like the idea of an OCS on the South Campus. Most alums have no real connection to that site.

I also disagree that LBMS is beyond economical upgrades. Most college stadiums are upgraded incrementally. I think the place has improved greatly in the past ten years with Tiger Lane, renovated restrooms, chair backs, new video board, etc. More can be done and for far less than starting over. Some people may think the single-tier design is obsolete, but that hasn't caused Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc. to build all-new stadiums.

If an university buys up land and develops facilities on it, it becomes a campus. Just like the Park Ave. is the south campus.

The golf course location would be the new mid campus.

The LBS has reached its peak. It's nice now, but we're talking 5-10 years from now where it will be. Out of date as newer technology for modern stadiums are passing up UofM and the LBS by miles.

Seriously, the LBS recent upgrades are nice, but they're a decade late.

Another thing, college football is changing yearly. Times are changing. No major programs are playing in city owned facilities. Temple and USF do but are making plans for OCS'.

What UofM has done and even gotten away with over the years by cutting corners in upgrades in the past won't work in the near future.

Otherwise we can start planning to downgrade to D2 level.

And I know Tiger Nation never wants to see that. Then we really would be "Tiger High".

So your argument is that if we don't get an OCS that you want, then we might as well shut down football?

Someone had better inform:
Miami
UCLA
Washington
Pittsburgh
Baylor
Navy
Georgia State
Oregon

+ NC State, South Carolina, Northwestern & the football program formerly known as UCONN

The article I found had like 18... I just included P5 and Navy

I included UConn for giggles

(08-20-2020 10:51 PM)CRM114 Wrote:  I can't see the point of replacing a stadium that's 2 miles from campus with one that's 1 mile from campus. That's still not an OCS. You can't just buy some land somewhere and call it "on campus"; otherwise we could acquire the fairgrounds for much less than a new stadium and bingo - we have an OCS. Nor do I like the idea of an OCS on the South Campus. Most alums have no real connection to that site.

I also disagree that LBMS is beyond economical upgrades. Most college stadiums are upgraded incrementally. I think the place has improved greatly in the past ten years with Tiger Lane, renovated restrooms, chair backs, new video board, etc. More can be done and for far less than starting over. Some people may think the single-tier design is obsolete, but that hasn't caused Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, UCLA, Oregon, etc. to build all-new stadiums.

THANK YOU.

This guy gets it. SPOT ON. Every point he made. +3

I was a big proponent of an on campus stadium when the study was commissioned years ago, but I don't see it happening now. And the golf course is too far away, we need an on campus stadium to drive the connection between alumni and the university. It needs to actually be on campus if we are going to spend the money.

The LB seems to be holding up well. If they move the restrooms and ramps outside the footprint to open the west side up, and replace the press box, they can probably get 30 more years out of the old girl.

(08-21-2020 06:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 05:29 PM)jsw3ent Wrote:  Why only 40k---why limit revenue----why not 60k----TIGERS routinely (ok a couple times yearly) draw 50k in spite of announced attendance . I thought rumor was university was going to buy MEMPHIS MEMORIAL stadium . Make it bigger.

The size of the Liberty Bowl makes it harder to generate money, not easier. There are always far more tickets than demand, which limits what the university can charge per ticket.

Then we should have never left Crump. Become a Power 5 and we sell out 60k every game. How much extra do we have to raise prices to make up the loss of 20k extra seats ?

(08-21-2020 11:26 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  I was a big proponent of an on campus stadium when the study was commissioned years ago, but I don't see it happening now. And the golf course is too far away, we need an on campus stadium to drive the connection between alumni and the university. It needs to actually be on campus if we are going to spend the money.

The LB seems to be holding up well. If they move the restrooms and ramps outside the footprint to open the west side up, and replace the press box, they can probably get 30 more years out of the old girl.

The South Campus is where all the new growth is. There will never be a Stadium on the main campus. The school is developing south with over 100 million in new additions. The golf course isn't to far away. It is right in the middle. Students travel around from the south to main campus daily now. In the next 10 years you will see a lot of more areas around park/getwell become part of the U of M. If done right the stadium would work there.

A better location would be to purchase the neighborhood between the south campus (Park Ave) & the main campus. The university has been doing that incrementally for years anyway. That would join the campuses, leave Audubon Park (ideal for tailgating) & the golf course intact. The city & university could partner on the park & golf course & let the university run it, maintain it (golf course management is a popular college major). That would have the campus span from Central (Poplar?) to Getwell & begin to rival the land grant schools in area. Systematically build new on-campus housing in that span also to encourage student attendance. Allow the LB & SHBC to use the stadium. Then the city could completely repurpose the complete fairgrounds.

And BTW, Navy & WA own their stadiums. At UW, the stadium is immediately adjacent to the campus also. Not sure how that would make a list of schools with off-campus stadiums.

(08-22-2020 04:06 AM)FORealTigerFan Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 11:26 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  I was a big proponent of an on campus stadium when the study was commissioned years ago, but I don't see it happening now. And the golf course is too far away, we need an on campus stadium to drive the connection between alumni and the university. It needs to actually be on campus if we are going to spend the money.

The LB seems to be holding up well. If they move the restrooms and ramps outside the footprint to open the west side up, and replace the press box, they can probably get 30 more years out of the old girl.

The South Campus is where all the new growth is. There will never be a Stadium on the main campus. The school is developing south with over 100 million in new additions. The golf course isn't to far away. It is right in the middle. Students travel around from the south to main campus daily now. In the next 10 years you will see a lot of more areas around park/getwell become part of the U of M. If done right the stadium would work there.

South campus doesn’t really do anything for the alumni connection. We could put a stadium in collierville at the UofM annex and it would technically be on campus. South campus or the golf course is about the same as the fairgrounds, none of them increase the alumni connection with the school. If that’s the options we might as well just stay at the LB.

Here are the locations from the 2007 study, the westernmost location south of the tracks was deemed the most feasible at the time but all locations were capable of supporting a 40k seat stadium for a cost of between 118M and 151M (location impacted cost) in 2010 dollars. The site by the library was the most expensive.

The longer the UofM waits to begin planning and actual fundraising, the more expensive the price will be.

In 2007, a $120 million dollar stadium would cost in 2020 $148 million. By 2027 that cost would be over $160 million.

I like Rudd. He's a go getter. So I feel he knows the importance long term for both the football program and the university by having an OCS.

Look at our conference mates. They're all investing in OCS and breaking away from being a renter to becoming a home stadium owner.

Cincinnati may not have built a new stadium, but they spent big bucks to expand and renovate their OCS.

Houston invested into football by building an OCS.

Even Tulane is ahead of Memphis right now in the OCS race.

USF and Temple are next for OCS'.

If SDSU, who is also investing in an OCS, is to join the AAC, soon Memphis will be the only member without an OCS.

Face it guys, the Liberty Bowl is too big and due to the LBC and SHC having say, it can't be chairbacked and reduced in seating capacity.

Memphis on average draws about 30-40,000 per home game, except when Ole Miss comes to town. And they're not coming back anytime soon.

The fairgrounds are 2 miles from campus. Too far to walk. The golf course is 1 mile from the new pedestrian bridge. That's walking distance.

It's also half a mile from the new indoor practice facility.

And let's say for a minute that the city sold the LBMS to UofM. The cost of renovation and upgrades, such as a new press box, would cost more than to build an OCS.

Louisiana-Monroe built a new press box and it cost $31 million. And that's on the cheap end. Because of the structure of LBMS, a new press box would run about $50 million.

Chairbacking the whole stadium to reduce capacity to about 48,000 would cost another $50 million.

This is just a few reasons why we need an OCS.

This would be an ideal OCS development for the UofM to go by. SDSU's new stadium.

(08-20-2020 04:28 PM)Claw Wrote:  I'd rather see it physically on the campus like Misstake. But I'll take it.

Same here. Look at how small the SMU stadium footprint is, there has to be a way to put it on main campus. Audobon is about same distance as LB

(08-22-2020 11:49 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 04:28 PM)Claw Wrote:  I'd rather see it physically on the campus like Misstake. But I'll take it.

Same here. Look at how small the SMU stadium footprint is, there has to be a way to put it on main campus. Audobon is about same distance as LB

Depends on the starting point. Leftwich is only a 20 minute walk from the University Center. LB is close to an hour.

Look, the whole point of OCS is to get guys and gals my age to come back to campus, see the buildings, reminisce, tug on the heartstrings, write a check, continue to come to the games even in a downturn in team performance because "they're my alma matre's team", not some semi-pro entity that is "entertainment". It's NOT entertainment. It is us against them (the opposing team).

And you can't do that unless you are on the actual campus that I and everyone else took classes on. You have to make us park in "C" lot, or some of those lots on Patterson or Frat Row, or tailgate on the grass along the trax on Walker out in front of the Admin building, and make us WALK THROUGH THE CAMPUS to get to the stadium.... conveniently right by the book store where you can walk in and buy a pennant and a T-shirt.

That's the connection we lack.

(08-22-2020 01:17 PM)Browning Hall Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 11:49 AM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 04:28 PM)Claw Wrote:  I'd rather see it physically on the campus like Misstake. But I'll take it.

Same here. Look at how small the SMU stadium footprint is, there has to be a way to put it on main campus. Audobon is about same distance as LB

Depends on the starting point. Leftwich is only a 20 minute walk from the University Center. LB is close to an hour.

It is 2.1 miles from the LBMS to the UofM main campus.

It's only 0.4 miles from Audobon Park to the new pedestrian bridge.

it will be at the South Campus because that's where the IPF, practice fields, workout areas, etc are located. It will be 39-42k and look like Louisville's PJCS before all the renovations.

(08-22-2020 02:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  it will be at the South Campus because that's where the IPF, practice fields, workout areas, etc are located. It will be 39-42k and look like Louisville's PJCS before all the renovations.

Where on south campus? There's no room for one.

The only realistic option is the Audobon Park/golf course.

(08-22-2020 02:43 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 02:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  it will be at the South Campus because that's where the IPF, practice fields, workout areas, etc are located. It will be 39-42k and look like Louisville's PJCS before all the renovations.

Where on south campus? There's no room for one.

The only realistic option is the Audobon Park/golf course.

blue would be the new entrance to the South Campus

(08-20-2020 04:51 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 04:42 PM)TigerFan40 Wrote:  There will have to be a lot of leniency from the city for either basketball or football to move away from their current venues. The city makes too much money off of Tiger athletics at LB and FEF to allow the school to build a competing facility.

UofM has its own BOR now and doesn't have to get permission anymore from city nor state to build.

The only thing the city could do is block the sale of the land to the UofM. But then the UofM can counteract by filing a discriminative lawsuit against the city.

There are legal ways around the city.

(08-20-2020 06:26 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 06:01 PM)Bathtub Gin Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 04:51 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-20-2020 04:42 PM)TigerFan40 Wrote:  There will have to be a lot of leniency from the city for either basketball or football to move away from their current venues. The city makes too much money off of Tiger athletics at LB and FEF to allow the school to build a competing facility.

UofM has its own BOR now and doesn't have to get permission anymore from city nor state to build.

The only thing the city could do is block the sale of the land to the UofM. But then the UofM can counteract by filing a discriminative lawsuit against the city.

There are legal ways around the city.

Caulkins has stated that even though we have our own board, the state will not allow the school to take on that kind of debt. The only way it happens if the school does a deal with the city sort of like the tennis facility. If that happens then the bowl game, SHC, and large concerts will be played at the new stadium. The school already owns the land Audubon park golf course is on so this is probably the most realistic plan

Caulkins is clueless of what he spews out. Just another media talking head.

The school doesn't own the land. They inquired about it a few years ago, but nothing came of it.

(08-22-2020 02:43 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  

(08-22-2020 02:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  it will be at the South Campus because that's where the IPF, practice fields, workout areas, etc are located. It will be 39-42k and look like Louisville's PJCS before all the renovations.

Where on south campus? There's no room for one.

The only realistic option is the Audobon Park/golf course.

That's owned by the city and they wouldn't sell it to the university, for many reasons, but the main one is probably because the university is a state entity. Just because we have our own BOR doesn't mean we're independent like a private school.

Unless a stadium was on South campus or main campus it would be no better than the Liberty Bowl which is pretty close already

Either wedge it in in the big parking lot attached to the intramural fields or leave it

(08-22-2020 01:42 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  Look, the whole point of OCS is to get guys and gals my age to come back to campus, see the buildings, reminisce, tug on the heartstrings, write a check, continue to come to the games even in a downturn in team performance because "they're my alma matre's team", not some semi-pro entity that is "entertainment". It's NOT entertainment. It is us against them (the opposing team).

And you can't do that unless you are on the actual campus that I and everyone else took classes on. You have to make us park in "C" lot, or some of those lots on Patterson or Frat Row, or tailgate on the grass along the trax on Walker out in front of the Admin building, and make us WALK THROUGH THE CAMPUS to get to the stadium.... conveniently right by the book store where you can walk in and buy a pennant and a T-shirt.

That's the connection we lack.

It's too late now, but awhile back I felt they should tear down the student fitness center and use all that land to build a stadium. I was also a teenager thinking off the top of my head at the time and even now I'm not sure if that could have worked.

(08-20-2020 03:09 PM)Penny1 Wrote:  Mark you calendars.

Within the next decade there will be an on campus football stadium at the UofM.

Where on campus, you may ask?

Between Southern Ave. and Park Ave. where the golf course is, currently own by the city.

One thing that has hurt our national perception of Tiger football has been lack of on campus facilities.

Now we have begun fixing that problem with the long awaited (over a decade) indoor practice facility finally completed.

Next phase will be relocating the student athletes to nearby future on campus housing. Rudd has mentioned this before.

It is 0.7 miles both ways on the yet to be purchased golf course land. Perfect location for new athletic village.

Accompanying it will be a 40,000 seat multi-purpose on campus stadium that will serve as an athletic/academic facility, a la Colorado State's new stadium.

Having on campus football will bring back alumni, create new fan support and donors.

Parking won't be that big of an issue as is now at LBS. Less capacity means less vehicle traffick. Students will be able to walk to the games, meaning much less parking needed.

The land is roughly 200 acres, therefore leaving space for additional developments in the future.

Such as an on campus basketball arena.

Right now, the Forum is ideal. But eventually an on campus arena will be needed if UofM is to ever expect a major power conference invite.

As for the future of the Liberty Bowl Stadium?

It's already reached it's financial limits of upgrading. And it's structural design is outdated and not modern enough to enhance or remodel.

The SHC and LBC can remain there, but may also choose to leave for another city.

Might be a bad loss for the city, but UofM needs to put it's needs and priorities first for a change.

It's time to stop depending on the citizens to invest into something they don't really support.

Stick to making wrong prediction on basketball recruiting.

The City still owns the Linx at Audubon.

Even if they were at one looking at a deal with the U of Memphis it is still city owned.

The city loses around $2 million a year operating the LBS and that is WITH the U of Memphis as their main tenant.

So it is unlikely the city will sell the U of Memphis a park where they can build their own OCS and take away most of the revenues generated by the LBS.

Especially since the city will soon be issuing massive number of bonds to cover the cost of rejuvenating the fairgrounds.

Tax dollars generated in midtown from events happening at the LBS is the main thing which will pay off those bonds.

PLUS the U of Memphis is on the hook for up to a million dollars each year IF the tourism zone does not generate enough funds to pay off the cost of repairs and upgrades to the LBS.

The U of Memphis athletic department is limited in funds especially since we went into dept to cover the cost of the IPF and South Campus upgrades.

We may have our own board but they will not allow the U of Memphis to go into even more massive dept to build an OCS when the school is trying to cover the cost of campus and educational expansion.

Not having an OCS is not holding us back. The main thing which is holding us back and is not being a Tier 1 research facility. THAT is what the University heads are focused on right now.

An OCS would be a negative cash flow for the University each year. Not only on operational cost but to pay off the debt for building it. The city loses $2 million a year with three paying tenants. But makes that money up by tax revenues generated by the events that happen at the LBS. The U of Memphis does not have the tax revenue stream to cove the operating losses.

As long as the city operates the LBS and we have as good of a deal as we have there will never be an OCS.