(11-23-2021 06:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Anyone know what UAB paid for their new place?

Original budget was $174 million. Not sure what it came in at.

(11-24-2021 09:59 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 06:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Anyone know what UAB paid for their new place?

Original budget was $174 million. Not sure what it came in at.

Different though when its owned by the school vs being a public owned building they let you use. UAB does not own their stadium.

(11-23-2021 02:48 PM)Bull Wrote:  I honestly think USF 'announced' that OCS with no intention to really do anything. They don't have the money, look how long it took just to raise the $$$ for the IPF. Forever. And, it's even harder to justify raising the money with a losing program, relegated long term to the nAAC. Nothing against the nAAC, I actually like the conference a lot. USF needs to focus on rebuilding and winning some CC games first... THEN see what attendance looks like and build accordingly.

Or... USF may build something relatively cheap on campus, likely where the track facility is now. They have to know that otherwise, they will be playing in an empty red stadium for a looooooong time... which may be a program killer. I actually like this option best, provided they can scrape together the funds, and are willing to build 'reasonable', not insist on a P5 level stadium that will never happen.

Word is that USF visited the UAB stadium a few weeks back, and that's the model. I'm just really having a hard time believing anything will happen. Our style is to languish and pray... then make excuses. And we like to overpay multiple head coaches at the same time. That's how we roll on Fowler Ave.

Good points and your conclusion seems accurate.

(11-23-2021 12:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Just a wild idea: could USF partner with the Tampa Rays to build a facility that could accommodate both teams on the USF campus?

Another good chance would have been if usf partnered to help bring a MLS team to the area...there could have been a football/soccer stadium (say 30,000-35,000) that could have helped both teams share the cost.

The minor league soccer team that plays at the old Spring Training Baseball Stadium where 80% of the seats are in the corner of the field is HORRIBLE place to watch a game.

(11-23-2021 09:12 AM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 05:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 09:58 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  usf needs the OCS. Weatherford said they are going to get it done. The program is down now but someone in Tampa needs to have some foresight and plan for the future. The student is trolling and going for the splashy troll headline to get a job. The more click traffic we give it the more we support the usf student. Future writer at the Tampa Bay Times with headlines that kick usf while their down.

The more usf drags its feet, the more likely FAU surpasses usf in the new AAC.

(11-22-2021 08:22 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Of course a UCF fan posted this from some random student who probably doesn't like sports to begin with. Every school in the country has one of these types of opinion pieces posted about how much money is spent on athletics for no real return.

It is usf hate week. Expect an increase in our trolling this week. Let it be know by all... usf sucks.

The Co-Editor of the Student Paper did make a solid point that usf should focus on INCREASING their actual fan base at games vs just blindly spending $250 Million and hope it would improve attendance.

FAU built a 30,000 seat stadium 10 years ago...and they can probably count on one hand the number of games that drew more than 20,000 "actual" fans to the stadium.

Even UAB....who is having a great year...has drawn "announced" crowds of 21,000-22,000 in their brand new 47,000 seat stadium the city/county built for them. (They even fell 10,000 short of a sellout in their stadium opener).

To the writer's point...its cheaper to focus on improving culture and school spirit vs building a $250 Million joint and HOPING the culture/spirit will improve.

I would argue the two go hand in hand though. I know someone in the UCF athletics office has the statistics. But there is almost certainly a direct correlation to the opening of our stadium and a consistent massive increase in donations. Having the campus on stadium helps create the student culture. It brings the alumni back to campus. It has so many more benefits than hosting a game 6 times a year. The ripple effects are huge and what really counts.

For 99% of all Div I Football Schools...the #1 event that helps bring alumni back to campus are on-campus football games.

All studies show that alumni (and other corporate athletic sponsors) are more likely to donate back to the University side IF they come back to campus and feel "connected".

Without on-campus football games....its hard to activate/engaged most alumni.

Now some schools have HUGE soldout basketball crowds that come back to campus too...and that certainly helps...but for most FL schools...basketball attendance lags way, way behind football.

And yes...Sports Illustrated did a study some 30 plus years ago that showed that alumni are more apt to buy season tickets IF they also attended games while being a student...and getting even a portion of large 50,000 plus student bodies to attend off-campus football games is never great...so most graduate from school without a "connection" to the football team...which means in the future, the odds that they become a season ticket holder or a booster is lower than those that did attend games as a student.

(11-23-2021 09:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Lots of UCF fans opining about what USF needs, LOL. Very few Bulls fans.

But OK, I'll bite: As someone else said, the Oracle writer isn't wrong about our school spirit and the cost of a major stadium. That said, if we are going to have an FBS football program, we need an OCS. The RJ experiment has failed. Call it throwing good money after bad and I won't disagree, but we need an OCS to have any chance of growing the program.

I agree with "Bull" though, that we should follow the UCF pattern of starting small and cheap out of the gate, no big $250m investment. Make it expandable. But the key is to get some kind of credible stadium built on campus.

This sums up the thread and problem.

The article is junk.

You don’t wait to build the bridge just because there is nobody swimming across the river.

(11-24-2021 07:35 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 07:57 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 06:03 PM)bullsbucsfan426 Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 02:48 PM)Bull Wrote:  I honestly think USF 'announced' that OCS with no intention to really do anything. They don't have the money, look how long it took just to raise the $$$ for the IPF. Forever. And, it's even harder to justify raising the money with a losing program, relegated long term to the nAAC. Nothing against the nAAC, I actually like the conference a lot. USF needs to focus on rebuilding and winning some CC games first... THEN see what attendance looks like and build accordingly.

Or... USF may build something relatively cheap on campus, likely where the track facility is now. They have to know that otherwise, they will be playing in an empty red stadium for a looooooong time... which may be a program killer. I actually like this option best, provided they can scrape together the funds, and are willing to build 'reasonable', not insist on a P5 level stadium that will never happen.

Word is that USF visited the UAB stadium a few weeks back, and that's the model. I'm just really having a hard time believing anything will happen. Our style is to languish and pray... then make excuses. And we like to overpay multiple head coaches at the same time. That's how we roll on Fowler Ave.

I can tell you right now that it wasn't a vanity statement by Will Weatherford. Things are working behind the scenes right now and there have been a few hints and secondary clues given (intentionally or not). I was at a USF watch party for the ECU game and a couple of things were stated that made me realize that the OCS is very feasible and is actually happening.

1. CITF fund. This is a fund taken directly from Tuition payments used to build beneficial buildings on campus that all students will have access to. the Marshall Center (USF's student union) was built with CITF money while I was a student. I thought it was around $15 million, but it seems that the money has grown larger with time and that number is closer to $50-60 million today. That is equivalent to getting a lead gift for the stadium.

2. Adding Lacrosse as a Title IX sport. They will start off at the soccer field I believe but it was stated by Michael Kelly that they will eventually move to a stadium on campus within a year or two of starting...guess which stadium that is.

3. The main free USF board, the Bulls Pen had an update earlier this week. Michael Kelly spoke to fans who went to the USF tailgate at Tulane and they were told there would be a major update on December 7th at the Board of Trustees meeting. I think it's going to be very clear before the end of the year when and where a stadium will be built. Most likely they will take down the track stadium and build there.

Man I would love it if you were right. Thanks for all the info.

CITF is a student affairs fund, you would need the SGA to approve. Lmao good luck with that.

Try not to lecture someone who served in SG. USF SGA would green light it. Or did you think my knowledge came out of thin air?

(11-22-2021 11:42 AM)panama Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 08:20 AM)bearcat29 Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 06:35 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  usf's student run newspaper:

OPINION: USF’s on-campus stadium will be a bust

https://www.usforacle.com/2021/11/21/opi...be-a-bust/

The article isn't wrong. But all of college football is insane when it comes to money spent in relation to the mission of an academic institution.

If the want in the B12, its pay to play.

One consistency since forever is students are upset at any spending period. "I dont participate in X, so why am I paying an X Fee???". Student newspapers are the worst place to go for unbiased non knee jerk journalism.

it is the same bunch that will want student loan forgiveness.A

(05-05-2022 05:46 PM)UHRedcat96 Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 11:42 AM)panama Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 08:20 AM)bearcat29 Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 06:35 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  usf's student run newspaper:

OPINION: USF’s on-campus stadium will be a bust

https://www.usforacle.com/2021/11/21/opi...be-a-bust/

The article isn't wrong. But all of college football is insane when it comes to money spent in relation to the mission of an academic institution.

If the want in the B12, its pay to play.

One consistency since forever is students are upset at any spending period. "I dont participate in X, so why am I paying an X Fee???". Student newspapers are the worst place to go for unbiased non knee jerk journalism.

it is the same bunch that will want student loan forgiveness.A

(11-22-2021 09:58 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  usf needs the OCS. Weatherford said they are going to get it done. The program is down now but someone in Tampa needs to have some foresight and plan for the future. The student is trolling and going for the splashy troll headline to get a job. The more click traffic we give it the more we support the usf student. Future writer at the Tampa Bay Times with headlines that kick usf while their down.

The more usf drags its feet, the more likely FAU surpasses usf in the new AAC.

(11-22-2021 08:22 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Of course a UCF fan posted this from some random student who probably doesn't like sports to begin with. Every school in the country has one of these types of opinion pieces posted about how much money is spent on athletics for no real return.

It is usf hate week. Expect an increase in our trolling this week. Let it be known by all... usf sucks.

Wait………………………………………………….I thought every week was “usf hate week!”

(11-22-2021 06:35 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  usf's student run newspaper:

OPINION: USF’s on-campus stadium will be a bust

I disagree with the writer, but I respect their opinion. It is defensible, and she may end up being right.

Hopefully, the stadium will get built, and then we shall see.

i didn't bother reading the whole thing, but i quickly got the impression that it's a very short-sighted attitude, one espoused by someone not committed to seeing their school excel in athletics because they cannot see how that benefits the school in the long run.

i'm so happy usf let Dr. Khator get away and bring her fierce commitment to athletics to UH, and paved the way for UH to not only aim high athletically, but actually hit those lofty targets.

(11-22-2021 05:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  Even UAB....who is having a great year...has drawn "announced" crowds of 21,000-22,000 in their brand new 47,000 seat stadium the city/county built for them. (They even fell 10,000 short of a sellout in their stadium opener).

Several points to make here. First off, attendance is down for college football pretty much across the board, including big P5 schools. The time and dollar cost of attending games has become an obstacle for many fans, and if the game is on television the temptation to watch it on a big screen with replay that's a few steps from your own private kitchen and bathroom is quite strong.

UAB is also an exception in that we still do not play in an OCS. This is the only major place that I am aware of that the Alabama Board of Trustees still holds our Athletic Department back. We are not to be allowed an OCS, not until more old bammers die anyhow. Protective stadium is owned by the Birmingham-Jefferson Civic Center. We are the prime tenant, and while UAB pays millions a year we are only on the hook for perhaps 20% of the cost of the stadium. Costs were split with the city, county, and BJCC. There is a shuttle that runs from campus that lets out between the student tailgate and the entrance to the student section of the stadium.

As to UAB's attendance numbers, building a stadium did not manufacture tens of thousands of new fans. Our numbers slowly grow, but winning games and having a gem of a state of the art stadium experience makes converting new fans much easier than losing in a dump like Historic Legion Field. We have been #1 or 2 in attendance in C-USA every year since The Return, we doubled our season ticket sales since the move to Protective, and overall ticket revenue is up. Our hard core of football fans used to be 17-18k, now it is 22-25k. I expect the improved schedule starting in '23 will sell more tickets, as well.

Protective Stadium seats about 47k. It is nicer than many current low end P5 stadiums. It cost $175M to build in relatively recent dollars as it has only been open for a year. USF would do well to have someone look at the construction as it is an excellent stadium in all respects. Note that the seating capacity was the BJCC's choice, as this is a multipurpose municipal stadium. The last Birmingham Bowl sold out, Garth Brooks is about to, we've got the World Games coming to town soon. If it's a little big for UAB's current needs, well, that's room to grow.

I enjoyed sitting club level at Raymond James for ECU @ USF games. Can always pop inside and get A/C and a beer.

Only thing that threw me a bit was all the Bucs stuff. But it is their stadium and all.

(11-24-2021 02:26 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 02:48 PM)Bull Wrote:  I honestly think USF 'announced' that OCS with no intention to really do anything. They don't have the money, look how long it took just to raise the $$$ for the IPF. Forever. And, it's even harder to justify raising the money with a losing program, relegated long term to the nAAC. Nothing against the nAAC, I actually like the conference a lot. USF needs to focus on rebuilding and winning some CC games first... THEN see what attendance looks like and build accordingly.

Or... USF may build something relatively cheap on campus, likely where the track facility is now. They have to know that otherwise, they will be playing in an empty red stadium for a looooooong time... which may be a program killer. I actually like this option best, provided they can scrape together the funds, and are willing to build 'reasonable', not insist on a P5 level stadium that will never happen.

Word is that USF visited the UAB stadium a few weeks back, and that's the model. I'm just really having a hard time believing anything will happen. Our style is to languish and pray... then make excuses. And we like to overpay multiple head coaches at the same time. That's how we roll on Fowler Ave.

Good points and your conclusion seems accurate.

I suspect they go cheap, like Central Florida did. You know, a glorified high school stadium look.

(11-24-2021 11:05 AM)MagicKnightmare Wrote:  

(11-24-2021 09:59 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 06:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Anyone know what UAB paid for their new place?

Original budget was $174 million. Not sure what it came in at.

Different though when its owned by the school vs being a public owned building they let you use. UAB does not own their stadium.

The project came in at roughly $190 million IIRC. And while UAB doesn’t technically own it, UAB paid $40 million for primary tenant rights. Has final say on what is allowed to go on there. The stadium is significantly UAB branded too. Think like leasing a home. You use it like it’s yours but your name isn’t on the deed.

(11-22-2021 09:49 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 08:20 AM)bearcat29 Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 06:35 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  usf's student run newspaper:

OPINION: USF’s on-campus stadium will be a bust

https://www.usforacle.com/2021/11/21/opi...be-a-bust/

The article isn't wrong. But all of college football is insane when it comes to money spent in relation to the mission of an academic institution.

If the want in the B12, its pay to play.

If that's the "reason" they build an OCS, then I'm afraid they are wasting their money.

There really is no reason for the B12 to go after USF now. They have their "Florida Team," I can't find a reason that USF would enhance the Conference or what USF brings to the Conference.

That ship has sailed. So, USF will either build an OCS to help their program or not. Maybe RayJay is the better option at this point: OCS's are expensive and only used six times a year, unless you make it a "Multi-purpose" facility with a track or can double as a soccer stadium.

USF has greatly enhanced its academic reputation in recent years. The B12, sans Texas, isn't exactly an academic powerhouse, so USF's addition would be a plus in that regard. In addition, Tampa Bay is a large market. All the school needs is some decent coaches to get the ball rolling again.

(05-06-2022 12:55 PM)tigerfan39 Wrote:  

(11-24-2021 02:26 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 02:48 PM)Bull Wrote:  I honestly think USF 'announced' that OCS with no intention to really do anything. They don't have the money, look how long it took just to raise the $$$ for the IPF. Forever. And, it's even harder to justify raising the money with a losing program, relegated long term to the nAAC. Nothing against the nAAC, I actually like the conference a lot. USF needs to focus on rebuilding and winning some CC games first... THEN see what attendance looks like and build accordingly.

Or... USF may build something relatively cheap on campus, likely where the track facility is now. They have to know that otherwise, they will be playing in an empty red stadium for a looooooong time... which may be a program killer. I actually like this option best, provided they can scrape together the funds, and are willing to build 'reasonable', not insist on a P5 level stadium that will never happen.

Word is that USF visited the UAB stadium a few weeks back, and that's the model. I'm just really having a hard time believing anything will happen. Our style is to languish and pray... then make excuses. And we like to overpay multiple head coaches at the same time. That's how we roll on Fowler Ave.

Good points and your conclusion seems accurate.

I suspect they go cheap, like Central Florida did. You know, a glorified high school stadium look.

Shots Fired

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(05-06-2022 12:13 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 05:16 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  Even UAB....who is having a great year...has drawn "announced" crowds of 21,000-22,000 in their brand new 47,000 seat stadium the city/county built for them. (They even fell 10,000 short of a sellout in their stadium opener).

Several points to make here. First off, attendance is down for college football pretty much across the board, including big P5 schools. The time and dollar cost of attending games has become an obstacle for many fans, and if the game is on television the temptation to watch it on a big screen with replay that's a few steps from your own private kitchen and bathroom is quite strong.

UAB is also an exception in that we still do not play in an OCS. This is the only major place that I am aware of that the Alabama Board of Trustees still holds our Athletic Department back. We are not to be allowed an OCS, not until more old bammers die anyhow. Protective stadium is owned by the Birmingham-Jefferson Civic Center. We are the prime tenant, and while UAB pays millions a year we are only on the hook for perhaps 20% of the cost of the stadium. Costs were split with the city, county, and BJCC. There is a shuttle that runs from campus that lets out between the student tailgate and the entrance to the student section of the stadium.

As to UAB's attendance numbers, building a stadium did not manufacture tens of thousands of new fans. Our numbers slowly grow, but winning games and having a gem of a state of the art stadium experience makes converting new fans much easier than losing in a dump like Historic Legion Field. We have been #1 or 2 in attendance in C-USA every year since The Return, we doubled our season ticket sales since the move to Protective, and overall ticket revenue is up. Our hard core of football fans used to be 17-18k, now it is 22-25k. I expect the improved schedule starting in '23 will sell more tickets, as well.

Protective Stadium seats about 47k. It is nicer than many current low end P5 stadiums. It cost $175M to build in relatively recent dollars as it has only been open for a year. USF would do well to have someone look at the construction as it is an excellent stadium in all respects. Note that the seating capacity was the BJCC's choice, as this is a multipurpose municipal stadium. The last Birmingham Bowl sold out, Garth Brooks is about to, we've got the World Games coming to town soon. If it's a little big for UAB's current needs, well, that's room to grow.

The stadium isn't on campus? I thought that was a major selling point of the project.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk