Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 168

Thread: Let's talk about stadium expansion

  1. #61
    Message Board Vagabond UteBeliever aka Port's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Vecinity of senioritis
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarid in Cedar View Post
    Season ticket renewal is at 98% for the third straight season. Time to build it Dr. Hill
    Don't hold your breath.

  2. #62
    Can we at least shoot some fireworks from the Cauldron? That thing is severely under utilized.
    “It only ends once. Anything that happens before that is just progress.”

    Well, because he thought it was good sport. Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by DrumNFeather View Post
    Can we at least shoot some fireworks from the Cauldron? That thing is severely under utilized.
    that's an awesome idea!

  4. #64
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    16,010
    "But the reality is, on our non-conference schedule BYU will be the highlight team." I'm surprised that statement hasn't gotten more attention.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  5. #65
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    16,010
    This will drive some of the folks at UteZone nuts:

    Kragthorpe: Utes should enhance, not expand, Rice-Eccles Stadium

    http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2550109...nce-not-expand

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    This will drive some of the folks at UteZone nuts:

    Kragthorpe: Utes should enhance, not expand, Rice-Eccles Stadium


    http://www.sltrib.com/sports/2550109...nce-not-expand
    I agree with Kurt. I think we would be wise to improve the stadium; rather than expand it.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahsMrSports View Post
    I agree with Kurt. I think we would be wise to improve the stadium; rather than expand it.
    Totally agree. Don't get the obsession with stadium expansion.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by wally View Post
    Totally agree. Don't get the obsession with stadium expansion.
    The obsession is it would be easier and cheaper to get tickets. That and we'd have an easier time scheduling big teams for home and homes. It could also help in recruiting.

    We should improve it and also expand it. If we're in the major leagues now then we shouldn't be playing in a minor league stadium.

  9. #69
    It can't/won't be cheaper--or it makes no sense to spend the money.
    They will want to add high end type seats, but hard to do without allowing booze in those new south end zone boxes.

    Adding low end seats just for volume & ease of getting tickets will not pencil out.

  10. #70
    RES is officially on campus, isn't it? If so, the NCAA wouldn't allow alcohol during the games anyhow. Never mind the unlikelihood of getting a liquor license in the first place...

    Mandatory(!!!) improvements include a better locker room, and more restroom facilities. Perhaps something to minimize the crowding around the food court areas.

    Closing in the SEZ might accomplish all of these, but it will still require complete demolition of the stands and would be difficult to accomplish without impacting football. That is a lot of work to squeeze into the tine frame between late-November and mid-August, particularly over a cold winter and with school in session (although a few strategic road games would help buy a few weeks on either end).

  11. #71
    For reference, Martin Stadium's (WSU) 2011-2014 facelifts cost $141M and basically got them new locker rooms and an updated press box, club/loge seating, and their Football Operations Center (weight rooms, offices, locker rooms, training rooms, etc). The renovations only added a total of 1900 new seats.

    The upgrades to RES cost ~$75M in current dollars. And that required a lot of money from donors AND money (guaranteed loans?) From the Fed Gubmint to fund the Winter Games.

    Do we have the massively impressive genitals required to make the required private donations necessary to truly expand the stadium? It would seem that we would get into the $100M+ range pretty quickly.

    That said, our 33 year old SEZ and locker rooms are dank and embarrassing, and will need to be replaced soon.

  12. #72
    1) The estimates just for the South end zone are more than $50 Million

    2) Athletics does not own the stadium. It leases it. The U owns it and would have to be involved.

    3) as many people try and point out the idea of expansion isn't a money maker no matter what price the seats are. Ticket sales are not a large revenue source, especially when most will be mid to lower revenue.

    4) A larger stadium would not attract different or better opponents

    Concourse renovations and expansions are on the table.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    1) The estimates just for the South end zone are more than $50 Million

    2) Athletics does not own the stadium. It leases it. The U owns it and would have to be involved.

    3) as many people try and point out the idea of expansion isn't a money maker no matter what price the seats are. Ticket sales are not a large revenue source, especially when most will be mid to lower revenue.

    4) A larger stadium would not attract different or better opponents

    Concourse renovations and expansions are on the table.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    100% this.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahsMrSports View Post
    100% this.
    Agreed.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    1) The estimates just for the South end zone are more than $50 Million

    2) Athletics does not own the stadium. It leases it. The U owns it and would have to be involved.

    3) as many people try and point out the idea of expansion isn't a money maker no matter what price the seats are. Ticket sales are not a large revenue source, especially when most will be mid to lower revenue.

    4) A larger stadium would not attract different or better opponents

    Concourse renovations and expansions are on the table.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Totally agree. Don't get the obsession with stadium expansion.

  16. #76
    Administrator U-Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    5,029
    Quote Originally Posted by wally View Post
    Totally agree. Don't get the obsession with stadium expansion.
    People who feel we need to keep up with the Jonses, or more likely in this case, the Youngs. Those who hold this belief haven't fully considered the situation that the Youngs bought their house 40 years ago and it is kind of drafty on thursday nights when the kids don't come round for Wagner night anymore.

  17. #77
    Handsome Boy Graduate mpfunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    1,495
    I agree with the sentiment that expansion is not necessary. Upgrades are certainly necessary.
    So I said to David Eckstein, "You promised me, Eckstein, that if I followed you, you would walk with me always. But I noticed that during the most trying periods of my life, there have only been one set of prints in the sand. Why, when I have needed you most, have you not been there for me?" David Eckstein replied, "Because my little legs had gotten tired, and you were carrying me." And I looked down and saw that I was still carrying David Eckstein.
    --fjm.com

  18. #78
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    16,010
    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post
    People who feel we need to keep up with the Jonses, or more likely in this case, the Youngs. Those who hold this belief haven't fully considered the situation that the Youngs bought their house 40 years ago and it is kind of drafty on thursday nights when the kids don't come round for Wagner night anymore.
    Besides, that place looks like an aging aircraft carrier built with an Erector Set.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by U-Ute View Post
    People who feel we need to keep up with the Jonses, or more likely in this case, the Youngs.
    This is basically how I interpret it, too. Sure, I'd love to see the SEZ closed off, if for no other reason than that I'd like to get some season tickets. I hear it's possible now, but it involves selling souls of myself and my children and a second mortgage on my house and car. That's too steep for me.

    But I'm tired of the people who loudly deride Chris Hill on Twitter and other forums making him out to be some sort of idiot while they - the Internet savants - have all of the answers. I don't pretend to think Hill is above reproach, but on something like this I'm pretty sure he'll get it right.

    In the meantime, these are VERY good days to be a Ute. There's too much good going on to worry about stuff that's not happening.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    1) The estimates just for the South end zone are more than $50 Million

    2) Athletics does not own the stadium. It leases it. The U owns it and would have to be involved.

    3) as many people try and point out the idea of expansion isn't a money maker no matter what price the seats are. Ticket sales are not a large revenue source, especially when most will be mid to lower revenue.

    4) A larger stadium would not attract different or better opponents

    Concourse renovations and expansions are on the table.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    You could say these same things about almost any improvements.

    The new video board? All of that applies there too.

    The new football facility? All of it applies.

    Concourse renovations? Applies there too.

    Kyle Whittingham's new contract? Yep, it applies there too.

    At least stadium expansion will bring in some additional revenue, even if it's not enough to cover the entire cost of the project. Most of the other projects the U has been so proud of haven't brought in any extra revenue at all.

    It's only going to get more expensive with time. I've seen a few posts mention how much cheaper it was back when BYU did it. Well interest rates are near all time lows right now. Expanding at some point is inevitable, so we should do it before it gets even more expensive.

    We can't really expect to be taken seriously as a P5 when we have no intentions of ever expanding our 46,000 seat stadium.

    The fact that a lot of people are forced to get tickets from scalpers may sound good to some people, and apparently Kragthorpe is one who likes that, but it also turns a lot of people off. A lot of would be fans tune out when they feel like they're excluded or not wanted.

    Sure, the U students and grads will probably remain fans. But what about the 7th grader wearing a U sweatshirt? When he grows up and doesn't attend the U, do you want to keep him as a fan? If so, then you better make sure the games are accessible to him.

    Directv doesn't think there are enough Pac 12 fans to warrant them paying to carry the network. When they see teams with a capacity of 46,000 in their stadium talking about how they won't be expanding, that certainly doesn't help things.

    It's also detrimental to recruiting.

    There are lots of good reasons to expand the stadium. The fact that it will also bring in some extra revenue to help pay for itself is just a bonus.
    Last edited by utefan; 05-28-2015 at 06:51 AM.

  21. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    you could say these same things about almost any improvements.

    The new video board? All of that applies there too.

    The new football facility? All of it applies.

    Concourse renovations? Applies there too.

    Kyle whittingham's new contract? Yep, it applies there too.

    At least stadium expansion will bring in some additional revenue, even if it's not enough to cover the entire cost of the project. Most of the other projects the u has been so proud of haven't brought in any extra revenue at all.

    It's only going to get more expensive with time. I've seen a few posts mention how much cheaper it was back when byu did it. Well interest rates are near all time lows right now. Expanding at some point is inevitable, so we should do it before it gets even more expensive.

    We can't really expect to be taken seriously as a p5 when we have no intentions of ever expanding our 46,000 seat stadium.

    The fact that a lot of people are forced to get tickets from scalpers may sound good to some people, and apparently kragthorpe is one who likes that, but it also turns a lot of people off. A lot of would be fans tune out when they feel like they're excluded or not wanted.

    Sure, the u students and grads will probably remain fans. But what about the 7th grader wearing a u sweatshirt? When he grows up and doesn't attend the u, do you want to keep him as a fan? If so, then you better make sure the games are accessible to him.

    Directv doesn't think there are enough pac 12 fans to warrant them paying to carry the network. When they see teams with a capacity of 46,000 in their stadium talking about how they won't be expanding, that certainly doesn't help things.

    It's also detrimental to recruiting.

    There are lots of good reasons to expand the stadium. The fact that it will also bring in some extra revenue to help pay for itself is just a bonus.
    lol!

  22. #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    3,041
    I've gone back and forth on RES expansion, but I've largely remained in the middle from an emotion standpoint. If we can expand it, great. If there are reasons not to, that's OK too. (I think everyone is on board with doing something about the SEZ.)

    I am vaguely familiar with our efforts in luxury seating and group sales, and to me, that's where the real money is at. It's not in adding 20,000 more mediocre seats.

    I would also ask myself how the U. stacks up with the Jazz in this matter. We're going to have to see real growth here from local companies -- if we had the alumni base for such growth, we would have seen it already. I'm afraid we're not getting close to maxing out our potential in this regard.

    I will say this -- the pro-expansion people have consistently been on the wrong side in their attempts at justifying their argument. They're not asking the right questions, they defend their positions with generalities while appealing to emotion, rather than common sense, and they refuse to look at both sides of the coin. With the anti-expansion group, at least their arguments are more thought out.

  23. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahsMrSports View Post
    lol!
    Totally agree. Don't get the obsession with stadium expansion.

  24. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    You could say these same things about almost any improvements.

    The new video board? All of that applies there too.

    The new football facility? All of it applies.

    Concourse renovations? Applies there too.

    Kyle Whittingham's new contract? Yep, it applies there too.

    At least stadium expansion will bring in some additional revenue, even if it's not enough to cover the entire cost of the project. Most of the other projects the U has been so proud of haven't brought in any extra revenue at all.

    It's only going to get more expensive with time. I've seen a few posts mention how much cheaper it was back when BYU did it. Well interest rates are near all time lows right now. Expanding at some point is inevitable, so we should do it before it gets even more expensive.

    We can't really expect to be taken seriously as a P5 when we have no intentions of ever expanding our 46,000 seat stadium.

    The fact that a lot of people are forced to get tickets from scalpers may sound good to some people, and apparently Kragthorpe is one who likes that, but it also turns a lot of people off. A lot of would be fans tune out when they feel like they're excluded or not wanted.

    Sure, the U students and grads will probably remain fans. But what about the 7th grader wearing a U sweatshirt? When he grows up and doesn't attend the U, do you want to keep him as a fan? If so, then you better make sure the games are accessible to him.

    Directv doesn't think there are enough Pac 12 fans to warrant them paying to carry the network. When they see teams with a capacity of 46,000 in their stadium talking about how they won't be expanding, that certainly doesn't help things.

    It's also detrimental to recruiting.

    There are lots of good reasons to expand the stadium. The fact that it will also bring in some extra revenue to help pay for itself is just a bonus.
    It won't bring in any real extra revenue. Go look at the books. Ticket sales do nothing for the U's bottom line as more seats = more expenses.

    To try and say we're not taken seriously in the conference due to stadium size is funny. Not a single AD would say to expand. Most wish they could drop back down. That's not just lip service from them. Large stadiums are a problem these days.

    You haven't a clue if you think DirectTV doesn't think we have enough fans. That's never been their stance. They want to put the channel in a la carte instead of a package, or pay far less. That's not about fans, it's about the network being owned by the conference and not tied to ESPN or another network who forces them to package it.

    Provide some proof of your recruiting statement. I'll be waiting.

    Oh your interest rate comment got me chuckling. This is a large public institution. There's not going to be a home equity loan to do some work.

    (PS, comparing stadium expansion to things like a coaches contract is good comedy, but has no basis in fact)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  25. #85
    Question: if a larger stadium does not attract better opponents, what does? Michigan agreed to come when they thought their was going to be a Pac12/Big 10 scheduling agreement.

    Are we ever going to get opponents like Michigan again? Can we not afford to pay them? Is it a matter of being good enough to get a good ESPN or Fox time slot?

    Or are we destined for the Northern Illinois's of the world. (I realize Baylor is coming in the far distant future.)

  26. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    3,041
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    Question: if a larger stadium does not attract better opponents, what does? Michigan agreed to come when they thought their was going to be a Pac12/Big 10 scheduling agreement.

    Are we ever going to get opponents like Michigan again? Can we not afford to pay them? Is it a matter of being good enough to get a good ESPN or Fox time slot?

    Or are we destined for the Northern Illinois's of the world. (I realize Baylor is coming in the far distant future.)
    Baylor is one of seven P5 schools with a stadium smaller than RES.

    We got our share of H-H with schools with massive stadiums when we were in the MWC. Texas A&M and UCLA come to mind.

    We're getting Michigan because it's a Thursday night and it's a near-exclusive TV audience. It's also been since 2003 since Michigan made a regular season visit to the Mountain or Pacific time zones (From 2001-03, Michigan played a road game vs. a Pac-12 school every year). In fact, I thought I read somewhere that this is Michigan's first non-Saturday regular season game ever.

  27. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    Question: if a larger stadium does not attract better opponents, what does? Michigan agreed to come when they thought their was going to be a Pac12/Big 10 scheduling agreement.

    Are we ever going to get opponents like Michigan again? Can we not afford to pay them? Is it a matter of being good enough to get a good ESPN or Fox time slot?

    Or are we destined for the Northern Illinois's of the world. (I realize Baylor is coming in the far distant future.)
    Is attracting big name opponents even a priority anymore? Seems like we have enough coming in already during conference play. Sure, having a big name come in would likely get us a good tv spot and dollars that way, but I just don't know if we are going to focus on that. Seems like we will be content with bringing in a decent p5 team or byu each year.

  28. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Twin Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    3,041
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahsMrSports View Post
    Is attracting big name opponents even a priority anymore? Seems like we have enough coming in already during conference play. Sure, having a big name come in would likely get us a good tv spot and dollars that way, but I just don't know if we are going to focus on that. Seems like we will be content with bringing in any p5 team or byu each year.
    Slight correction. And I'm happy with that. I've always thought of luring Ohio State or Florida here as pie-in-the-sky fanboy talk. It will probably be another 10-15 years before we get a traditional power to RES in the non-con.

  29. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Diehard Ute View Post
    It won't bring in any real extra revenue. Go look at the books. Ticket sales do nothing for the U's bottom line as more seats = more expenses.

    To try and say we're not taken seriously in the conference due to stadium size is funny. Not a single AD would say to expand. Most wish they could drop back down. That's not just lip service from them. Large stadiums are a problem these days.

    You haven't a clue if you think DirectTV doesn't think we have enough fans. That's never been their stance. They want to put the channel in a la carte instead of a package, or pay far less. That's not about fans, it's about the network being owned by the conference and not tied to ESPN or another network who forces them to package it.

    Provide some proof of your recruiting statement. I'll be waiting.

    Oh your interest rate comment got me chuckling. This is a large public institution. There's not going to be a home equity loan to do some work.

    (PS, comparing stadium expansion to things like a coaches contract is good comedy, but has no basis in fact)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So we can't do any improvements unless they immediately pay for themselves?

    I keep reading how ADs want to decrease stadium size, and I think it's being taken way out of context. Sure, an AD might want to go down from an 80,000 seat stadium to a 60,000 seat stadium if they can increase luxury boxes in the process. I don't think anyone wants to go down to 46,000.

    If Directv thought it was worth it, they'd carry the Pac 12 Network. Meaning, if Ditectv thought enough people wanted to watch it, they'd carry it.

    Stadium expansion seems to be pretty important in the SEC.
    http://www.foxsports.com/south/story...-behind-050713

    Someone else mentioned Baylor as having a smaller stadium than us. Keep in mind, Baylor has a brand new 45,000 seat stadium that just opened last season, and they already have plans to expand it to 55,000.

  30. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by utefan View Post
    So we can't do any improvements unless they immediately pay for themselves?

    I keep reading how ADs want to decrease stadium size, and I think it's being taken way out of context. Sure, an AD might want to go down from an 80,000 seat stadium to a 60,000 seat stadium if they can increase luxury boxes in the process. I don't think anyone wants to go down to 46,000.

    If Directv thought it was worth it, they'd carry the Pac 12 Network. Meaning, if Ditectv thought enough people wanted to watch it, they'd carry it.

    Stadium expansion seems to be pretty important in the SEC.
    http://www.foxsports.com/south/story...-behind-050713

    Someone else mentioned Baylor as having a smaller stadium than us. Keep in mind, Baylor has a brand new 45,000 seat stadium that just opened last season, and they already have plans to expand it to 55,000.
    You still don't get it.

    The stadium expansion will NEVER pay for itself.

    Athletics would have to come up with the money, yet they'd never see ticket sales to pay for it. It's just not going to happen. It would require a very large donation campaign (the basketball center is being built because Jon Huntsman is willing to do whatever it takes to get that done)

    Some improvements are worth the investment. Such as the restroom expansions, concourse remodel and new video board. Eventually the south end zone will be rebuilt. But that may not include a large size increase, instead it will likely include more luxury seating.

    Stanford dropped from 85,000 seats to 50,000.

    Cal incurred well over $300,000,000 in debt to rebuild their stadium. Something that's now consuming 20% of their athletic budget.

    And if you truly believe the drivel you're spouting about DirecTV you cannot be convinced otherwise so there's really no point to a discussion.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •