Should ISU wait on next phase of Stadium Expansion?

jdoggivjc · 05-02-2008, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by DJK15

Those same teams aren't spending 65 mil on additional seats.

Yeah - those teams did it 15-30 years ago when it DIDN'T cost $65 mil to do it. For all we know if we wait another 10-15 years this project will cost $100mil+ and we'll STILL have the same people that say "it's better if we wait another several years until we have even more success at football." This program is at a crossroads, the pieces are falling in place. Either we assemble the puzzle while it's on the table or just swipe all the pieces back into the box, put it back in the closet and let it collect dust for another 25 years. I'm tired of waiting - let's see what this puzzle looks like when it's completed.

Aclone · 05-02-2008, 06:36 PM

It's simple. The Trice expansion generates revenue, and is therefore self supporting.

A practice facility may save some cash in places, but generates no cash flow. It would have to be paid for entirely by donation, while the stadium pays (Or, helps pay) for itself, and then other programs. That's the whole reason why they're going ahead with Jack first.

besserheimerphat · 05-03-2008, 09:34 AM

We're not looking to spend $65 million just on endzone seats either. This includes the expanded endzone seating and upper deck, additional premium seating (club, suites, etc), upgrading the east concourse to be identical to the new west concourse (widening, all new concessions and restrooms, likely a new facade around the outside), an "operations, maintenance and storage facility" for the field turf crew (both for the stadium and practice fields) and fencing and other safety/security/deferred maintenance issues throughout the staduim. Clearly this is NOT a $65 million upper deck.

Stormin · 05-03-2008, 10:05 AM

Bowling in the endzone will stop those Cyclone force winds that we have in our current wind tunnel. It will make the game situations more tolerable for the fans.

besserheimerphat · 05-03-2008, 11:10 AM

We need to expand the stadium. While it is a short term large expense, the additionally generated revenue will allow us to continue on as members of the Big 12. Per the 07-08 Big 12 Handbook, ISU sponsors more sports than six other teams in the conference with seven men's varsity sports and eleven women's varsity sports. We offer more varsity sports than Baylor, Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech. Yet we currently have the 11th smallest athletic budget in the conference. It's no wonder that we are struggling in the sport that requires the most money to operate.

To maintain membership in the Big 12, we have to offer six out of a particular seven sports. Those sports are MBB, FB, baseball, indoor track/field, outdoor track/field, golf and cross country. Two of those sports are required to be football and basketball. ISU does not offer baseball, which puts us at the minimum number of men's sports offered to maintain conference membership. Note that wrestling is NOT on this list, as there are not enough members of the Big 12 that offer it to count. Since I don't forsee us ever dropping wrestling, we have no choice but to find the money to pay for all of these programs.

Women's athletics are in a similar situation. We must offer a total of eight women's varsity sports, with six coming from a particular list of nine sports. One of those eight sports must be basketball and another either volleyball or soccer. The other four offered sports must come from the list of cross country, indoor track/field, outdoor track/field, softball, tennis and golf. Currently we offer all eleven women's sports. We have to be able to continue to fund these sports.

I also saw in the handbook that the Big 12 may no longer have championships in gymnastics, men's swimming or wrestling since all three of these sports have less than 50% participation across the conference. These sports were grandfathered in and "retain championship status pending further review." While we don't offer men's swimming, gymnastics and wrestling are good sports for ISU. If these sports were to lose championship status, we would look even worse in comparison to our Big 12 conference members.

The stadium project is not about adding an upper deck to the south endzone. It is about doing everything we can to become a truely competitive member of the Big 12. The increased revenue from tickets and concessions, as well as anticipated increases in NCC memberships to purchase some of those tickets, will fund the athletic department and allow us to field more competitive teams in all sports.

weR138 · 05-03-2008, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by BryceC

Football will generate more money with those seats filled, but there is no indication they will be.

Do you think we'd fill the stadium if we won the conference?

Ficklone02 · 05-03-2008, 12:24 PM

I am excited about the increased atmosphere that an endzone upper deck would provide. Not only would it keep some of that cold wind out of the stadium, but it will trap more noise inside and really help increase our home field advantage. Don't you think its more intimidating for an opposing qb to play in a stadium with an enclosed endzone? I think so.

I am bummed about it not adding seating, honestly. I was hoping when we were finished that when someone asked me our capacity I could proudly say something like 60,000....how could it not add to our capacity though if we add an upper deck?

Flag Guy · 05-03-2008, 12:43 PM

I had thought there was going to be a small increase in capacity... I could be wrong though. The difference is where that capacity is.... currently 10,000 of our 55,000 or so capacity comes from Hillside seating. Bowling the South Endzone/2nd deck will add around that many seats (maybe a few thousand more? Someone that has kept track of the numbers chime in here)

MontyBurns · 05-03-2008, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclone711

Indiana, Oklahoma State, Illinois, and Minnesota (250 million dollar stadium). All of these universities are spending TONS of money renovating (building in the case of MN) their stadiums when they do not annually sell out each home game (much like ISU). But hey, I'm sure each of those schools AD's are run by a bunch of idiots right?

Also I named all of these schools off the top of my head from my own knowledge, if I actually spent time researching I bet I could find a bunch more cases.

Indiana's renovation doesn't make a lot of sense, but the others all have valid reasons that are different from ISU:

Illinois' stadium is starting to sell out -- they now have a lot of success to build on with a BCS bowl game. And unlike JTS, their stadium is also a dump. It was built in 1923 and other than replacing a few upper deck seats and the scoreboard, it had not been renovated (concourses, restrooms, concessions, etc.) - ever.

Oklahoma State's renovation makes no sense except for the fact that they have T. Boone Picken's donations behind it. They could install gold plated seats without going into debt, so why not?

Minnesota does not sell out home games, but they are going from 65,000 seats in the Metrodome to ~45,000 seats in their new stadium. They will also be moving to an on-campus stadium so that students can actually tailgate and attend games.

HandSanitizer · 05-03-2008, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by Flag Guy

I had thought there was going to be a small increase in capacity... I could be wrong though. The difference is where that capacity is.... currently 10,000 of our 55,000 or so capacity comes from Hillside seating. Bowling the South Endzone/2nd deck will add around that many seats (maybe a few thousand more? Someone that has kept track of the numbers chime in here)

You are right. Here is the confusion. Stadiums should not be listed by their Standing room only capacity. Jack Trice is listed as 55,000. Our current "real seating" capacity is around 46,500 with the current south endzone bleachers. So that is what probably should be listed.

So if you think about it we are adding capacity to "real seats" to "approx. 58,000ish (pending plans, approval etc). So if ISU wanted to keep doing what they are doing now they could say 58,000ish + North Hills and bleachers for a total capacity of 63,000.
So that is why every hawk fan and negative nelly Cyclone fan that talks about not filling the stadium should relax a bit.
Now....If we had 58,000 Real seats currently and we wanted to expand to 63,000 then I would have a problem with that. The issue is the stadium doesn't have that big time feel and is a wind tunnel with only 46,000 real seats. And if a recruits wanted to see 10,000 seats on a hill they would proably just go to the Hamilton County Speedway on a Saturday night. Maybe get some ticks and some mud stains on the paints while they are there.

BOTTOM LINE: Our Total Capacity will only go up a couple of Thousand...But the stadium looks real. Yes there will be empty seats for some games, but that is just the way it is.

rjp · 05-03-2008, 01:13 PM

are they going to enclose both levels of the stadium? i thought the plans were just going to inclose the lower level and add a big new score board in place of the old one?

Ficklone02 · 05-03-2008, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by HandSanitizer

You are right. Here is the confusion. Stadiums should not be listed by their Standing room only capacity. Jack Trice is listed as 55,000. Our current "real seating" capacity is around 46,500 with the current south endzone bleachers. So that is what probably should be listed.

So if you think about it we are adding capacity to "real seats" to "approx. 58,000ish (pending plans, approval etc). So if ISU wanted to keep doing what they are doing now they could say 58,000ish + North Hills and bleachers for a total capacity of 63,000.
So that is why every hawk fan and negative nelly Cyclone fan that talks about not filling the stadium should relax a bit.
Now....If we had 58,000 Real seats currently and we wanted to expand to 63,000 then I would have a problem with that. The issue is the stadium doesn't have that big time feel and is a wind tunnel with only 46,000 real seats. And if a recruits wanted to see 10,000 seats on a hill they would proably just go to the Hamilton County Speedway on a Saturday night. Maybe get some ticks and some mud stains on the paints while they are there.

BOTTOM LINE: Our Total Capacity will only go up a couple of Thousand...But the stadium looks real. Yes there will be empty seats for some games, but that is just the way it is.

So if you are correct in saying that we would increase our possible gross attendance capacity from 55,000 to 63,000, I would have to say I'm pretty happy with that. Numbers aside, I am with you and others that the bigger deal is creating a better environment for a football game. Now, if only we don't have to listen to "sweet caroline" in the middle of an intense game I will be completely satisfied.

HandSanitizer · 05-03-2008, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by rjp

are they going to enclose both levels of the stadium? i thought the plans were just going to inclose the lower level and add a big new score board in place of the old one?

Everything is pending funding, but just look at my avatar and that would be a good idea of what it would look like

HandSanitizer · 05-03-2008, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by Ficklone02

So if you are correct in saying that we would increase our possible gross attendance capacity from 55,000 to 63,000, I would have to say I'm pretty happy with that. Numbers aside, I am with you and others that the bigger deal is creating a better environment for a football game. Now, if only we don't have to listen to "sweet caroline" in the middle of an intense game I will be completely satisfied.

Sounds good. This is all still speculation, but probably somewhat close. Heck, Jamie could even say nobody sits on the north hills until we need more room if all I know. I just want to make sure people realize we are not increasing much

Aclone · 05-03-2008, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Ficklone02

So if you are correct in saying that we would increase our possible gross attendance capacity from 55,000 to 63,000, I would have to say I'm pretty happy with that.

That sounds reasonable to me, as well. Of course, it also tells us exactly where we have to go if in say, twenty years, we want to increase capacity to 70K, 72K, or even 75K (do you really think that if we have a winning, exciting team, that fans won't roll in?). I should add that I'm not a big fan of tearing down perfectly good structures to allow fo eventual expansion.

I'll also assume that they would have more luxury boxes between the south end zone decks, as well. At a reduced price, of course.

Some people may complain about too many seats, but you can't sell those seats if you don't have them. And an additional 10K seats would mean at least an additional half million dollars in revenue a game alone--in ticket revenue only. Beef up the non conference schedule with some recognizable names (read, BCS schools), and we would be selling more season tickets. Seriously, who really wants to pay extra money to come to see Toledo (or SD State) when the come to town? Even Kentucky would beat Kent. Washington State is wandering around out there somewhere, too--and why wouldn't Arizona want to come to town?