Future Campus Framework Discussion

[CuseLegacy]

Kansas just announced a $300 million stadium renovation that will include an IPF. No real details about funding.

KU Athletics planning $300 million Memorial Stadium renovation

News, Notes & Quotes - June 23

- Kansas is about to put a TON of money into football. How much will it help?

Athletic director Sheahon Zenger said the school is planning a stadium renovation and $300 million to go into the program, according to the Kansas City Star. For reference, Minnesota’s entire TCF Bank Stadium, which opened in 2009, cost about the same to construct.

What does it mean? You know Kansas’ problems. Outside of the 2007 Orange Bowl season, they’ve been one of the worst Power 5 teams for almost two decades. They haven’t won a road game since 2009. Facilities need to get better, but can you get talent? Big 12 recruiting has fallen back recently. Kansas State built its program behind Bill Snyder and JUCO players. Kansas currently has the No. 27 class and two 4-star commits. David Beaty is getting the attention of recruits, but he has a long way to go.

"It's exciting for me because it's a great time to be at KU," Beaty said. "That guy (Zenger) has done so much here, and for him to clear the deck and really make room for football right now — and he's a football guy at heart — knowing that our fans deserve a really, really nice stadium ... we want these people to be comfortable and really enjoy their time there.”

 

[Townie72]

News, Notes & Quotes - June 23

- Kansas is about to put a TON of money into football. How much will it help?

Athletic director Sheahon Zenger said the school is planning a stadium renovation and $300 million to go into the program, according to the Kansas City Star. For reference, Minnesota’s entire TCF Bank Stadium, which opened in 2009, cost about the same to construct.

What does it mean? You know Kansas’ problems. Outside of the 2007 Orange Bowl season, they’ve been one of the worst Power 5 teams for almost two decades. They haven’t won a road game since 2009. Facilities need to get better, but can you get talent? Big 12 recruiting has fallen back recently. Kansas State built its program behind Bill Snyder and JUCO players. Kansas currently has the No. 27 class and two 4-star commits. David Beaty is getting the attention of recruits, but he has a long way to go.

"It's exciting for me because it's a great time to be at KU," Beaty said. "That guy (Zenger) has done so much here, and for him to clear the deck and really make room for football right now — and he's a football guy at heart — knowing that our fans deserve a really, really nice stadium ... we want these people to be comfortable and really enjoy their time there.”

This connection between the quality and comfort of the stadium and the excellence of the football team is lost on me.

Has anyone ever said, "No, I don't want to go to that college game because I don't like the stadium?" I've never heard it among the dozens of excuses and reasons I have heard.

 

[IthacaMatt]

This connection between the quality and comfort of the stadium and the excellence of the football team is lost on me.

Has anyone ever said, "No, I don't want to go to that college game because I don't like the stadium?" I've never heard it among the dozens of excuses and reasons I have heard.

Not to be a jerk, but a better in-stadium experience helps fans enjoy the game, even if the team are not world beaters. If your team is a mediocre team, talent wise, and the stadium experience sucks, then you're not going to make as much effort to go to games. If your team is a contender, then you deal with crappy parking, stadium experience, etc. But if your team sucks and plays boring football, that's death.

 

[Townie72]

Not to be a jerk, but a better in-stadium experience helps fans enjoy the game, even if the team are not world beaters. If your team is a mediocre team, talent wise, and the stadium experience sucks, then you're not going to make as much effort to go to games. If your team is a contender, then you deal with crappy parking, stadium experience, etc. But if your team sucks and plays boring football, that's death.

That's all an interesting theory on facilities and the "Quality of the experience" and a lot of money has been spent chasing it.

But there are so many examples where:

A. Schools or even pro teams with so-so or even bad facilities have had good teams and draw good crowds. I was in the Oakland-Alameda Colliseum a few years ago and it is a DUMP! I'd put the current Redskins venue in the category of "Pretty Bad". But they sell out.

B. Many teams with very good facilities don't draw all that well. Camden Yards in B'More is a good as it gets but O's crowds aren't usually very big (even though they have had a winning team for the past five years.)

It's great that marginal fans "enjoy the game". But I'd want a lot more than that it it were my $300M.

 

[SWC75]

That's all an interesting theory on facilities and the "Quality of the experience" and a lot of money has been spent chasing it.

But there are so many examples where:

A. Schools or even pro teams with so-so or even bad facilities have had good teams and draw good crowds. I was in the Oakland-Alameda Colliseum a few years ago and it is a DUMP! I'd put the current Redskins venue in the category of "Pretty Bad". But they sell out.

B. Many teams with very good facilities don't draw all that well. Camden Yards in B'More is a good as it gets but O's crowds aren't usually very big (even though they have had a winning team for the past five years.)

It's great that marginal fans "enjoy the game". But I'd want a lot more than that it it were my $300M.

I've always said that the majority of the "fan experience" was provided by the fans themselves. Nobody ever complained about the Dome when we were getting 30,000 for basketball and 48,000 for football. That made it an exciting place to be.

 

[orange_in_VA]

I've always said that the majority of the "fan experience" was provided by the fans themselves. Nobody ever complained about the Dome when we were getting 30,000 for basketball and 48,000 for football. That made it an exciting place to be.

It's such a chicken/egg debate though. What do fans want most? Wins. How do we win? Well we have to get the players we need to compete. They wanna see fans at the games. So, how do you get the fans in the building while the team is a work in progress? You gotta sell something to people. If it's not the team, it needs to be the stadium/atmosphere/fan experience until it is the team that sells.

 

[SWC75]

It's such a chicken/egg debate though. What do fans want most? Wins. How do we win? Well we have to get the players we need to compete. They wanna see fans at the games. So, how do you get the fans in the building while the team is a work in progress? You gotta sell something to people. If it's not the team, it needs to be the stadium/atmosphere/fan experience until it is the team that sells.

The fans need to think like investors, not consumers. Contests during time outs don't build programs.

 

[orange_in_VA]

The fans need to think like investors, not consumers. Contests during time outs don't build programs.

Telling fans how they need to think isn't helping. They don't seem to be investing at this time. So what do we do? :noidea:

 

[Townie72]

It's such a chicken/egg debate though. What do fans want most? Wins. How do we win? Well we have to get the players we need to compete. They wanna see fans at the games. So, how do you get the fans in the building while the team is a work in progress? You gotta sell something to people. If it's not the team, it needs to be the stadium/atmosphere/fan experience until it is the team that sells.

Interesting, but an unproven and largely theoretical connection. That's the problem. We know the egg begets the chicken. No one knows or sure the connection between fan experience and an eventual improvement in the program.

The $100 Million or $200 Million you need to spend is not theoretical. It's real money.

 

[orange_in_VA]

Interesting, but an unproven and largely theoretical connection. That's the problem. We know the egg begets the chicken. No one knows or sure the connection between fan experience and an eventual improvement in the program.

The $100 Million or $200 Million you need to spend is not theoretical. It's real money.

Indeed

 

[OrangeXtreme]

How about 25 cent hot dogs?

Crave gameday gluttony? Syracuse Chiefs have you covered with 25-cent hot dogs

 

[Orijinal]

This connection between the quality and comfort of the stadium and the excellence of the football team is lost on me.

Has anyone ever said, "No, I don't want to go to that college game because I don't like the stadium?" I've never heard it among the dozens of excuses and reasons I have heard.

My 2 cents is that if you want the quality of the football to be better, you have to blow away recruits with the quality of the campus experience (it has to be immediately tangible when a recruit steps on campus). What I find here is that the campus experience seems to me to be somewhat disjointed (I say this not having attended the university but having lived in the area for quite some time, so others might be able to chime in better in regards to this) But Syverud seems to have a plan in place to begin to rectify at least some of the matters here.

And secondly, the city of Syracuse itself needs to continue to take steps in the invigoration process. Again, visitors need to readily feel the vitality of the city that surrounds campus. The effect of Syracuse's winter climate (which is always in the forefront of a recruit's mind) can only be mitigated by both of these factors.

These solutions are harder than others to bring to fruition, but I think that they are the key cogs in seeing a better product on the field

 

[Toga]

My 2 cents is that if you want the quality of the football to be better, you have to blow away recruits with the quality of the campus experience (it has to be immediately tangible when a recruit steps on campus). What I find here is that the campus experience seems to me to be somewhat disjointed (I say this not having attended the university but having lived in the area for quite some time, so others might be able to chime in better in regards to this) But Syverud seems to have a plan in place to begin to rectify at least some of the matters here.

And secondly, the city of Syracuse itself needs to continue to take steps in the invigoration process. Again, visitors need to readily feel the vitality of the city that surrounds campus. The effect of Syracuse's winter climate (which is always in the forefront of a recruit's mind) can only be mitigated by both of these factors.

These solutions are harder than others to bring to fruition, but I think that they are the key cogs in seeing a better product on the field

I don't disagree with you but at this point I'll be happy with some kind of replacement roof, nice locker rooms and some cool LED lighting.

 

[Orijinal]

I don't disagree with you but at this point I'll be happy with some kind of replacement roof, nice locker rooms and some cool LED lighting.

Oh, I would be ecstatic. I'm not saying Syracuse should not do this in any way, shape or form ...unless it would lead to some sort of financial pit that the school just couldn't get out of. Not for foolish spending either.

If $250 million comes through for that LED roof, a new façade and concourse improvements, I'm making a concerted effort to get out to more football games each year

 

[donniesyracuse]

Has anyone ever said, "No, I don't want to go to that college game because I don't like the stadium?" I've never heard it among the dozens of excuses and reasons I have heard.

I only attend one or two basketball games each year because it is such an uncomfortable experience. Football is much better, so I have season tickets. If the team starts averaging over 45,000 fans/football game, it will be a far less comfortable experience.

 

[SWC75]

Telling fans how they need to think isn't helping. They don't seem to be investing at this time. So what do we do? :noidea:

Talk about it. It's the beginning of changing attitudes. The prolbem is not that those who talk about investing aren't being listened to. Nobody is takking about it. That's the problem. Instead they talk about bells and whistles.

 

[UnknownOrange]

Winning solves everything. You can upgrade the Dome so it is the coolest place you've ever been - but that honeymoon ends very quick if the team is pumping out 3-5 win seasons. We're a bandwagon/event city. It is what it is. If football were to hypothetically pull out 10 wins this year and win a bowl I guarantee you there would be the most season tickets sold (for the following year) in over 15 years.

 

[reedny]

Oh, I would be ecstatic. I'm not saying Syracuse should not do this in any way, shape or form ...unless it would lead to some sort of financial pit that the school just couldn't get out of. Not for foolish spending either.

If $250 million comes through for that LED roof, a new façade and concourse improvements, I'm making a concerted effort to get out to more football games each year

And I don't think you'd be alone. Facilities draw recruits, recruits improve team success and wins bring fans. This is the same formula we benefited from in the 1980's, and I think our new offense has the potential (with enough of a talent upgrade) to be every bit as explosive as we were during the glory days.

You can argue about the renovation budget and the ROI to taxpayers for the public investment piece. But the Dome has a significant regional economic impact, and after 35 years, the asset needs recapitalization to retain its value. The roof's got to go. The facility needs AC, better food options, better entertainment options and better seating (and site lines for MBB). So it's an exciting time to be an SU fan, and I can't wait to see the final plans.

In terms of SU being a potential NCAA regional site (or even FF) for Mens BB, from the news articles I've read the City's hotel capacity seems to be on the rise. The Mariot/Syracuse Hotel is stunning, and they're adding more than 100 new rooms on top of the renovation. Other projects are completed or in the works, although I don't know if it's enough to host an NCAA FF (by edit). But that's the direction I think we should go in ... to maximize the economic benefits to the region and showcase our new facility to the college sports world.

It's not just hotel space, of course. There are many other infrastructure changes that would have to be made. But if we're going to make the Dome a first class facility (it's already one of a kind at the college level), why not build for the future.

 

[Townie72]

And I don't think you'd be alone. Facilities draw recruits, recruits improve team success and wins bring fans. This is the same formula we benefited from in the 1980's, and I think our new offense has the potential (with enough of a talent upgrade) to be every bit as explosive as we were during the glory days.

You can argue about the renovation budget and the ROI to taxpayers for the public investment piece. But the Dome has a significant regional economic impact, and after 35 years, the asset needs recapitalization to retain its value. The roof's got to go. The facility needs AC, better food options, better entertainment options and better seating (and site lines for MBB). So it's an exciting time to be an SU fan, and I can't wait to see the final plans.

In terms of SU being a potential NCAA regional site (or even FF) for Mens BB, from the news articles I've read the City's hotel capacity seems to be on the rise. The Mariot/Syracuse Hotel is stunning, and they're adding more than 100 new rooms on top of the renovation. Other projects are completed or in the works, although I don't know if it's enough to host an NCAA regional. But that's the direction I think we should go in ... to maximize the economic benefits to the region and showcase our new facility to college sports.

It's not just hotel space, of course. There are many other infrastructure changes that would have to be made. But if we're going to make the Dome a first class facility (it's already one of a kind at the college level), why not build for the future.

The problem is that this is just a theory.

"Facilities draw recruits, recruits improve team success and wins bring fans. This is the same formula we benefited from in the 1980's,"

As I recall, it took 7 long years to get from the completion of the Dome to the 1987 Team.

1981 Syracuse 4–6–1
1982 Syracuse 2–9
1983 Syracuse 6–5
1984 Syracuse 6–5
1985 Syracuse 7–5 Cherry Bowl
1986 Syracuse 5–6
1987 Syracuse 11–0–1

 

[reedny]

The problem is that this is just a theory.

"Facilities draw recruits, recruits improve team success and wins bring fans. This is the same formula we benefited from in the 1980's,"

As I recall, it took 7 long years to get from the completion of the Dome to the 1987 Team.

That's my point ... it's not a "theory". It's established history, and I think few would argue that the shortest path to a winning program involves quality academics (done), great coaching (so far so good) and an amazing facility ... It's time to recapitalize the Dome, clearly. The question is on what scale?

Personally, I'd say go big. The Dome is a unique venue, that has incredible potential. An indoor college FB/BB arena is one-of-a-kind in college sports. The economic impact is already significant, why not take it up a notch? If we're going to spend the money and go to all the trouble and expense to phase the construction (multi-year, obviously) around FB and BB, why not do it right? The investment will pay off, as it did before.

 

[Toga]

OK folks - I'm going to the Albany road show on June 29 with JB and Wildhack. Can someone frame a question re the Dome renovation which may actually elicit info from the AD?

 

[Townie72]

That's my point ... it's not a "theory". It's established history, and I think few would argue that the shortest path to a winning program involves quality academics (done), great coaching (so far so good) and an amazing facility ... It's time to recapitalize the Dome, clearly. The question is on what scale?

Personally, I'd say go big. The Dome is a unique venue, that has incredible potential. An indoor college FB/BB arena is one-of-a-kind in college sports. The economic impact is already significant, why not take it up a notch and bring in regional NCAA games? If we're going to spend the money and go to all the trouble and expense to phase the construction (multi-year, obviously) around FB and BB, why not do it right? The investment will pay off, as it did before.

And if SU goes big, spends a ton of money and the results are barely improved, then what? This isn't the Government where fortunes are spent, the program fails and they move on to something else.

My advice to the University would be to go slow and build what you have the money for.

 

[sutomcat]

OK folks - I'm going to the Albany road show on June 29 with JB and Wildhack. Can someone frame a question re the Dome renovation which may actually elicit info from the AD?

I would start by just trying to get confirmation that the new roof will be a fixed one.

If this is confirmed, is it planned to use ETFE to open p walls and/or the roof to the outside? I would be interested to see if John even knows what ETFE is. If so, that is a good sign.

 

[reedny]

And if SU goes big, spends a ton of money and the results are barely improved, then what? This isn't the Government where fortunes are spent, the program fails and they move on to something else.

My advice to the University would be to go slow and build what you have the money for.

All kinds of public investments are made every year with less risk. This is a proven program .. when we've had competitive facilities. We have the coaching and a venue that is iconic in college sports. The economic impact is well known. NYS has supported private sports arenas in the past (with public economic impacts), and spends hundreds of millions in tax incentives to entice corporations to re-locate here or add jobs ... even though the results are often mixed. In the case of the Dome, we've already seen what it can do, although (as you point out) it doesn't happen overnight (what does?). Either way, there's little argument that the facility needs to be recapitalized to continue providing the same impact or a greater one.

As far as "going slow", are you referring to investment caution or the pace of construction?

 

[Ward]

And if SU goes big, spends a ton of money and the results are barely improved, then what? This isn't the Government where fortunes are spent, the program fails and they move on to something else.

My advice to the University would be to go slow and build what you have the money for.

I agree with your premise that SU could spend big in the short term and ultimately have it matter little in the grander picture. I think the unfortunate reality for schools like us is that the major P5 sports in the coming years will see a growing divide between the state schools and the private schools. It's evolving into an arms race that many of the private schools have little chance of competing in when you start talking about the consistent costs it takes to maintain competitive practice facilities, stadium, locker rooms, player lounges, academic staff, coaching staff, players dormitory, weight lifting facilities, training staff, training/rehab facilities etc. The revenue streams for the huge state vs. smaller private groups are just not the same. Especially when you start thinking about how invested governors, senators and the like are in their state's respective flagship athletic programs and how it is relayed into funding.

However, I do think SU needs to at least try. Maybe it helps, maybe it doesn't but by not trying you are more or less guaranteeing the worst case scenario. The school and community would suffer if the basketball and football programs became irrelevant. As is, we're probably 8-10 years behind where we should be in many of our facilities. The roof dilemma alone is going to stretch our pockets and that's not even to do anything fancy but just to stay within regulations. It's a tough call but I think the history of the respective programs at the very least deserves to go down fighting.