Future Campus Framework Discussion

[rrlbees]

Of course large donations are needed for a project like this at a private university. The university will also be ponying up a large chunk, I assume through the issuance of bonds. Between increased ACC revenue and, hopefully, increased projected revenue from an updated, more fan-friendly dome, there should be sufficient funds to cover the interest on these bonds. News like this doesn't hurt in this regard:

University Earns Top Short-Term Credit Rating from Standard and Poor’s

Your first sentence is correct. I didn’t say SU wasn’t putting up any money. Just that some of these people want to spend 100’s of millions of dollars and think SU can pay for it all and are being cheap if they don’t. It doesn’t happen anyplace like that.

 

[rrlbees]

so it doesn't feel like an anti-aircraft bunker in there.

We might need that.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Maybe they could afford more for the Dome if Chancy Nancy didn't spend like a drunken sailor for ten years on pointless crap.

 

[storange]

Dome is the best place to watch football I've been to compact with the crowd close to the field and as loud as any place. I love games there. The AC will be nice I guess

 

[upperdeck]

tv 3. just did a story about the new dome and pointed out AC coming by 2020?

 

[OrangeXtreme]

tv 3. just did a story about the new dome and pointed out AC coming by 2020?

Along with a new roof for 2020, Syracuse currently plans to have new sound and lighting systems, a new scoreboard and accessibility improvements. By Fall of 2022, the university also expects to have added air conditioning, along with improved restrooms and concession spaces.

 

[upperdeck]

I was trying explain to the wife that the story was wrong but she says i am wrong cause it was on the news...

 

[TexanMark]

To be fair, football attendance in November has been horrible for the last 15 seasons in our indoor stadium.

non-sequitur...that is win-loss induced

 

[P Vasiloff]

Hopefully this doesn't end up on Nunes
View attachment 141535

It looks completely different with the Louvre wall. If it's able to be done, that would be the way to go. In my humble opinion, it looks much better.

 

[dollarbill44]

non-sequitur...that is win-loss induced

I know. It was supposed to be a joke.

 

[orangecuse]

Which we've seen invested in the Melo Center and the IPF and Manley and now the Carrier Dome but the fact remains that Syracuse is a private university with no huge money donors for sports. Just because the ACC is giving us more TV money doesn't mean that is liquid for us to spend.

The proposal you posted would probably cost the school 3 to 4 times more than the 100+ million they are investing. I'm sure there's a plan in place to make the proposals look nice.

The fact you say SU has the money doesn't make it so. Unless you are on the planning committee for this, or on the BOT or are currently working in the infrastructure field, you likely have no idea what the real cost would be of a project or projects that tick off enough boxes to make the fans happy. The more complex the project(s), the longer the planning process, the higher the cost for design (which I think a lot of people are underestimating) and the higher the cost for basically everything, including cost of capital.
You can't just take the PV of ACC cash flows and say SU has at least this much to cover it.

I did preface the $200 mil surplus in just 10 short years as a simplistic perspective, realizing other costs, etc. But the fact is, is that SU was GIFTED (Just ask UConn who SU could just as easily be...outside looking in) this winfall of a lifetime that felled onto its lap. SU basically hit the lottery, so to speak, with such lucky fortune. Of course, the powers that be/stewards will see fit just how they choose to spend/re-invest/do with all of this EXTRA disposable income they otherwise wouldn't have.

I didn't propose anything. It was obviously proposed by the Walter's Group after their meetings, etc. with SU for the whole world to see, not me. I just commented that from a pure aesthetically pleasing standpoint, it was far superior to this non attractive alternative. Again, this is just my opinion.

And, for those that are commenting about SU being a "small private school," doesn't have the means, etc., well then maybe they shouldn't be playing with the big boys anyways in football. Other than Notre Dame, Stanford, and USC, most "small private schools" don't really stand a realistic chance today in truly competing and winning the national championship in football. It's dominated by the huge state, land grant type institutions that have much deeper pockets, and Ritz Carlton type facilities, living quarters, etc. This isn't about to change anytime, if anything, the gap will continue to expand.

No one truly knows for sure what the future holds in the decades ahead, especially for the "small private schools" that can't compete/commit financially as the state schools can. Who's to say the current large P5 public schools don't evolve (because of same/lack of means, commitment, etc.) to form their own huge conference amongst all these huge states schools that "do" have the the money? These "small privates" will be delegated to the minors, while the aforementioned remain in The Show. It wasn't too long ago that most never would've predicted what the current landscape has evolved to.

 

[dollarbill44]

I did preface the $200 mil surplus in just 10 short years as a simplistic perspective, realizing other costs, etc. But the fact is, is that SU was GIFTED (Just ask UConn who SU could just as easily be...outside looking in) this winfall of a lifetime that otherwise wouldn't had fallen onto its lap. To argue that SU basically didn't hit the lottery, so to speak, with such lucky fortune is short sight, but again, it's just my opinion.

I didn't propose anything. It was obviously proposed by the Walter's Group after their meetings, etc. with SU for the whole world to see, not me. I just commented that from a pure aesthetically pleasing standpoint, it was far superior to this non attractive alternative. Again, this is just my opinion.

And, for those that are commenting about SU being a small private school, doesn't have the means, etc., well then maybe they shouldn't be playing with the big boys anyways in football. Other than Notre Dame, Stanford, and USC, most "small private schools" don't really stand a chance in truly competing and winning the national championship in football. It's dominated by the huge state, land grant type institutions that have much deeper pockets, and Ritz Carlton type facilities, living quarters, etc.

No one truly knows for sure what the future holds in the decades ahead, especially for the "small private schools" that can't compete/commit financially as the state schools can. Whose to say the current large P5 public schools don't evolve (because of same/lack of means, commitment, etc.) to form their own huge conference amongst all these huge states schools that have the all the money? These "small privates" will be delegated to the minors, while the aforementioned remain in The Show. It wasn't too long ago that most never would've predicted what the current landscape has evolved to.

I haven't seen anyone refer to SU as a "small private school" that you alluded to multiple times. You say SU was gifted an additional $20MM per year and implied that is available to fund a new stadium. While it's true that the revenue from the ACC is a big step up, competing in the ACC in all sports has led to increased costs within the athletic department, particularly in football coaching salaries and facilities (recall that the indoor practice facility was only partially funded by donors).
I would love for SU to be able to write a check for $500MM for a shiny new stadium with all of the amenities that other schools are getting in their stadiums, but it's just not realistic. I also don't think it's necessary to spend that kind of money on a stadium to compete for an ACC title in football, which incidentally would likely land SU in the playoff. For anyone who thinks this is outlandish, we are only 2 fourth down stops from having the inside track to the ACC title game. Maybe I'm too optimistic.

 

[orangecuse]

I haven't seen anyone refer to SU as a "small private school" that you alluded to multiple times. You say SU was gifted an additional $20MM per year and implied that is available to fund a new stadium. While it's true that the revenue from the ACC is a big step up, competing in the ACC in all sports has led to increased costs within the athletic department, particularly in football coaching salaries and facilities (recall that the indoor practice facility was only partially funded by donors).
I would love for SU to be able to write a check for $500MM for a shiny new stadium with all of the amenities that other schools are getting in their stadiums, but it's just not realistic. I also don't think it's necessary to spend that kind of money on a stadium to compete for an ACC title in football, which incidentally would likely land SU in the playoff. For anyone who thinks this is outlandish, we are only 2 fourth down stops from having the inside track to the ACC title game. Maybe I'm too optimistic.

Well, call me crazy then relative to small private school, I could swear I've read in various threads over the years SU had been mentioned before here as being a relatively a small private. Remove the small, as that wasn't the emphasis anyways vs. private, private is the substance/focus being debated.

SU was gifted the winfall of a lifetime from the ACC invite, no way around all of that extra disposable income they otherwise wouldn't have. I wasn't implying (athough I see how it came across that way) that this $20 mil surplus was all there for SU to fund the the renovations, etc., just that they now have all of this extra money that in just 10 years would be around $200 million, so $400 mil in 20 years, etc. Meaning, that SU could (if they wanted to) take a large percentage of this extra disposable $$$ and reinvest it into its main infrastructure that is the face of Syracuse University.

I don't know how much that Walter's Group rendering would've cost, but I thought I read somewhere in the neighborhood of $260 million, but possibly that was just a best guess of someone's.

 

[orangecuse]

They don't have the money no matter how many times you say it. No school has $400M+ they are going to sink into sports facilities. Nobody. Its mostly done through donors.

How many times have I said it? I realize SU, or similar entities don't use all/a lot of their own money as they don't have to & lobby for public/private subsidies to fund capital improvements, etc. It's part of the great society this country has evolved to...where 10% of the people have 90% of $$$. Just arguing that SU has the $$$ based upon their winfall/good fortune, and all the extra disposable revenue, if they had to dig into their own pockets.

 

[AZOrange]

I’m proud that the University and City are not falling victim to the wave of overbought stadium projects. Spend the money on interior and goodies. That said, that roof...uh...

 

[NJCuse97]

It looks completely different with the Louvre wall.

Why it’s the Mona Lisa!

 

[Cusefan0307]

With the amount of people complaining about the University going cheap you think some people would have commented on the Boost the Cuse initiative I had the mods pin on both main boards that is happening two weeks from today.

 

[sutomcat]

I originally thought the steel cables from the outer truss support ring (the part that looks like a roller coaster) to the roof would hold the inner ring up as well as holding up the PTFE/ETFE material to be used to cover the inner part of the new roof. I thought the bubbles on the PTFE/ETFE material were going to be formed by steel cables attached to the material that ran to the outer truss support ring. Like Olympic Stadium in Montreal.

But it looks like that isn't the case. It looks like the bubbles are pre-formed. Interesting.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

But it looks like that isn't the case. It looks like the bubbles are pre-formed. Interesting.

If they are pre-formed, why would that be? Someone, I think, suggested that would enhance snow removal. Looks to me that those "bumps" would make snow and ice removal more difficult. I'd invite someone with more familiarity with these issues to educate me...

 

[sutomcat]

If they are pre-formed, why would that be? Someone, I think, suggested that would enhance snow removal. Looks to me that those "bumps" would make snow and ice removal more difficult. I'd invite someone with more familiarity with these issues to educate me...

I am sure they do not want the roof to be flat. A convex surface, or a series of them, will force ice, snow and rain off the surface better. If they could be put together to form a large convex surface, that would be ideal for removing precipitation from the surface. I am assuming that is the rationale but would love to hear from an engineer on this.

 

[AZOrange]

If they are pre-formed, why would that be? Someone, I think, suggested that would enhance snow removal. Looks to me that those "bumps" would make snow and ice removal more difficult. I'd invite someone with more familiarity with these issues to educate me...

Each “bump” is actually an inverted jet afterburner. Just light em up. Heard it from a friend

 

[SU68]

You never sat in Archbold in November, cold,
and wind on the hill can make it almost unbearable.

Yep, and we had to visit the package store before the game for some antifreeze to help survive the elements!

 

[FrancoPizza]

I might be too. The key is knowing what it would cost to accommodate possible future requirements. A couple of million dollars makes sense. 50 million does not.

Honestly, I am thrilled just to see the university make a substantial investment in the future of the Dome. Having a facility with state of the art acoustics and lighting and a top notch scoreboard is going to make my game day experience a lot better.

If the new roof is virtually at the same height, how big can a new scoreboard really be? Do they plan to slide it back and forth when the punt teams trot out?

 

[BVille44]

If the new roof is virtually at the same height, how big can a new scoreboard really be? Do they plan to slide it back and forth when the punt teams trot out?

Based on the submission the high point of the existing roof is 159’ 2” feet and the height of the new roof will be 188’ 2” feet allowing for an extra 29 feet at the center for the new scoreboard.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Based on the submission the high point of the existing roof is 159’ 2” feet and the height of the new roof will be 188’ 2” feet allowing for an extra 29 feet at the center for the new scoreboard.View attachment 141550

You’re misreading the diagram. The 188' measurement is for the top of the truss. There's nothing on there that gives a true height for the roof itself. If the drawings are to scale, it looks like the old and new roof heights are very similar. Hence the scoreboard issues.