The 2nd Pillar (IPF groundbreaking and funding)

[kcsu]

When you bring in an extra 10-20m per year you can afford a little more for travel. In one year the ACC will have paid for about 20 years of increased travel expense if they are actually increased. Remember the Sun Beast never sleeps. By going to the ACC we will save money on travel over staying in the Beast

 

[Chip]

Agree with you that the Marrone defection sped things up and probably precipitated a more aggressive financial approach by the trustees. None of us have a clue about the nitty-gritty's of the financials, but I would be willing to guess that our normally conservative approach to capital projects was overrode once we lost Marrone.

Would this have been announced this quickly if Marrone was still here? Impossible to know, but I have my doubts. If this is true, I retract my statements from a few weeks ago that our trustees weren't serious about big time college football. If they've loosened the purse strings due to the Marrone loss, I consider that a good thing.

Sped things up I agree with. But I also think the trustees expected to invest the ACC $ in the program all along. They don't have the $ in hand yet, and I'm sure there's some confusion on how much it will be, what exactly we're going to do with it.

Marrone's departure probably moved this up 6 months to a year. Forced the trustees to use the ACC as collateral on a fund raising campaign now. But this has been Gross' vision for quite some time. It was going to happen regardless.

Hope Marrone provided the seed money, or at least kicks in a significant donation.

 

[All4SU]

So are you saying this is going to be more than just an indoor field?

And a water slide...

 

[OttoMets]

Oh, I get the benefits of it. And I absolutely agree that in the world of big-time college athletics, facilities are an absolute necessity. What I also believe, however, is that it's complete insanity to believe that dedicated practice facilities are absolutely necessary in a real world way. I mean, a qb and wrs couldn't get together on an outdoor turf/field? Or, in the winter, they couldn't find a way to coordinate and work together in an indoor space when the space was available? Listen, I get that if I were a football prospect, I'd love the idea of going to a school with a swanky new players lounge, a state of the art weight room and a pimped out dedicated practice facility (that's why we need those things). But as an athlete who went to a school with stuffty lockerrooms, no dedicated practice facility, dated astroturf and no actual film room -- we somehow made it work and spent literally, what, $100M less in the process?

It's cool that SU is doing it, but I also get the feeling that all those millions we chase around by moving to a southern dominated conference are already spent between travel, coaching salaries, facilities demands (they will never end. people know that this never ends, right?), and whatever other expenses must be incurred to keep up with the big boys.

You're right. I remember being in Manley while people were using the track and Marvin Graves and Qadry Ismail were heaving the ball back and forth on the infield alongside the west end of the court. Same deal with runners using the facility while the basketball team practiced. And when slower noontime runners (faculty, students) used the outside lanes while SU's team did speedwork in Lane One.

This is all a matter of "want," not "need." It's a terribly immoderate and inefficient culture; if SU thinks this is the best way to a.) get good recruits and b.) win games (and they're likely right), more power to them. But to suggest that sharing a facility is impossible is disingenuous.

 

[TheCusian]

You're right. I remember being in Manley while people were using the track and Marvin Graves and Qadry Ismail were heaving the ball back and forth on the infield alongside the west end of the court. Same deal with runners using the facility while the basketball team practiced. And when slower noontime runners (faculty, students) used the outside lanes while SU's team did speedwork in Lane One.

This is all a matter of "want," not "need." It's a terribly immoderate and inefficient culture; if SU thinks this is the best way to a.) get good recruits and b.) win games (and they're likely right), more power to them. But to suggest that sharing a facility is impossible is disingenuous.

I'd say about 25% is practical, the rest is all about the arms race. Which is cool with me.

 

[xc84]

Not sure about the dimensions for softball (or the appeal of playing indoors), but here's a second for your motion to convert Manley back to a track facility.

Chris Fox and his assistants have conducted themselves admirably through this affair, fielding a very successful program (with an individual national champion last season) despite not having an indoor track.

In hindsight, it's unfortunate that SU solicited donors and flushed away $2 or $3 million to gut a terrific multipurpose facility (new 200-meter indoor track with jumping pits and 55-meter straightaway; hardwood basketball court; ~6,000 operable bleacher seats) and convert it into an empty shell, only to spend about eight times that amount to effectively replace it. Whatever "urgency" the football program felt in 2010 would have best been directed toward building the IPF at that time; would be interesting to know if the three-year Manley experiment contributed to one win or got us one recruit.

Converting to a track facility will eliminate or take away it's usefulness for other sports depending on how far they go for track. I am not sure the school would be willing to sacrifice or negatively impact other sports for track's benefit. Also, do they have a raised track they could leverage if needed?

 

[OttoMets]

I'd say about 25% is practical, the rest is all about the arms race. Which is cool with me.

Yeah that sounds about right.

 

[OttoMets]

Converting to a track facility will eliminate or take away it's usefulness for other sports depending on how far they go for track. I am not sure the school would be willing to sacrifice or negatively impact other sports for track's benefit. Also, do they have a raised track they could leverage if needed?

They don't, but it's under consideration. Not a bad idea. Wouldn't be as useful for everyday practice purposes, but Madison Square Garden and other venues make good use of it for meets.

I wonder what options exist for playing surface for lacrosse/field hockey/softball. Could they return to Astroturf that can be rolled over a permanent track? Is there a new version of Fieldturf that can be removed?

It's only eight years since Daryl came in and quickly disproved the "Fieldturf can't work in the Dome" theory. I don't doubt that he's investigating solutions to the "full turf coverage and track can't coexist in Manley" problem

 

[javadoc]

Remember the Sun Beast never sleeps. By going to the ACC we will save money on travel over staying in the Beast

You know what they say: The Sun Never Sets on the Sun Beast Empire.

God doesn't trust those rogues in the dark.

 

[anomander]

You're right. I remember being in Manley while people were using the track and Marvin Graves and Qadry Ismail were heaving the ball back and forth on the infield alongside the west end of the court. Same deal with runners using the facility while the basketball team practiced. And when slower noontime runners (faculty, students) used the outside lanes while SU's team did speedwork in Lane One.

This is all a matter of "want," not "need." It's a terribly immoderate and inefficient culture; if SU thinks this is the best way to a.) get good recruits and b.) win games (and they're likely right), more power to them. But to suggest that sharing a facility is impossible is disingenuous.

Agree it's not impossible to share of facility but to have basketball and football share with the winter sports would be illogical considering the amount of money both programs bring in . It's just not practical

 

[billsin01]

When you bring in an extra 10-20m per year you can afford a little more for travel. In one year the ACC will have paid for about 20 years of increased travel expense if they are actually increased. Remember the Sun Beast never sleeps. By going to the ACC we will save money on travel over staying in the Beast

Yeah, but it's not simply travel or travel versus whatever the BE ends up being. My point is that the whole conference expansion process disregards travel in general. So if, by some crazy scenario like bland ratings not producing nearly the ad revenue networks are forecasting, then sending every sport not named football all over the coast or across the country suddenly begins to look even more absurd.

But you're right -- travel is somewhat minimal compared to other expenditures. We haven't seen the last of increasing coaching salaries, however, and the facilities arms race isn't going to stop as long as the money comes in. So as much as you're making, you have to figure on spending a huge chunk of it to keep up.

 

[kcsu]

Ok better facilities will mean better recruits which means more wins and more fans. Lets say we sell an extra 5000 season tickets each year and we end up increasing the gate on game day by anther 2500 or 7k per game at 6 games Doesnt seem like that would be too hard. What is that worth per head? 50 75 100 per person per game? Anyway you cut it the facility will pay for itself.

 

[billsin01]

Anyway you cut it the facility will pay for itself.

There is no chance -- absolutely no chance -- that these facilities (it should be plural b/c it doesn't stop) pay for themselves. That's absurd.

 

[OrangePA]

Buzz did but didn't give a sh#t. Jake and P did but were "company" men and didn't protest loud enough. If my job was being hurt by the facilities and my concerns were falling on deaf ears maybe taking it public would have quickened the pace of improvements.

Can't disagree.

 

[BlackKnight76]

Got my call from Telefund the other night and sent some cash towards the practice facility. Very easy to do if they call you.

 

[kcsu]

There is no chance -- absolutely no chance -- that these facilities (it should be plural b/c it doesn't stop) pay for themselves. That's absurd.

Yes they do if you increase the gate by 5k per game and figure 50 per that is an additional 250k per game @ 6 games 1.5 per year run that out for 10 years. I also think that rev per game figure would be more in the 60-70 range

 

[AAM62]

Yes they do if you increase the gate by 5k per game and figure 50 per that is an additional 250k per game @ 6 games 1.5 per year run that out for 10 years. I also think that rev per game figure would be more in the 60-70 range

Can't raise ticket prices if you can't fill the building.

 

[Crusty]

Can't raise ticket prices if you can't fill the building.

Actually you can. Not saying that is the case here but just because you are not a capacity doesn't mean that you can't make more money at higher prices and lower occupancy. Classic pricing issue.