The Carrier Dome Renaming Thread...

CusefanATL

2018 Iggy Post Season Record NCAA Winner
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
9,969
Like
10,523
Interesting point. Most corporations, especially retail charge an arm and a leg to be on their site, in their catalogs, for naming and branding to be in/at their trade shows, etc.

Just because they paid to name the building doesn't mean that SU is obligated to publicize it in any way shape or form without additional compensation.

They could charge for every mention in every catalog, media guide, TV mention etc. I know that Staples charges like 50k for a banner ad on their website per year or quarter. Maybe the university should approach Carrier with this ala cart style of payment for exposure.

Maybe they would prefer the opt out of the contract and go for a modern naming rights deal instead.

I would bet the archaic 40 year old contract never mentioned TV, website or print mentions, social media, etc.

It just mentioned naming the building.

I think SU has them by the balls if that is the case.
The Carrier Dome brought to you by Staples
 

Qbobby

2nd String
Joined
Nov 29, 2015
Messages
953
Like
2,339
A major sporting goods store makes a great idea as well.

The Dick's Carrier dome.

:cool:
 

richmondcuse03

2nd String
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
500
Like
1,294
A major sporting goods store makes a great idea as well.

The Dick's Carrier dome.

:cool:
The Trane is Better than Carrier Dome has a nice ring to it. Same with "Lennox is Better than Carrier Dome"

Lot of potential down this route...
 

Geode

Block Head
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
739
Like
616
The deal also is specifically related to the current Dome.
If we renovate the Dome and we are the dome techincally under the law becomes a different facility under a contract.
Thus all Syracuse needs to do is change something on the outside of the Dome and I bet we have plans to do so and the Dome is a new facility and the Carrier deal is over.

Syverud I am sure understands this.
The outside is changing. I believe the fundamental replacement of the air supported roof with the new "crown" (my highly technical term) replaces the concept of an air supported dome. I'm guessing we've got an architect or two on the board that might be able clarify if a domed structure is a definable thing. That's my story and I'm sticking to that.
 

Geode

Block Head
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
739
Like
616
I would actually be a bit surprised if Wegmans wasn't the one who would want naming rights the most on whatever we call the new Dome if naming rights go up for bid. As Wegmans is expanding more and more west and south I think having naming rights on a Stadium would help with there expansion and growth.
We need Wegman's commercials to counter act Food Lion...
 

xc84

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
14,250
Like
12,966
The outside is changing. I believe the fundamental replacement of the air supported roof with the new "crown" (my highly technical term) replaces the concept of an air supported dome. I'm guessing we've got an architect or two on the board that might be able clarify if a domed structure is a definable thing. That's my story and I'm sticking to that.
"Dome" is not limited to being air supported. See Super Dome and Astro Dome. "Dome" is just a term used for indoor stadiums.
 

longtimefan

All American
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
5,073
Like
4,473
"Dome" is not limited to being air supported. See Super Dome and Astro Dome. "Dome" is just a term used for indoor stadiums.
"Dome" denotes a specific type of arena. One as large as ours is suitable for outdoors as well as indoors acitvities. That suitability is ensured by the roof. And the iconic feature of our dome is the roof.

The new roof will be pretty much the same size, shape, and color. But, architecturally it's a whole different animal. So certainly the argument can be made that this a different building from the one Carrier originally chipped in towards. Ergo, it needs a new name, or another infusion of funding from Carrier to maintain the status quo.

I wonder if the splitting of UTC could be impacting any of this.
 

xc84

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
14,250
Like
12,966
"Dome" denotes a specific type of arena. One as large as ours is suitable for outdoors as well as indoors acitvities. That suitability is ensured by the roof. And the iconic feature of our dome is the roof.

The new roof will be pretty much the same size, shape, and color. But, architecturally it's a whole different animal. So certainly the argument can be made that this a different building from the one Carrier originally chipped in towards. Ergo, it needs a new name, or another infusion of funding from Carrier to maintain the status quo.

I wonder if the splitting of UTC could be impacting any of this.
I get that it could be a "different animal" and that could be the rationale for Carrier's name being taken off but it is still a "dome". That does not mean the term "dome" has to be in the name but by definition of "dome" it still fits. For the naming, I really don't think the "dome" part matters.

168892
 

OttoMets

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
14,825
Like
19,310
"Dome" is not limited to being air supported. See Super Dome and Astro Dome. "Dome" is just a term used for indoor stadiums.
See Alamo Dome, which doesn't even have a dome shape.
 

longtimefan

All American
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
5,073
Like
4,473
I get that it could be a "different animal" and that could be the rationale for Carrier's name being taken off but it is still a "dome". That does not mean the term "dome" has to be in the name but by definition of "dome" it still fits. For the naming, I really don't think the "dome" part matters.

View attachment 168892
There are some domed arenas that are not stadiums.
 

xc84

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
14,250
Like
12,966
There are some domed arenas that are not stadiums.
Usually not referred to as a "dome" but I guess I will let it slide if someone uses "dome" in its name. See Dean Dome nickname for Dean Smith Center. I will let that slide.

In all seriousness, my main point is whether and architect calls it a dome or stadium, it has no bearing on the gift naming agreement.
 
Last edited:

Cusefan69

Starter
Joined
Mar 26, 2016
Messages
1,507
Like
3,104
See Alamo Dome, which doesn't even have a dome shape.
Would Dome be possibly a defined term in the type of contract that was put in place? If so that's where things may well rest regarding the old contract.
 

xc84

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
14,250
Like
12,966
Would Dome be possibly a defined term in the type of contract that was put in place? If so that's where things may well rest regarding the old contract.
I'd bet $100 the term "dome" is not defined in the contract but I heave never seen it.
 

Cusefan69

Starter
Joined
Mar 26, 2016
Messages
1,507
Like
3,104
I'd bet $100 the term "dome" is not defined in the contract but I heave never seen it.
Yeah I was just tossing that out there. If the premise is the dome is no longer the same construct and speculation has been focused on that in all these threads, I was just spitballing that maybe the actual agreement contemplates that somehow. You are likely right but then again the basketball court and football field are both constructs/components of the dome/within the dome and yet were not impacted by the universities naming restrictions with Carrier. So where does the break line occur? Again just thinking out loud. Technically if no roof was added to the structure, would it still be considered a dome?
 

longtimefan

All American
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
5,073
Like
4,473
Usually not referred to as a "dome" but I guess I will let it slide if someone uses "dome" in its name. See Dean Dome nickname for Dean Smith Center. I will let that slide.

In all seriousness, my main point is whet her and architect calls it a dome or stadium, it has no bearing on the gift naming agreement.
I agree on dome vs stadium.

My point is that the replacement of the roof, which is the iconic part of the structure, with a totally different design could be the basis of a legal argument that there is a new building.
 

xc84

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
14,250
Like
12,966
I agree on dome vs stadium.

My point is that the replacement of the roof, which is the iconic part of the structure, with a totally different design could be the basis of a legal argument that there is a new building.
I agree. That may be part of SU's argument.
 

Online statistics

Members online
280
Guests online
610
Total visitors
890

Top Bottom