asu66 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 09, 2017 12:40 pm

WXAPP wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:21 am

http://www.wataugademocrat.com/news/tru ... dium=social

I like the rendering..

I mentioned in a post on this topic about two months ago that every effort would be made to make this a part of Appalachian's participation in the UNC-BOG's Millennial Campus. Among the plusses for this approach is to acquire a state-of-the-art facility using a combination of public and private funding for planning and construction of a critical-need facility that will eventually provide new revenue streams for athletics WHILE INVOLVING NO-ZERO-ZILCH STUDENT FEES. WTG, Doug Gillin!

http://www.news.appstate.edu/2015/06/29 ... al-campus/

You forgot to mention the new debt in the form of bonds that will also be used to fund the project.

Stadium enhancements are the way to go. Our attendance is not so great outside of the Wake, Miami and the annual Parents Weekend game.


http://footballscoop.com/news/ncaa-foot ... oard-2017/

HighlandsApp wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:37 pm

Stadium enhancements are the way to go. Our attendance is not so great outside of the Wake, Miami and the annual Parents Weekend game.


http://footballscoop.com/news/ncaa-foot ... oard-2017/

Replacing metal temporary endzones seats and porta johns is definitely an enhancement. Temporary seats are not part of the stadium. Our attendance looks great when compared to our actual seating capacity. It looks not so great when compared to our seating capacity, plus temporary bleachers, plus a hill, plus a track behind the hill, plus that grass area at the entrance, plus standing room under the east side. I think the writer of this article and any football fan would agree that a program that has had temporary seating for almost 10 years not only has good attendance, but is also overdue for some type of expansion.

HighlandsApp wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:37 pm

Our attendance is not so great outside of the Wake, Miami and the annual Parents Weekend game.

HighlandsApp wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:37 pm

Stadium enhancements are the way to go. Our attendance is not so great outside of the Wake, Miami and the annual Parents Weekend game.


http://footballscoop.com/news/ncaa-foot ... oard-2017/

We did 20k+ for every home game this year and our capacity before we started these renovations was like 24k or something.

My point is...

That outside of the big games we average 20k to 22k and since the story notes a continuation of decline in college football attendance; that adding luxury seats and stadium amenities as we are preparing to do appears to be the most prudent measure.

Many who share ideas here believe that we should add seats. Some want lots more seats... Some have mentioned 35k to even 40k.

Since we averaged more in the 2006 to 2009 time period and the report shows continued data that sports attendance is falling accross the board, then it looks to me that adding premium seats and selling out the seats every game like Montana and the upper half of most P5 conference schools do is better than having a half empty stadium for all but the big draw game each year.

BTK2000 wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:23 pm

asu66 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 09, 2017 12:40 pm

WXAPP wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:21 am

http://www.wataugademocrat.com/news/tru ... dium=social

I like the rendering..

I mentioned in a post on this topic about two months ago that every effort would be made to make this a part of Appalachian's participation in the UNC-BOG's Millennial Campus. Among the plusses for this approach is to acquire a state-of-the-art facility using a combination of public and private funding for planning and constot ruction of a critical-need facility that will eventually provide new revenue streams for athletics WHILE INVOLVING NO-ZERO-ZILCH STUDENT FEES. WTG, Doug Gillin!

http://www.news.appstate.edu/2015/06/29 ... al-campus/

You forgot to mention the new debt in the form of bonds that will also be used to fund the project.

Not so fast, 2000. Not gonna let you off the hook with that comment. I specifically mentioned public and private funding. Bonds fall into those categories. I didn't forget anything. I just chose not to get in a dig at our admin about debt. Pay-as-you-go is a lofty ideal, but with today's low interest rates, 90% plus of all millennial App grads who live in "their" own homes have low-single-digit home loans. It's understandably the only thing that makes good sense to them. State universities all over the U.S. utilize bonds for major construction. As you know very well, even NC state government utilizes bond funds (and has done so for at least the last five decades).

If this were the early-to-mid-70s with the oil ebargo in place and borrowing rates were in the high teens, your argument would hold water.

25,787 Avg attendance in 2017. I won't exclude "the big games" because that would skew the data. Attendance is attendance.

In the Sun Belt and the G5 our attendance is "so great." Premium seating before outdoor seating is indeed prudent, but outdoor seating after that and as soon as we're able financially.

Ground hog day!

Current and past attendance figures for us and college football as a whole don’t necessarily lend to support expanding. However, with the increase in regional opponents and the potential of some bigger draws to the Rock mandate that we build for the future to accommodate those occasional crowds. Empty seats looks bad on TV, but lost revenue due to being at capacity because you have no more seats available is lost revenue. Build for the future or play catch up. It’s a fine line between which direction to go.

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:03 am

25,787 Avg attendance in 2017. I won't exclude "the big games" because that would skew the data. Attendance is attendance.

In the Sun Belt and the G5 our attendance is "so great." Premium seating before outdoor seating is indeed prudent, but outdoor seating after that and as soon as we're able financially.

Last three words are critical to this discussion. If the funds were available we would expand to 35,000, but our fanbase doesn't give back enough to support it. This isn't said to be degrading, just a reality of our financial situation.

We still don't fully fund athletic scholarships with over 110k alumni. Our giving rate is < 4%. We can and should do more.

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:03 am

25,787 Avg attendance in 2017. I won't exclude "the big games" because that would skew the data. Attendance is attendance.

In the Sun Belt and the G5 our attendance is "so great." Premium seating before outdoor seating is indeed prudent, but outdoor seating after that and as soon as we're able financially.

Yeah, i've never understood why some people want to omit attendance figures for marquee games. That would be like a restaurant only focusing on weekday figures to determine its success. Or a beach town only advertising its weather from November to March.

I've got a great idea to help people that are on the fence about needed expansion. Lets not install the temporary seats this season, remove all porta johns, require 1 student per seat in the student section, and see what the actual stadium looks like on gameday.

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:03 am

25,787 Avg attendance in 2017. I won't exclude "the big games" because that would skew the data. Attendance is attendance.

In the Sun Belt and the G5 our attendance is "so great." Premium seating before outdoor seating is indeed prudent, but outdoor seating after that and as soon as we're able financially.

I am not disagreeing. I think that we should have 26,000 to 30,000 permanent seats with an enhanced Miller Hill or standing room field side concourse that can put us at 35k to 40k for the big game.

A third entrance gate maybe for students only and ingress/egress for safety as well as more bathroom and a field level around the field concourse for all lower stands to use will mage the current concourse manageable and enjoyable for the fans who buy season tickets and numbered tickets.

Long and short is our history shows that we must have scarcity of tickets to the Big Games in order to sell season tickets.

HighlandsApp wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:18 pm

My point is...

That outside of the big games we average 20k to 22k and since the story notes a continuation of decline in college football attendance; that adding luxury seats and stadium amenities as we are preparing to do appears to be the most prudent measure.

Many who share ideas here believe that we should add seats. Some want lots more seats... Some have mentioned 35k to even 40k.

Since we averaged more in the 2006 to 2009 time period and the report shows continued data that sports attendance is falling accross the board, then it looks to me that adding premium seats and selling out the seats every game like Montana and the upper half of most P5 conference schools do is better than having a half empty stadium for all but the big draw game each year.

Don't worry HA - it appears the people making the business decisions get this, even if not all the message board posters do.

HighlandsApp wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 14, 2018 1:08 pm

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:03 am

25,787 Avg attendance in 2017. I won't exclude "the big games" because that would skew the data. Attendance is attendance.

In the Sun Belt and the G5 our attendance is "so great." Premium seating before outdoor seating is indeed prudent, but outdoor seating after that and as soon as we're able financially.

I am not disagreeing. I think that we should have 26,000 to 30,000 permanent seats with an enhanced Miller Hill or standing room field side concourse that can put us at 35k to 40k for the big game.

A third entrance gate maybe for students only and ingress/egress for safety as well as more bathroom and a field level around the field concourse for all lower stands to use will mage the current concourse manageable and enjoyable for the fans who buy season tickets and numbered tickets.

Long and short is our history shows that we must have scarcity of tickets to the Big Games in order to sell season tickets.

I think 27k permanent seats with an smaller closer hill is the sweet spot.

I’m with you on the number of permanent seats, 30K max. I would move the hill closer but make it larger with teired seating with SRO at the base to allow for adequate site lines. . My only question would be was the current video board placed where it is done strategically? It seems that it would be far away from the action if you pull the hill in closer.

Something that hurts the look of attendance is the fact that 10k worth of students pack into 7k worth of seats.

My first suggestion is getting rid of the temporary end zone seating and moving the band to the East Side next to visiting fans.

AppSt94 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:04 pm

I’m with you on the number of permanent seats, 30K max. I would move the hill closer but make it larger with teired seating with SRO at the base to allow for adequate site lines. . My only question would be was the current video board placed where it is done strategically? It seems that it would be far away from the action if you pull the hill in closer.

I don't think that would be a bad thing. I actually wished they'd have put it behind the walkway to begin with. That way you don't obstruct sight lines for possible seating on the walkway itself (I'm thinking cafe tables) and you don't burst people's eardrums by having lawn seating directly under/in front of the scoreboard.

If we move the hill in and leave the scoreboard where it is, it could be a win-win.

Some of you get off on telling people "no", I swear. If someone thinks we should have a 100,000 seat stadium then more power to them, idgaf. I trust DG to do what's right for us within our budget.

This rendering is old and not correct. Architect is CJMW. They were the previous architect who did the first concepts that my company was involved in. The builder will be picked from CM style!