|
|
Post by owlcountry on Sept 13, 2007 12:57:13 GMT -5
with all due respect, you're wrong... right on ucfathletics.com it says "tickets still availible for the home opener against texas" Somone on here posted that UCF has already sold out the game against Texas. In any event, if it hasn't sold out I am sure that will. GO OWLS!!! Which is excellent. I do think they should have gotten somebody less talented so they could destroy them but UCF always does it big and I'm always pulling for the underdog. You know what would have been a really interesting match for that first game? UCF vs Troy. Or us. |
|
|
|
Post by owlcountry on Sept 13, 2007 13:05:01 GMT -5
apologies... i just go by what i read, lol... good for them.... they have a BOT who cares I'm not so convinced that it's a matter of caring or not caring. I do know that FAU went through some pretty tough financial troubles years ago and rebounded to form all the partner campuses and so forth. But I'm sure that painful memory still resonates and guides these decisions. So it makes sense that they would be cautious. That's the word I would use. If you look at the PDF, the company recommends 30k because that's what the data points to. It says in our climate, with our students and alumni and so forth, 30k is a comfortable number for us. It's a recommendation but they paid this company to analyze the data and make these recommendations so FAU didn't overextend themselves and do something like build a 100k seater for an average attendance of 10k. UCF is in a different situation. They have almost twice as many students as we do. They have all the frills -- the expensive Greek houses, the huge student union, the nice gym, yadda yadda -- and they encourage people to get involved. Since they're also attracting better students now, sometimes even away from UF, that means that the better students will want to get involved and do things like attend a college football game. So they can rationalize it from the data. We can't. Not yet. I would like to see a provision that we expand to 45,000 seats by 2015 if attendance growth is positive in the first three years. |
|
|
|
Post by Lm77 on Sept 13, 2007 13:33:41 GMT -5
30000 is also the minimum requirement to be a member of I-A...
The revenue doesn't increase much with a larger stadium as, according to the report, the number of club seats and luxury suites will likely stay the same, although the expenses do increase (such as increased need for parking, maintenance, etc.). The recent trend has been to smaller stadiums in college football, but with more amenities. The findings in the report indicate that there is actually more enthusiasm for luxury suites than there was for UCF, and that we would be able to fill far more than the planned-for 20 suites.
An interesting new development in the proposal is the decoupling of the stadium with the Innovation Village. It shows that a $62 million stadium could be self-financed with an initial donation of $5 million. This is good news because it dramatically reduces the size of the retail component of the Innovation Village. It would be bad for FAU to have it turn into a retail destination.
|
|
|
|
Post by rdownin1 on Sept 13, 2007 16:14:18 GMT -5
As long as the stadium can allow for expansion im all about it! I mean 30,000 is not thatbad but who wouldnt mind around 60,000 in the future!
|
|
