Correct but it isn’t the on campus stadium. They said on the Fla/Ga game today that part of Beck’s NIL deal includes him driving a Lambo. May be old news for all I know but like the old location saying it’s NIL, NIL and NIL.
Weird. I have season tickets and was at that game and most of the stadium was standing quite often. Maybe you were in the only section that wasn’t.
Better to spend $$$ on Alliance than $800,000,000. for a field w/o parking squeezed on a hill.
So stop obsessing on unrealistic things that can't be done and focus on the actual, real, tangible things that can actually move the program forward.
If you took the money for a stadium, say $500m, put it in an endowed fund whose legally restricted purpose was only to fund athletics NIL and/or specifically only support Pitt football, that would generate ~$25m a year, for perpetuity, and that $25m would grow regularly to keep up with inflation. Even in inevitable lean years, the financial power to overcome those dips would be there, regardless of how the university's leadership felt about athletics. If you put that on top what just what is currently being put into the program, Pitt would be a legitimate regular threat to nationally compete, and overtime, that, my friends, would draw the type of crowds that would make the arguments about Acrisure's yellow seats moot.
Pitt wasn't getting into the B10 no matter what. There is a Penn State problem that can't be overcome.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It’s not your money, so mind your own business! And anything that would boost the program is worth pursuing. 99 and a half percent of the universities in the ncaa have their own stadium on campus for very good reasons…and you in your infinite lack of wisdom play the yinzer card.
So why moan about it. 25 years ago the decision was correct, as much as I hated it.
Drama queen.
| school | main campus acres |
| Clemson | 17000 |
| Duke | 8470 |
| Stanford | 8180 |
| Texas A&M | 5500 |
| Penn State | 5448 |
| Michigan State | 5200 |
| Illinois | 4552 |
| Mississippi State | 4200 |
| Mississippi | 3350 |
| Michigan | 3177 |
| Oklahoma | 3000 |
| Nebraska | 2815 |
| Minnesota | 2730 |
| Rutgers | 2688 |
| Purdue | 2602 |
| Virginia Tech | 2600 |
| NC State | 2110 |
| Florida | 2000 |
| LSU | 2000 |
| Iowa State | 1984 |
| Alabama | 1970 |
| Indiana | 1937 |
| Iowa | 1900 |
| Auburn | 1843 |
| Texas Tech | 1839 |
| Ohio State | 1765 |
| Virginia | 1682 |
| Utah | 1534 |
| Oklahoma State | 1489 |
| UCF | 1415 |
| Missouri | 1262 |
| Notre Dame | 1250 |
| Maryland | 1250 |
| California | 1232 |
| Kansas | 1100 |
| Baylor | 1000 |
| Wisconsin | 936 |
| West Virginia | 913 |
| Colorado | 786 |
| Kentucky | 784 |
| Georgia | 759 |
| North Carolina-Chapel Hill | 729 |
| Washington | 703 |
| Kansas State | 688 |
| Syracuse | 683 |
| Houston | 667 |
| Washington State | 640 |
| Arizona State | 631.6 |
| Tennessee | 560 |
| Florida State | 451.6 |
| Texas | 423.5 |
| UCLA | 419 |
| Arkansas | 412 |
| Georgia Tech | 400 |
| Oregon State | 400 |
| Arizona | 380 |
| South Carolina | 359 |
| Louisville | 345 |
| Wake Forest | 340 |
| Boston College | 332.5 |
| Vanderbilt | 330 |
| TCU | 325 |
| USC | 308 |
| Oregon | 295 |
| Miami, FL | 260 |
| Northwestern | 240 |
| SMU | 230 |
| Cincinnati | 194 |
| Pitt | 168 |
Not gonna lie, I'm kinda shocked we even have 168 acres. I would have guessed less.
That's 38 more than the official number, because I mapped it out myself for Pitt. Obviously, the vast majority are plots with existing buildings taking up the entire footprint, not greenspace. It includes the entirety of Oakland, including things like the Mellwood Ave maintenance facility and buildings that are leased out long term (like the Rand Building) which may or may not be considered "campus". It doesn't include Commonwealth owned lots, like Hillman library, which would bring it up to about 190 acres, nor UPMC owned buildings.
At first I was surprised to see that number for Clemson, but then I remembered why they, uh, came into all of that acreage.
No, you aren't realistic, rationale, or informed. Pitt acquires parcels that become available all the time. Pitt owns parcels they are just sitting on, like the old Burger King lot, in anticipation of future development or has plots it hopes to eventually add contiguous plots to like along Oakland and Atwood Aves. It takes decades and decades to acquire and/or assemble some pieces that are adequate for development of much smaller projects. However, to acquire land, someone also has to be willing to sell it. Look at the holdout houses on the Bouquet Gardens plot. But what isn't available, and what hasn't been available, is 15 contiguous acres. The last time they acquired that much, for the Petersen Sports Complex, it took over decade of a major political fight and they didn't even get everything they wanted.
And land and money
Two words:
Show me an MSPaint rendering and we can get it rolling.
Not at all, you just continue to live in some ridiculous fantasy instead of the real world. There is nothing in Oakland that the university has not acquired in the past 30 years that could have been used for football.
Someone needs to tarp your a$$!!!! Maybe sue and dot will let u in on the action. Sicko
What exactly is going to be placed where the current baseball field is located?
