Someone was going to bring this up eventually...
The Temple trustees voted and gave the go-ahead to create conceptual designs of the proposed stadium, and look into parking and impact on the neighborhood.
The shit storm is already is full swing.
The issues of cost, parking, impact on the community, and the campus are all being used against the plan.
Outside the building where the trustees met, a coalition of student groups and North Philadelphia residents, demonstrated "so loud they could be heard from inside the building." Protesters said the university is consistent in excluding the community, with no transparency. The vote was planned in late 2015, but delayed until now due to concerns by the mayor elect.
Who knows if they will ever overcome the political hurdles to get this built.
The plan is to build a 35,000 seat stadium. Sounds about right for Temple, since their official average attendance is 23k, which we know is padded. Getting to 35k each game would represent a doubling or more of current (real) attendance, so a big reason for building the stadium will be increased attendance. I'd say there a good chance it will work in increasing attendance.
They also claim it makes financial sense since they currently pay 3M a year to use Lincoln Field, and they think they can build a stadium for $100M. That number is likely a total fantasy. In fact, in a very short period of time, the estimate has grown now to $126M. If they eventually build it, I'd be shocked if the final total isn't at least double that.
In any event, here comes the inevitable transition to....an on-campus stadium for Pitt.
For all of the proponents of an on-campus stadium in Oakland, I've never once seen anyone suggest a big stadium be built. Everyone suggests it be "right sized," in the 40k to 45k range, with the upper 40s being the upper limit. That was a great idea...in 1985.
If we knew in '85 that the university was not going to support the program any better than it did while other schools went all-in in football and we were going to be stuck in a 30 period of mediocrity, we'd have all said yes,let's build that new 42k stadium. It would've been nice and served our needs for the past 3 decades, and even the Pitt Stadium diehards might have been OK with saying goodbye to it in favor of the shiny new stadium.
But does it make sense today? Well, no, it doesn't. Its a new day for Pitt football. A move to the ACC has brought big boy conference funds, program stability and legitimacy, and increased recruiting capabilities. Add in a new chancellor who gets the importance of college football to a modern university, and is willing to fund the football program. We've got a legit coach, with a big time recruiting budget, and new impressive facilities, and a new AD who 'gets it.' Pitt is poised for a new, successful era of football.
Even though we are just one year into the new era, enthusiasm is off the charts compared to the recent past, and the AD said the season ticket goal this year is 53.75k. Assuming the program continues on the current path, with admin support and enhanced recruiting, Pitt's win totals should increase, and I'm guessing the season ticket goal will approach 60k in 2-3 years time; just a 10% increase of 2016's goal.
Kinda makes that 44k-ish on-campus stadium idea seem outdated, doesn't it? And only a fool, or someone who is clueless about politics and getting approvals in the city of Pittsburgh, would think that community concerns, parking, traffic, etc. wouldn't be a concern in getting that 44k stadium approved and built. Imagine how difficult it would be to get approval (and find solutions to traffic and parking, etc.) for a "right sized" stadium, based on FUTURE, not past needs, of say, 57k to 62k?
OK, Heinz will soon be old, and there is a chance the Steelers may move outside the city limits, etc. Pitt needs to plan for the day with a new solution is needed. But the future stadium needs to be reasonably big to meets Pitt's future needs, seriously reducing the chance that it will ever be built in Oakland.
The Temple trustees voted and gave the go-ahead to create conceptual designs of the proposed stadium, and look into parking and impact on the neighborhood.
The shit storm is already is full swing.
The issues of cost, parking, impact on the community, and the campus are all being used against the plan.
Outside the building where the trustees met, a coalition of student groups and North Philadelphia residents, demonstrated "so loud they could be heard from inside the building." Protesters said the university is consistent in excluding the community, with no transparency. The vote was planned in late 2015, but delayed until now due to concerns by the mayor elect.
Who knows if they will ever overcome the political hurdles to get this built.
The plan is to build a 35,000 seat stadium. Sounds about right for Temple, since their official average attendance is 23k, which we know is padded. Getting to 35k each game would represent a doubling or more of current (real) attendance, so a big reason for building the stadium will be increased attendance. I'd say there a good chance it will work in increasing attendance.
They also claim it makes financial sense since they currently pay 3M a year to use Lincoln Field, and they think they can build a stadium for $100M. That number is likely a total fantasy. In fact, in a very short period of time, the estimate has grown now to $126M. If they eventually build it, I'd be shocked if the final total isn't at least double that.
In any event, here comes the inevitable transition to....an on-campus stadium for Pitt.
For all of the proponents of an on-campus stadium in Oakland, I've never once seen anyone suggest a big stadium be built. Everyone suggests it be "right sized," in the 40k to 45k range, with the upper 40s being the upper limit. That was a great idea...in 1985.
If we knew in '85 that the university was not going to support the program any better than it did while other schools went all-in in football and we were going to be stuck in a 30 period of mediocrity, we'd have all said yes,let's build that new 42k stadium. It would've been nice and served our needs for the past 3 decades, and even the Pitt Stadium diehards might have been OK with saying goodbye to it in favor of the shiny new stadium.
But does it make sense today? Well, no, it doesn't. Its a new day for Pitt football. A move to the ACC has brought big boy conference funds, program stability and legitimacy, and increased recruiting capabilities. Add in a new chancellor who gets the importance of college football to a modern university, and is willing to fund the football program. We've got a legit coach, with a big time recruiting budget, and new impressive facilities, and a new AD who 'gets it.' Pitt is poised for a new, successful era of football.
Even though we are just one year into the new era, enthusiasm is off the charts compared to the recent past, and the AD said the season ticket goal this year is 53.75k. Assuming the program continues on the current path, with admin support and enhanced recruiting, Pitt's win totals should increase, and I'm guessing the season ticket goal will approach 60k in 2-3 years time; just a 10% increase of 2016's goal.
Kinda makes that 44k-ish on-campus stadium idea seem outdated, doesn't it? And only a fool, or someone who is clueless about politics and getting approvals in the city of Pittsburgh, would think that community concerns, parking, traffic, etc. wouldn't be a concern in getting that 44k stadium approved and built. Imagine how difficult it would be to get approval (and find solutions to traffic and parking, etc.) for a "right sized" stadium, based on FUTURE, not past needs, of say, 57k to 62k?
OK, Heinz will soon be old, and there is a chance the Steelers may move outside the city limits, etc. Pitt needs to plan for the day with a new solution is needed. But the future stadium needs to be reasonably big to meets Pitt's future needs, seriously reducing the chance that it will ever be built in Oakland.
