according to wikipedia, the next to the last game at pitt stadium against Miami only had 38k. I was there and that is probably close to being correct.
Temple moving forward with New Stadium (35K)
- Thread starter ZetaZetaBeta
- Start date
according to wikipedia, the next to the last game at pitt stadium against Miami only had 38k. I was there and that is probably close to being correct.
No doubt. But we averaged ~ 40K the last three years at Pitt Stadium where we had average only 30K in 96.
Because enrollment is larger and more kids live on campus now.
How many more 4000-5000 UG at most? Grad students as a whole don't go much. What color tarps will we need? Though should look good with mustard and blue with the Pitt script.
I dont know but I think the notion that a lot more students are going now is silly. Students go to 2 games per year: the first game and the 1 event game of there is 1. The rest of the time there are maybe 2000 students there, maybe.
That was my point, no matter where a stadium is not sure the students make a difference in attendance.
120 yards long and 53 1/3 yards wide field with troughs to piss in...same needed amenities as Heinz without the ugly yellow seats...
well, it the visiting fans are happy, who am I (or the kids paying 34 grand a year herded into school buses every game) to complain....
I remember Hackett, Majors 2, that killed a generation of fans right there. We could avg 50 g these days , if we fielded a winner in a parking lot. I am just talking about the college experience and atmosphere, I don't enjoy being a baby Steeeler, neither does many friends and family, but that's just an opinion. Pitt is selling GT tickets for 5 bucks, so there is that also and it's 2016
Cool story. Pony up the $400M and you've got something...bring your tape measure
Fans fans are happy because they have a lot of room in the stadium and tickets are cheap.
Not in 97 and beyond. Sure, 98 and 99 weren't great but at least we were competitive and headed in the right direction. We are light years away from there today. I would say the only time we were in "shambles" was the Hackett and Majors 2 eras.
129 Luxury Suites
6,600 Club Seats
Chairbacks
Better Sight Lines
Far More Bathrooms
Far More Concession Stands
Far Better Food and Drink Selection
This is spot on. The atmosphere at Heinz Field is absolutely atrocious.
The problem is not the stadium. It is the people inside the stadium. PS, ND, VT, WV, etc were excellent atmospheres.
Disagree about sight lines, but it is obviously a personal and subjective thing. LOL...drink selection? What exactly are they offering down at Heinz that the soda guns at Pitt Stadium did not have? Hail to Pitt!
like I said...needed amenities(filled seats and bathrooms)... kids still have to ride school buses to the place with the wide selection of 8 dollar hot dogs and 10 dollar beers (not to mention the $6.25 bottle of water I bought for my wife on Saturday) only to still have to wiz in troughs like good ole Pitt Stadium...
I'm ok on the north shore for the time being.
My preference, if we ever got back on campus, would be that the university buys up a bunch of south Oakland near the Blvd of allies and puts it down that way. That area is a dump and eyesore to potential students when you come in that way. It gets worse every time I go back.
There's a good deal of rundown property across the Blvd too that could likely be bought up for additional parking decks.
I see no reason to try putting it somewhere right in the middle of campus. That area is nice and will continue to have $ put into it. South Oakland continues to go downhill in appearance and needs something major like this to re-develop the area. I'm talking the area behind the quality inn/Panera over to McKee. Closer to Blvd of Allies.
My preference, if we ever got back on campus, would be that the university buys up a bunch of south Oakland near the Blvd of allies and puts it down that way. That area is a dump and eyesore to potential students when you come in that way. It gets worse every time I go back.
There's a good deal of rundown property across the Blvd too that could likely be bought up for additional parking decks.
I see no reason to try putting it somewhere right in the middle of campus. That area is nice and will continue to have $ put into it. South Oakland continues to go downhill in appearance and needs something major like this to re-develop the area. I'm talking the area behind the quality inn/Panera over to McKee. Closer to Blvd of Allies.
How many Luxury Suites and Club Boxes did Pitt Stadium offer and what amenities did they have? At Pitt Stadium you made a larger donation and got to sit on the 50 yard line on bleachers.
I honestly would be happy for go without a luxury suite or club box. Watching a football game from such a place is sterile and you may as well be home watching it on television. The Suites at Heinz are too far away from the action and not very nice. I have all but once turned down my invitations to sit in the AD's or Chancellors suites at Heinz. And no, the donation requirement at Pitt Stadium was not higher than at Heinz--that simply is just silly. Considering the best college programs in the country have stadiums that are largely bench seats without backs--I am okay with that. I am not so old or infirmed that sitting on a bench for a couple of hours is going to adversely impact me. Frankly, it made standing and cheering a bit easier too--which perhaps explains the atmosphere deficiency at Heinz? Not really worth discussing this topic since we are at Heinz or wherever the Steelers play for the rest of my lifetime. Hail to Pitt!
Luxury Suites and Club Boxes = More Revenue. The donation amount to sit on the 50 yard line next to John Pelusi was $200. How much do you think the luxury suites cost? There were no raucous crowds at Pitt Stadium either aside from the games against PS, WV, ND, etc.
Man, this again. To address a smattering of random dumb points in this thread:
- Alumni and Clapp are not being torn down for a football stadium.
- Municipal bonds will never be issued to fund a stadium for Pitt, because beyond the fact that people are catching on to the racket that is 'publicly-funded stadiums', Pitt football can't threaten to relocate the same way that a professional franchise can.
- The university would never play hardball over its role in mass transportation initiative in order to secure the zoning for a stadium; that's outright ludicrous.
- The link in the OP is in no way Pitt affiliated, and a complete and utter joke. I have no idea how this guy hasn't been banned.
- Alumni and Clapp are not being torn down for a football stadium.
- Municipal bonds will never be issued to fund a stadium for Pitt, because beyond the fact that people are catching on to the racket that is 'publicly-funded stadiums', Pitt football can't threaten to relocate the same way that a professional franchise can.
- The university would never play hardball over its role in mass transportation initiative in order to secure the zoning for a stadium; that's outright ludicrous.
- The link in the OP is in no way Pitt affiliated, and a complete and utter joke. I have no idea how this guy hasn't been banned.
Did some of that revenue go towards Pedersons 5 million buyout? Just cause we give government more taxes, doesn't mean it is spent well.
Perhaps you don't know or comprehend what you wrote...but here is the quote: "At Pitt Stadium you made a larger donation and got to sit on the 50 yard line on bleachers." So as I said, that statement is simply silly and FALSE. Donations requirements at Heinz are higher--of course it is also 17 years later in time too. The contribution levels could have and would have been hiked at Pitt Stadium. Moreover, there was a plan to add luxury suites to Pitt Stadium...but that plan had the plug pulled once the decision to tear down the stadium was made. Pitt Stadium was far louder on average than Heinz Field. Moreover, put 40K in either stadium and Pitt Stadium always looked better. The acoustics at Heinz are just not that great. Pitt Stadium was close to the correct size for Pitt's fan base. But as I said...matters not now...Pitt is at Heinz for as long as the Steelers play there. Hail to Pitt!
A muni issuance is much different than forcing people to pay taxes. People would CHOOSE to lend Pitt the money in return for a competitive, potentially tax-free interest.
A good question I'll try to shed some perspective on: I attended Pitt from 1976 -1980 , catching all of their home games. I also caught most of their home games from 1973 - 1975 and about 1 game per year 1981 and on. With that Pitt presently has the best student section I've ever seen ( 12k-15k ) and about 35k - 45k Diehard fans the function being the quality of the opponent and the quality of Pitt's team. Good Pitt team, good opponent = 12,000 students + 38,000 Diehard fans + 2,000 visitors = 52,000 fans - this is what I would expect for GA Tech Saturday.
In the days I attended games at Pitt Stadium, with Great teams, they averaged 42,000 fans selling out when PSU, WVU or ND came to town. Again, more students living on campus and much better support from today's students. I would surmise that Pitt will add 1500 to the Diehard fan base each year from present students that graduate. So in another decade Pitt will have another 10,000 Diehard fans.
Saying all that, Pitt needs to follow the Stanford model - build an on campus 52,000 seat stadium with a view of the Cathedral of Learning, support the Football Program and you will have a great environment for college football.
As raggedy as South Oakland is, it generates $$$$$$$$$ in property tax for the city. Pitt struggles to get permission to tear down half a block for needed dorms. Do you really think the city is going to allow Pitt to take several blocks off of the tax rolls for a stadium, and the parking that will need to go with it?
Probably not, though the city seems pretty amenable to CMU land acquisition in N Oakland.
You can tell the veracity of that claim by the fact that he has said in the past that they wouldn't even need to do any prep work to level the land on the OC lot site, that it was already flat enough that they could start building on it almost immediately. Anyone who knows anything about the size of that lot and the elevation changes from street level at the front of the lot to the elevation of the lot on the Cost Center side who read that knew that he was full of it from that moment on (assuming that they weren't bright enough to understand that in the first place).
One of two things is obviously true. He has either never been on the OC lot site or he has absolutely no idea how much of a footprint a 50,000 seat stadium takes up. Or both. I guess I shouldn't discount the fact that it could be both.
If you're the city, you don't allow land to be taken off of the tax rolls unless the tradeoff will benefit the city to a degree that offsets the lost revenue. Will the development result in jobs? Is it badly needed (like dorms) by an important institution? I doubt an Oakland stadium will meet that criteria, especially when Pitt has a place to play, which the city helped build with the idea that Pitt would play there.
Yes, this. All day. You could put a nice football field on top of the OC lot. As long as you weren't putting anything more than bleacher seats around it. Dip**** needs to stop spamming and trolling.
The area near there could easily develop with more businesses - hotels, restaurants, shopping, etc. As well as some non-university owned nicer apartment complexes. I'm not sure how much tax they are generating out of those boarded up places across the Blvd, but I'd think that area is capable of being a lot more than it currently is.
The funny thing is that you can easily go to Google maps and see that even if that whole area was flat the surface area of the OC lot is approximately the same size as the soccer field over the hill in the Petersen Complex. It's actually a little smaller than the baseball field. And I'm just talking about the fields, no stands included. The notion that you could fit a football field with enough seats for 50,000 people on that lot without a significant amount of work is simply absurd.
How much of the $400 million could be knocked off by selling the naming rights?
Would 50,000 fans be willing to spend a couple hundred dollars more a year for 20 years to self fund their own stadium for the opening of the 2035 season?
Would 50,000 fans be willing to spend a couple hundred dollars more a year for 20 years to self fund their own stadium for the opening of the 2035 season?
Heinz and pnc pay around 3m a year. Consol was around the same. Pitt would probably bring less. Would cover some of the interest payments.
A couple hundred for our smallish fan base wouldn't make a dent and people would bitch anyway.
You need the giant donors and corporations to step up. Seems none are interested.
