TEMPLE TO GET NEW STADIUM! 2/15/16
- Thread starter Z #2
- Start date
That's because every single post that ignoramus writes is the absolute epitome of idiotic.
I will always come to the side of crazy and captain. We are proud Panthers and will always remember our glory days.
LOL, thank you, just a style to respond to great postings by others without erasing them. I just separate them by color, did not mean to offend. It is a good discussion and DRVY & CrazyPaco gave some good info that I learned from and responded to get some clarification and learn from Crazy Paco and share.
Well, are adults here and can figure it out. Don't worry if the colored font and quotation usage is borderline nauseating we do that to irritate those in the nursery. Just ignore the posts and complain about the colors because they can't add to the content. Just keep watching the flying colored airplanes over your head?
CP gave great content and I commend, learned and thanked him. CP reminded everyone that read the thread where Pitt has come from in 1996 and how difficult it was just returning to winning and building new facilities.
As well as how Pitt operates with other schools so others can know more. I agreed with him when he reminded and corrected me with no offense taken. We all know more now, and thanks for putting up with my own but that's on me.
Last edited:
A good Link on Heinz Field by CMU with details on history, size and costs. Just FYI for those interested.
Starkey last week, talked about how Heinz may be too old???? Steelers may want to build another Dome Stadium to host a future Super Bowl like in Arlington, Texas and proposed in LA and Las Vegas. Not saying or demanding Pitt should build one in Oakland or next to Pitt UPMC Practice Facilities in smaller size like at Baylor or TCU?
I am just grateful what Nordenberg did and now Gallagher is doing and leave it to Pitt to first rebuild Top 25 Winning Teams multiple 10 Game Wins the next 10 years to establish a Top 25 Winning Program, and then when the time comes, decides how to address any other needs, if it ever comes to build any more buildings or facilities in this class by computer era with more to come.
LINK:
http://www.cmu.edu/steinbrenner/brownfields/Case Studies/pdf/heinz-field.pdf
Starkey last week, talked about how Heinz may be too old???? Steelers may want to build another Dome Stadium to host a future Super Bowl like in Arlington, Texas and proposed in LA and Las Vegas. Not saying or demanding Pitt should build one in Oakland or next to Pitt UPMC Practice Facilities in smaller size like at Baylor or TCU?
I am just grateful what Nordenberg did and now Gallagher is doing and leave it to Pitt to first rebuild Top 25 Winning Teams multiple 10 Game Wins the next 10 years to establish a Top 25 Winning Program, and then when the time comes, decides how to address any other needs, if it ever comes to build any more buildings or facilities in this class by computer era with more to come.
LINK:
http://www.cmu.edu/steinbrenner/brownfields/Case Studies/pdf/heinz-field.pdf
Last edited:
Did you even read the article, or did you just glance at the headline? Or did you bypass both and just take Z#2's interpretation of the headline as gospel? The article is an op-ed from a political columnist, not a news article. There is nothing in the article that even remotely approaches proof that the state capital expenditures necessary for the Temple Stadium project are imminent. And then its another Grand Canyon-esque leap to draw a line to an unmentioned new on-campus Pitt Stadium project.
Del, I know that it's your opinion that only dumb people were were standing in the way of a glorious new on-campus edifice. Now that new forward thinking leadership is in place, a simple stroke of the pen will initiate the wheels of progress, and our beloved Panthers will soon be playing in the shadows of The Cathedral. But THIS article, and the previously debated article on Temple moving forward with a feasibility study are hardly reasons for you and Z#2 to be polishing your trumpets in anticipation of a victory parade. You may want to pump your brakes.
I realize there are significant hurdles to Pitt building an on-campus FB stadium. I also believe, however, that it's not impossible, as some people would suggest, and that Pitt will examine the possibility and keep its options open. I don't consider people who reject out of hand the idea of an on campus stadium dumb but I do consider them short sighted, and there is an element of this fanbase including people in this thread who go completely out of their way to quash the idea of an on-campus stadium by labeling it a waste of resources and an engineering impossibility, in large part, to defend the lame decision making of the past administration who consisted of of a group of myopic and in reality, anti-athletics, buffoons who couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag. People who go out of their way to completely try and kill the idea of an on campus stadium ignore that Pitt in not having it's own stadium is at a competitive disadvantage and are part of a tiny group of schools competing in Div. I who don't have their own stadiums. These people have ulterior motives, which they try to mask, and aren't really supporters of Pitt athletics. No matter how far fetched, expensive and difficult the idea may be, no true Pitt fan would campaign against the idea of an on campus stadium, like some of the above posters do, if they had the best interests of Pitt athletics in mind. That sums it up.
Oh Del, you were doing so well for about two and a half sentences before you slipped off into your comfortable world of blindness by supposition.
Should Pitt continuously study options on capital investments that would benefit the University as a whole? ABSOLUTELY. Not doing so would be a dereliction of duties. What is often argued in this space isn't the merits of having an on campus stadium, what is argued is the realistic prospects of such an investment considering the current political and financial winds as well as the other available solutions.
Unfortunately, your argument above then slips off into the abyss as usual. I don't think I've ever read a dissenting opinion of an on campus stadium ever reject the notion out of some blind affinity for an individual or individuals. This erroneous assumption is a large part of your repetitive agenda. It's not that those who argue against the on campus "solutions" that have been offered here are anti-athetics, lame, backward thinking, nor do they have some mysterious ulterior motive. It's that they have the capacity to reason logically and remove emotional bias.
As to your "competitive disadvantage" argument, I offer you these questions. How many Power 5 football programs are similar to Pitt in campus size, setting, and enrollment? Is it possible that Pitt being one of a "tiny group" of D1 schools playing off campus a mere reflection of the unique circumstances that Pitt operates in? And, in light of Pitt's unique circumstances, isn't it possible that solutions that work for the majority not be applicable in its case? Further, if an on campus stadium is the be all end all of competitive football, why have only a few on campus football playing D1 programs had consistent success? Shouldn't there be more parity based on your argument?
But, but, there's no land in Oakland.
But, but, there's no room in Oakland.
But, but, there's no parking in Oakland.
But, but, they'll only use it seven times a year.
But, but, oh the traffic!
What other small-minded excuses am I missing?????
Forbes Field. Three Rivers Stadium. The Syria Mosque. Buildings come and go.
If we can cure polio, we damn well can put a stadium wherever we damn well please.
BEAUTIFUL! THE ENTIRE AREA OF THE OC LOT WILL FIT THE ORIGINAL PITT STADIUM, I KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE BECAUSE I PERSONALLY MEASURED THE OC LOT WITH COST CENTER.
The personal attacks are old. I have asked you to post any urban planning studies that you have been involved with in your professional career. I have seen nothing. I did not create the plan. I admire the ideas in the www.newpittstadium.com plans as you should as well.
I thank you for promoting the NEW PITT STADIUM plan by DeFiore & Associates. I have tried to contact him, but he is not available to discuss the plan under some legal agreement signed with Pitt. This was emailed to me from his office staff. I do know that there is another design plan already paid for by Pitt regarding New Stadium on the Hill / OC Lot. Just know that if it works, Pitt will build it.
If you really believe everything you read about politicians, you know that they lie a lot. Pitt just redeemed a $250,000,000 - 5% bond. Pitt could reissue under that number and it will be bought in up in 30 minutes to institutional investors alone. But the fact is that it won't take any bonds to build this stadium. It will only take the Pitt Endowment to back the construction mortgage until the naming rights of the Stadium as sold for 25 years at $200,000,000 (Philips Technology just bought the naming rights at the Atlanta Hawks new arena for 8.5 million annually. And PPG wouldn't like to be as comparable in the Pittsburgh and World Advertising stage as say PNC Park, Consol Energy Center or Heinz Field? Call the new Pitt Stadium PPG Stadium. The Tepper family Stadium ~ David Tepper being our most gracious Pitt alumni philanthropist.....to CMU! [Tepper has fully funded the entire Pitt basketball teams scholarships / look it up!] COME ON PEOPLE! IF GALLAGHER SAYS YES ~ IT'S GONNA GET BUILT! HELL, JIMBO COVERT COULD BUILD THE DAMN THING HIMSELF PRIVATELY IF HE WANTED TO DO IT!
We found the space for a stadium once . We can do it again. The powers that be took the easy way out, a way that suited their biases, when they tore down Pitt stadium. Logic devoid of foresight is useless-welcome to the past Pitt regime's world. And we'll just have to agree to disagree that the position of opponents of the on-campus stadium idea is premised on a reading of "current political and financial winds". It's very much a vendetta resting on the need to defend Nordenberg and nothing else! What comes out of peoples' mouths doesn't necessarily reveal their motivations. I have no "agenda" other than advocating what's in Pitt's best interests and when I'm on this blog I'm focused on the best interests of Pitt athletics. Many people who post on this Board have ties to Nordenberg and the past Pitt administration, they're the people with the agenda, some of whom have been trying to censor the content on this site for years. I have no time for these people. Nordenberg and his coterie of idiots were a disaster for Pitt athletics-the facts bear this out.
There isn't a pitt fan on this planet that wouldn't prefer a nice on campus stadium over that eye sore that is Heinz field. We just disagree on how much of a priority it is and is it worth the investment of 400-600 million dollars (if not more).
I have a hard time with pitt fans that think tearing down pitt stadium was a mistake though. You don't do that, you don't have the Pete.. I love pitt stadium as much as anyone but folks, that stadium had seen it's days and was a heap.. The pete, outside of a nice venue for hoops, offers a lot of facility / resources for the student population as well..
I have a hard time with pitt fans that think tearing down pitt stadium was a mistake though. You don't do that, you don't have the Pete.. I love pitt stadium as much as anyone but folks, that stadium had seen it's days and was a heap.. The pete, outside of a nice venue for hoops, offers a lot of facility / resources for the student population as well..
Not sure it matters now, but I would love to hear more info on this "rumored" idea of a dual venue idea PItt was looking at in late 90's. Some sort of dome venue to house our hoops and football teams. Couple posters talked about it briefly. Would be curious if this was a real possibility or just a crazy idea..
Yes, in 1925. To the tune of under $30 million dollars in today's value. The conditions in Oakland and the purchasing power of a greenback are exactly the same now. Great points.
I'm curious. What "facts" do you base your opinions on? And I'm curious why you chose to ignore my questions regarding on campus competitive advantages.
Del, Love your optimism. To add, Steve P was a message board psycho. He felt it killed him in Nebraska. I've spoken to Nebraska heavy hitters about it. He and Nordy are DOA. The logo change to script buried Steve with his golden parachute. Nordy was not as beloved as you may think. He may know people, but like any politician will tell you, once you are out of office, you lose the juice. People don't answer the phone anymore.
I enjoyed reading all the discussions and especially the histories by CP (CrazyPaco), the back and forth on possibilities and priorities, and other aspects that will impact on Pitt.
After reading all, I have come to some opinions without offending anyone that contributed or know far more than myself.
1. Temple's President has stated they are seeking a Power Conference Invitation and they have committed many resources and political alliances just like Pitt did under Nordenberg. This was a commitment that started years ago. Al Golden, Addazio, and now Rhule broiught back winning in football and a few National Games last year in beating Penn State and then giving Notre Dame a tough game sell out, but 5 to 6 years of winning is often not enough. It is a tough uphill climb to even consider if a Power Conference will ever include Temple. This is not a put down of Temple just a reality of limited options of Power Conference Expansions with Temple location. The ACC and Big Ten have Pennsylvania hard to see them adding another school from Pennsylvania. The Big-12 already has location transportation problems with WVU. Unless they go with UConn and Temple, hard to see how that helps them?
2. Temple has the Best Pennsylvania Historical Record in Basketball and the Liacouras Center has really added to their Campus and Area Development. They have a huge Practice Astro-Turf Facility built in 1970s right next to Liacouras. They can build a 35,000 Stadium but it will take Neighborhood Cooperation. Temple is very lucky to have Subway Access right to their Campus and Parking is not a problem from all directions, unlike Pitt.
3. Many Philadelphia Politicians are from Temple since Temple has had big influence at City Hall and Courts in the Government Sector versus PENN in the Private Investment Sector. If Penn State gets any State Public Funding to renovate Beaver Stadium, like CP & others said, so will Temple and Pitt! How they use those Funds are limited for use is up to the Universities priorities. Just a fact of life in Harrisburg. How the Legislature will do it when they are mired in 8 month Budget mess is murky to me, but never underestimate a compromise sooner or later and higher taxes.
4. I have always found the Pitt Campus right with CMU far more beautiful than Temple, PENN, WVU, or Penn State, but far tougher Public Transportation access and Parking. When I look from other Tall Buildings the view is outstanding and like many say, limited in space that would require major re-developments. It does not have a Subway Access like PENN & Temple or a SkyBus like WVU alternative, or spread out like Penn State, and like Temple is Commuters Urban School more than Rural Small Town On-Campus Big Student Body like WVU & Penn State with high Fan Attendance and Booster Support. Re-development of City Blocks requires about $200,000 per acre versus building in rural areas only about $30,000. Competing with Pro Sports and being in Partnership with the Rooney's Steelers onStadium a& Practice Facilities are a reality the other Schools do not have even Temple. Renovations at Penn State Beaver Stadium or even building near it is so much more easier to do than finding urban city land, tearing it down and building a Stadium in Pittsburgh or Philadelphia. Just another fact of location and not easy obstacles to overcome.
5. Moreover, Penn State has the Boosters and abilities to raise the money to renovate Beaver Stadium. Still, never discount doing that when a Legislature will and can help them do it. Remember, Heinz Field and all the Political Power got behind to build Two New Public Football Stadiums, Two Ball Parks, and Two Hockey Facilities and Altoona's Ball Park for Pirates Farm Club. It was voted down by Referendum by the people but passed anyway by the Legislature. The Steelers put in $76 Million (Less than Big Ben's Contract), for a $283 Stadium, Pitt was a big part of it too. Changing that will not be easy with Steeler Rooney support.
5. As CP points out and others. Chancellor Patrick Gallagher with A.D. Barnes, Pat Narduzzi and Jamie Dixon are building on what Nordenberg, Pederson and the ACC Money has already built for Pitt to compete within a Power Conference. It has been done, but now the concentration is on Rebuilding Pitt Football by Winning under Narduzzi Stability, increasing Attendance by Winning, and Barnes rebuilding money support by Boosters and Fans. This no longer includes just football but by Pitt in ACC Basketball too and other Sports. Attracting and keeping Top Coaches and developing recruiting requires more money to win more too.
6. Temple needs to build more support and facilities near a Campus that requires much Re-Development. Penn State can renovate Beaver Stadium on its own due to its great support on its own. Pitt is just adjusting to the ACC Power Conference Money and New Regime from Top to Bottom in Athletics to build it's own base of outside support.
Consequently, the priorities of all Three Universities are different and means to acquire them are also different but one can impact the other if it includes Public Money given to all, but according to their priorities like CP's says.
Temple plans have an uphill political and neighborhood battle to make it happen is what the article said, but they have plans to overcome it and make it happen too? Penn State is moving along with or without anyone telling them what they can or cannot do? Pitt is on its own mission on just rebuilding the Football Program on Winning, becoming stable, and attracting more fans. WVU is lost in the Big-12 and Big-12 is considering Expansion or Busting up or staying the same?
I have no idea how it will all play out, just know even NCAA Football, Big Ten Conference TV Network Negotiations Are coming up, and the one thing to bet on is Never say Never, because no one can predict outside influences over the next few years like Z#2 article reports, or DRVY & others say can be a possibility, and CP's and others knowing the realities at Pitt far more than many.
But if I had to bet right now, I go with CrazyPaco & others analysis that it is not a priority for Pitt right now. It is very hard to see it happening, even with or without Public Funding going to a New Stadium on Campus or next to Pitt UPMC Facilities and that is not disrespecting others that think it should be a priority, just an opinion.
As for my view, unlike WC Fields, I rather overlook Pitt Campus and be in Pittsburgh rather than Philadelphia. I am just very excited and happy to see Chancellor Gallagher Vision into making Pitt Football & Athletics a priority by bringing in Coach Pat Narduzzi, A.D. Barnes and other right people to do it in the ACC making Pitt Is It!
After reading all, I have come to some opinions without offending anyone that contributed or know far more than myself.
1. Temple's President has stated they are seeking a Power Conference Invitation and they have committed many resources and political alliances just like Pitt did under Nordenberg. This was a commitment that started years ago. Al Golden, Addazio, and now Rhule broiught back winning in football and a few National Games last year in beating Penn State and then giving Notre Dame a tough game sell out, but 5 to 6 years of winning is often not enough. It is a tough uphill climb to even consider if a Power Conference will ever include Temple. This is not a put down of Temple just a reality of limited options of Power Conference Expansions with Temple location. The ACC and Big Ten have Pennsylvania hard to see them adding another school from Pennsylvania. The Big-12 already has location transportation problems with WVU. Unless they go with UConn and Temple, hard to see how that helps them?
2. Temple has the Best Pennsylvania Historical Record in Basketball and the Liacouras Center has really added to their Campus and Area Development. They have a huge Practice Astro-Turf Facility built in 1970s right next to Liacouras. They can build a 35,000 Stadium but it will take Neighborhood Cooperation. Temple is very lucky to have Subway Access right to their Campus and Parking is not a problem from all directions, unlike Pitt.
3. Many Philadelphia Politicians are from Temple since Temple has had big influence at City Hall and Courts in the Government Sector versus PENN in the Private Investment Sector. If Penn State gets any State Public Funding to renovate Beaver Stadium, like CP & others said, so will Temple and Pitt! How they use those Funds are limited for use is up to the Universities priorities. Just a fact of life in Harrisburg. How the Legislature will do it when they are mired in 8 month Budget mess is murky to me, but never underestimate a compromise sooner or later and higher taxes.
4. I have always found the Pitt Campus right with CMU far more beautiful than Temple, PENN, WVU, or Penn State, but far tougher Public Transportation access and Parking. When I look from other Tall Buildings the view is outstanding and like many say, limited in space that would require major re-developments. It does not have a Subway Access like PENN & Temple or a SkyBus like WVU alternative, or spread out like Penn State, and like Temple is Commuters Urban School more than Rural Small Town On-Campus Big Student Body like WVU & Penn State with high Fan Attendance and Booster Support. Re-development of City Blocks requires about $200,000 per acre versus building in rural areas only about $30,000. Competing with Pro Sports and being in Partnership with the Rooney's Steelers onStadium a& Practice Facilities are a reality the other Schools do not have even Temple. Renovations at Penn State Beaver Stadium or even building near it is so much more easier to do than finding urban city land, tearing it down and building a Stadium in Pittsburgh or Philadelphia. Just another fact of location and not easy obstacles to overcome.
5. Moreover, Penn State has the Boosters and abilities to raise the money to renovate Beaver Stadium. Still, never discount doing that when a Legislature will and can help them do it. Remember, Heinz Field and all the Political Power got behind to build Two New Public Football Stadiums, Two Ball Parks, and Two Hockey Facilities and Altoona's Ball Park for Pirates Farm Club. It was voted down by Referendum by the people but passed anyway by the Legislature. The Steelers put in $76 Million (Less than Big Ben's Contract), for a $283 Stadium, Pitt was a big part of it too. Changing that will not be easy with Steeler Rooney support.
5. As CP points out and others. Chancellor Patrick Gallagher with A.D. Barnes, Pat Narduzzi and Jamie Dixon are building on what Nordenberg, Pederson and the ACC Money has already built for Pitt to compete within a Power Conference. It has been done, but now the concentration is on Rebuilding Pitt Football by Winning under Narduzzi Stability, increasing Attendance by Winning, and Barnes rebuilding money support by Boosters and Fans. This no longer includes just football but by Pitt in ACC Basketball too and other Sports. Attracting and keeping Top Coaches and developing recruiting requires more money to win more too.
6. Temple needs to build more support and facilities near a Campus that requires much Re-Development. Penn State can renovate Beaver Stadium on its own due to its great support on its own. Pitt is just adjusting to the ACC Power Conference Money and New Regime from Top to Bottom in Athletics to build it's own base of outside support.
Consequently, the priorities of all Three Universities are different and means to acquire them are also different but one can impact the other if it includes Public Money given to all, but according to their priorities like CP's says.
Temple plans have an uphill political and neighborhood battle to make it happen is what the article said, but they have plans to overcome it and make it happen too? Penn State is moving along with or without anyone telling them what they can or cannot do? Pitt is on its own mission on just rebuilding the Football Program on Winning, becoming stable, and attracting more fans. WVU is lost in the Big-12 and Big-12 is considering Expansion or Busting up or staying the same?
I have no idea how it will all play out, just know even NCAA Football, Big Ten Conference TV Network Negotiations Are coming up, and the one thing to bet on is Never say Never, because no one can predict outside influences over the next few years like Z#2 article reports, or DRVY & others say can be a possibility, and CP's and others knowing the realities at Pitt far more than many.
But if I had to bet right now, I go with CrazyPaco & others analysis that it is not a priority for Pitt right now. It is very hard to see it happening, even with or without Public Funding going to a New Stadium on Campus or next to Pitt UPMC Facilities and that is not disrespecting others that think it should be a priority, just an opinion.
As for my view, unlike WC Fields, I rather overlook Pitt Campus and be in Pittsburgh rather than Philadelphia. I am just very excited and happy to see Chancellor Gallagher Vision into making Pitt Football & Athletics a priority by bringing in Coach Pat Narduzzi, A.D. Barnes and other right people to do it in the ACC making Pitt Is It!
Last edited:
It isn't impossible....but it is dumb & fiscally irresponsible. A 100% reliable source questioned Gallagher, and the reply was totally straightforward....."The numbers don't work."
You really enjoy trying to get people to spend $$$ on your favorite playthings. I'm glad they don't listen. And your pathetic attempts at character assassination are evidence of deep-rooted problems. Can't buy influence...it isn't 1987.
"Z #2, post: 988028, member: 380"]Del, Love your optimism. To add, Steve P was a message board psycho. He felt it killed him in Nebraska. I've spoken to Nebraska heavy hitters about it. He and Nordy are DOA. The logo change to script buried Steve with his golden parachute.
I agree that Pederson's Re-Branding of Pitt Traditions, Colors, Logos, and waste of money on his Consultants were failures both at Pitt and NU. Yet, to be fair, Pederson's implementation of Chancellor's Nordenberg Vision to rebuild Pitt Athletics was very good in his First Tenure at Pitt and choosing Howland and Harris. This was Pederson's Goal all along to be elevated to Nebraska his Alma Mater, but Nordenberg like any chief used that ambition to implement his own Vision on Rebuilding Pitt Athletics. Steve had his issues and failed even worse at his Alma Mater, but Nordenberg did improve The University of Pittsburgh in Academics & Athletics. Let us be clear and fair.
Nordy was not as beloved as you may think. He may know people, but like any politician will tell you, once you are out of office, you lose the juice. People don't answer the phone anymore.
I respectfully disagree with no disrespect to you. I saw Nordenberg give one of 3 Eulogies at Elsie Hillman's Celebration of Life. He is very well respected and did more for Pitt Athletics than many Chancellors before him as CP points out factually. It is not a matter if anyone is calling Nordenberg anymore, it is now if Nordenberg chooses to answer his phone. Don't forget it was Nordenberg that hired Dixon and Wannstedt that brought back a 10 Win season and #1 Status in the NCAA Basketball at times and seeds. As well as, helped saved the Big East for a while among selfish myopic BEC Catholic Basketball Schools. Pederson was brought back in my opinion, to help Nordenberg get Pitt into the ACC. I very much trust CP's proven knowledge on Pitt and respect it too.
I outlined above what I thought of this thread and I am grateful for the discussion, opinions, facts, corrections, and details of what more Pitt has to do and when and how to do it, and I am happy to leave that to others doing it.
I hope you keep postings on developments at Temple & Penn State when they come up.
I agree that Pederson's Re-Branding of Pitt Traditions, Colors, Logos, and waste of money on his Consultants were failures both at Pitt and NU. Yet, to be fair, Pederson's implementation of Chancellor's Nordenberg Vision to rebuild Pitt Athletics was very good in his First Tenure at Pitt and choosing Howland and Harris. This was Pederson's Goal all along to be elevated to Nebraska his Alma Mater, but Nordenberg like any chief used that ambition to implement his own Vision on Rebuilding Pitt Athletics. Steve had his issues and failed even worse at his Alma Mater, but Nordenberg did improve The University of Pittsburgh in Academics & Athletics. Let us be clear and fair.
Nordy was not as beloved as you may think. He may know people, but like any politician will tell you, once you are out of office, you lose the juice. People don't answer the phone anymore.
I respectfully disagree with no disrespect to you. I saw Nordenberg give one of 3 Eulogies at Elsie Hillman's Celebration of Life. He is very well respected and did more for Pitt Athletics than many Chancellors before him as CP points out factually. It is not a matter if anyone is calling Nordenberg anymore, it is now if Nordenberg chooses to answer his phone. Don't forget it was Nordenberg that hired Dixon and Wannstedt that brought back a 10 Win season and #1 Status in the NCAA Basketball at times and seeds. As well as, helped saved the Big East for a while among selfish myopic BEC Catholic Basketball Schools. Pederson was brought back in my opinion, to help Nordenberg get Pitt into the ACC. I very much trust CP's proven knowledge on Pitt and respect it too.
I outlined above what I thought of this thread and I am grateful for the discussion, opinions, facts, corrections, and details of what more Pitt has to do and when and how to do it, and I am happy to leave that to others doing it.
I hope you keep postings on developments at Temple & Penn State when they come up.
Last edited:
If college athletics had anything to do with strict fiscal responsibility, no university would be involved. If you are involved, then be prepared to compete in an equal footing or get the hell out- your 1959's view of what is or isn't fiscally prudent is obsolete. On Nordenberg and Pedersen, I'm basing my views on their record in the athletics realm-nothing else. It's not character assassination to hold people accountable for results and poor decisions. Once again your views are out of Alice in Wonderland. Get of the 50's you might like it.
So...that both programs improved both in performance and certainly financially..is something you selectively ignore?
Pitt FB was a complete mess for virtually the entirety of Nordenberg's tenure. I don't think you'd find a handful of Pitt FB fans who would agree that Nordenberg and Pedersen left Pitt FB on anything other than life support. If the poll were taken at some point early on in Harris' tenure as coach you may have gotten a few people to agree with you- but not after the coaching carousel and extension of Pedersen's contract. Those events overshadow completely any de minimus positives of the type to which you allude.
Man these threads crack me up. Listening to you people act like you know whether the university could or couldn't pull this off never gets old.
The Build-It! crowd is driven by passion and the desire to see the football program grow. That I can live with.
The It-Can't-Be-Built! crowd is fueled by a compulsive desire to sound like an expert on the internet. That I can live with too b/c it makes great comic relief.
What's ironic is the members of the latter group like to compliment themselves for thinking logically rather than emotionally, but their compulsive desire to sound like an internet intellectual is emotionally driven to the point where it's clearly pathological for several of them.
The Build-It! crowd is driven by passion and the desire to see the football program grow. That I can live with.
The It-Can't-Be-Built! crowd is fueled by a compulsive desire to sound like an expert on the internet. That I can live with too b/c it makes great comic relief.
What's ironic is the members of the latter group like to compliment themselves for thinking logically rather than emotionally, but their compulsive desire to sound like an internet intellectual is emotionally driven to the point where it's clearly pathological for several of them.
Last edited:
lol I've actually asked why he does this, why he puts question marks at the end of declarative statements, and why he capitalizes random letters. He just told me it's his style.
Yeah.
While the ACC is already in Pennsylvania with Pitt, it is not in the Philadelphia media market, thus Temple is better positioned for the ACC than for the B1G. (It can be argued that the B1G already has a foothold in the Philadelphia market with State Farm--the very same argument that is made vis-a-vis the Pittsburgh market that the B1G doesn't need Pitt.) I think the bigger obstacle to Temple ever joining the ACC is the former Big East members currently in the ACC, who no doubt continue to hold to the perception of turn-of-the-millennium Temple. (Temple has had more favorable relationships with the old-line ACC schools, mainly through basketball.)
Where does the parking come from for ANYTHING in the Pittsburgh metro area ?? All the building going on in Pittsburgh central and it is a mess getting around and finding parking for anything in the city. Parking is the last thing considered when they are building.
Nope. You ring the same old "My way is the only way, because, well, I'm me." song about the Pirates. Then you try to sneak some goofy generational cheapshot. Big hat, no cattle = Delpanther.
Gee, Pitt FB was in great shape in 1995-96. Hoops, too. They're both much better now....and SP was an idiot.
I would just like to see some actual numbers and realistic plans rather than the wildly speculated numbers/plans that have no/little basis in reality that we often see on here.
Half of you make it sound like it can be done easily and with chump change and would be clear sailing from beginning to end. That is completely ridiculous. There would be a ton of financial and political hurdles but the university would have to overcome to even start this process. If it were to ever get approval, which is no sure thing, this would clearly be a major project that may or may not make sense for the university as a whole.
However, the other half of you make it sound like Pitt's building an on campus stadium is some sort of impossible dream and would constitute the most complex and expensive architectural puzzle in the history of Western Pennsylvania. That too this clearly untrue.
I don't think a project like this would cost Pitt almost twice as much as it cost to build Heinz Field. That's just as difficult to believe as some of the other numbers around in support of building an on campus stadium.
Again, I don't know if we'll ever have the loot to pull off something like this? Further, I don't know if it would ever be an investment that we could justify?
Finally, even if we could do it and decided to go for it, I am not sure helpful the residence and politicians that represent those residents would be in that endeavor?
The hurdles are many, they are great, and they are very, very real. I would just want to find out how exactly how many hurdles we're talking about and how tall they are? That seems like the only reasonable approach to this situation.
Half of you make it sound like it can be done easily and with chump change and would be clear sailing from beginning to end. That is completely ridiculous. There would be a ton of financial and political hurdles but the university would have to overcome to even start this process. If it were to ever get approval, which is no sure thing, this would clearly be a major project that may or may not make sense for the university as a whole.
However, the other half of you make it sound like Pitt's building an on campus stadium is some sort of impossible dream and would constitute the most complex and expensive architectural puzzle in the history of Western Pennsylvania. That too this clearly untrue.
I don't think a project like this would cost Pitt almost twice as much as it cost to build Heinz Field. That's just as difficult to believe as some of the other numbers around in support of building an on campus stadium.
Again, I don't know if we'll ever have the loot to pull off something like this? Further, I don't know if it would ever be an investment that we could justify?
Finally, even if we could do it and decided to go for it, I am not sure helpful the residence and politicians that represent those residents would be in that endeavor?
The hurdles are many, they are great, and they are very, very real. I would just want to find out how exactly how many hurdles we're talking about and how tall they are? That seems like the only reasonable approach to this situation.
You all need to excuse CrazyPaco and SoufOaklin4Life, as they are both disciples of Steve from their days as students/young alums, and still under his influence. The result is that both of these gentlemen will argue against almost every decision that would reverse something Steve has been responsible for or heavily involved with, i.e. moving football back onto campus, using the script, etc.
Paco, why don't you make your case against some of the more well thought out posts like that of Dr. Von Yinzer, instead of always attempting to attack what you perceive as the lower hanging fruit posts in every stadium thread?
Paco, why don't you make your case against some of the more well thought out posts like that of Dr. Von Yinzer, instead of always attempting to attack what you perceive as the lower hanging fruit posts in every stadium thread?
Location Location Location
Finding land and adequate parking in Oakland for a 50,000 seat stadium is going to be difficult.
In the past some posters have mentioned Panther Hollow, South Side near current Pitt practice facilities or in Hazelwood (former J&L site) etc. The problem is the further out you go from Oakland, it no longer becomes an on campus facility. Heinz field is about 3.5 miles from Oakland. Would a new stadium 1.5 miles from Oakland be an on campus stadium.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Finding land and adequate parking in Oakland for a 50,000 seat stadium is going to be difficult.
In the past some posters have mentioned Panther Hollow, South Side near current Pitt practice facilities or in Hazelwood (former J&L site) etc. The problem is the further out you go from Oakland, it no longer becomes an on campus facility. Heinz field is about 3.5 miles from Oakland. Would a new stadium 1.5 miles from Oakland be an on campus stadium.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
When Pedersen was axed, Pitt FB was on life support and he was fired for this reason and the reason that Gallagher was unequivocally advised that any coach worth a $hit wouldn't come to Pitt so long as he was the AD and the same could be said for so long as Nerdy was chancellor. And if you follow the rise and fall of Pitt hoops, the fortunes of the BB program follow quite nicely with Pedey boy's tenure. Boehm hired JD and then Long replaced Boehm and Pitt hoops was doing quite nicely when Nerdy rehired his idiot friend. Pitt hoops went in the tank on Pedersen's watch. Pedey boy has the Midas touch, everything he touches turns to crap. How can you possibly deny any of this?
Pitt would need to acquire a minimum of 30 acres of land in Oakland, on or near campus. If the University owned none of that land, and had to pay about $3 million per acre, then your looking at about $90 million in costs to buy the space. That's IF Pitt owns none of the land.
Disciples of the two stooges- you have that right. Very puzzling....
He'll just go off and do more research in his ample free time trying to justify Nerdy's stupid decisions. Pay-Co.
