Future of the XL Center as a Home Site

[krinklecut]

Possibly one of the dumbest things I've ever read. No one ever took our politicians to be the brightest individuals.

You’re in the city right? How many home games do you make it to? Complaining about the difference in getting to Storrs over Hartford from somewhere like Fairfield is such a joke when we have die hards who travel much further to make it to games.

 

[Fishy]

The best solution would be to build a new modern facility in Hartford for basketball with all the great amenities. Since it has to have hockey, how much would MSG Sports kick in? anything? They're always trying to do too many things but nothing great. XL Center is far too old. Gampel was nice but the design by modern standards, meh.

Fiserv Forum, Milwaukee $1.2 billion, 17,3685 for basketball and 15,178 for hockey
Wintrust Arena, Chicago, $173 million, 10,387 for basketball

The biggest issue is that these small city civic centers never make money. New, old - doesn’t matter, they all lose cash.

So the state can’t afford the $700M to build a new one and it would not be able to afford operating a new one or even the old one. (Eventually, they will slap a bandaid on the old one and call it grand.)

The only sensible way forward for UConn is to start planning for the replacement for Gampel.

 

[husky429]

Congratulations. You've just bankrupted your entire university. Liberal Arts departments are actually in the black and bring in revenues that subsidize other departments.

I don't have much to say other than to re-emphasize that this is correct. Liberal arts departments have super low expenses compared to other departments.

 

[krinklecut]

I don't have much to say other than to re-emphasize that this is correct. Liberal arts departments have super low expenses compared to other departments.

Especially, you know, at a large liberal arts university lol

 

[husky429]

The UConn operating budget is like $3.3Bn (all campuses and medical).

State is proposing a $160M cut (assuming just for storrs/regional campuses).

The UConn President "threatening" publicly (first mistake) to pull games out of Hartford and pointing to the financial hardships that amount of a rounding error in the scheme of things comes off very ineffectual.

The state has publicly supported UConn athletics with votes of confidence in spite of us falling behind our regional peers in terms of top line rev due to no media deals (and in footballs case playing in front of sparse crowds for years) and now this President thinks it's the time to play hard ball publicly?

The vast majority of the $$ in that budget is already allocated. A 160M cut is not a rounding error.

 

[Storrs South]

You’re in the city right? How many home games do you make it to? Complaining about the difference in getting to Storrs over Hartford from somewhere like Fairfield is such a joke when we have die hards who travel much further to make it to games.

I think you mistook my comment. I've been to 3 games in Hartford this year and 4 or 5 in Gampel this season and I'm coming from NYC.

I don't want to go through my entire opinion of the topic but I do see value in both venues. However if politicians in CT think UConn must always be in Hartford regardless of terms that's where I find it ridiculous.

The terms from a monetary, scheduling prioritization, and quality of building need to be completely overhauled for UConn to consider Hartford going forward.

 

[husky429]

This is precisely why in many countries, there's differential tuition. At U. Toronto, you pay a lot less for a liberal arts degree than you do an engineering degree. The charge almost doubles.

Always thought this is the way it should be.

 

[krinklecut]

I think you mistook my comment. I've been to 3 games in Hartford this year and 4 or 5 in Gampel this season and I'm coming from NYC.

I don't want to go through my entire opinion of the topic but I do see value in both venues. However if politicians in CT think UConn must always be in Hartford regardless of terms that's where I find it ridiculous.

The terms from a monetary, scheduling prioritization, and quality of building need to be completely overhauled for UConn to consider Hartford going forward.

Oh no, I wasn’t trying to comment on anything you said or misconstrue, just replied to that post since it was your most recent one.

If you can make the trip to Storrs from the city, people can make it from in state.

 

[uconnfan68]

$4M cut is not nothing. Entire departments exist on less than that.

Now try $360 million over the next 2 years. Are we closing UConn?

 

[CL82]

The agreement in vacuum is less favorable to UConn if you view it as an independent entity from the state, but viewing through the lense of a political arrangement it becomes a lot more mutually beneficial

But none of those benefits are contingent upon UConn losing money every time it plays at the XL Center, right? If the state wants to use its funds to spur the economy for Hartford, it certainly can do that. It doesn’t need to do use UConn as a conduit.

 

[CL82]

Capacities were 18,000, 20,000, 20,738. Different terms for each venue on rev share for suites, concessions, and parking.

So all were larger venues and one offs, rather than a yearly lease. For all of them, the lessee got some varying percentage of suites, concessions, and parking for their $40,000. Not really an apples to apples comparison to the UConn’s lease at the XL Center but still good information.

 

[CL82]

The only sensible way forward for UConn is to start planning for the replacement for Gampel.

I don’t know that we need to replace Gampel. I think it is about “right sized” for us. I suspect that the proposed concourse project would allow for some addition to seats, as well as upgrading concessions and bathrooms. That would seem to be all we need in the near term.

 

[Kolumbo]

The biggest issue is that these small city civic centers never make money. New, old - doesn’t matter, they all lose cash.

So the state can’t afford the $700M to build a new one and it would not be able to afford operating a new one or even the old one. (Eventually, they will slap a bandaid on the old one and call it grand.)

The only sensible way forward for UConn is to start planning for the replacement for Gampel.

I was going under the assumption that UConn Basketball will be played in Hartford no matter what which does have its benefits. I agree the best and most sensible solution is a new arena on campus.

 

[drayenob]

She's in charge of $1.7bn. Not the $3.3bn budget.

The $160m cut is to the enterprise that has a $1.7bn budget. This is almost a 10% budget cut. I can't even begin to describe for you how catastrophic this is, since very little of that budget is fungible. This would devastate UConn.

As for the $3.3bn, there's an additional $160m being cut from the other side which she isn't responsible for.

By any measure, the state of Connecticut is nowhere near a good partner for the university. It's bottom of the barrel lowest quintile in support. You're quickly entering Pennsylvania territory as you drop below 20% in state subsidy,

Your comment took me by surprise. I went looking for data and found this which suggests that CT provides one of the highest subsidies per student:

National Science Foundation - State Indicators

National Science Board Science and Engineering Indicators. A broad base of quantitative information on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise.

ncses.nsf.gov

I'm sure its more complicated than this. How do you arrive at the bottom quintile?

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Since when is 10% a rounding error?

The vast majority of the $$ in that budget is already allocated. A 160M cut is not a rounding error.

The rounding error comment is directed at the $4M it costs UConn to play basketball at the civic center and football at the rent. That again, is only the expense and doesn't provide any revenue numbers like tickets and seat donations.

But none of those benefits are contingent upon UConn losing money every time it plays at the XL Center, right? If the state wants to use its funds to spur the economy for Hartford, it certainly can do that. It doesn’t need to do use UConn as a conduit.

Again you keep saying that UConn loses money playing at the civic center but fail to account for seat donations. That's a massive omission.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I don't have much to say other than to re-emphasize that this is correct. Liberal arts departments have super low expenses compared to other departments.

Lab costs and facilities are pretty small.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I don’t know that we need to replace Gampel. I think it is about “right sized” for us. I suspect that the proposed concourse project would allow for some addition to seats, as well as upgrading concessions and bathrooms. That would seem to be all we need in the near term.

If, and only if, UConn stopped playing any games at XL, then Gampel needs expanding.

 

[CL82]

Again you keep saying that UConn loses money playing at the civic center but fail to account for seat donations. That's a massive omission.

But there are seat donations for Gampel as well, right? Again, if you have those specific numbers post a link to them. If not, it’s just speculation.

 

[Hunt for 7]

This has been going on since Gampel opened. They should of made it bigger then but they wanted a cozy on campus facility and the we became a consistent national power. I thought they already expanded Gampel once not an architect but there will be limits to how much bigger you could make it where it becomes more efficient to build a new building. There is no good answer to this. The state and university got on the road with the two venues and now there is no off ramp. There will be political concessions on both sides and there will be slight upgrades to XL and the it will go away. Of course there is always the chance the roof at XL collapse again and that would change everything.

 

[Fishy]

I don’t know that we need to replace Gampel. I think it is about “right sized” for us. I suspect that the proposed concourse project would allow for some addition to seats, as well as upgrading concessions and bathrooms. That would seem to be all we need in the near term.

It’s 10,000 seats. We sold 15,000 the other night.

The concourse project is DOA.

Lord, you people and your “near term” bandaids.

How many of them need to fail before the lightbulb goes off?

 

[ConnHuskBask]

But there are seat donations for Gampel as well, right? Again, if you have those specific numbers post a link to them. If not, it’s just speculation.

I'm bringing seat donations into the discussion as a relevant piece of information but not drawing any definitive conclusions based off of it.

You have claimed they lose money on the games played in Hartford multiple times in this thread by passing that off as a fact, when by your own admission have said you didn't take into account seat donations.

If anyone has those numbers it would be UConn, right? UConn is trying to make a compelling case as to why they shouldn't play in Hartford and the only numbers the President cites are expenses. You would think it would make their case more definitively compelling could they state we're a net money loser. But they don't, which leads me to believe it's break even at worse and most likely a net positive.

 

[August_West]

Horrible idea. Alienating half the fan base and capping the number of people who can go to games is not going to work out.

Great idea, we are not Hartford’s economic nursemaid

 

[CL82]

It’s 10,000 seats. We sold 15,000 the other night.

The concourse project is DOA.

Yeah, but we aren’t selling 15,000 every night. 12,500, which, if I recall correctly, was the original goal for Gampel before the legislature downsized it to protect the Hartford Civic Center, and the New Haven Coliseum. It’s probably about right. I don’t know that an additional 2500 seats justifies building a new arena.

What killed the concourse project? Is that a fact or speculation? That seemed like such a sensible and cost effective way to add seats and upgrade facilities to improve the fan experience at Gampel.

 

[CL82]

I'm bringing seat donations into the discussion as a relevant piece of information but not drawing any definitive conclusions based off of it.

You have claimed they lose money on the games played in Hartford multiple times in this thread by passing that off as a fact, when by your own admission have said you didn't take into account seat donations.

If anyone has those numbers it would be UConn, right? UConn is trying to make a compelling case as to why they shouldn't play in Hartford and the only numbers the President cites are expenses. You would think it would make their case more definitively compelling could they state we're a net money loser. But they don't, which leads me to believe it's break even at worse and most likely a net positive.

You’re bringing up a number that you have zero idea of its impact. That’s the point. I could speculate that more games at Gampel would create more alumni donations to the University because they’re on campus. It’s an easy enough thing to do, but without any data, it’s meaningless.

None of that changes the fact that unless games at the XL Center are sold out, the school loses money versus playing at Gampel on a per game basis.

 

[Fishy]

Yeah, but we aren’t selling 15,000 every night. 12,500, which, if I recall correctly, was the original goal for Gampel before the legislature downsized it to protect the Hartford, Civic Center, and the New Haven Coliseum, it’s probably about right. I don’t know that an additional 2500 seats justifies building a new arena.

What killed the concourse project? That seemed like such a sensible and cost effective way to add seats and upgrade facilities to improve the fan experience at Gampel.

It’s a 33 year old building that isn’t particularly nice or comfortable. And it was not about adding seats, so while common sense should have killed it, a broke-ass state of Connecticut killed it. (It was never actually on the schedule. It was a color-pencil sketch on a plan ten years ago.)

XL is not going to get better - it will simply get worse raster or slower, depending on what they do. Gampel is not going to get better - it’s just getting older.

We need a modern 12,500-15,000 seat facility. We can pretend we don’t, but do not be surprised when “game day” atmosphere kneecaps us again when realignment comes around again. Eventually, you all will figure it out.