Rentschler Field managers urge state to upgrade the stadium

[CL82]

I just don't understand why people keep saying we can't fill our stadium because of the location. That's absurd. We used to fill it all the time when we were slightly above average. We have been horrible for 10 years. that's why it isn't full. Major football schools like FSU have abysmal attendance when they suck---and they've never sucked like us. If we win, the Rent will fill right back up.

Agreed and the Rent is gives us a great home-field advantage when it’s packed.

I guess the argument people are making is that making it easier for college kids to get to the game makes it easier to fill the stadium. They aren’t wrong but we did pack the place during Edsal’s first stint and will do it again as soon as we start putting out a competent product.

 

[Chief00]

I find it slanted, but in a different way.

CRDA is coming in, asking for "upgrades," when many of these things are deferred maintenance items that have been left to rot.
Using the XL center is a hoot, too, given that the same thing happened, with the same people.

F the CRDA. Upgrade the Rent by getting them out first.

Quite frankly, we can agree on that.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

I don't think it was slanted. If anything it was fair. The building needs improvements regardless of how the team is playing and how many fans they currently draw. The stadium and the FB program have a resemblance. After the Fiesta Bowl every possible wrong decision that could be made has been made culminating with bringing back Edsall on what they thought was a bargain contract. What that cheap "investment" created was further rusting of the beams of the program. Do it right.

I don’t either. If you had a car with 180,000 miles on it that needed $10,000 in repairs, would you fix it or just buy a new one. I say build a new stadium and do it right this time.

 

[Husky25]

I don’t either. If you had a car with 180,000 miles on it that needed $10,000 in repairs, would you fix it or just buy a new one. I say build a new stadium and do it right this time.

For this to be analogous, they need to say how much in repairs are needed or you need to identify the car. The site cost $91 Million ($128 Million in 2020 dollars) to develop. Do you think this study will come back with a recommendation for $30-50 Million in renovations? I hope not.

To me, this is the most important part of the article:
"While the emphasis may be on UConn football, Swords and other experts say a more holistic approach is necessary to attract a wide variety of events and accommodate different kinds of crowds.

“Football at this level will not make enough money to supply the school with what it needs, therefore the stadium must be a destination venue to attract bids to host other types of events,” Patty Raube Keller, program director of sports administration at Boston College."

I recall the clause in the UConn lease is that UConn will pay the first $250,000 in losses, only provided that each and every other event is in the black. Whoever at the CDRA agreed to the second part of that clause should dangle from section 241 by their thumbs. This hamstrings bookings to virtually no end. Who can guarantee 100% that a given event will make money on it's own before the event? They should be able to book concerts, festivals, private occasions, and other events such as Monster Jam, without UConn hanging 1/4 $mil over them. They are losing $500k with that stipend already. Greater volume, carrying even significantly less certainty means astronomically better odds of being in the black as a whole, even if some dates lost money on the event level.

UConn can still be the main anchor tenant, but if they are the only tenant (which is basically the case), the CDRA should just turn management over to them.

 

[CL82]

For this to be analogous, they need to say how much in repairs are needed or you need to identify the car. The site cost $91 Million ($128 Million in 2020 dollars) to develop. Do you think this study will come back with a recommendation for $30-50 Million in renovations? I hope not.

To me, this is the most important part of the article:
"While the emphasis may be on UConn football, Swords and other experts say a more holistic approach is necessary to attract a wide variety of events and accommodate different kinds of crowds.

“Football at this level will not make enough money to supply the school with what it needs, therefore the stadium must be a destination venue to attract bids to host other types of events,” Patty Raube Keller, program director of sports administration at Boston College."

I recall the clause in the UConn lease is that UConn will pay the first $250,000 in losses, only provided that each and every other event is in the black. Whoever at the CDRA agreed to the second part of that clause should dangle from section 241 by their thumbs. This hamstrings bookings to virtually no end. Who can guarantee 100% that a given event will make money on it's own before the event? They should be able to book concerts, festivals, private occasions, and other events such as Monster Jam, without UConn hanging 1/4 $mil over them. They are losing $500k with that stipend already. Greater volume, carrying even significantly less certainty means astronomically better odds of being in the black as a whole, even if some dates lost money on the event level.

UConn can still be the main anchor tenant, but if they are the only tenant (which is basically the case), the CDRA should just turn management over to them.

That clause always struck me as so odd. Why should UConn have to subsidize the bad scheduling of the CDRA?

 

[Husky25]

That clause always struck me as so odd. Why should UConn have to subsidize the bad scheduling of the CDRA?

It's a bad deal for both parties and should have been stricken from the contract long ago. It not only forces UConn to play for 1.5 more home games with no possibility of recouping the cost, it ties CDRA's hands. If every individual event has to make money on it's own, CDRA is prevented from giving discounts as on rents as loss leader and make it up in a different period, for example. For example there is no reason a brewfest couldn't be held in the concourse with some entertainment on different parts of the field. The CDRA could charge lesser booth fees in exchange for the opportunity of a profit-share on the back end, why still charging admission.

Also, I don't buy the 60+ events. Other than 6 UConn home games, and CT Foodshare (for which the CDRA would be just plain evil if they charged them for use of the driveway during COVID), the place is a virtual ghost town.

 

[hardcorehusky]

For this to be analogous, they need to say how much in repairs are needed or you need to identify the car. The site cost $91 Million ($128 Million in 2020 dollars) to develop. Do you think this study will come back with a recommendation for $30-50 Million in renovations? I hope not.

To me, this is the most important part of the article:
"While the emphasis may be on UConn football, Swords and other experts say a more holistic approach is necessary to attract a wide variety of events and accommodate different kinds of crowds.

“Football at this level will not make enough money to supply the school with what it needs, therefore the stadium must be a destination venue to attract bids to host other types of events,” Patty Raube Keller, program director of sports administration at Boston College."

I recall the clause in the UConn lease is that UConn will pay the first $250,000 in losses, only provided that each and every other event is in the black. Whoever at the CDRA agreed to the second part of that clause should dangle from section 241 by their thumbs. This hamstrings bookings to virtually no end. Who can guarantee 100% that a given event will make money on it's own before the event? They should be able to book concerts, festivals, private occasions, and other events such as Monster Jam, without UConn hanging 1/4 $mil over them. They are losing $500k with that stipend already. Greater volume, carrying even significantly less certainty means astronomically better odds of being in the black as a whole, even if some dates lost money on the event level.

UConn can still be the main anchor tenant, but if they are the only tenant (which is basically the case), the CDRA should just turn management over to them.

Why are they quoting a BC person for a UConn article? GRRRRRR

 

[CONN78SEJ]

For this to be analogous, they need to say how much in repairs are needed or you need to identify the car. The site cost $91 Million ($128 Million in 2020 dollars) to develop. Do you think this study will come back with a recommendation for $30-50 Million in renovations? I hope not.

To me, this is the most important part of the article:
"While the emphasis may be on UConn football, Swords and other experts say a more holistic approach is necessary to attract a wide variety of events and accommodate different kinds of crowds.

“Football at this level will not make enough money to supply the school with what it needs, therefore the stadium must be a destination venue to attract bids to host other types of events,” Patty Raube Keller, program director of sports administration at Boston College."

I recall the clause in the UConn lease is that UConn will pay the first $250,000 in losses, only provided that each and every other event is in the black. Whoever at the CDRA agreed to the second part of that clause should dangle from section 241 by their thumbs. This hamstrings bookings to virtually no end. Who can guarantee 100% that a given event will make money on it's own before the event? They should be able to book concerts, festivals, private occasions, and other events such as Monster Jam, without UConn hanging 1/4 $mil over them. They are losing $500k with that stipend already. Greater volume, carrying even significantly less certainty means astronomically better odds of being in the black as a whole, even if some dates lost money on the event level.

UConn can still be the main anchor tenant, but if they are the only tenant (which is basically the case), the CDRA should just turn management over to them.

You make good sense, but in the long run I think building the Rent where they did was a mistake, and I think spending millions and millions on repairs instead of building a new one is another mistake. Now the question remains, should it be built on the Storrs campus or elsewhere?

 

[Salty Dog]

You make good sense, but in the long run I think building the Rent where they did was a mistake, and I think spending millions and millions on repairs instead of building a new one is another mistake. Now the question remains, should it be built on the Storrs campus or elsewhere?

Storrs. I just graduated and was in greek life. I can say with 100% confidence that if the stadium was on campus way more students would go to the games. Taking the bus sucked (and I always took a private bus with a sorority that my fraternity rented). And with all honestly even if we were really good, taking the bus would still suck... just a little bit less.

 

[uconnric]

Storrs. I just graduated and was in greek life. I can say with 100% confidence that if the stadium was on campus way more students would go to the games. Taking the bus sucked (and I always took a private bus with a sorority that my fraternity rented). And with all honestly even if we were really good, taking the bus would still suck... just a little bit less.

You probably would have more students but many less non-students. This is really a non-issue. as far as building it in Storrs, that ship sailed long ago.

 

[UCFBfan]

Agreed and the Rent is gives us a great home-field advantage when it’s packed.

I guess the argument people are making is that making it easier for college kids to get to the game makes it easier to fill the stadium. They aren’t wrong but we did pack the place during Edsal’s first stint and will do it again as soon as we start putting out a competent product.

I agree that a winning product brings people, and students, back. I still recall going down into the student section a year or two after graduating and rocking that place into multiple Palko false starts for Pitt.

If I recall correctly, the buses have horrible schedules. They leave before the 4th quarter and some maybe after the game? Why? If you want the kids to stay, don't give them the chance to leave early.

Also, this has been talked about before but they need to up the student experience in the lot so when students get to the game, there's something there for them. Sure, many will find a tailgate so they can drink and play games. But you still have a crew to entice with free things like tailgates and other activities for students.

Off campus is hard but when the Rent first opened, students came with no issues. They need to hire an internal group, no external, money grabbing, research firm, to figure out how to get students back. Solid WiFi is a huge start!!

 

[HuskyDogArt]

I don’t either. If you had a car with 180,000 miles on it that needed $10,000 in repairs, would you fix it or just buy a new one. I say build a new stadium and do it right this time.

Do it right this time? What was wrong with the Rent when it opened? I know people said location, but Mansfield didn't want it and at the time, if I recall, there was a Democrat from Mansfield who was going to veto any plans for a stadium in Mansfield. We have a centrally located stadium.

What would you do with the Rent if the state said 'We are building a new stadium in Storrs'? The state would need to improve the roads to Storrs.

 

[CL82]

Do it right this time? What was wrong with the Rent when it opened? I know people said location, but Mansfield didn't want it and at the time, if I recall, there was a Democrat from Mansfield who was going to veto any plans for a stadium in Mansfield. We have a centrally located stadium.

Mansfield has zero ability to “veto” a stadium built in Storrs. Zero. They can make some of noise, if they want to, but that’s it. I have no idea who you’re talking about, but if that’s an actual quote, he’s an idiot.

I’ve said this plenty of times but let me say it again, I like Rentschler field. It is a great place to see a game. But putting it in East Hartford on “free land“ instead of in Storrs on “free land” was a reactionary move by the legislature to losing the Patriots in Hartford. It was dumb and has been mentioned every time we come up for realignment since.

The notion that the state would have to do massive improvements in roads is equally wrong. The vast majority of college stadiums aren’t located directly on interstate highways. Somehow, they manage to get people in and out six Saturdays a year. I have been to plenty of Rutgers games and they managed to get people in and out of the stadium without having an exit ramp that leads directly into the parking lot. The notion that that is the only way to do things in Connecticut is just another myth.

That said, it’s a great stadium a good place to see a game and an outstanding tailgating location, that just happens to be 30 minutes too far west. It is what it is and it’s not changing, but the notion that it was impossible to build on campus is just wrong. It’s like the idiots who say there’s no such thing as a white husky notwithstanding the fact that we’ve had one for a mascot for 60 some odd years.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

Do it right this time? What was wrong with the Rent when it opened? I know people said location, but Mansfield didn't want it and at the time, if I recall, there was a Democrat from Mansfield who was going to veto any plans for a stadium in Mansfield. We have a centrally located stadium.

What would you do with the Rent if the state said 'We are building a new stadium in Storrs'? The state would need to improve the roads to Storrs.

I think the whole area around Rentscheler

Do it right this time? What was wrong with the Rent when it opened? I know people said location, but Mansfield didn't want it and at the time, if I recall, there was a Democrat from Mansfield who was going to veto any plans for a stadium in Mansfield. We have a centrally located stadium.

What would you do with the Rent if the state said 'We are building a new stadium in Storrs'? The state would need to improve the roads to Storrs.

What’s wrong with Rentschler Field? It needs many millions in repairs and upgrades, it sits on a toxic waste dump going back to WW2 or before, god knows what’s in the ground there, unexploded ordnance aside. Why do you think the land was donated? Lol. Last but not least it’s 25 miles from where it should be.

 

[Salty Dog]

Mansfield has zero ability to “veto” a stadium built in Storrs. Zero. They can make some of noise, if they want to, but that’s it. I have no idea who you’re talking about, but if that’s an actual quote, he’s an idiot.

I’ve said this plenty of times but let me say it again, I like Rentschler field. It is a great place to see a game. But putting it in East Hartford on “free land“ instead of in Storrs on “free land” was a reactionary move by the legislature to losing the Patriots in Hartford. It was dumb and has been mentioned every time we come up for realignment since.

The notion that the state would have to do massive improvements in roads is equally wrong. The vast majority of college stadiums aren’t located directly on interstate highways. Somehow, they manage to get people in and out six Saturdays a year. I have been to plenty of Rutgers games and they managed to get people in and out of the stadium without having an exit ramp that leads directly into the parking lot. The notion that that is the only way to do things in Connecticut is just another myth.

That said, it’s a great stadium a good place to see a game and an outstanding tailgating location, that just happens to be 30 minutes too far west. It is what it is and it’s not changing, but the notion that it was impossible to build on campus is just wrong. It’s like the idiots who say there’s no such thing as a white husky notwithstanding the fact that we’ve had one for a mascot for 60 some odd years.

Here's a cool map of the land owned by UConn in Storrs from the Campus Master Plan (also map picture is not up to date). Any one have ideas for where you would put the stadium? You wouldn't necessarily need large parking lots surrounding it like the rent. As an alternative people could tailgate at a few spots around campus and the crowds would eventually walk to the stadium through campus closer to tip-off. Students I'd imagine would have big tailgates at off-campus houses and then walk to the stadium as well. Just one idea but I could definitely see it becoming a big community thing that everyone looks forward to. One can dream.

 

[HuskiesFan1014]

Here's a cool map of the land owned by UConn in Storrs from the Campus Master Plan (also map picture is not up to date). Any one have ideas for where you would put the stadium? You wouldn't necessarily need large parking lots surrounding it like the rent. As an alternative people could tailgate at a few spots around campus and the crowds would eventually walk to the stadium through campus closer to tip-off. Students I'd imagine would have big tailgates at off-campus houses and then walk to the stadium as well. Just one idea but I could definitely see it becoming a big community thing that everyone looks forward to. One can dream.

Just stop. PLEASE STOP.