USF…. (Merged threads)

[Hoophound]

So, just to be clear, your position is that we need to have a stadium 30 minutes off campus because it's more convenient for people to get to, and, in any event, it doesn't matter that it's 30 minutes off campus because Connecticut is such a small state that travel times don't matter?

No. My position is that a stadium 30 minutes off campus and in the population center isn’t a big deal. My evidence is that when we had a solid football team in a major conference literally no one was complaining about the Rent. The game day experience was fantastic.

Would it be even better on campus? Sure. Is it critical? I just don’t see it. We already have a fan base that pretty enthusiastically accepts playing basketball in Hartford half the time.

 

[CL82]

No. My position is that a campus 30 minutes off campus and in the population center isn’t a big deal. My evidence is that when we had a solid football team in a major conference literally no one was complaining about the Rent. The game day experience was fantastic.

Would it be even better on campus? Sure. Is it critical? I just don’t see it. We already have a fan base that pretty enthusiastically accepts playing basketball in Hartford half the time.

I think we sort of agree. I like the Rent, but agree an on campus stadium would have been a better choice. When faced with dumping more money into the Rent which is approaching the end of its nominal life at 30 years. The state should think hard about whether it makes more sense to invest that money into an on campus stadium.

 

[Hoophound]

I think we sort of agree. I like the Rent, but agree an on campus stadium would have been a better choice. When faced with dumping more money into the Rent which is approaching the end of its nominal life at 30 years. The state should think hard about whether it makes more sense to invest that money into an on campus stadium.

Sure, but I just don’t really expect that to happen. There’s so many people against putting the stadium in Storrs due to infrastructure and it would be far easier to update the Rent.

People focus on whatever they don’t have rather than what they do. I find the Rent to be a very positive asset with a great game day experience. I really don’t think putting the stadium on campus is going to fill the student section on the regular if we aren’t in a major conference. Our fan base wants to play major college football like we used to. That’s the only genuine problem.

 

[CL82]

Sure, but I just don’t really expect that to happen. There’s so many people against putting the stadium in Storrs due to infrastructure and it would be far easier to update the Rent.

People focus on whatever they don’t have rather than what they do. I find the Rent to be a very positive asset with a great game day experience. I really don’t think putting the stadium on campus is going to fill the student section on the regular if we aren’t in a major conference. Our fan base wants to play major college football like we used to. That’s the only genuine problem.

What "infrastructure" do you believe needs to happen in order to put a stadium in on campus? Who, exactly, are the "so many people" who are against putting a stadium in on campus? Why would their opinion matter?

Asking students to get on a bus an hour before game time and drive 30 minutes to an off-campus facility is a decidedly different experience than allowing them to roll out of bed and walk across campus to a football stadium. It absolutely impacts student attendance. Having the tailgating on campus creates a better experience for both students and non-students. There's a reason why virtually every other FBS school does it this way and our lack of a non-campus stadium is often cited as one of the reasons that Connecticut " is not serious about football".

It is easy to get trapped in the mindset of "the way things are is the way that they will always be". Hopefully, when faced with the decision of investing nine figures into an aging stadium that has reached the end of its useful life, the powers that be will evaluate whether it makes more sense to spend that money on an on campus stadium.

 

[Hoophound]

What "infrastructure" do you believe needs to happen in order to put a stadium in on campus? Who, exactly, are the "so many people" who are against putting a stadium in on campus? Why would their opinion matter?

Asking students to get on a bus an hour before game time and drive 30 minutes to an off-campus facility is a decidedly different experience than allowing them to roll out of bed and walk across campus to a football stadium. It absolutely impacts student attendance. Having the tailgating on campus creates a better experience for both students and non-students. There's a reason why virtually every other FBS school does it this way and our lack of a non-campus stadium is often cited as one of the reasons that Connecticut " is not serious about football".

It is easy to get trapped in the mindset of "the way things are is the way that they will always be". Hopefully, when faced with the decision of investing nine figures into an aging stadium that has reached the end of its useful life, the powers that be will evaluate whether it makes more sense to spend that money on an on campus stadium.

I’m really not trapped in that mindset. I would like a nice, new on campus stadium. I just don’t think it’s that critical at a school that plays lots of games in Hartford successfully and has for 50 years. It’s kind of a tradition.

The townies always oppose growth of the campus. That may change as a new generation is taking over, but in the past they’ve been very difficult. Maybe, political will can overcome that but you need a strong governor that genuinely wants and cares about getting a studium built in Storrs. Its also a chicken/egg situation. Do we need the on campus stadium to move up or do we need to move up to justify the new stadium? We aren’t borrowing an NFL stadium or playing in a crap hole like UMass does, so it’s tough to generate that urgency. We have a nice home in a convenient location and we’ve been playing big games in Hartford forever.

However, I would like to see some serious talks started, maybe some preliminary drawings and some real discussion of potential sites on campus in the press in order to aid our realignment narrative.

 

[Travelman6]

USF ended their season 9-4, 6-2 in the AAC
They beat Florida as everyone said who had a very lackluster 4-8 (2-6) season. Boise finished 9-5. Miami crushed usf 49-12.
Lost to the best aac team they played, Navy, didn't play Tulane but crushed N. Texas. Also lost to Memphis.

For anyone who wanted to know.

 

[CL82]

I’m really not trapped in that mindset. I would like a nice, new on campus stadium. I just don’t think it’s that critical at a school that plays lots of games in Hartford successfully and has for 50 years. It’s kind of a tradition.

The townies always oppose growth of the campus. That may change as a new generation is taking over, but in the past they’ve been very difficult. Maybe, political will can overcome that but you need a strong governor that genuinely wants and cares about getting a studium built in Storrs. It also a chicken/egg situation. Do we need the on campus stadium to move up or do we need to move up to justify the new stadium? We aren’t borrowing an NFL stadium or playing in a crap hole like UMass does, so it’s tough to generate that urgency. We have a nice home in a convenient location and we’ve been playing big games in Hartford forever.

However, I would like to see some serious talks started, maybe some preliminary drawings and some real discussion of potential sites on campus in the press in order to aid our realignment narrative..

I think the fear of the peoples republic of Mansfield is dramatically overblown. For example, if a new stadium were put in the existing athletic complex behind Toscano, an environmental impact study has already been done. There really aren't any approvals necessary from any Mansfield board. So while I am confident that Mansfield residence will chirp up about it, they'll be shouting into the wind.

You seem to be suggesting that there's an argument that if we built a stadium we'd automatically be admitted into the conference of our choice, or any P4 conference. I don't think anyone is suggesting that. Instead people, including me, are pointing out that having an off campus stadium hurts our overall profile. We know from our dalliance with the big 12 that big 12 athletic directors specifically listed the fact that we have an off-campus stadium as an indication that we aren't committed to football. I don't think anyone can say it's absolutely critical to our realignment hopes, but where we have consistently been treated as a "borderline" candidate, it's probably helpful. If a P4 conference says that it's a requirement for us to join, there's very little doubt in my mind that will build one because the ROI from that investment, under those circumstances is pretty easy to figure out. In any event, other universities that are looking to make the jump to the P4 have or are investing in on campus arenas. What do they know that we don't?

I respectfully point out that the "well we've played in Hartford for 50 years and it's been fine" assertion is exactly a "the way it is, is the way it will always be" argument. Playing at Civic Center makes sense because the legislature forced us to cap the size of the arena we campus. I enjoy seeing games in Hartford and they are certainly easier for me to get to then going to Gampel. What I don't love about it is the pricing structure which essentially hides part of the CDRA annual multimillion dollar loss in the athletic department budget.

The same argument can be made about the Rent, except in that case there's no viable alternative. In my opinion, if the state wants the university of Connecticut to play in state (or municipal) owned arenas to pump up the local economy, it should do it at no cost to the university. It is silly to have the state pay the university, who pays the athletic department, who pays the CDRA, who runs an annual multimillion dollar deficit, which is paid for by the state. In the end, everything is being paid for by the state so why not structure it in a way that makes the university a more attractive candidate for conference alignment? It's a net nothing that would put us in a stronger position.

 

[JwittersPAC]

I’m really not trapped in that mindset. I would like a nice, new on campus stadium. I just don’t think it’s that critical at a school that plays lots of games in Hartford successfully and has for 50 years. It’s kind of a tradition.

The townies always oppose growth of the campus. That may change as a new generation is taking over, but in the past they’ve been very difficult. Maybe, political will can overcome that but you need a strong governor that genuinely wants and cares about getting a studium built in Storrs. Its also a chicken/egg situation. Do we need the on campus stadium to move up or do we need to move up to justify the new stadium? We aren’t borrowing an NFL stadium or playing in a crap hole like UMass does, so it’s tough to generate that urgency. We have a nice home in a convenient location and we’ve been playing big games in Hartford forever.

However, I would like to see some serious talks started, maybe some preliminary drawings and some real discussion of potential sites on campus in the press in order to aid our realignment narrative.

If and when the RENT has run its useful life, there should be consideration of an on campus stadium. It will assist in increasing Students wanting to attend games and get alumni back to campus which typically drives up donations.

 

[Hoophound]

I have no problem with any of this. I'd love a beautiful on campus stadium. I just like the Rent and I really don't think it hurts us. If the B12 cited lack of an on campus stadium as an issue after seeing our facilities and our draw in Hartford and even NYC, they were just trying to find a reason to keep us out. We've hosted raucous crowds for B12 games at the Rent. We are a big brand and we draw a good home crowd in multiple densely populated locations. We also have a campus right downtown, just a stone's throw away. The school has to keep working the narrative better to our advantage. This is an advantage in many ways and Yormark sees it.

I can tell you right now, based on living in a very "Red" area, that Connecticut's reputation as one of the bluest of "Blue" states probably hurt us more than anything else. There's a palpable groan when CT, MA, CA, VT, NY, NJ etc. are mentioned around here. Its a strong bias. The cultural fit is an issue to many, although I think its a big misunderstanding as to what CT is really like.

 

[RitzLuce1]

USF ended their season 9-4, 6-2 in the AAC
They beat Florida as everyone said who had a very lackluster 4-8 (2-6) season. Boise finished 9-5. Miami crushed usf 49-12.
Lost to the best aac team they played, Navy, didn't play Tulane but crushed N. Texas. Also lost to Memphis.

For anyone who wanted to know.

Thanks for the update! People sure were quick to slobber over their win vs Florida.

 

[hank970]

Look at the situation this way: How many major universities would consider abandoning a still-functional but aging on-campus stadium in favor of building a new venue that's some distance off-campus? I'd guess none; the value of an on-campus stadium is too high, even one that might need costly renovations from time to time. If it were possible to go back and consider where to site a new stadium, would the state and UConn opt again for an off-campus stadium? No. Temple would love a new on-campus stadium. USF is building one. UConn should too. Given the will, there are ways to surmount every objection and obstacle.

 

[Kolumbo]

putting all of the usual logistical bullspit aside, the football stadium is often the key centerpiece of a university campus. universities hold many events in those stadiums, both athletic and non-athletic. They are a sign of athletic pride and often house various offices. the campus is missing a very key and valuable component which is a shame. I am sure there are disadvantages when a recruit visits UConn there is no football stadium to be seen there. The biggest problem I have is The Rent as a stand-alone facility in East Hartford will never be as great a stadium as one built on campus. It just doesn't make sense to build up that facility.

I don't know but maybe they use Morrone Stadium (5,100) or Elliott Ballpark (1,500) for some events.

 

[CL82]

I can tell you right now, based on living in a very "Red" area, that Connecticut's reputation as one of the bluest of "Blue" states probably hurt us more than anything else

There was also some commentary about whether Connecticut would be a "cultural fit" which I took as referring to the issue you're referencing.

 

[Chin Diesel]

If and when the RENT has run its useful life, there should be consideration of an on campus stadium. It will assist in increasing Students wanting to attend games and get alumni back to campus which typically drives up donations.

As others have said the Rent is already over 20 years old and replacing a stadium after 30 years is not unreasonable. Sure, plenty last longer, but plenty are redone by age 30.

And with the way anything gets done in CT, making some plans 10 years in advance of when you want to be playing in a new stadium, is, a good timeline.

 

[Kolumbo]

I'm always amazed we have the iconic Yale Bowl in this state. Built 111 years ago. Seats 61k. Let's just play the games there and the folks in Fairfield County will be happy to have such a short commute.

 

[Kolumbo]

anger and questions. we have a big-time stadium issue. no on-campus stadium. a shell of a stadium in East Hartford of all places which needs big money to keep running. meanwhile the Yale Bowl in Connecticut which is never nearly full and is also "off-campus" could do the same job The Rent does and a fraction of the cost. CT always makes bad decisions which never 100% satisfies the ultimate goals. Play the games in the Yale Bowl. Plenty of room for when Michigan comes to visit. We have two legitimate football stadiums in CT and neither one fits the job requirements.

 

[jostar1]

anger and questions. we have a big-time stadium issue. no on-campus stadium. a shell of a stadium in East Hartford of all places which needs big money to keep running. meanwhile the Yale Bowl in Connecticut which is never nearly full and is also "off-campus" could do the same job The Rent does and a fraction of the cost. CT always makes bad decisions which never 100% satisfies the ultimate goals. Play the games in the Yale Bowl. Plenty of room for when Michigan comes to visit. We have two legitimate football stadiums in CT and neither one fits the job requirements.

Pay rent to Yale instead of to the state of Connecticut? That's not going to fly.

By the way, the Rent will be undergoing more improvements.

State Bond Commission set to approve $3.8M for Rentschler Field to address upgrades

The Connecticut Bond Commission is expected to approve $3.8 million in funding for Rentschler Field Thursday, continuing a series of state-funded improvements for the UConn football stadium in East Hartford.

Thursday's allocation of new GO bonds will support security improvements, communications, television broadcast, and audiovisual upgrades to the 38,000-seat stadium, according to the state Office of Fiscal Analysis.

In 2021, the Capital Region Development Authority commissioned a study of Rentschler Field to assess the stadium's critical needs after nearly two decades of use. The state agency's report estimated that the total cost of these needs sits at $63.3 million.

The state Bond Commission has now approved a total of $12.8 million in funding for Rentschler Field over the past 18 months, beginning in June 2024 when the 10-member body allocated $5 million for roof repairs and team facilities, among other "miscellaneous repairs." In December of that year, the commission allotted another $4 million primarily for new metal detectors, repairs to TV production systems and updated restrooms.

https://www.ctinsider.com/sports/uconn-football/article/rentschler-field-renovations-upgrades-state-bonds-21248544.php

 

[Kolumbo]

Pay rent to Yale instead of to the state of Connecticut? That's not going to fly.

By the way, the Rent will be undergoing more improvements.

State Bond Commission set to approve $3.8M for Rentschler Field to address upgrades

The Connecticut Bond Commission is expected to approve $3.8 million in funding for Rentschler Field Thursday, continuing a series of state-funded improvements for the UConn football stadium in East Hartford.

Thursday's allocation of new GO bonds will support security improvements, communications, television broadcast, and audiovisual upgrades to the 38,000-seat stadium, according to the state Office of Fiscal Analysis.

In 2021, the Capital Region Development Authority commissioned a study of Rentschler Field to assess the stadium's critical needs after nearly two decades of use. The state agency's report estimated that the total cost of these needs sits at $63.3 million.

The state Bond Commission has now approved a total of $12.8 million in funding for Rentschler Field over the past 18 months, beginning in June 2024 when the 10-member body allocated $5 million for roof repairs and team facilities, among other "miscellaneous repairs." In December of that year, the commission allotted another $4 million primarily for new metal detectors, repairs to TV production systems and updated restrooms.

https://www.ctinsider.com/sports/uconn-football/article/rentschler-field-renovations-upgrades-state-bonds-21248544.php

I'm sure paying rent to Yale is a lot less expensive than whatever improvements they can make to the stadium outpost

 

[Waquoit]

The Rent isn't what's holding UConn back. The Rent is what put UConn in the picture in the first place. A free gift from the state. If UConn wants to build an on-campus stadium I don't care. As long as they pay for it themselves.

 

[CL82]

The Rent isn't what's holding UConn back. The Rent is what put UConn in the picture in the first place. A free gift from the state. If UConn wants to build an on-campus stadium I don't care. As long as they pay for it themselves.

If it was a gift from the State, wouldn't we actually own it?

 

[Kolumbo]

The Rent isn't what's holding UConn back. The Rent is what put UConn in the picture in the first place. A free gift from the state. If UConn wants to build an on-campus stadium I don't care. As long as they pay for it themselves.

Nothing is free. Pratt donated the land. The State owns the stadium. UConn pays to use it.