Will stadium issues doom UConn?

[Pudge]

Lets get a few sellouts in a row before we start the silly talk of taxpayer funded expansion. Most of us are both football fans and taxpayers.

I have tried, over the years, to get this board to focus on Public Finance beyond the cliche. It never works.

Rentschler is fine. In fact, the conservative operating revenue projections done when the Stadium was built PLUS the unbelievable low finance cost now locked into place ... leaves the Net Income available for Debt Service at a number that you can expand that Stadium.

So ... the issue is Public Relations. It is this "silly talk of taxpayer funded expansion" that is incorrect. That is NOT what happens. The Stadium (and also the Public Authority that owns the Stadium) is a separate finance entity. This is NOT going to be paid with your CT tax dollars. I am not saying that it is totally separate from the "full faith & credit" of the State Government. But, I am saying that you can certainly raise the funding necessary to accomplish the expansion on current Net Income.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The Rent was never going to be built on campus because it would have cost hundreds of millions to address the infrastructure issues - namely extending 384 or building a 4 lane connector to 84.

Even beyond those fundamental issues, if it was in Storrs, you would really diminish your Fairfield county attendance, a part of the state where you are already competing with many pro sporting options.

Even with flaws such as the beer garden, the Rent is an expandable facility in a great spot...it won't be a deciding factor in the ACC selection.

The reality is that with a little foresight, the state would see the wisdom in doing those things anyway. Universities should be magnets for research and development, tech companies, entertainment venues etc. If Storrs was more accessible, with football on campus, and more restaurants, bars and other necessities, businesses would move there, and it would all be a nice growth opportunity.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

The Rent was never going to be built on campus because it would have cost hundreds of millions to address the infrastructure issues - namely extending 384 or building a 4 lane connector to 84.

These things should have been done anyway. You have the University of Friggin Connecticut stuck out in the middle of nowhere without limited highway access. Connecticut needs to start thinking in this century not the 1800's.

 

[hexlub]

These things should have been done anyway. You have the University of Friggin Connecticut stuck out in the middle of nowhere without limited highway access. Connecticut needs to start thinking in this century not the 1800's.

The infrastructure can barely handle 10,000 people coming to a game at Gampel. How is it going to handle 5x's that? Plus, where was it going to go?

I would have liked it to be on campus as much as the next guy/gal. However, it just doesn't make sense.

 

[businesslawyer]

Stadium issues have long been an issue if being shortsighted is a problem. Stadium should have been built on campus (nothing like college football on game day to bring people back to old State U). But even on it's present stite, the tried to make it "unobtrusive" and "low profile" (What . . . so no one would be able to see it? Because it was visual blight?). And of course, they built it tiny. 50K should have been the minimum and they should have closed off that stupid beer garden (and I love suds don't get me wrong) to force more people to spend more time in their seats rather than stand, drink, and BS with the game as an after thought). And finally, since the public can only glimnce at the Stadium from Silver Lane, how about putting something similar on this side as they have on the Cabelas side so that to the uninformed who are riding by are immediately aware of UConn's pride and joy. Stop thinking small Connecticut.

We would be behind, not ahead of, where we are today if we build the stadium to seat 50k. Because we didn't need the seats, and the fact that we basically filled the stadium from day one made the stadium exciting and created more buzz. If we started playing in a half empty stadium, fans would have stopped coming sooner.

When we need 50k seats, we will have the expansion.

By the way TDH -- I'm waiting for your explanation of how it's possible to emphasize everything you want in a football team (Heisman contender, throw the ball around, move the ball explosively) and still be on a five game losing streak like the 'Neers. I thought all we had to do to win was that?