Important OCS Update

[puc86]

15 minutes ago, SilverBull said:

Given the state of college in general, and in particular the state of USF football, I agree with this point and think it only makes sese to build an OCS if it is part of a more comprehensive infrastructure improvement plan that benefits the university and the community at large.  But, for whatever reason, they didn't ask me for my input.

You would think that would have happened during at least one of the feasibility studies

[Triple B]

9 hours ago, Brad said:

How many college teams have on-campus stadiums isn’t it like 98% and now suddenly you’re saying we’re realizing it’s important for our students and our student athletes (in the current situation)?

How many college teams had to build an on-campus stadium or not have a football program .......probably like 98% of them?

I don't think they suddenly realized anything. I think we've finally reached the point in the development of the donor base that we can build one the way we need to. College football should be played on campus ..... but it doesn't need to be.

 

[Triple B]

8 hours ago, puc86 said:

Improve the situation and then you can see if you think it’s a good idea to build a stadium but you don’t build a stadium because you think it’s going to miraculously improve your situation and you need a grand gesture.

One of those rarities where we're in agreement ...

[Jim Johnson]

12 hours ago, Brad said:

You don't make investments this large to stay where you're at.

EXACTLY.

But USF cannot wait.  "Build the stadium for the conference you want, not the conference you're in."

[michibull]

5 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I think this is looking at it from a historical perspective and ignoring the cap that exists based on who you are playing and that live sports attendance in general is in decline. The Yuengling center is not packed with people reliving the BEAST days, it is mostly empty.

The Tampa market has spoken and most people want nothing to do with the AAC and they will want even less to do with it as it continues to decline. If we do not have have a solution in place for the AAC problem there is nothing else that can be done to force people to be excited about something they are not going to be excited about. 

In the past decade most Minor League stadiums around here have had amazing improvements to keep Spring Training up to snuff but that has not lead to any greater minor league attendance within those stadiums. College Football is now professional sports and no one cares about third tier minor league professional sports even if it is playing in their back yard.

This is not Field of Dreams and Shoeless Joe Jackson is not going to come if we build it, which would lead to the people coming. UNT is going to show up which will lead to emptiness anywhere and everywhere. 

 

Agree with your points, but this is a part of the total package. I like that they are targeting 35k with potential for more. In terms of improving our conference situation, winning IS #1, but while that is happening, we need to work on the other neglected areas and that’s where the IPF and OCS come into play. I think the conference expansion circus is going to explode, but idk when and therefore, I do believe that USF has to do everything it can NOW in preparation; as to help our chances of landing in a good spot. In terms of the stadium cost, IF we get back to winning 7 or 8 games a year, we will have enough attendance to pay for it, which I think is doable in the AAC; but as you said, the OCS alone won’t do it, but it is a part of the equation. 

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

EXACTLY.

But USF cannot wait.  "Build the stadium for the conference you want, not the conference you're in."

These are the stadiums in the ACC (there are more teams with stadium like ours than ones like the proposed stadium)

• 1. Clemson | Memorial Stadium | 81,500
• 2. Florida State | Doak Campbell Stadium | 79,560
• 3. Pittsburgh | Acrisure Stadium | 68,400
• 4. Virginia Tech | Lane Stadium | 66,233
• 5. Miami | Hard Rock Stadium | 65,236
• 6. Louisville | Cardinal Stadium | 65,000
• 7. Virginia | Scott Stadium | 61,500
• 8. NC State | Carter Finley Stadium | 56,919
• 9. Georgia Tech | Bobby Dodd Stadium | 55,000
• 10. North Carolina | Kenan Memorial Stadium | 50, 500
• 11. Syracuse | JMA Wireless Dome | 49,057
• 12. Boston College | Alumni Stadium | 44,500
• 13. Duke | Wallace Wade Stadium | 40,004
• 14. Wake Forest | Truist Field | 31,500

[USF_Bullsharks]

On 8/5/2023 at 8:01 PM, Jim Johnson said:

I don't believe anything that happened this week should give anyone pause to reconsider the stadium project.

Agreed, Jim. The stadium planning was underwritten with today's budget and revenues expected from the completion of the project, not with the expectation of an additional $25MM in conference TV money. That said, our situation is not deteriorating - we still have a conference and a TV deal and the budget to service that debt, our sports teams and athletic facilities. The major conferences DO look for universities to invest in their athletics programs, it shows cooperation and stability from the top. If we were in a bad spot financially - we would not be undergoing dozens of facilities projects, expanding our athletics teams (W Lax and Beach VBall), and building a football stadium + football operations center. Every single college out there built their stadiums before there were crowds of 40k, 50k, 75k, 100k+ for their home football games. You have to start somewhere and with the continued investment from the university, a focus on our students and alumni, we will be selling out our 35k+ stadium in front of any team we play against including FCS openers, out of conference G5's, and in conference G5's/P5's wherever we may be. 

This time is certainly interesting with all of the movement - but that should not waver our support of USF even one iota. Show up, donate, support. Go Bulls. 

[puc86]

2 minutes ago, michibull said:

Agree with your points, but this is a part of the total package. I like that they are targeting 35k with potential for more. In terms of improving our conference situation, winning IS #1, but while that is happening, we need to work on the other neglected areas and that’s where the IPF and OCS come into play. I think the conference expansion circus is going to explode, but idk when and therefore, I do believe that USF has to do everything it can NOW in preparation; as to help our chances of landing in a good spot. In terms of the stadium cost, IF we get back to winning 7 or 8 games a year, we will have enough attendance to pay for it, which I think is doable in the AAC; but as you said, the OCS alone won’t do it, but it is a part of the equation. 

That seems like a pretty big bet on a very contingent plan, what if we saw how much winning contributed to incremental growth and then extrapolated from there? If we see that yes people have now bought into our lowered station you can still build a stadium and should we improve our station we can also still build a stadium. 

[Triple B]

27 minutes ago, puc86 said:

The Tampa market has spoken and most people want nothing to do with the AAC and they will want even less to do with it as it continues to decline.

It's all about winning. 2016-18 we averaged 33K against AAC opponents not named UCF, which was probably factored in to the size of the stadium.

[Bull Matrix]

1 minute ago, Triple B said:

It's all about winning. 2016-18 we averaged 33K against AAC opponents not named UCF, which was probably factored in to the size of the stadium.

Yes definitely. Once USF starts winning it should help answer a lot of questions. Looking at the Sept calendar I’m hoping USF is at least 3-2 heading into Oct. October I think they can go 1-2. November I think they can at least 2-2 which will put USF at 6-6. Not too bad.