Houston's Rice University considering a 'drastic' change for its football stadium

[Ross Hodgeson]

Although the Rice Owls football team's home has already undergone improvements, Rice school administrators have stated that some significant changes are now required. With the help of a sports design firm, the institution finished a facilities master plan last year that addressed the 1950s building. The Houston Business Journal was informed more recently by Tommy McClelland, Rice's director of athletics, that a "transformational" overhaul is required for the deteriorating stadium.

"We're looking at whatever it takes. Our approach is we have to do something drastic. ... Just putting new paint on what we have is not what we're looking at," McClelland told HBJ's Chandler France. 

While the university has made some renovations, such as upgrading seating and adding new spaces over the past two offseasons, a more extensive project has been postponed despite being a priority for athletic officials. Joe Karlgaard, the previous director of athletics, had hoped to oversee a major renovation of the 70,000-seat stadium before his departure in August 2023.

Rice had approved a design for a major renovation project in 2022, but that plan was put on hold. The project aimed to reduce the stadium's capacity instead of building a new one, aligning it with other teams in the American Athletic Conference, which the school joined in July.

read more:  https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/rice-university-stadium-19518306.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0GOACiCfLSdtPF7ShNfnw4seQzzuj18gAKjh0KcUOeJzZAqLW2jqShlOE_aem_VNgLnj9bcfTt9bpEewOIEw

[NT80]

27 minutes ago, Ross Hodgeson said:

Although the Rice Owls football team's home has already undergone improvements, Rice school administrators have stated that some significant changes are now required. With the help of a sports design firm, the institution finished a facilities master plan last year that addressed the 1950s building. The Houston Business Journal was informed more recently by Tommy McClelland, Rice's director of athletics, that a "transformational" overhaul is required for the deteriorating stadium.

"We're looking at whatever it takes. Our approach is we have to do something drastic. ... Just putting new paint on what we have is not what we're looking at," McClelland told HBJ's Chandler France. 

While the university has made some renovations, such as upgrading seating and adding new spaces over the past two offseasons, a more extensive project has been postponed despite being a priority for athletic officials. Joe Karlgaard, the previous director of athletics, had hoped to oversee a major renovation of the 70,000-seat stadium before his departure in August 2023.

Rice had approved a design for a major renovation project in 2022, but that plan was put on hold. The project aimed to reduce the stadium's capacity instead of building a new one, aligning it with other teams in the American Athletic Conference, which the school joined in July.

read more:  https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/rice-university-stadium-19518306.php?utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0GOACiCfLSdtPF7ShNfnw4seQzzuj18gAKjh0KcUOeJzZAqLW2jqShlOE_aem_VNgLnj9bcfTt9bpEewOIEw

The article first mentions required renovations (due to declining condition) and reducing capacity instead of building new.  Then thoughts switch to perhaps a (new?) multi-use stadium and accepting naming-donors without much details on either.   I don't think they know what they want to do, and really don't want to do either.

Back in the 1950's when this stadium was built Rice was a power program in the Country and SWC.   They rivaled the Texas program of today in attendance and media.  They have been falling ever since to a shadow of a program and attendance.   I wouldn't be surprised to see them end football in this NIL era. 

[SMU2006]

2 hours ago, NT80 said:

The article first mentions required renovations (due to declining condition) and reducing capacity instead of building new.  Then thoughts switch to perhaps a (new?) multi-use stadium and accepting naming-donors without much details on either.   I don't think they know what they want to do, and really don't want to do either.

Back in the 1950's when this stadium was built Rice was a power program in the Country and SWC.   They rivaled the Texas program of today in attendance and media.  They have been falling ever since to a shadow of a program and attendance.   I wouldn't be surprised to see them end football in this NIL era. 

Rice made the decision years ago that they were not going to be financially competitive at football.  They have routinely been among the bottom in coaches salaries, facilities, recruiting budgets, etc.  

I agree I don't think there is much of a future for them in the future landscape of college football.  

[cousin oliver]

21 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

Rice made the decision years ago that they were not going to be financially competitive at football.  They have routinely been among the bottom in coaches salaries, facilities, recruiting budgets, etc.  

I agree I don't think there is much of a future for them in the future landscape of college football.  

If that is the case - and I do not dispute you - why look for a stadium upgrade at this point in the game.  The article seems to push against your theory. 

[SMU2006]

12 minutes ago, cousin oliver said:

If that is the case - and I do not dispute you - why look for a stadium upgrade at this point in the game.  The article seems to push against your theory. 

I genuinely don't know what they're thinking at Rice.  It feels like they are just continuing the program until the gas tank finally gets to empty.  

[greenminer]

14 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

I genuinely don't know what they're thinking at Rice.  It feels like they are just continuing the program until the gas tank finally gets to empty.  

If money is the fuel, they'll be fine.  Their endowment is nearly 4x SMU's.

[SMU2006]

12 hours ago, greenminer said:

If money is the fuel, they'll be fine.  Their endowment is nearly 4x SMU's.

Totally agree with you however they have chosen to allocate those resources elsewhere.  Nerds gonna nerd.

[HoustonEagle]

I live next to Rice and used to attend games regularly. I used to question why they did not spend more of their massive endowment on sports.  I realize now they got it right.  “Big Time” college sports or the dream of getting there is now dead for almost every program.  Rice focused on academics instead.  Now they are the best University in Texas and also world renowned.  For most schools they are neither academically or athletically special.  Rice chose academics and won.  What’s more, they have right-sized athletic facilities (football withstanding) that well serve their student athletes.  It’s just at Rice they are students first and have to make the grade.  
 

Rice got it right
 

 

[UNTLifer]

What happened to Rice baseball?

[Jonnyeagle]

40 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

What happened to Rice baseball?

Dunno they sort of suck now.

[UNTcrazy727]

6 hours ago, SMU2006 said:

Totally agree with you however they have chosen to allocate those resources elsewhere.  Nerds gonna nerd.

How dare a university put a higher priority on education and research lol

[NT80]

3 hours ago, HoustonEagle said:

I live next to Rice and used to attend games regularly. I used to question why they did not spend more of their massive endowment on sports.  I realize now they got it right.  “Big Time” college sports or the dream of getting there is now dead for almost every program.  Rice focused on academics instead.  Now they are the best University in Texas and also world renowned.  For most schools they are neither academically or athletically special.  Rice chose academics and won.  What’s more, they have right-sized athletic facilities (football withstanding) that well serve their student athletes.  It’s just at Rice they are students first and have to make the grade.  
 

Rice got it right

I don't agree.  Athletics at our level is pure marketing for the school.   I never hear Rice mentioned, athletically or academically.  Duke, yes.  Rice, no.   If they won't support athletics correctly, then they should just drop to DIII and stop pretending to be competitive even in the AAC, because they are not.   

[SUMG]

I never understand why folks covet being in a league with them. Don't give me the Academics stuff. Academics mean nothing in the scheme of things......any more.

Their facilities suck. 

And they travel worse than any school in the nation. Of all the times we've played them in basketball.....I don't think I've ever seen a fan of theirs at the Pit. They bring nobody to Denton for football or basketball.  And didn't look like other than cheerleaders, they took anyone to FW for the hoops tourney.

And yet.....when there are new conference configurations put together.....some times they're included...and we're not. 

Boggles the mind. 

Edited June 21 by SUMG

[SMU2006]

15 hours ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

How dare a university put a higher priority on education and research lol

You can commit to both high level athletics and academics.  The two concepts are not mutually exclusive and Rice has the means to do it.  Rice has chosen not to do it for whatever reason.

Edited June 21 by SMU2006

[NT80]

15 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

You can commit to both high level athletics and academics.  The two concepts are not mutually exclusive and Rice has the means to do it.  Rice has chosen not to do it for whatever reason.

I will use Stanford as an example for Rice.  Rice has about 4,800 undergrads, plus very high academics. Stanford has 7,800 undergrads, plus very high academics.   But Stanford excels in Athletics too...

Stanford's program has won 136 NCAA team championships, the most of any university. Stanford has won at least one NCAA team championship each academic year for 48 consecutive years, starting in 1976–77 and continuing through 2023–24. Through January 2024, Stanford athletes have won 552 individual NCAA titles.

Stanford has won 26 of the 29 NACDA Directors' Cups, awarded annually to the most successful overall college sports program in the nation, including 25 consecutive Cups from 1994–95 through 2018–19. 177 Stanford-affiliated athletes have won a total of 296 Summer Olympic medals (150 gold, 79 silver, 67 bronze), including 26 medals at the 2020 Tokyo games

Edited June 21 by NT80

[UNTcrazy727]

25 minutes ago, SMU2006 said:

You can commit to both high level athletics and academics.  The two concepts are not mutually exclusive and Rice has the means to do it.  Rice has chosen not to do it for whatever reason.

They're more interested in being compared to Ivy League schools than Big 12 schools. There's no benefit for them to spend tens of millions on athletics. They're already a world renowned institution that gets the smartest kids and their alumni donate at a level most schools couldn't even imagine. 

They'll continue to support athletics enough to remain in the picture of Texas collegiate athletics, but they understandably have more important aspirations. 

[SMU2006]

27 minutes ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

They're more interested in being compared to Ivy League schools than Big 12 schools. There's no benefit for them to spend tens of millions on athletics. They're already a world renowned institution that gets the smartest kids and their alumni donate at a level most schools couldn't even imagine. 

They'll continue to support athletics enough to remain in the picture of Texas collegiate athletics, but they understandably have more important aspirations. 

what does "remain in the picture" mean for Rice?  Middle of the pack in the AAC when they could easily be the best G5 program in the country given their location, resources, etc.  

Rice has chosen their path but they could've easily been Stanford or Northwestern.  Oh well.  

[SMU2006]

48 minutes ago, NT80 said:

I will use Stanford as an example for Rice.  Rice has about 4,800 undergrads, plus very high academics. Stanford has 7,800 undergrads, plus very high academics.   But Stanford excels in Athletics too...

Stanford's program has won 136 NCAA team championships, the most of any university. Stanford has won at least one NCAA team championship each academic year for 48 consecutive years, starting in 1976–77 and continuing through 2023–24. Through January 2024, Stanford athletes have won 552 individual NCAA titles.

Stanford has won 26 of the 29 NACDA Directors' Cups, awarded annually to the most successful overall college sports program in the nation, including 25 consecutive Cups from 1994–95 through 2018–19. 177 Stanford-affiliated athletes have won a total of 296 Summer Olympic medals (150 gold, 79 silver, 67 bronze), including 26 medals at the 2020 Tokyo games

Well if we're using the endowment comparison, Stanford's is 5x of Rice (which is absolutely wild).  

Endowment as a proxy for commitment to athletics is a stupid metric.  It really comes down to how active the alumni are in giving to various programs and Rice simply does not have many alums that are willing to commit the financial resources needed to compete at a higher level.

[SilverEagle]

33 minutes ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

They're more interested in being compared to Ivy League schools than Big 12 schools. There's no benefit for them to spend tens of millions on athletics. They're already a world renowned institution that gets the smartest kids and their alumni donate at a level most schools couldn't even imagine. 

They'll continue to support athletics enough to remain in the picture of Texas collegiate athletics, but they understandably have more important aspirations. 

Hmmm, I'm all for universities being hot beds of academia rather than sports, but I still don't get Rice. Hot beds of Academia for lack of a better word "produce" something for the benefit of mankind and the community. They do lots of research to make the world better, safer, and (in spite of what I've seen lately) more insightful. The Harvards, Princtons, Dukes, Stanfords and even the UTs and A&M's of the world are trying very hard to cure cancer, come up with more hardy and productive crops, improve renewable energy etc, etc. Their graduates and/or professors are constantly being asked to come on national news programs to discuss the latest medical, scientific, or legal challenge to our world, and what they are trying to do about it.  None of those experts are ever from Rice. 

So to paraphrase one of my best supervisors at CPS....."It's not enough to be academically busy, the question is what are you academically busy about?"

Edited June 21 by SilverEagle

[NT80]

On 6/21/2024 at 12:12 PM, SMU2006 said:

Well if we're using the endowment comparison, Stanford's is 5x of Rice (which is absolutely wild).  

Endowment as a proxy for commitment to athletics is a stupid metric.  It really comes down to how active the alumni are in giving to various programs and Rice simply does not have many alums that are willing to commit the financial resources needed to compete at a higher level.

I talked to some older Rice fans (late 60’s) when they came to play us in Denton about 10 years ago. 
They were sad about Rice’s athletic decline then.  They said the school did not want to (or could not) use Endowment money on Athletics.   The students and younger alumni were not really interested in supporting Athletics and it was up to older alums to keep it going. 
Sad. 

Edited June 22 by NT80

[UNTcrazy727]

15 minutes ago, NT80 said:

I talked to some older Rice fans (late 60’s) when they came to play us in Denton about 10 years ago. 
They were sad about Rice’s athletic decline then.  They said the school did not want to use Endowment money on Athletics.   The students and younger alumni were not really interested in supporting Athletics and it was up to older alums to keep it going. 
Sad. 

Schools can't use their endowment for whatever they want. Most of it is earmarked for specific departments, research, etc. by whoever gave the money. If people wanted their money to be used for athletics they would have given it to the athletic department. 

[Matt from A700]

7 hours ago, UNTcrazy727 said:

Schools can't use their endowment for whatever they want. Most of it is earmarked for specific departments, research, etc. by whoever gave the money. If people wanted their money to be used for athletics they would have given it to the athletic department. 

Can they use it on a cybertruck?

[97and03]

On 6/21/2024 at 3:08 AM, NT80 said:

I don't agree.  Athletics at our level is pure marketing for the school.   I never hear Rice mentioned, athletically or academically.  Duke, yes.  Rice, no.   If they won't support athletics correctly, then they should just drop to DIII and stop pretending to be competitive even in the AAC, because they are not.   

Rice is arguably the best university in the South. They don’t need athletics to attract quality students. Any athletics success is a bonus. They offer very generous financial aid to students in need to ensure they get the best students regardless of income bracket. 

[NT80]

6 hours ago, 97and03 said:

Rice is arguably the best university in the South. They don’t need athletics to attract quality students. Any athletics success is a bonus. They offer very generous financial aid to students in need to ensure they get the best students regardless of income bracket. 

Yes , they are a quality academic school.  But they are a less than quality athletic school.  Their sub-standard investment and interest in sports affects the quality of the conference.   

[greenminer]

On 6/20/2024 at 8:08 PM, NT80 said:

I don't agree.  Athletics at our level is pure marketing for the school.   I never hear Rice mentioned, athletically or academically.  Duke, yes.  Rice, no.   If they won't support athletics correctly, then they should just drop to DIII and stop pretending to be competitive even in the AAC, because they are not.   

I don't think you can have a world where athletics is 100% separate from academics.  I believe there are many legitimate reasons for a conference to WANT a high-academics institution, even if they are not invested in athletics.

PS: same possibly goes for wanting a high endowment, even if - as stated - they have zero intent to use it on athletics.

Edited June 22 by greenminer