Fw*telegram On New Stadium Status Link

UNT_playmaker · July 25, 2007

Im not suprised the least bit. As you guys would rememeber their were no updates about this proposed now defunct stadium for years. A 30,000 seat stadium, that is what we currently have. 30,000 seats will not bring in the opponents we want to play.

I hope this is enough proof for some who believe that our AD will one day magicially hand us a new stadium, its not going to happen....Read the last sentence of the article. "IF UNT BUILDS A NEW STADIUM", that speaks for itself. This project is derailed and defunct. The AD hopes to "be in a position" is a far cry from what we have heard in the past regarding this issue.

Also WTF happened to the Goldfield's $1.5 million donation, for the love of god, please tell me that money wasnt actually used to field this pathetic study to determine that a stadium is not feasible at this time.

Until proven otherwise, our atheltic dept and university does not want to take this program to the next step.

By the way TXDOT is moving forward with their plans to expand I-35. Because of this news, begin reserving seats at the new DISD stadium in the next coming years.

Eagle1855 · July 25, 2007

suuucksss

Stan R · July 25, 2007

Also WTF happened to the Goldfield's $1.5 million donation, for the love of god, please tell me that money wasnt actually used to field this pathetic study to determine that a stadium is not feasible at this time.

That's exactly what it was used for. I could have told you that and I would have only charged NT $200K. :lol:

UNTflyer · July 25, 2007

If we can't fill a 30,000 seat stadium, why would anyone PONY UP the money for a 40,000 stadium?

Renovate Fouts. Pull out the bleachers on the alum side and put in real seats, rebuild the bathrooms.

LoveMG · July 25, 2007

why does a newspaper guy get info and fans get no information. recruits are told there will be a stadium and fans are told nothing. donors should be told what is going on and how fast it will happen if it is to happen. poor communication again with the fan base.

foutsrouts · July 25, 2007

As I've said in the past, this is the one thing we agree on. It isn't going to happen that way, you and I both know that, but I don't see why it shouldn't. I don't like the location of the AC for a stadium to be built there when you already have an on-campus location. Actually killing the crickets needs to happen this year. The million dollar question is could they be moved (not certain) and how much would it cost. But I have a feeling it would be way less than 50 million.
The only disagreement I have with that is that it *IS* rocket science to move 20,000 concrete and aluminum seats 10 yards. You don't just hook up a dolly, you know.

IF we stayed on the Fouts site you wouldn't have to move much of anything other than ditching the track and dragging the endzone bleacher seats. Just trash the whole alumni side and build what you can afford twenty yards to the east. I personally prefer a new stadium next to the AC, but there is something to be said for building it in stages at the current site near The Superpit. I guess we'll know more in a few months.

Censored by Laurie · July 25, 2007

It got mentioned on her I believe yesterday when the I-35 expansion plan was posted that perhaps RV and the university are playing a wait and see game with TX DOT. If I-35 is expanded through Denton, Fouts would have to go and TX DOT would have to pay for it if it was "still in use." This article doesn't seem to optimistic

The Fake Lonnie Finch · July 25, 2007

As I've said in the past, this is the one thing we agree on. It isn't going to happen that way, you and I both know that, but I don't see why it shouldn't. I don't like the location of the AC for a stadium to be built there when you already have an on-campus location. Actually killing the crickets needs to happen this year. The million dollar question is could they be moved (not certain) and how much would it cost. But I have a feeling it would be way less than 50 million.
The only disagreement I have with that is that it *IS* rocket science to move 20,000 concrete and aluminum seats 10 yards. You don't just hook up a dolly, you know.

Moving bleachers in isn't rocket science, for sure. But, it also isn't paying for a demolition and a rebuild. School are constantly renovating and adding seating. It's not as expensive. And let's face it, even with the best seat at Fouts, you are still far away from the action.

We've all been to nearby road games - Baylor, OU, TCU, and Sun Belt foes. There's just much more "game" atmosphere when you're closer to the game. Our end zone seat are ridiculously far away. I don't even know why they bother to charge money for them. What they should do is just give those seats away fo' free to local church and high school groups. At minimum, we might get some concession and souvenir money if a few of those folks buy a coke and hot dog and maybe a hat or t-shirt. Surely, we couldn't make any less than we make on those seats now.

If you've been up to Tulsa, you can see that they were pretty land restricted. So, they took what little land they had on the west side of the campus and built a new tennis center, a track facility, a soccer field, and a softball field. All pretty nice. Then, they went to work at "renovating" Skelly. There was nothing else they could do. But, they knew they had to do something.

I was in law school at TU from 2000-2003. They were really bad from 2000-2002. They were so bad that people were talking of dropping down to I-AA. I mean, the school has less than 3,000 undergrads and no one really came to the football games anyway.

Anyway, they did what they could do with their crappy, aging, high-school-like stadium. We have the same problem, so I say we do the same thing. The only thing I'd change, though, is to do the Fouts renovation before building all of the minor sport facilities.

Edited July 25, 2007 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

LongJim · July 25, 2007

Despite an ongoing capital campaign, Villarreal said UNT hasn't determined if the stadium "is a feasible project."
"It would be a huge undertaking," he said. "We want to move as quickly as possible when that time comes, but I can't say when that will be."

(UNT hasn't determined if the stadium) "is a feasible project." Of course they haven't. They don't have all the money yet.

"It would be a huge undertaking." Of course it would. RV is saying something by saying nothing.

"We want to move as quickly as possible when that time comes..." Of course he does. Says nothing.

"I can't say when that will be." This is the truth. Either the dept doesn't yet have the sugar-daddy, or RV 'can't say' when that will be.

RV (IMO) is blowing smoke. He's not saying anything concrete because "he can't".

He's not saying nothing's happening. He didn't say work isn't going on to get it done.

Read between the lines.

NT80 · July 25, 2007

(UNT hasn't determined if the stadium) "is a feasible project." Of course they haven't. They don't have all the money yet.
"It would be a huge undertaking." Of course it would. RV is saying something by saying nothing.
"We want to move as quickly as possible when that time comes..." Of course he does. Says nothing.
"I can't say when that will be." This is the truth. Either the dept doesn't yet have the sugar-daddy, or RV 'can't say' when that will be.
RV (IMO) is blowing smoke. He's not saying anything concrete because "he can't".
He's not saying nothing's happening. He didn't say work isn't going on to get it done.
Read between the lines.

Good post. The stadium issue has to be the priority funding item for the AD but at $50-60 million it will take a lot of pull to get enough donors from a program not used to being asked for that kind of money. It will happen, when and how are the big questions.

DeepGreen · July 25, 2007

(UNT hasn't determined if the stadium) "is a feasible project." Of course they haven't. They don't have all the money yet.
"It would be a huge undertaking." Of course it would. RV is saying something by saying nothing.
"We want to move as quickly as possible when that time comes..." Of course he does. Says nothing.
"I can't say when that will be." This is the truth. Either the dept doesn't yet have the sugar-daddy, or RV 'can't say' when that will be.
RV (IMO) is blowing smoke. He's not saying anything concrete because "he can't".
He's not saying nothing's happening. He didn't say work isn't going on to get it done.
Read between the lines.

UCF, Troy, MTSU, Tulsa, Western Ky, etc., all seem to be able to take on "huge undertakings". Guess NT is not committed enough. <_<

The Fake Lonnie Finch · July 25, 2007

It got mentioned on her I believe yesterday when the I-35 expansion plan was posted that perhaps RV and the university are playing a wait and see game with TX DOT. If I-35 is expanded through Denton, Fouts would have to go and TX DOT would have to pay for it if it was "still in use." This article doesn't seem to optimistic

This is where we get lost in the shuffle...no one at UNT knows how to play the political game to our favor. We're just sitting around waiting to be told what to do instead of gathering those UNT alums in politics or with political connections and being aggressive about what we want and/or need.

It's really, really sad. Maybe even pathetic.

Look at where DKR-Memorial Stadium is in Austin. Do you seriously think the UT brass would let the DOT tell them to move their stadium for an I-35 expand? I doubt it. But, Texas alumni are more politically savvy and active than UNT alumni, so....

I guess we wait and get told where our stadium can be.

PlummMeanGreen · July 25, 2007

(UNT hasn't determined if the stadium) "is a feasible project." Of course they haven't. They don't have all the money yet.
"It would be a huge undertaking." Of course it would. RV is saying something by saying nothing.
"We want to move as quickly as possible when that time comes..." Of course he does. Says nothing.
"I can't say when that will be." This is the truth. Either the dept doesn't yet have the sugar-daddy, or RV 'can't say' when that will be.
RV (IMO) is blowing smoke. He's not saying anything concrete because "he can't".
He's not saying nothing's happening. He didn't say work isn't going on to get it done.
Read between the lines.

Very true...

You know, I think Rick Villarreal is a good AD for UNT for most of the slices for what makes up the entire UNT Athletic Department pie, but it might just be that he just merely needs to hire another proven fund-raiser that has Texas ties and knows where the old (and new) Texas monies are. Most out-of-staters on our campus would not know such potential donors in most cases.

It seems that many D1-A school's AD's are not the prime fund-raiser from what I've observed anyway. Granted, they are there to put the icing on the cake of a big donation and it might appear that they pulled in the Big Tater', but its the fund-raising grunts who are out there doing all the leg-work and creating all the ties for said university that come up with the gems.

Anyone out there don't think there are other UNT-graduated Matress Macs out there that need to be reeled in for dear ol' alma mater? I think most Old Gun Alums who I know would tell you that they are out there; hellsbells, probably more than half of them who haven't heard from UNT since they left campus truth be told.

Ad Nausem Time But.............UNT officials really, really, really...............ought to consider hiring Hayden Fry (a la Gene Stallings) on a fund-raiser/consultant basis. FWIW..............I think we have wasted much precious time (along with rising construction costs) by not having done this already. Hellsbells! The man has a passion for UNT and its athletic program because you (still) cannot keep him away from Mean Green Country when he has an excuse for coming up to Denton so why the heck not? In fact, hire both Coach Fry & Bill Blakely on a consultant basis because there is a part of UNT that is still deeply imbedded in both. They want our program to be successful as much as any of us do.

BTW, how many "EX" UNT employees still give a damn about our school as it is, anyway? And what 2 "EX" UNT employees could still be as valuable as these 2 could if given the responsbility for such a magnificent challlenge?

PS: Didn't "W" even have George Herbert Walker Bush and Bill Clinton working together post Tsunami tragedy?

Edited July 25, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

foutsrouts · July 25, 2007

This is where we get lost in the shuffle...no one at UNT knows how to play the political game to our favor. We're just sitting around waiting to be told what to do instead of gathering those UNT alums in politics or with political connections and being aggressive about what we want and/or need.
It's really, really sad. Maybe even pathetic.
Look at where DKR-Memorial Stadium is in Austin. Do you seriously think the UT brass would let the DOT tell them to move their stadium for an I-35 expand? I doubt it. But, Texas alumni are more politically savvy and active than UNT alumni, so....
I guess we wait and get told where our stadium can be.

Isn't that why Lee Jackson is here?

SilverEagle · July 25, 2007

If we can't fill a 30,000 seat stadium, why would anyone PONY UP the money for a 40,000 stadium?
Renovate Fouts. Pull out the bleachers on the alum side and put in real seats, rebuild the bathrooms.

This solution has been looked at already. I don't think that it's feasable to dig down (having to do with the water table, or something like that) to lower the field and take out the track. Otherwise I'd be very much in favor of doing that...... as long as we took out those metal stands on either end.

As long as we have those metal stands on either end, we are always going to have trouble filling the stadium. I know that they were put there to satisfy the NCAA requirement of having a 30K stadium to get back to 1-A, but I don't think that's a requirement any longer.

Sitting in those stands has to be the biggest (to quote FFR) "ass-whipping" in all of fandom. We could at least do some promotional give aways like personal fans, such as this http://www.portabreezefan.com/faninacan.html. Instead of a soft drink label, "North Texas W/SOW" could be printed on the can-fan.

Or possibly this http://www.motivators.com/Promotional-Cust...sFan-11745.html

The other thing they could give away is cheap binoc's like this http://www.identity-links.com/binoculars-w...-7097.html...in black

or this http://www.identity-links.com/cheap-promot...-7100.html...in white.

Edited July 25, 2007 by SilverEagle

UNTLifer · July 25, 2007

Again, just renovate the stadium we have now:
-Build a new facade/wall around the whole stadium where the crappy chain link fences now stand
-Eliminate the track and move the bleachers in where the track is now
-Build a separate track facility down in the area between beer barn and the stadium, etc.
-Kill the crickets
It's not rocket science. We don't need to build a $50 million dollar structure that no one sits in like they have at SMU. If SMU, in the heart of Dallas, can't even fill up Ford, there's no way we'd fill up a new stadium. It's a complete waste of money to do a completely new stadium from the ground up.
Do what is possible, and quit f'n around.
It's no less than amazing that we have stayed I-A. It's like Larry, Curly, and Moe oversee our athletic department.

As has been reported previously, this was considered but the playing field can't be lowered due to the water table, or something of that nature, so adding seats where the track is can't be done. Well, it could be, but just like the current first few rows at Fouts, you couldn't see the game.

Comparing our attendance to SMU's is ridiculous. Our undergraduate enrollment is 4 times their total enrollment and we have outdrawn them consistently the last few years with far less attractive opponents coming to Fouts.

Look at where DKR-Memorial Stadium is in Austin. Do you seriously think the UT brass would let the DOT tell them to move their stadium for an I-35 expand? I doubt it. But, Texas alumni are more politically savvy and active than UNT alumni, so....

DKR-Memorial is not even remotely as close to I35 as Fouts is. Also, they sit in the state's capital and are the state's flagship university with a much greater athletic history than NT. Please try to compare apples to apples.

Best post in the thread:

(UNT hasn't determined if the stadium) "is a feasible project." Of course they haven't. They don't have all the money yet.
"It would be a huge undertaking." Of course it would. RV is saying something by saying nothing.
"We want to move as quickly as possible when that time comes..." Of course he does. Says nothing.
"I can't say when that will be." This is the truth. Either the dept doesn't yet have the sugar-daddy, or RV 'can't say' when that will be.
RV (IMO) is blowing smoke. He's not saying anything concrete because "he can't".
He's not saying nothing's happening. He didn't say work isn't going on to get it done.
Read between the lines.

LongJim · July 25, 2007

This solution has been looked at already. I don't think that it's feasable to dig down (having to do with the water table, or something like that) to lower the field and take out the track. Otherwise I'd be very much in favor of doing that...... as long as we took out those metal stands on either end.

Not only that, but Fouts is waaay too close to 35 as it stands now. Relocation of 35 per TXDOT would be almost on top of the stands, and moving Fouts--even if it were feasible, I would think would severely limit the amount by which it could be expanded. For example, the west seats would still be close to 35, and any fascia or building to expand it (suites, walkways, upper deck, the like) would be limited. It's not a good location for a stadium the size UNT needs.

In relation to distance from 35, comparing Fouts and DKR is like comparing the Earth's distance from the moon and sun, respectively.

Tceh moved their stands at Jones like is being suggested, many years ago, and it was a "monumental undertaking". Monumental dollars too. Comparable to a new stadium cost.

Fouts will almost certainly have to come down.

Edited July 25, 2007 by LongJim

foutsrouts · July 25, 2007

Just out of curiousity, does anyone know what it looked like just west of Fouts back before I-35 was built? Just wondering if Fouts was built up next to a two lane highway or if there was any major road at all next to the stadium a half century or so ago.

the real grad88 · July 25, 2007

Plumm and a few others make it sound like that all we need to do is get the right fundraiser in there. Not true. When a univerisity is building relationships the way it should with its alums and creating positive memories over the years, it creates alums who have an emotional connection to the univerisity...who want to give back. When some of those CONNECTED alums get into very high places, then they have the power to give big and make things like this happen. We have some very rich alums...they just aren't there in the "connected" category. Having the right fundraiser doesn't change our alums. Only lots of time and investment changes our alums. Major support is built over decades...not over night. We are just beginning to crawl in that department. Having students experience wonderful times following the Mean Green in their younger years goes a long way to building those connections.

I do wish that we could get the track out of there and at least move the endzone seats up to the action and maybe put some more bleachers up on the sidelines. That would create more game day noise. There have to be some affordable things we could do even now.

risinggreen · July 25, 2007

Just out of curiousity, does anyone know what it looked like just west of Fouts back before I-35 was built? Just wondering if Fouts was built up next to a two lane highway or if there was any major road at all next to the stadium a half century or so ago.

I believe that just like most Texas towns back then all the main highways went straight through the center of town by the town square, but I have no idea what kind of road would of been just west of Fouts.

gangrene · July 25, 2007

A 30,000 seat stadium, that is what we currently have. 30,000 seats will not bring in the opponents we want to play.

That is the biggest reason why we need a bigger stadium. Look at UCF, they built a 45K stadium and get to host UT this year. Where did Troy pull off the upset against MIZZOU?? Hint...it wasn't an away game for them.

If we want to host any of the big boys (and have a better chance of an upset), we need to have a bigger stadium. Will we fill it up for our SBC games? Hell no. But maybe...just maybe, more people will come out as our team gets better and, eventually, we can start drawing 35-40K for every game.

Daddy Dumpsalot · July 25, 2007

I heard that there are a 'few' construction companies offering bids to build the new stadium.

I would assume that the $1.5M we got was for drawing up the plans and not so much on the 'research' of whether we could afford it or not. Because going off of the past with the fan support, there is no way financially it would make sense.

I also heard that while RV is ready to tango with the new stadium, there are other, more 'powerful' people, that must be influenced first and they are not currently on board with this new project.

I do not believe they are waiting for TX dot to offer money to buldoze Fouts, this makes me chuckle. I think rather he is waiting to see the turnout of this season and the next to see what their new investment (Todd Dodge) will do to the program and fan support as well as season tickets. I believe that if this season and the next are successful and we have a great showing of fan support and we win some games, this will be what is needed to get the more 'powerful' people on board.

Eagle1855 · July 25, 2007

A 30,000 seat stadium, that is what we currently have. 30,000 seats will not bring in the opponents we want to play.

Your post is all over the place, but this particular comment is right-on, in my opinion. As others have said, I think we need AT LEAST a 35-40k stadium expandable to 50k. It won't represent that much of an increase in cost, and it shows you are actually planning ahead- and COMMITTING to having a legit program and the accompanying fanbase. I think you'd get a lot more fans out if you showed you were serious about winning, serious about the program. Basically the old "if you build it, they will come" line of thought. THINK BIG!

Edited July 25, 2007 by Eagle1855

Stan R · July 25, 2007

I also heard that while RV is ready to tango with the new stadium, there are other, more 'powerful' people, that must be influenced first and they are not currently on board with this new project.

Huh??? Care to elaborate?

UNTflyer · July 25, 2007

Your post is all over the place, but this particular comment is right-on, in my opinion. As others have said, I think we need AT LEAST a 35-40k stadium expandable to 50k. It won't represent that much of an increase in cost, and it shows you are actually planning ahead- and COMMITTING to having a legit program and the accompanying fanbase. I think you'd get a lot more fans out if you showed you were serious about winning, serious about the program. Basically the old "if you build it, they will come" line of thought. THINK BIG!

We built a 30,000 seat stadium already and they're not coming.

You're not going to get a large following just because we have a nice stadium. We have to get butts in the seats first, and then we can justify a new 40,000-seat stadium. With our average attendance hovering somewhere around 17,000, it's not surprising that there isn't a lot of support for a new stadium.