Not sure what the issue is but it's not as bad a stadium as many are making out to be.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Oh they did take the track out. That looks much better. Thanks for that info.


And it does look like Duke has spent a bunch of money recently, upgrading their football stadium: https://today.duke.edu/2016/08/wallacewaderenovations





See ... these basketball schools that have passionate fans .... they will care about football too, if the school invests in the facilities, and if the team wins ...

KU would do very well to hire Tracy Claeys as its next head football coach. I hope they consider that.

(06-23-2017 07:33 AM)panama Wrote:  Not sure what the issue is but it's not as bad a stadium as many are making out to be.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Concourse area is a dump, no luxury seating, no chair back seating, low visibility site line. Not the best stadium.

Our Stadium (and we are suppose to be a poor G5 program expected to do nothing) blows their stadium out of the water. Same goes for Houston and Cincinnati.

Concourse and bathrooms at most SEC school suck

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(06-22-2017 07:50 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Kansas looks like it plays in a MAC Stadium and is doing 1 for 1's with MAC schools.

Are you thinking there's a MAC expansion opportunity here?

Kansas plays in a historic nearly 100 year old stadium that seats 55k. Not a MAC stadium I think.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Plus, not many MAC schools invest $300M into their football stadiums.

I think Akron built a brand new stadium, for like $60M?

(06-22-2017 10:56 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Their stadium is one of the worst I have ever been in especially for a Div. 1 school. It is about time. Every other school in the Big 12 with the possible exception of ISU and WVU(only because I have not been there to see) have great stadiums and practice facilities. Kansas is trying to catch up with the rest of the conference.

Iowa State has a very nice stadium

I'm planning on going to that game as well.

(06-22-2017 07:49 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  When Ohio played at Kansas last year the reported box score was 28,467.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...e?id=25687

There may be more actual fans in Peden this year with the game in Athens. I know because I will be at that game.

(06-23-2017 10:24 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Plus, not many MAC schools invest $300M into their football stadiums.

I think Akron built a brand new stadium, for like $60M?

So a lot of these G5 upgrades are moving power confernce late adopters to invest to stay way aheadm. Kentucky is another that did a recent huge renovation.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(06-22-2017 07:49 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  When Ohio played at Kansas last year the reported box score was 28,467.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...e?id=25687

There may be more actual fans in Peden this year with the game in Athens. I know because I will be at that game.

Sent from my SM-G920V using CSNbbs mobile app

(06-23-2017 12:27 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 07:49 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  When Ohio played at Kansas last year the reported box score was 28,467.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...e?id=25687

There may be more actual fans in Peden this year with the game in Athens. I know because I will be at that game.

Sent from my SM-G920V using CSNbbs mobile app

So will I, season tickets this year.

Sent from my SM-G920V using CSNbbs mobile app

(06-23-2017 11:48 AM)panama Wrote:  So a lot of these G5 upgrades are moving power confernce late adopters to invest to stay way aheadm. Kentucky is another that did a recent huge renovation.

I think North Carolina has invested in their football program and stadium, as well? While we're on the topic of basketball blue bloods ...

Indiana did a stadium upgrade not too long ago. Don't think UCLA has ... but they don't own the Rose Bowl, just play there.

(06-23-2017 08:23 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 07:33 AM)panama Wrote:  Not sure what the issue is but it's not as bad a stadium as many are making out to be.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Concourse area is a dump, no luxury seating, no chair back seating, low visibility site line. Not the best stadium.

Our Stadium (and we are suppose to be a poor G5 program expected to do nothing) blows their stadium out of the water. Same goes for Houston and Cincinnati.

Kansas prefers to pay for most of their facilities with very little debt

their athletics department has $36 million in debt while Cincy has $139 million, dem coogs doh $95 million and ECU $41.5

and most of this football stajium project should be done with little to no additional debt

Kansas also runs a very very small academic side subsidy unlike the others mentioned that run an extremely high one

(06-23-2017 11:03 AM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 10:56 AM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Their stadium is one of the worst I have ever been in especially for a Div. 1 school. It is about time. Every other school in the Big 12 with the possible exception of ISU and WVU(only because I have not been there to see) have great stadiums and practice facilities. Kansas is trying to catch up with the rest of the conference.

Iowa State has a very nice stadium

I have been in Jack Trice (Iowa State) in December (Iowa State was playing Kansas), when the wind was blowing out of the north through the gap of the stands, with the temperature somewhere in the single digits and the wind-chill somewhere below zero.

There aren't much colder places in the world. That pre-cast concrete stadium has no warmth.

(And WVU's Milan Puskar is a very similar stadium in layout and construction... Really, almost twins at birth, though they have diverged a little as they have been filled out...)

Looking at this one picture:

Quote:

first thing that came to mind knowing this is a renovation was "asbestos."

And even if there wasn't any, it's a double-edged sword with these older structures. These things were almost overbuilt, and tough as nails as buildings go. Definitely built to last a long time; meant to handle lots of people doing who knows what within it. But not invincible. And very unique; not of the "interchangeable parts" mentality of maybe more recent venue constructions.

It sounds like part of the $300 million is going toward the practice facility. It's kind of cool that Kansas wants to keep this frame as the hub for football. It's going to be an interesting study on why it has to cost so much.

It has me thinking about buildings as historical landmarks, and maybe the future challenges older constructs face. The value and significance of any structure vs. utility and upkeep. Sport venues are no different...but, they can't all be Wrigley and Fenway.

(06-23-2017 07:11 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(06-23-2017 12:11 AM)Groo Wrote:  Track was taken out in 2014.

By taken out, you mean "covered up"?

It was removed. Prior renovation-talk included digging-down (to lower the field) which should add about 8,000 seats that are much closer to the field (and thus eliminating the space formerly occupied by the historic track; read about Jim Ryan, the Kansas Relays, etc.).

(06-24-2017 05:46 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Looking at this one picture:

Quote:

first thing that came to mind knowing this is a renovation was "asbestos."

And even if there wasn't any, it's a double-edged sword with these older structures. These things were almost overbuilt, and tough as nails as buildings go. Definitely built to last a long time; meant to handle lots of people doing who knows what within it. But not invincible. And very unique; not of the "interchangeable parts" mentality of maybe more recent venue constructions.

It sounds like part of the $300 million is going toward the practice facility. It's kind of cool that Kansas wants to keep this frame as the hub for football. It's going to be an interesting study on why it has to cost so much.

It has me thinking about buildings as historical landmarks, and maybe the future challenges older constructs face. The value and significance of any structure vs. utility and upkeep. Sport venues are no different...but, they can't all be Wrigley and Fenway.

I was looking at the list of Track and Field athletes that ran in that stadium . Impressive list, especially of those who went on to later fame I n the NBA or NFL.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(06-23-2017 10:24 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Plus, not many MAC schools invest $300M into their football stadiums.

I think Akron built a brand new stadium, for like $60M?

60 million is correct, but seats 27k(not including grass seating)

Sent from my Z988 using CSNbbs mobile app

(06-24-2017 05:46 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  It's kind of cool that Kansas wants to keep this frame as the hub for football. It's going to be an interesting study on why it has to cost so much.

Further case study on that: Stanford vs Cal stadium projects.

Stanford just said "the h__ with it" and tore the whole thing down, starting from scratch. Cal, on the other hand, wanted to preserve the historic facade of the stadium exterior. Granted, the Cal project had a lot of special engineering and costs associated with earthquakes, but still some of the cost difference does correspond between the two different schools of thought there.