Sounds like there is some movement on revenue and

Discussion on Rich Rodriguez and the Arizona Football team
Post a reply

Re: Sounds like there is some movement on revenue and

Postby El Gato » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:57 pm

rickyk wrote:When is the last time you've been to a bathroom on the east side? Those bathrooms on the south east corner on the 2nd level haven't been expanded or upgraded I'm guessing since they were put in back in the 1960s. Agree with El Gato about having a larger stadium than tempe. Unfortunately, it appears that Byrne is continuing his quest to reduce the stadium capacity. The original plant for the NEZ I was told by Dr. Shelton at a tailgate was around 65K JL said 62.5. Then Bryrne came up withj under 58K and I still have no idea how he managed to do that if you look at the area covered and the sizew of the old bleachers and come up with fewer ove3rall seats. But I have been assured it is fewer seats unless you include the terraced SRO. If GB keeps reducing capacity we should modify Hansen's helpful suggestion and petition Big Sky or WAC/MWC for admission so we could get away from Scott, officiating et al. We already have a Big Sky/WAC level OOC schedule. Have heard second hand that GB's capacity reduction is based on a way to increase pricesa based on supply and demand which seems to me to be kind of backwards thinking.I personally prefer a stadium look of 65,000 filled seats rather than 45,000 with lots of sky boxes. Either way we will need a higher level of competitiveness on the field.

One guess on the shrinking of the NEZ. It may well have been caused by the huge rise in construction costs during the time frame you mentioned. They may have downsized as costs for steel and concrete went up.
User avatar
El Gato
Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 8:47 am

Re: Sounds like there is some movement on revenue and

Postby b_dog » Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:13 am

Virtually every Pac-12 team has contracted their stadium. Washington's remodel resulted in fewer seats, Stanford went about 20K smaller, ASu is going smaller, and even USC will be eliminating 14,500 seats as part of their upcoming Coliseum remodel. Considering how many questionnaires I've gotten recently, I'd say the only issue is a huge focus on the game experience. Individual seats with cup holders take up more room than aluminum bleachers, and it lowers the capacity somewhat. As far as I'm concerned, every change they've made to Arizona Stadium has been good, so I welcome the next round. Meanwhile, college football attendance has generally been in decline, so we're not doing that badly.

Pac-12 attendance for 2015 was as follows:

USC: 75K
Wash: 62K
Ore: 58K
ASu: 53K
UofA: 51K
Stanf: 50K
Cal: 49K
Utah: 47K
Col: 39K
OSU: 36K
WSU: 29K
Bear Down
User avatar
Posts: 1079
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:28 am

Re: Sounds like there is some movement on revenue and

Postby catnaz » Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:49 am

Yes, I think GB's been pushing the right buttons. I missed that "helpful" suggestion by Hansen. :roll:
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 6:20 am


Post a reply

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests