Football's future upgrades

[jackmd]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I think we want to keep these on the west side due the sun set. At the start of night games early in the season and at the end of afternoon games late in the season the sun shines directly on the east side of the stadium. We probably don't want our highest paying ticket holders to have to stare into the sun during portions of games.

I thought about the same thing. East side can be a little tough with the early season sunset. I just don't want us to wait too long to offer a luxury box option. Perhaps there is a way to place them on the west side and still demo the grandstand later or....maybe not. I'm not an engineer.

[Rabbitlivinginverm]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I thought about the same thing. East side can be a little tough with the early season sunset. I just don't want us to wait too long to offer a luxury box option. Perhaps there is a way to place them on the west side and still demo the grandstand later or....maybe not. I'm not an engineer.

East side can also be a lot warmer with the sun shining on it those chilly late October/November afternoons.

[EQguy]

Re: Football's future upgrades

not any warmer than a nice cozy luxury box!

[Jack4Life]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I see in the Argus this morning that the local sports authority has come to an agreement with the school to lease Howard Wood stadium. They mentioned in the story that USD and SDSU will probably move some games there. Again, why would we? Smaller stadium and why play a home game on a neutral field? I wonder if they are talking with the adminisration or just talking.

[ringthebells]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I see in the Argus this morning that the local sports authority has come to an agreement with the school to lease Howard Wood stadium. They mentioned in the story that USD and SDSU will probably move some games there. Again, why would we? Smaller stadium and why play a home game on a neutral field? I wonder if they are talking with the adminisration or just talking.

Perhaps bringing a game to 200,000 potential donors.

[JimmyJack]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I see in the Argus this morning that the local sports authority has come to an agreement with the school to lease Howard Wood stadium. They mentioned in the story that USD and SDSU will probably move some games there. Again, why would we? Smaller stadium and why play a home game on a neutral field? I wonder if they are talking with the adminisration or just talking.

My guess (just a guess): They're just talking.

HW is a dump. It seats 10,000, all with lousy sight-lines. As an added bonus, there's the wind-tunnel effect since the thing sits out in the middle of the land of many parking lots. And the scoreboard? It's craptacular... if you're into living-scoreboard-history displays.

How many portable seats can they bring in from Minneapolis and Omaha? They'd need 4,000 to reach our Coughlin average. Of course if we're splitting the gate with an opponent and with the Sioux Falls Sports Authority, you'd need a lot more than that to meet our revenue expectations. It's also not free to get 80 or 90 football players from Brookings to Sioux Falls, feed them, and then bring them back. You'd be taking money out of Brookings business owners' pockets. They rely on gameday business for a lot of revenue. So does the SDSU bookstore, which helps fund SDSU athletics. Our flagship sponsors would be cut out of the action, and we'd lose that revenue (see scoreboard comment above). And how many students would you expect to make the trip. Isn't this also about them? There's another intangible: Augie is building an on-campus stadium because of the atmosphere you create with that. Bands marching in. Fight songs. Students walking over from dorms. The whole "feeling" that is created by a big event on campus. Everything Augie talks about wanting to create -- read the Augie story in the Argus today -- we already have. So naturally, we'd want to give that up by playing 52 miles from campus in an unpleasant wind tunnel of a stadium. And we'd want to lose money doing it.

Finally, I'm not sure how you're reaching 200,000 potential donors when the place seats 10,000, and we already get covered in all the Sioux Falls media.

Better to work on getting a Coughlin game next year on TV. You'd actually reach into the homes of a few hundred thousand people while maintaining the attendance momentum you've started building at Coughlin.

[SD-STATE]

Re: Football's future upgrades

My guess (just a guess): They're just talking.

HW is a dump. It seats 10,000, all with lousy sight-lines. As an added bonus, there's the wind-tunnel effect since the thing sits out in the middle of the land of many parking lots. And the scoreboard? It's craptacular... if you're into living-scoreboard-history displays.

How many portable seats can they bring in from Minneapolis and Omaha? They'd need 4,000 to reach our Coughlin average. Of course if we're splitting the gate with an opponent and with the Sioux Falls Sports Authority, you'd need a lot more than that to meet our revenue expectations. It's also not free to get 80 or 90 football players from Brookings to Sioux Falls, feed them, and then bring them back. You'd be taking money out of Brookings business owners' pockets. They rely on gameday business for a lot of revenue. So does the SDSU bookstore, which helps fund SDSU athletics. And how many students would you expect to make the trip. Isn't this also about them?

Finally, I'm not sure how you're reaching 200,000 potential donors, when the place seats 10,000, and we already get covered in all the Sioux Falls media.

Better to work on getting a Coughlin game next year on TV. You'd actually reach into the homes of a few hundred thousand people.

Well said!

[MilwaukeeJacksAlum]

Re: Football's future upgrades

My guess (just a guess): They're just talking.

HW is a dump. It seats 10,000, all with lousy sight-lines. As an added bonus, there's the wind-tunnel effect since the thing sits out in the middle of the land of many parking lots. And the scoreboard? It's craptacular... if you're into living-scoreboard-history displays.

How many portable seats can they bring in from Minneapolis and Omaha? They'd need 4,000 to reach our Coughlin average. Of course if we're splitting the gate with an opponent and with the Sioux Falls Sports Authority, you'd need a lot more than that to meet our revenue expectations. It's also not free to get 80 or 90 football players from Brookings to Sioux Falls, feed them, and then bring them back. You'd be taking money out of Brookings business owners' pockets. They rely on gameday business for a lot of revenue. So does the SDSU bookstore, which helps fund SDSU athletics. Our flagship sponsors would be cut out of the action, and we'd lose that revenue (see scoreboard comment above). And how many students would you expect to make the trip. Isn't this also about them? There's another intangible: Augie is building an on-campus stadium because of the atmosphere you create with that. Bands marching in. Fight songs. Students walking over from dorms. The whole "feeling" that is created by a big event on campus. Everything Augie talks about wanting to create -- read the Augie story in the Argus today -- we already have. So naturally, we'd want to give that up by playing 52 miles from campus in an unpleasant wind tunnel of a stadium. And we'd want to lose money doing it.

Finally, I'm not sure how you're reaching 200,000 potential donors when the place seats 10,000, and we already get covered in all the Sioux Falls media.

Better to work on getting a Coughlin game next year on TV. You'd actually reach into the homes of a few hundred thousand people while maintaining the attendance momentum you've started building at Coughlin.

Don't forget that the seats that are already there do a good job of placing you as far away from the playing field as possible. So, if you're one of the lucky fans who aren't forced to sit in the folding tables brought in from the local VFW, you'll need to bring your field glasses to the game to take in the action. (Note: I'm using field glasses instead of binoculars because it sounds so much more formal. Also, it's my little way of helping the US dollar catch up to the EURO. If we start using more european terms, maybe people will confuse us for British and give us incorrect change on the ol' dollar to EURO conversion. Sorry for the off topic note.)

[Jack4Life]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Don't forget that the seats that are already there do a good job of placing you as far away from the playing field as possible. So, if you're one of the lucky fans who aren't forced to sit in the folding tables brought in from the local VFW, you'll need to bring your field glasses to the game to take in the action. (Note: I'm using field glasses instead of binoculars because it sounds so much more formal. Also, it's my little way of helping the US dollar catch up to the EURO. If we start using more european terms, maybe people will confuse us for British and give us incorrect change on the ol' dollar to EURO conversion. Sorry for the off topic note.)

Where the hell you goin' with that? (Don't take offense, just kidding!)

[joeboo22]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I would be very disappointed if SDSU moved a game to Howard Wood unless the situation was perfect in SDSU's favor or construction at CAS made them...... If you are going to move the game to Sioux Falls you could just as well move it to the metrodome then atleast we would be inside because the few people you are going to gain by having the game be in Sioux Falls you are going to loose in students and I thought college was still about the students.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Football's future upgrades

My guess (just a guess): They're just talking.

HW is a dump. It seats 10,000, all with lousy sight-lines. As an added bonus, there's the wind-tunnel effect since the thing sits out in the middle of the land of many parking lots. And the scoreboard? It's craptacular... if you're into living-scoreboard-history displays.

How many portable seats can they bring in from Minneapolis and Omaha? They'd need 4,000 to reach our Coughlin average. Of course if we're splitting the gate with an opponent and with the Sioux Falls Sports Authority, you'd need a lot more than that to meet our revenue expectations. It's also not free to get 80 or 90 football players from Brookings to Sioux Falls, feed them, and then bring them back. You'd be taking money out of Brookings business owners' pockets. They rely on gameday business for a lot of revenue. So does the SDSU bookstore, which helps fund SDSU athletics. Our flagship sponsors would be cut out of the action, and we'd lose that revenue (see scoreboard comment above). And how many students would you expect to make the trip. Isn't this also about them? There's another intangible: Augie is building an on-campus stadium because of the atmosphere you create with that. Bands marching in. Fight songs. Students walking over from dorms. The whole "feeling" that is created by a big event on campus. Everything Augie talks about wanting to create -- read the Augie story in the Argus today -- we already have. So naturally, we'd want to give that up by playing 52 miles from campus in an unpleasant wind tunnel of a stadium. And we'd want to lose money doing it.

Finally, I'm not sure how you're reaching 200,000 potential donors when the place seats 10,000, and we already get covered in all the Sioux Falls media.

Better to work on getting a Coughlin game next year on TV. You'd actually reach into the homes of a few hundred thousand people while maintaining the attendance momentum you've started building at Coughlin.

Very well said, the only reason I can think of having a game at HW would be is if construction forced a game to be moved there. If construction were to require moving the beginning of a season to HW, then it would be OK and could allow the grand opening to be on Hobo Day. But that is way off in the future

[Jack4Life]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Very well said, the only reason I can think of having a game at HW would be is if construction forced a game to be moved there. If construction were to require moving the beginning of a season to HW, then it would be OK and could allow the grand opening to be on Hobo Day. But that is way off in the future

I agree...

[Jacked_Up]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I respectfully take issue with some of this Brookings protectionism. The Jacks ought to try to play a game in Sioux Falls every other year or so. Not the NDSU game or a USD game, of course. Maybe not a conference game. But face it, the Jacks need the financial, political and fan support of the Sioux Falls area. What better way to pursue it? Howard Wood has been improved, and more improvements probably are on the way. If the Jacks schedule a game there, I suspect the sports authority would have to make it worth the team's while financially. ... That said, I'm glad the athletic center at the north end of CAS is finally being proposed. Anyone know what happened last Friday at the Regents meeting? Until those kind of improvements are made at CAS, I don't think we Jacks fans can be too critical of Howard Wood or any other stadium.

[joeboo22]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I respectfully take issue with some of this Brookings protectionism. The Jacks ought to try to play a game in Sioux Falls every other year or so. Not the NDSU game or a USD game, of course. Maybe not a conference game. But face it, the Jacks need the financial, political and fan support of the Sioux Falls area. What better way to pursue it? Howard Wood has been improved, and more improvements probably are on the way. If the Jacks schedule a game there, I suspect the sports authority would have to make it worth the team's while financially. ... That said, I'm glad the athletic center at the north end of CAS is finally being proposed. Anyone know what happened last Friday at the Regents meeting? Until those kind of improvements are made at CAS, I don't think we Jacks fans can be too critical of Howard Wood or any other stadium.

I believe the Regents meeting is this thursday...

But as too your post... why move a game 52 miles when you are getting the attendances you are getting at home? If Rapid City was the size of Sioux Falls I could see it because its a big market that is extended from your school that you could capitalize on but right now Rapid isn't that big... The problem with Sioux Falls is the majority of the fans that live in Sioux Falls that would attend the game in Sioux Falls are the ones that already make the trip up to Brookings the majority of the time..... Also if Sioux Falls had a new stadium that fit 20,000+ it would be one thing but Howard Wood is worse then CAS and seats 5000 less.....

[SUPERBUNNY]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I have to agree with joeboo22 on this one. If we start to consistently draw 10,000+ for games and even more for the marquis matchups, then it probably doesn't make sense to move a game to the south.

Nothing attracts a crowd like a crowd and continuing to draw this kind of gate will make CAS the place to be for a game on a Saturday afternoon. CAS is a great atmosphere and HW is definitely a run down facility.

There is something to be said for engaging the Sioux Falls market more in the future but I think the Summit basketball championships provide a much better opportunity to do that than a football game. There could be other basketball games, volleyball, and baseball in the future and they would fit into that market nicely.

Getting approval for the field house from the Regents will be a huge boost for the football team as well as other teams on campus. I was a ball boy for the Jacks football team in 1980 and the locker room was a dump then. Haven't been inside since but all reports are that it hasn't gotten much better. The field house would be a great help in recruiting as well.

GO JACKS!

SUPERBUNNY