Football's future upgrades

[bisonbacker]

Re: Football's future upgrades

* comments deleted by moderator--reason: off-topic and smack on non-smack forum*

[fabio208]

Re: Football's future upgrades

That is a very nice and classy stadium...if the renovations to CAS were any where close to that... i would be very pleased and excited!!!

[bisonbacker]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I never, ever, ever, want SDSU football to be played inside a dome.

Ok lets try it this way then. You don't want to see football in a dome but yet this venue (dome games) gives both teams the best opportunity to play the game without regard to conditions (weather conditions) that are out of anyones control. So both teams have the opportunity to showcase their teams talents on a level playing field. My comments were smacky but yet not really intended to be but more so to prove my point. Last years game that you played in less then perfect conditions you surely would have won IMHO had the playing conditions been better. I won't mention which game as most can figure it out themselves. But that is the perfect example of why domes in our part of the country are needed. Yes I miss outdoor football when the conditions are ideal but how often do we get those conditions in October or November in this part of the country not to mention when we get into playoff games I like our chances of hosting and winning games based on who's the best team not because one teams offense or defense was hampered by less then perfect playing conditions. Sorry for the earlier post that was considered smacky but I believe this to be on topic given the comments of Rabitlivinginverm. Carry on.

[goon]

Re: Football's future upgrades

[quote author=Rabbitlivinginverm link=1165242043/0#14 date=1165362990]I never, ever, ever, want SDSU football to be played inside a dome.

Ok lets try it this way then.  You don't want to see football in a dome but yet this venue (dome games) gives both teams the best opportunity to play the game without regard to conditions (weather conditions) that are out of anyones control.  So both teams have the opportunity to showcase their teams talents on a level playing field.  My comments were smacky but yet not really intended to be but more so to prove my point.  Last years game that you  played in less then perfect conditions you surely would have won IMHO had the playing conditions been better.  I won't mention which game as most can figure it out themselves.  But that is the perfect example of why domes in our part of the country are needed.  Yes I miss outdoor football when the conditions are ideal but how often do we get those conditions in October or November in this part of the country not to mention when we get into playoff games I like our chances of hosting and winning games based on who's the best team not because one teams offense or defense was hampered by less then perfect playing conditions.  Sorry for the earlier post that was considered smacky but I believe this to be on topic given the comments of Rabitlivinginverm.  Carry on.[/quote]
I have 2 parts to this post.
Part 1. Watching football in a dome is just wrong, Baseball for that matter too. Basically everything but basketball should be played in an open air stadium. I have been in the pride for many years and just from the point of view of the band, having a dome would hurt us. No matter what the weather is the band is still does its thing, rain or snow for practice, it doesn't matter because we embrace what ever it is. The band for the most part loves the open stadium; I would not want it any other way. Plus playing in domes, the sound usually stinks.
Part 2. A lot of open stadiums provide the best for home field advantage. The only time there can be a level playing field for both teams would be a neutral site. Also Teams that tend to play in doors a lot don't usually have much success outside and visa versa. With our stadium and the weather we have, I would use that to our advantage scheduling wise. Bring in a team from Texas or Florida or the south for one of the November games and just see how much fun they have playing outside in the weather. In return, it’s just as hard for a team use to cold weather to go play where it’s warm, but that’s what makes it a home field advantage.

[mitchell2006]

Re: Football's future upgrades

They still play games at soldior field and at lambaue in December and January. A little football in South Dakota during November doesn't hurt anybody. This isn't badmitton we're talking about, it's football. I here by pronounce a Man Law that football should never be played inside.

[2002jack]

Re: Football's future upgrades

We don't need a dome, but the turf does need improvements, ASAP!!

[bisonbacker]

Re: Football's future upgrades

That's fine that you don't want to play in a dome. Your attendance figures will not improve as much as they could if you were playing in a dome however and that makes a big difference in $$$$$. Carry on.

[89rabbit]

Re: Football's future upgrades

If you enjoy playing in a dome, that too is fine.  One of the big issues I have with a dome is the capacity is finite.  Pretty hard to expand a domed structure, while and outdoor stadium can grow with the program.

Go State!  

[HoboD]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Bison,
Your probably correct that on average you will get bigger crowds indoors in November in a dome vs. outside.  However I would disagree about that being a smart move based on the money it brings in.  Your forgetting that the costs of building a dome vs. an outdoor stadium arent even close.  Say 100 million vs. 50 million.  Maintance costs arent even close (Those of us in SD will remember the cost of replacing the roof at the Dakotadome).  And utilities are astronomical in a dome vs. minimal out doors.   So I would venture to estimate that over the 50 year life of a dome, including the additional construction costs, maintenance and repairs plus utilities cost you will have close to a million dollars a year more cost in a dome vs. outdoors (not including the cost of money in the original investment)  

Lets assume 2 November home games a year.  Lets assume your average ticket price was $50 dollars, (Not realistic)  In order to break even you would need to increase attendance by 10,000 a game over the crowd you would have had outside.  
Thats just not realistic.     Not going to happen.   The only other way to make up that additional cost is by leasing out the facility for other events.  Brookings is not Fargo which has a much bigger population for concerts etc and those events have cost built in to.  

The bottomline is the idea that a dome would "make money" vs. an outdoor stadium is not realistic from a financial standpoint.  

[Go_Herd]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Bison,
Your probably correct that on average you will get bigger crowds indoors in November in a dome vs. outside.  However I would disagree about that being a smart move based on the money it brings in.  Your forgetting that the costs of building a dome vs. an outdoor stadium arent even close.  Say 100 million vs. 50 million.  Maintance costs arent even close (Those of us in SD will remember the cost of replacing the roof at the Dakotadome).  And utilities are astronomical in a dome vs. minimal out doors.   So I would venture to estimate that over the 50 year life of a dome, including the additional construction costs, maintenance and repairs plus utilities cost you will have close to a million dollars a year more cost in a dome vs. outdoors (not including the cost of money in the original investment)  

Lets assume 2 November home games a year.  Lets assume your average ticket price was $50 dollars, (Not realistic)  In order to break even you would need to increase attendance by 10,000 a game over the crowd you would have had outside.  
Thats just not realistic.     Not going to happen.   The only other way to make up that additional cost is by leasing out the facility for other events.  Brookings is not Fargo which has a much bigger population for concerts etc and those events have cost built in to.  

The bottomline is the idea that a dome would "make money" vs. an outdoor stadium is not realistic from a financial standpoint.  

While I understand what your trying to say about the cost associated with a dome and I will agree with you to some extent that they are much much higher than a outdoor stadium. But it's just foolish to throw around numbers associated with cost of upkeep of a dome. Your assumption is totally unvalid because it is based on what? If there is no concrete evidence of associated cost with a dome, there is no point in making up numbers to make a point. Now if you had numbers on the actual costs or were the manager of a dome then I would listen to you.

What you forgot to consider HoboD is that inside a dome people are more likly to spend 75% more money on concession stands and apperal due to the magicical atmosphere and comfort of a dome. Thus the average price of the 75% increase of the concession stands items and apperal sales are $10. We average 16,500 for a home game thats an added income of $165,000 per game. And with 6 home games thats a whopping .990 MILLION dollars, so basically we break even compared to an outdoor stadium.
See I can make up assumptions and number too. It's pointless.

As far as the Fargodome is concerned, we didn't pay for it so we don't have any of those repair/maintenence costs, and it only costs us around $200,000 annually to use it for football games.

Whatever happens its good to see that CAS will be getting a facelift soon. It will benifit your program/institution and recruiting.

[goon]

Re: Football's future upgrades

That's fine that you don't want to play in a dome.  Your attendance figures will not improve as much as they could if you were playing in a dome however and that makes a big difference in $$$$$.  Carry on.

The only time that playing in a dome is best for weather would be november. Even if we play 2 games then, The difference in attendance figures might improve, but if we are hoping that 2 games in november are going to be what improves attendence numbers, then we might have other problems to look at. So from that standpoint we it would only be a small improvement for what the extra attendance would mean. I would much rather stay outside and enjoy the weather then hide indoors. If weather stops fans from coming, then they prolly are not as true of a fan as those who do go rain or shine. Was it not hobo daze a 2 years ago? i can not remember, however it started to snow and such right as the game started. The crowd, the students and the band loved it. It was a great experince becuase of the weather. The players seemed to have embraced it also. As long as the players enjoy it and are alright playing outside what ever the weather may be, then I am fine sitting out there watching them also.

[HoboD]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Bisonbacker,
Actually, I am quite familiar with construction costs, funding, M & R and utilities costs in my work. The figures I used for operating expenses of an indoor facility are laughably conservative. For example, the Bismark Civic center last year had operating expenses of $1.8 million, a consultant's projected operating expenses for the Central Minnesota events center in St. Cloud was, $1.7 million (They're projected cost of construction was $68 million for a 16,000 seat facility) Finally, according to the Fargo city budget, the operating expenses for the 2007 Fargodome budget are $3.4 million. That does not include debt service on the bonds that were used to construct the facility. Those are ACTUAL figures. Domes are EXPENSIVE!

Your assumption that all of the games inside would draw better then outside is falacious. At best it would increase attendance a couple games a year. In addition, I doubt there would be little differences in concession sales between indoors and outdoors. A hot dog is a hot dog whether purchased indoors or out. Im sure the Packers, Giants, U of Michigan, U of Wis. due quite well with concessions outside. You would have some increased sales due to the larger crowds for the two games, but in the figures I quoted, I used an average ticket sale of $50 which is probably double current prices.

NDSU might get the use of the dome for $200K a year. Good for them if thats true, but someone has to pay that $3.4 million operating expense.

As I said earlier, increased attendance at two games a year does not justify such a huge expense at least down here.

[bisonbacker]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Ummm I wasn't the one coming up with the numbers????

[Jacks02]

Re: Football's future upgrades

Ummm I wasn't the one coming up with the numbers????

I'm pretty sure he was responding to Go_Herd, not you.

[bisonbacker]

Re: Football's future upgrades

I'm sure your right but he's specifically referenced me. :-/