EagleOutsider.com

The lack of sales at Rutgers and Yukon as well as the tax payers of New Jersey ANC Connecticut agree with your air tight logic.

I'll think of this argument as I pass the stores with the aged "grand reopening" signs and permanently shuttered doors

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:The lack of sales at Rutgers and Yukon as well as the tax payers of New Jersey ANC Connecticut agree with your air tight logic.

I'll think of this argument as I pass the stores with the aged "grand reopening" signs and permanently shuttered doors

I'd LOVE to see the average attendance numbers for the years before and after Maryland's eleventy billion dollar stadium expansion.

oh yeah, maryland isn't part of the acc anymore so we can include them in our arguments too. thanks, mo.j.

I just got dumber reading last night's additions to this thread. Shit.

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:oh yeah, maryland isn't part of the acc anymore so we can include them in our arguments too. thanks, mo.j.

Maryland's average attendance this past season: 38,878
Maryland's stadium capacity: 51,802.

In 2003, Maryland supposedly averaged 51,236 a game. In 2007 they announced that after the season they would begin a $50.8mm expansion project (which included 64 luxury suites, 440 new mezzanine-level seats, a presidential suite for 200 guests, new work areas for television, radio and print media, a new team shop and a state-of-the-art scoreboard). The construction was completed in time for the start of the 2009 season.

Here are the attendance figures since they reopened Byrd Stadium (or what ever bank they had to sell the rights to to help fund the uber necessary expansion):
2009: 44,452
2010: 39,168
2011: 42,355
2012: 36,023
2013: 38,878

In related news, UMass is blaming their football futility on Bob Kraft's lack of expansion plans for Gillette. How can they compete playing on a soccer field?

HJS {l Wrote}:

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:oh yeah, maryland isn't part of the acc anymore so we can include them in our arguments too. thanks, mo.j.

Maryland's average attendance this past season: 38,878
Maryland's stadium capacity: 51,802.

In 2003, Maryland supposedly averaged 51,236 a game. In 2007 they announced that after the season they would begin a $50.8mm expansion project (which included 64 luxury suites, 440 new mezzanine-level seats, a presidential suite for 200 guests, new work areas for television, radio and print media, a new team shop and a state-of-the-art scoreboard). The construction was completed in time for the start of the 2009 season.

Here are the attendance figures since they reopened Byrd Stadium (or what ever bank they had to sell the rights to to help fund the uber necessary expansion):
2009: 44,452
2010: 39,168
2011: 42,355
2012: 36,023
2013: 38,878

yeah - but what about stanford. they are a private school and super awesome and it's all because of stadium expansion and upgrades that prevented them from selling out the pac 12 championship game

Stanford renovated their stadium and made it smaller. I do think we need to improve our facilities, but a bigger Alumni is not one of the needs.

When the f is Bates going to announce facilities?

Not until we get our free tacos.

my original question in the post got hijacked. And for the record BC should not add an addtional seat to the stadium, until they can prove they need it.

MY question is, based upon knowledge, or actually being in other stadiums, do most other college venues have the aluminum seating, or the individual chairs? This is awful to admit, I have been to Army, Navy, the Big House, MSU, ND and the orange bowl, and cant remember if they had seats or the aluminum job?

hinghameagle {l Wrote}:my original question in the post got hijacked. And for the record BC should not add an addtional seat to the stadium, until they can prove they need it.

MY question is, based upon knowledge, or actually being in other stadiums, do most other college venues have the aluminum seating, or the individual chairs? This is awful to admit, I have been to Army, Navy, the Big House, MSU, ND and the orange bowl, and cant remember if they had seats or the aluminum job?

the answer in most arenas is "yes"

there's a mixture of spendier locations with seats or rows with backs and cheaper locations with benches

now - your hijack of a perfectly good thread aside... anyone suggesting that alumni needs to expand should have their weener removed to prevent them from procreating

hinghameagle {l Wrote}:my original question in the post got hijacked. And for the record BC should not add an addtional seat to the stadium, until they can prove they need it.

MY question is, based upon knowledge, or actually being in other stadiums, do most other college venues have the aluminum seating, or the individual chairs? This is awful to admit, I have been to Army, Navy, the Big House, MSU, ND and the orange bowl, and cant remember if they had seats or the aluminum job?

Big House and ND have benches. Not sure if they are aluminum or not. I'm never that sober at such events.

hinghameagle {l Wrote}:my original question in the post got hijacked. And for the record BC should not add an addtional seat to the stadium, until they can prove they need it.

MY question is, based upon knowledge, or actually being in other stadiums, do most other college venues have the aluminum seating, or the individual chairs? This is awful to admit, I have been to Army, Navy, the Big House, MSU, ND and the orange bowl, and cant remember if they had seats or the aluminum job?

The ONLY one I specifically recall having actual chairs was this year's USC trip to the Coliseum.
Coliseum has chairs.
Michie has benches (aluminum).
Boone Pickens has mostly aluminum benches (but mostly chairs in the areas we consider DBS).
LSU has benches (aluminum).
Bryant-Denney has benches (aluminum).
Keenum has benches (aluminum).
Carter-Finlay has benches (aluminum).
Byrd Stadium has benches (aluminum).
Bobby Dodd has benches (aluminum).
Doak Campbell has benches (aluminum).
Clemson has benches (aluminum).
ND had wooden benches (which I believe are now aluminum post-renovation).

Now... some of these places also have donor seating... and club seating... and those high rollers are afforded more comforts. Others (like Bama) allow you to buy a seat back to be installed on your bench seat. But, it should be noted that BC also have added cheap seating cushions to the DBS zones. It is also possible that some of these school have recently renovated. And... it is also possible that I was too drunk to remember it accurately.

A... perhaps THE... major difference between these stadiums and BC is that the stanchions on which the benches sit (and that you walk on to get to your seat) are generally concrete. Alumni seems a bit out of place by having the whole freaking stadium being aluminum (which evenly included the walls before we installed fake brick by Garden State Brickface and Stucco). That may exacerbate the empty look (as opposed to similar lack of attendance of others schools) as there is no visual difference between the seats and the surrounding... as a result giving a greater perception of emptiness. Again... a way to possibly and cheaply address this (if one was so inclined) is to paint (or otherwise add color to) the walkways, floors or seats. Or... you could just better the product on the field and make it easier to tailgate (but that's crazy talk).

The propensity of aluminium also exacerbates the decibels when the fanatics of BC actually show up. Alumni is actually a very loud stadium for a night game against FSU or VT. Between the aluminium and the design with no track and an upper deck that is right over the lower deck, sound builds.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:The propensity of aluminium also exacerbates the decibels when the fanatics of BC actually show up. Alumni is actually a very loud stadium for a night game against FSU or VT. Between the aluminium and the design with no track and an upper deck that is right over the lower deck, sound builds.

More than one opponent has commented on BC being one of the loudest stadiums to play in. Miami players have often talked about how difficult it is. It is never really addressed by the media types (as they are quietly positioned in the boxes that overlook both the Stadium and Conte). But, the way Alumni is built, it places the fans (and noise) directly onto the field.

There is nothing wrong with the stadium. What's been wrong is the product on the field combined with the ridiculous tailgating situation. Throw-in a Stanford-like alumni base that is likely not to live near the school after graduation.

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

hinghameagle {l Wrote}:my original question in the post got hijacked. And for the record BC should not add an addtional seat to the stadium, until they can prove they need it.

MY question is, based upon knowledge, or actually being in other stadiums, do most other college venues have the aluminum seating, or the individual chairs? This is awful to admit, I have been to Army, Navy, the Big House, MSU, ND and the orange bowl, and cant remember if they had seats or the aluminum job?

Big House and ND have benches. Not sure if they are aluminum or not. I'm never that sober at such events.

ND Benches were wood last time I went. ass splinters

Big House seats are plastic coated or made of some type of resin, but you can't really sit down or at least only every other person can sit down.
The width of the seats are designed for a 12 year old gymnast.

it's a good thing snoop and campion aren't here anymore. we'd hve to talk about the seats of 12 year old gymnasts the rest of the day

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:The propensity of aluminium also exacerbates the decibels when the fanatics of BC actually show up. Alumni is actually a very loud stadium for a night game against FSU or VT. Between the aluminium and the design with no track and an upper deck that is right over the lower deck, sound builds.

More than one opponent has commented on BC being one of the loudest stadiums to play in. Miami players have often talked about how difficult it is. It is never really addressed by the media types (as they are quietly positioned in the boxes that overlook both the Stadium and Conte). But, the way Alumni is built, it places the fans (and noise) directly onto the field.

There is nothing wrong with the stadium. What's been wrong is the product on the field combined with the ridiculous tailgating situation. Throw-in a Stanford-like alumni base that is likely not to live near the school after graduation.

The ruffling of the corduroy whale pants is signal deafening noise.

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:The propensity of aluminium also exacerbates the decibels when the fanatics of BC actually show up. Alumni is actually a very loud stadium for a night game against FSU or VT. Between the aluminium and the design with no track and an upper deck that is right over the lower deck, sound builds.

More than one opponent has commented on BC being one of the loudest stadiums to play in. Miami players have often talked about how difficult it is. It is never really addressed by the media types (as they are quietly positioned in the boxes that overlook both the Stadium and Conte). But, the way Alumni is built, it places the fans (and noise) directly onto the field.

There is nothing wrong with the stadium. What's been wrong is the product on the field combined with the ridiculous tailgating situation. Throw-in a Stanford-like alumni base that is likely not to live near the school after graduation.

The ruffling of the corduroy whale pants is signal deafening noise.

Whalepants in corduroy strikes me as being akin to caviar on Ritz crackers.

BIGDUKE6 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:The propensity of aluminium also exacerbates the decibels when the fanatics of BC actually show up. Alumni is actually a very loud stadium for a night game against FSU or VT. Between the aluminium and the design with no track and an upper deck that is right over the lower deck, sound builds.

More than one opponent has commented on BC being one of the loudest stadiums to play in. Miami players have often talked about how difficult it is. It is never really addressed by the media types (as they are quietly positioned in the boxes that overlook both the Stadium and Conte). But, the way Alumni is built, it places the fans (and noise) directly onto the field.

There is nothing wrong with the stadium. What's been wrong is the product on the field combined with the ridiculous tailgating situation. Throw-in a Stanford-like alumni base that is likely not to live near the school after graduation.

The ruffling of the corduroy whale pants is signal deafening noise.

Aluminum can be rough on hemorrhoids! Could be the reason that attendance is down.
We should have a "hemorrhoid and aluminum thread" and keep this thread as the "2014 recruiting thread"
My hunch is that people who are hemorrhoid - free are changing the focus of this thread . . . perfect assholes!

BIGDUKE6 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:The propensity of aluminium also exacerbates the decibels when the fanatics of BC actually show up. Alumni is actually a very loud stadium for a night game against FSU or VT. Between the aluminium and the design with no track and an upper deck that is right over the lower deck, sound builds.

More than one opponent has commented on BC being one of the loudest stadiums to play in. Miami players have often talked about how difficult it is. It is never really addressed by the media types (as they are quietly positioned in the boxes that overlook both the Stadium and Conte). But, the way Alumni is built, it places the fans (and noise) directly onto the field.

There is nothing wrong with the stadium. What's been wrong is the product on the field combined with the ridiculous tailgating situation. Throw-in a Stanford-like alumni base that is likely not to live near the school after graduation.

The ruffling of the corduroy whale pants is signal deafening noise.

Aluminum can be rough on hemorrhoids! Could be the reason that attendance is down.
We should have a "hemorrhoid and aluminum thread" and keep this thread as the "2014 recruiting thread"
My hunch is that people who are hemorrhoid - free are changing the focus of this thread . . . perfect assholes!

Casey {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:

Casey {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:

Casey {l Wrote}:

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:Too much can happen injury-wise and with 2 true frosh as part of the "3-4 ahead of him" that passing on Kimble would be dumb.

I expect this is a two way street. Daz won't waste practice reps or game carries on Kimble unless he's in the starting 2-3 man rotation.

Will Kimble even bother to come back for fall practice if he's buried at 3rd, 4th, or scout team/5th on depth chart? I doubt it. He certainly knows that Hillmam & Outlow were promised real playing time this year.

I just don't see this marriage working out unless he beats out 1 (if not both) of Willis/Rouse in Spring ball ... And it may well be Kimble that backs out. When you've been hurt for two years, you don't really feel like part of the team, until you're back in the rotation.

Hilliman and Outlow were not "promised real playing time" next season. They were promised to be given a chance to play as a true freshman. Same promise that Daz gave Wade which is costing us with Murphy (though it didn't prevent us from wanting to add him into the mix)..

Misdrawn Analogy. It's a given that at least 2 (probably 3) RBs will get meaningful carries to share the load & run different packages ... Particularly in our run-heavy offense. Not true for QBs, where it's usually a one man job. So it's of no consequence for Daz to promise carries to Hillman & Outlow carries as a freshman. Doesn't mean they were promised a starting position and Andre Williams level workload. It just means they'll get carries. Both cited early playing time as a huge factor in their decision, I think you're to think we stole guts from Big10/SEC schools without promising they'll play as true Frosh.

I am willing to bet that at least one of Hilliman and Outlow will redshirt... if not both. There is a big difference between promising PT as a true frosh and promising a change to play.

Let's make they bet. How much?

After Reading Daz's transcript, you must be stoked that you shied away from this bet? It's pretty obvious both Hilman & Outlow are playing in the opener.

http://www.bceagles.com/sports/m-footbl ... 14aag.html
""We're talking about two big-time backs and I anticipate them playing right away. My mindset is to play this class. Does that mean everyone will play right away? No, but I want to play this class. I told them we'll get them in, get them playing, and build it for the future."

No worries, even I was surprised how over the top Daz's praise was for the new recruits relative to the players he inherited. I always heard he was promising the blue chips (RB, DE, LB) they wouldn't redshirt, but I had no idea he publicly announced they would get substantial playing time right out of the gate. (By contrast, I heard he wouldn't' make that promise that Murphy). I was equally floored by the comment that with the this class, BC will have 60 quality players to build off of next fall. That doesn't bode well for the 20-25 other players that don't fit the plan. I expect we are in store for another year of heavy roster churn, to enable a larger than expected 2015 class.

Here is the quote: "When we look at our team, we will have over 60 some odd players that make up this team. We are a very young football team. We are going to play some younger players, but that is a good thing. It will help us build for the future."

In other news, Kimble left team. I'm assuming he stays to graduate, but reportedly he's already focused on an entertainment career.

The stadiums that you are comparing BC to are huge stadiums. The max number of seats BC should have is 50, 000. 1 row of benches around the entire stadium equal 1, 000 seats, an old rule of thumb. The benefits to enclosing the upper deck to match the lower deck are several. It creates an even louder stadium, creates much need space under the expanded areas, and is very impressive to recuits and the TV cameras. The chair seats will keep the capacity down and make it a very impressive, first class facility. If we are not going to have 80, 000 seats or play all of our games at Gillette, we should have the best 50, 000 seat stadium in the country.

Eaglekeeper {l Wrote}:The stadiums that you are comparing BC to are huge stadiums. The max number of seats BC should have is 50, 000. 1 row of benches around the entire stadium equal 1, 000 seats, an old rule of thumb. The benefits to enclosing the upper deck to match the lower deck are several. It creates an even louder stadium, creates much need space under the expanded areas, and is very impressive to recuits and the TV cameras. The chair seats will keep the capacity down and make it a very impressive, first class facility. If we are not going to have 80, 000 seats or play all of our games at Gillette, we should have the best 50, 000 seat stadium in the country.

You can enclose the stadium without adding significant seats, which is something I think they should do. All the corners can be enclosed with luxury seating/boxes assuming there is demand for that. On the "plex side" yawkey can be expanded/wrapped around to the other corners to enclose the stadium, whether it is box seating, offices, or some kind of press room (which would be a major upgrade from using that dumpy room below alumni), or even putting smaller video boards in teh corners to complement 1 or 2 larger video boards behind the endzones, there are plenty of options without adding significant seats, which BC does not need.

I always thoguht Conte should undergo some kind of similar transformation. Similar to the University of Tennessee's basketball arena, where one of the sidelines has limited general seating and a "wall" of box seating/media seating, behind it. Size/capacity is not the issue, Bates needs to make adjustments to decrease/maintain size and increase the asthetic/comfort level of both arenas. Hockey obviously is a fixed number of seats, but adjustments can be made to the basketball setup to add seats/get fans closer to the court if there is need for more seats.

Casey {l Wrote}:No worries, even I was surprised how over the top Daz's praise was for the new recruits relative to the players he inherited.

Really? Because I'm not. With the seniors graduating, I wouldn't be surprised if the team's best 30 players consist of at least 25 freshmen and transfers.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

Casey {l Wrote}:No worries, even I was surprised how over the top Daz's praise was for the new recruits relative to the players he inherited.

Really? Because I'm not. With the seniors graduating, I wouldn't be surprised if the team's best 30 players consist of at least 25 freshmen and transfers.

He pretty much sandbagged what he inherited. Said something like "these are OUR players" talked about how last year's class has a few guys that they got lucky with (but basically saying the rest suck). We all know he is generally right. We know that there is a pretty massive talent gap between the players who just graduated and the ones who are seniors next year... and the class they just landed. It is the reason why giving Spaz a 4th year was a tragic mistake... and is the reason why I keep saying that a bowl appearance in 2014 would be an incredible accomplishment for the staff.

As for the RB situation, Kimble changes the analysis drastically. I have always liked him and thought he was the most purely talented RB on the roster (even with Finch and Smash). He was fast and had Mike Cloud-like cutting ability. It is entirely possible that his knee injury has sapped him of all this. Nonetheless, if Kimble came back healthy, I saw him and Willis vying to be the starter with Rouse and likely Hilliman backing them up. I saw no reason why you would take a redshirt off of Outlow (which would ultimately allow the program to have a little breathing room between Hilliman and Outlow). With Kimble gone, I'd still prefer to try to redshirt Outlow or Hilliman. But, now there is a likelihood that we need a 4th RB... meaning Outlow may have to play.

The reason I am putting Hilliman ahead of Outlow is because of the size difference. At 210+, Hilliman would be something we don't have in Willis, Rouse (or Kimble if he returned). And, I think that Outlow would ultimately benefit from a year in the weightroom to bulk-up his 190lbs frame.

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

Casey {l Wrote}:No worries, even I was surprised how over the top Daz's praise was for the new recruits relative to the players he inherited.

Really? Because I'm not. With the seniors graduating, I wouldn't be surprised if the team's best 30 players consist of at least 25 freshmen and transfers.

He pretty much sandbagged what he inherited. Said something like "these are OUR players" talked about how last year's class has a few guys that they got lucky with (but basically saying the rest suck). We all know he is generally right. We know that there is a pretty massive talent gap between the players who just graduated and the ones who are seniors next year... and the class they just landed. It is the reason why giving Spaz a 4th year was a tragic mistake... and is the reason why I keep saying that a bowl appearance in 2014 would be an incredible accomplishment for the staff.

As for the RB situation, Kimble changes the analysis drastically. I have always liked him and thought he was the most purely talented RB on the roster (even with Finch and Smash). He was fast and had Mike Cloud-like cutting ability. It is entirely possible that his knee injury has sapped him of all this. Nonetheless, if Kimble came back healthy, I saw him and Willis vying to be the starter with Rouse and likely Hilliman backing them up. I saw no reason why you would take a redshirt off of Outlow (which would ultimately allow the program to have a little breathing room between Hilliman and Outlow). With Kimble gone, I'd still prefer to try to redshirt Outlow or Hilliman. But, now there is a likelihood that we need a 4th RB... meaning Outlow may have to play.

The reason I am putting Hilliman ahead of Outlow is because of the size difference. At 210+, Hilliman would be something we don't have in Willis, Rouse (or Kimble if he returned). And, I think that Outlow would ultimately benefit from a year in the weightroom to bulk-up his 190lbs frame.

Outlow and Hilliman were always going to play next season. Willis will be the man, but he isn't going to get half the carries that Andre got.

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

Casey {l Wrote}:No worries, even I was surprised how over the top Daz's praise was for the new recruits relative to the players he inherited.

Really? Because I'm not. With the seniors graduating, I wouldn't be surprised if the team's best 30 players consist of at least 25 freshmen and transfers.

He pretty much sandbagged what he inherited. Said something like "these are OUR players" talked about how last year's class has a few guys that they got lucky with (but basically saying the rest suck). We all know he is generally right. We know that there is a pretty massive talent gap between the players who just graduated and the ones who are seniors next year... and the class they just landed. It is the reason why giving Spaz a 4th year was a tragic mistake... and is the reason why I keep saying that a bowl appearance in 2014 would be an incredible accomplishment for the staff.

As for the RB situation, Kimble changes the analysis drastically. I have always liked him and thought he was the most purely talented RB on the roster (even with Finch and Smash). He was fast and had Mike Cloud-like cutting ability. It is entirely possible that his knee injury has sapped him of all this. Nonetheless, if Kimble came back healthy, I saw him and Willis vying to be the starter with Rouse and likely Hilliman backing them up. I saw no reason why you would take a redshirt off of Outlow (which would ultimately allow the program to have a little breathing room between Hilliman and Outlow). With Kimble gone, I'd still prefer to try to redshirt Outlow or Hilliman. But, now there is a likelihood that we need a 4th RB... meaning Outlow may have to play.

The reason I am putting Hilliman ahead of Outlow is because of the size difference. At 210+, Hilliman would be something we don't have in Willis, Rouse (or Kimble if he returned). And, I think that Outlow would ultimately benefit from a year in the weightroom to bulk-up his 190lbs frame.

Hilliman is also jersey strong!