Dome Stadium...... (Birmingham, Auburn, Troy: luxury, yard, campus)

[cpg35223]

Originally Posted by steveklein

Check your facts. Perhaps 22 athletic programs made money, but far more than 22 football programs made money. UAB was not one of them.

Check again:

Is College Football Profitable for Universities? - Ethos

Money quote:

What’s more, there’s actually a kind of hierarchy among the top-tier football programs. According to Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, authors of The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football (2013), figures from the 2010-11 academic year show that only 22 of the 120 top-tier football programs broke even or made a profit. That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue. To put that more starkly, even within the so-called top tier, 82% of college football teams actually take away money from the university’s budget, rather than generate net revenue.

Even if we use the NCAA's more generous accounting based on some pretty creative accounting, only half of teams make money.

[raj kapoor]

Originally Posted by cpg35223

Check again:

Is College Football Profitable for Universities? - Ethos

Money quote:

What’s more, there’s actually a kind of hierarchy among the top-tier football programs. According to Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, authors of The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football (2013), figures from the 2010-11 academic year show that only 22 of the 120 top-tier football programs broke even or made a profit. That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue. To put that more starkly, even within the so-called top tier, 82% of college football teams actually take away money from the university’s budget, rather than generate net revenue.

Even if we use the NCAA's more generous accounting based on some pretty creative accounting, only half of teams make money.

Clear as crystal.

Thanks

[bhamoutlook]

Originally Posted by steveklein

Is UAB a little bit better this year? Sure, I guess. But I am just speaking over the last 10-20 years. They haven't had more than 30,000 at a game since 2006... and that was when Mississippi State came and provided a lot of the fans.

30000 fans isn't really that bad for a football team like UAB. I think that where UAB is hurting is not having an on campus stadium.

[steveklein]

Originally Posted by bhamoutlook

30000 fans isn't really that bad for a football team like UAB. I think that where UAB is hurting is not having an on campus stadium.

30,000 would be solid average attendance for UAB. And if that were the case, they wouldn't be talking about doing away with the program.

And I agree that not having an on-campus stadium is detrimental. The problem is... I don't see a partnership between Birmingham and UAB giving them an on-campus stadium. Any kind of joint venue would probably be near the BJCC/Uptown district. That would not be as good as an on-campus stadium for attendance, though I suspect it would still be a huge upgrade over Legion Field because there are things to do in the immediate vicinity of the BJCC. Legion Field? Not so much.

But the crux of the issue is a chicken/egg type thing. The university really wants to see some profitability before it dives head first into a 9 figure project. And the public want a nice place to watch the games before they make it profitable for the university.

As someone who wants Birmingham to have more energy, of course I would like to see a new facility built. But if I were in charge of making decisions for what is best for the university, I can totally understand why thinking the UAB football program is a money pit not worth the investment at the current time.

Also, re: that article about only 22 football programs making money... I like how it just glossed over that half (or about 60) programs make money according to the NCAA and attributed it to shaky accounting without going over why its own numbers should be believed over the NCAA's. The data I've seen shows every top 25 team in the country made money, as well as quite a few others.

[cpg35223]

Originally Posted by steveklein

30,000 would be solid average attendance for UAB. And if that were the case, they wouldn't be talking about doing away with the program.

And I agree that not having an on-campus stadium is detrimental. The problem is... I don't see a partnership between Birmingham and UAB giving them an on-campus stadium. Any kind of joint venue would probably be near the BJCC/Uptown district. That would not be as good as an on-campus stadium for attendance, though I suspect it would still be a huge upgrade over Legion Field because there are things to do in the immediate vicinity of the BJCC. Legion Field? Not so much.

But the crux of the issue is a chicken/egg type thing. The university really wants to see some profitability before it dives head first into a 9 figure project. And the public want a nice place to watch the games before they make it profitable for the university.

As someone who wants Birmingham to have more energy, of course I would like to see a new facility built. But if I were in charge of making decisions for what is best for the university, I can totally understand why thinking the UAB football program is a money pit not worth the investment at the current time.

Also, re: that article about only 22 football programs making money... I like how it just glossed over that half (or about 60) programs make money according to the NCAA and attributed it to shaky accounting without going over why its own numbers should be believed over the NCAA's. The data I've seen shows every top 25 team in the country made money, as well as quite a few others.

Well, given that the NCAA's agenda is to support college football, I'm pretty sure I'd trust the math of the authors I quoted over that of the NCAA's. College football is a money-losing proposition for most schools and is generally regarded by most of them as the price of doing business.

Back to the other point at hand. A stadium would not exist solely for UAB football. Not even close. However, having UAB football reside there would be a definite asset in such a facility's favor.

[wetdawg]

Originally Posted by Tourian

Having a strong Blazer fanbase with a 30-40k fan attendance each game, along with a new place to play would go a long way to bringing back the title of "Football Capital of the South."

Hundreds of Millions of Fans Tune to Record-Setting College Football Coverage across ESPN Networks « ESPN MediaZone



I mean, look at that. We watch more then anywhere. Imagine all the sports grille/bars and fandom stores that could profit off that if suddenly there was a clean/inviting/safe place downtown for an SEC kickoff game and the Blazers to play at home. That's money on the table just laying there ready to be scooped up.

People think that Just when Alabama and Auburn play, but I remember correctly that is even the games that arent those 2 teams, and not just SEC either. we watch college football in its entirety. A stadium open air or Dome would be great and don't forget the Birmingham Bowl.

[mcalumni01]

just imagine if MAPS would have passed in 2009, the stadium would have already be here. their would have been a new updated stadium for uab so all this talk now wouldn't exist, an sec kickoff game cause sec commissioner has already stated he wants a kickoff game in bham, high school super 48 wouldn't have left, some neutral site games perhaps for some colleges in the south, and who knows maybe the iron bowl back( I know that won't never happen)
and that just on the sports side of things. not to mention the stadium for larger conventional and concerts space.

[raj kapoor]

Originally Posted by mcalumni01

just imagine if MAPS would have passed in 2009, the stadium would have already be here. their would have been a new updated stadium for uab so all this talk now wouldn't exist, an sec kickoff game cause sec commissioner has already stated he wants a kickoff game in bham, high school super 48 wouldn't have left, some neutral site games perhaps for some colleges in the south, and who knows maybe the iron bowl back( I know that won't never happen)
and that just on the sports side of things. not to mention the stadium for larger conventional and concerts space.

This may sting a bit, but MAPS was voted on in 1990's. (96 or 97, I believe) Time flies when your city is doing nothing.

[wardamnbham]

1998 actually. Still waiting on Plan B from RAPS.

[cpg35223]

Originally Posted by mcalumni01

just imagine if MAPS would have passed in 2009, the stadium would have already be here. their would have been a new updated stadium for uab so all this talk now wouldn't exist, an sec kickoff game cause sec commissioner has already stated he wants a kickoff game in bham, high school super 48 wouldn't have left, some neutral site games perhaps for some colleges in the south, and who knows maybe the iron bowl back( I know that won't never happen)
and that just on the sports side of things. not to mention the stadium for larger conventional and concerts space.

Well, it was entirely possible to support the notion of a domed stadium in 1998 and not support MAPS, which was essentially an ill-considered grab bag of bribes for every possible constituency, while adding yet another percentage to the area's already outrageous sales tax rate.

As has already been pointed out in this thread, the city has been steadily accumulating the money to build it without a regressive tax.