Philadelphia 2035 (Liberty, Sandy, Penn: landing, important, articles)

[MB1562]

Originally Posted by thedirtypirate

I can't lie. I get fired up talking about this.

I am a sports fanatic. My family gives quite a bit of money to Temple. I personally think that a stadium will add to the liveliness and cohesiveness to the campus along with drawing millions of consumer dollars to go right into businesses around it. Temple has done a lot and continues to do a ton to improve its academics. It can build a stadium and make the academics better at the same time.

Ok, but the fact remains, Temple won't ever be a big time program. They have no proven, sustainable track record of winning to point to. A couple seasons doesn't count. Also, there just isn't the interest in their program to keep it going once they return to mediocrity (which they almost certainly will). Just imagine how sad it'll look when a 35k person stadium is only 1/3 filled when they go back to sub-.500 seasons. Temple is a great school and a great force for that neighborhood, but certainly not because of their football program.

I am a big time sports fan as well, and nothing beats the college football experience. But, we have to be realistic here. Big time sports corrupts universities like no other. Penn State being a prime example. What happens when a school thinks it has a big time program when they really don't? I can see this going seriously south very quickly. If they want to build a stadium (scaled down), fine. But doing it right there on campus in the heart of North Philly is just stupid.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Kinda makes you wonder whether the Society Hill Towers would be built today.

Heck no. They would be scaled down to 3 stories with parking garages galore.

[timeEd32]

Originally Posted by MB1562

Ok, but the fact remains, Temple won't ever be a big time program. They have no proven, sustainable track record of winning to point to. A couple seasons doesn't count. Also, there just isn't the interest in their program to keep it going once they return to mediocrity (which they almost certainly will). Just imagine how sad it'll look when a 35k person stadium is only 1/3 filled when they go back to sub-.500 seasons. Temple is a great school and a great force for that neighborhood, but certainly not because of their football program.

I am a big time sports fan as well, and nothing beats the college football experience. But, we have to be realistic here. Big time sports corrupts universities like no other. Penn State being a prime example. What happens when a school thinks it has a big time program when they really don't? I can see this going seriously south very quickly. If they want to build a stadium (scaled down), fine. But doing it right there on campus in the heart of North Philly is just stupid.

I'm really not following your line of thinking - 35k is a very small college football stadium. In a previous post you brought up Penn St., Ohio St. and Alabama. They all play in 100k+ seat stadiums. Obviously they are major, well established programs but I'm not sure why they are being brought up. Temple isn't proposing a stadium way out of whack with where they stand in the pecking order.

Also, you're completely discounting the benefits of an on campus stadium. It will be a major recruiting benefit despite being small - (I assume) it will have a new locker room, weight room, and amenities that are Temple's (not the Eagles), it will be accessible players to hang out in at any time, there will be a better atmosphere in the smaller stadium, and it theoretically should be much easier to get a large student attendance. Add some corporate boxes and you have a much better experience for sponsors, alumni, students, and players.

The program will not grow in the same way by renting out a stadium 15-20 min away.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by cpomp

Heck no. They would be scaled down to 3 stories with parking garages galore.

Afaik, the intimate town houses that surround Society Hill Towers on its southside and along 3rd St were also designed by I. M Pei and built around the same time. But, I agree, someone would fight a treasure like that complex today.

[Pennsport]

Originally Posted by timeEd32

I'm really not following your line of thinking - 35k is a very small college football stadium. In a previous post you brought up Penn St., Ohio St. and Alabama. They all play in 100k+ seat stadiums. Obviously they are major, well established programs but I'm not sure why they are being brought up. Temple isn't proposing a stadium way out of whack with where they stand in the pecking order.

Also, you're completely discounting the benefits of an on campus stadium. It will be a major recruiting benefit despite being small - (I assume) it will have a new locker room, weight room, and amenities that are Temple's (not the Eagles), it will be accessible players to hang out in at any time, there will be a better atmosphere in the smaller stadium, and it theoretically should be much easier to get a large student attendance. Add some corporate boxes and you have a much better experience for sponsors, alumni, students, and players.

The program will not grow in the same way by renting out a stadium 15-20 min away.

Totally agree with all of this. Plus, let's not forget the most important aspect... 35k seats will almost certainly be filled for most games as there is a very loyal and passionate student and alumni fan base. So, ultimately, if they fill the seats, impose a modest geographic footprint, add a huge plus to student life to one of Philly's key institutions, and generally act like a D1 sports school, I don't see the big downside other than a handful of long-time residents once again want to halt any progress/change to our quickly advancing city.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Afaik, the intimate town houses that surround Society Hill Towers on its southside and along 3rd St were also designed by I. M Pei and built around the same time. But, I agree, someone would fight a treasure like that complex today.

You would think the city as a whole and especially Society Hill would be warmer to bigger development in 2017, its almost like people are afraid of what Philadelphia could become.... New York lol.

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by cpomp

You would think the city as a whole and especially Society Hill would be warmer to bigger development in 2017, its almost like people are afraid of what Philadelphia could become.... New York lol.

Some of this local attitude is strange because there's the spiffy, ultra expensive, condo being constructed directly across Walnut St from Independence Hall. Definitely radical and is pretty much an NYC type building.

[Pennsport]

Originally Posted by kyb01

Some of this local attitude is strange because there's the spiffy, ultra expensive, condo being constructed directly across Walnut St from Independence Hall. Definitely radical and is pretty much an NYC type building.

For what it's worth, here's my opinion...

Remember how the city was 20/30 years ago? It really didn't even have a "city feel." More of a village/town feel per each neighborhood. The strong opposition to progress/change comes from these long-time residents and my belief is that many of them never wanted, and still don't want, to be in the midst of a true city (which is what Philly is quickly and finally once again transforming into).

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by Pennsport

For what it's worth, here's my opinion...

Remember how the city was 20/30 years ago? It really didn't even have a "city feel." More of a village/town feel per each neighborhood. The strong opposition to progress/change comes from these long-time residents and my belief is that many of them never wanted, and still don't want, to be in the midst of a true city (which is what Philly is quickly and finally once again transforming into).

Do you or anyone else think if Philadelphia never had the Gentlemans Agreement, our skyline would resemble more of a Chicago/ residents would be more open to pushing the limits on design and height?

[kyb01]

Originally Posted by Pennsport

For what it's worth, here's my opinion...

Remember how the city was 20/30 years ago? It really didn't even have a "city feel." More of a village/town feel per each neighborhood. The strong opposition to progress/change comes from these long-time residents and my belief is that many of them never wanted, and still don't want, to be in the midst of a true city (which is what Philly is quickly and finally once again transforming into).

Of course. Not only do I remember 20/30 years ago, I remember 40/50 years ago. I'm really old, people. lol

But, yes, I agree that there are generous amounts of provincialism among many long-time residents who fear the city's growing cosmopolitanism.