Will we increase the size of AGC

[PurplePutt]

Which is why I never said we should reduce it to 40,000. I also don't think we should build it to 50-55k just because that many might show up for one game. That brings that same problems our former size stadium had for so many years.

That is were I think you are wrong. I think the jump in attendance from 42K-50K is an achievable goal. Why do you think we have reached the limit on attendance growth. With all the positives, new stadium, RB win, #2/3 finish, AQ conference, attendance should continue to grow. The money is there and so is the construction crew--getter done.

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

True, but you don't build a a venue for the largest capacity you might ever have. That would be a big waste 99.9% of the time.

I'm pretty sure he is not advocating a 70,000 seat stadium either. :wacko:

 

[Duquesne Frog]

That is were I think you are wrong. I think the jump in attendance from 42K-50K is an achievable goal. Why do you think we have reached the limit on attendance growth. With all the positives, new stadium, RB win, #2/3 finish, AQ conference, attendance should continue to grow. The money is there and so is the construction crew--getter done.

Serious question ... when the upper deck was built in the 50's, was TCU selling out regularly then? I realize the DFW sports landscape has changed significantly since then (as has the population), but I'd be curious to know what kind of crowds TCU was pulling in during our last heyday ...

 

[gdu]

That is were I think you are wrong. I think the jump in attendance from 42K-50K is an achievable goal. Why do you think we have reached the limit on attendance growth. With all the positives, new stadium, RB win, #2/3 finish, AQ conference, attendance should continue to grow. The money is there and so is the construction crew--getter done.

I don't think, nor of course have I ever said, we reached our limit on attendance growth. But again, you can't just go big because you might have that demand in the future. That is a big part of many issue we have had with our stadium now (too low ticket prices, low demand, people think they can walk up and get tickets, empty seats on ESPN, etc....). Fortunately, it seems TCU realizes that scarcity leads to action.

 

[gdu]

I'm pretty sure he is not advocating a 70,000 seat stadium either. :wacko:

55k (which he is talking about) is too big right now. It would leave us with the exact same problems having a 46k seat stadium did 2 years ago.

 

[NNM]

Total time to pee, 35 minutes.

Sounds like you are over 50, my friend. It only gets worse.

 

[PurplePainD]

Serious question ... when the upper deck was built in the 50's, was TCU selling out regularly then? I realize the DFW sports landscape has changed significantly since then (as has the population), but I'd be curious to know what kind of crowds TCU was pulling in during our last heyday ...

Slightly off topic, but doesn't anyone know if the "rule" is still in effect that no building on campus can have a higher max elevation than the church steeple (I believe some big donors put this in as a clause way back when...)?

 

[PurplePutt]

I don't think, nor of course have I ever said, we reached our limit on attendance growth. But again, you can't just go big because you might have that demand in the future. That is a big part of many issue we have had with our stadium now (too low ticket prices, low demand, people think they can walk up and get tickets, empty seats on ESPN, etc....). Fortunately, it seems TCU realizes that scarcity leads to action.

You can't just add a few rows every year as attendance increases. And...I never said 55K. I said 50K. You just said 46K (actually it is 44K) was a problem 2 years ago. Hmmm. It wasn't a problem this year. What about two or three years from now. 50K isn't that many more seats.

 

[LVfrog]

I say it should be 45K, that way when we avg. 42K it will look like it is full. Hopefully, we can someday get to a point where we need a 55K seat stadium, but until we do we shouldn't build one.

 

[PurplePutt]

55k (which he is talking about) is too big right now. It would leave us with the exact same problems having a 46k seat stadium did 2 years ago.

I'll say it again. 50K. First of all it was 44K and it was not a problem this year because our attendance grew from 38 to 42. Why don't you think our attendance can't grow from 42 to 48 in 3 or 4 years.

 

[mcdaddy]

My guess is that WVU will bring a bunch of people when they visit. Maybe Looieville, too.

Most of the other BE schools-- maybe Cincy, Rutgers, 'Cuse, USF-- not so many. Particularly if they (or TCU, I suppose) aren't having a good year.

I understand that the new east stands should be quickly expandable when/if needed. I would hate to overbuild now, and miss a chance to stimulate ticket demand and price through a measured amount of scarcity.

But we haven't discussed that construction costs are probably the lowest right now that we may see for years or decades to come. May be a good time to build out.

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

I understand that the new east stands should be quickly expandable when/if needed. I would hate to overbuild now, and miss a chance to stimulate ticket demand and price through a measured amount of scarcity.

So, exactly how much do you want to see the price for tickets increase? I'd prefer to see the revenue increase with volume rather than simply charging the one's that already come more.

Construction costs are cheaper right now than they might be 5-10 years from now too. They might be even cheaper 5-10 years from now I guess, but I wouldn't count on it.

I like the aesthetic value of a full-to-capacity stadium just as much as the next guy, but I'd still rather have 46,000 fans sitting in the stands of a 50,000 seat stadium than 40,000 fans sitting in a 40,000 seat stadium and 6,000 standing around or not there period. And as far as meaningless angles go, I just like the sound of a 50,000 seat stadium as opposed to a 40,000 seat stadium for a nationally prominent program. How many of you ridicule SMU for having a 32,000 seat stadium, and why?

 

[gdu]

You can't just add a few rows every year as attendance increases. And...I never said 55K. I said 50K. You just said 46K (actually it is 44K) was a problem 2 years ago. Hmmm. It wasn't a problem this year. What about two or three years from now. 50K isn't that many more seats.

You actually said 50-55K. 46k wasn't a "problem" this year, but we had more non-sellouts than sellouts.

I really think you are ignoring the SRO capacity and the negatives of having too many seats.

 

[PurplePutt]

None of this crap about what we want or what we think we need matters. I'm pretty sure the train has left the station. The money has been raised. The construction is ongoing. The 50K option is going to be exercised which is economical and smart. By the time the thing is finished we will be in the BE and attendance will increase.

 

[OmniscienceFrog]

None of this crap about what we want or what we think we need matters. I'm pretty sure the train has left the station. The money has been raised. The construction is ongoing. The 50K option is going to be exercised which is economical and smart. By the time the thing is finished we will be in the BE and attendance will increase.

I hope your intel is right, and while I don't have any inside sources myself, I'm betting it is. It's just too obvious.

 

[michaelperrytcu]

So you don't think we will grow our attendance. You don't think the trend from 32K to 42K will go to 46K and eventually 50K if there are that many seats. You don't think that having a state of the art stadium, being in an AQ conference with traditional football teams from the populous North East, and playing LSU, Arkansas, OU, Tech, Virginia, a Rose Bowl championship, higher ranked recruit classes, and playing for a BCS birth or chance at a National Championship birth annually will increase our average attendance to 48-50K a year?

I think you are short sighted. I think they are going to build this thing to hold 50K and are in the process of doing that now. The money has already been raised. That is what I think. Guess we'll see what happens.

I bet you were one of the ones who thought rising home prices and the dotcom boom would continue forever. We've had ONE game ever in the history of Amon Carter with 50K attendance. That's all that needs to be said... I don't care about the BE and what other reasons you give for attendance increasing through the roof. One game EVER with 50K fans.

 

[PurplePutt]

You actually said 50-55K. 46k wasn't a "problem" this year, but we had more non-sellouts than sellouts.

I really think you are ignoring the SRO capacity and the negatives of having too many seats.

I said 50 -55K because that is what has been advertised as the capacity that the stadium could be expanded to. What I heard they were shooting for was 50K.

 

[PurplePutt]

I hope your intel is right, and while I don't have any inside sources myself, I'm betting it is. It's just too obvious.

I am just reporting what (has been) a real reliable source has posted on another site. He is like E. F. Hutton. Ain't no guarantees though.

 

[Pure Purple]

Construction cost is another point that should be considered.

It would be considerably cheaper to initially build the East side

to the desired capacity, as opposed to adding a second deck

a year or two later.

 

[gdu]

No one disputes that. I just don't think there will be consistent demand for a 50k seat + SR0 stadium anytime soon.