Division IAA Football Stadium Capacities

[danefan]

Scheduling Montana at home will be difficult no matter what our stadium looks like. They don't have many away games. They give up a ton of revenue if they don't have home games. This year they have 7 home games.

 

I'd love to put a whooping on Delaware at home though. Even better would be having a home and home with Army.....the Hudson River Shootout! Thoughts of playing Army or another FBS school are right around the corner. Once we get above the minimum scholarships to count as a counter for FBS teams, we should be able to get to some big money games.

[UA_MA_2000]

Can anyone show why a 20,000 seat stadium is necessary?

 

I think 15k is fine. I don't think we can go to the well to often and 15k should be plenty for quite a few years.

 

I. On Necessity

I agree with: "15k is fine. I don't think we can go to the well to often and 15k should be plenty for quite a few years."

 

Given that we can't expect another (or second) stadium to be built for a couple (or several) decades after this stadium, I think a stadium seating only 10,000 is short-sighted. As to the issue of whether a 15,000-seat stadium (or even larger) it necessary right now --- no, it is arguably not. But a stadium in and of itself is also not "necessary". Whether or not this stadium, and the seats it contains, is "necessary" right now should not be the standard by which we should examine this issue of seating capacity. Said differently, if we build a stadium only to what is "necessary" now, then we forestall that which is possibly necessary (or simply desirable) 5 to 10 years from now.

 

II. On Limiting Future Growth?

If we build a 10,000 seat stadium, are we then limiting ourselves to 10,000 seats for the next 10 years, are we not? How easy would it be to expand?

 

And for those who are advocating a smaller stadium of, let's say, 8,000 to 10,000, would those posters be comfortable, or okay, with 15,000 seats? Or do they feel strongly that, based on our attendance figures, and attendance figures of other "Division I-AA" schools, that 10,000 would adequately accommodate future growth over the next decade or two? How soon could we expect an upgrade?

 

III. A Consensus?

It seems to me, based on the foregoing posts, that most of us are comfortable with 15,000 seats to begin with, so long as the stadium is expandable to some larger and yet-to-be-determined figure in the future. Would we all pretty much agree to this? Or are there some of us who would much rather see 8,000 to 12,000 seats versus 15,000 seats?

IV. Cost

Would a 15,000 or 20,000 seat stadium cost a lot more as opposed to, for example, 12,000 seat stadium? I know NOTHING of construction or the costs of building a stadium, but it seems that once we're building it, would the cost be that much more for another 5,000 seats (perhaps, but I simply have no idea)?

 

 

*All said, I think my tentative but subject-to-being-changed vote would be for a 15,000 to 19,999 seat stadium. I'm hoping that with an increase in scholarships, and a potential automatic bid for the NEC (or a move to another conference), we will be able to generate more interest in UAlbany football and attract bigger crowds for a new stadium!

[danefan]

I vote yes.

 

 

Cmon guys, we are only two votes away from calling the bulldozer operaters and giving them the go ahead!

[UA_MA_2000]

I vote yes.

 

 

Cmon guys, we are only two votes away from calling the bulldozer operaters and giving them the go ahead!

 

Just 7 hours, 24 minutes shy of the start of the basketball season too.

[danes05]

I'm in favor of at least 15,000 seats with the ability to expand down the road. Going for 8000-10000 seats is just not worth it. Lets think big! yeah we probably don't need that many seats as of this exact minute but hopefully down the road the football team will give fullholarships and move the program to a better conference (no offense to our fellw NEC members, but UA doesn't belong with the schools in that conference.)

[ATL_DANE]

I stand corrected.

 

But 60-70,000 was an over statement too - this year was 48,000 which I believe was a record

 

I was closer, but if you are playing by Price is Right rules I lose for going over.

 

On a serious note though. I think 12-15k is a good start, so long as its expandable to 20-25k without a major structural overhaul.

 

I am one person who does not want UAlbany to go FBS anytime soon. I've said it 100 times..I'd rather be Montana or Delaware than Buffalo.

 

Buffalo is on track to win four games this year. It's steady progress. UB's success on the field is good for us. Go Bulls!

 

FBS has to be UA's long term goal. It's where every flagship is at with the exception of a few New England and sparely populated plains states. The other 90% are FBS.

 

You don't win if you don't try!

[danefan]

I stand corrected.

 

But 60-70,000 was an over statement too - this year was 48,000 which I believe was a record

 

I was closer, but if you are playing by Price is Right rules I lose for going over.

 

On a serious note though. I think 12-15k is a good start, so long as its expandable to 20-25k without a major structural overhaul.

 

I am one person who does not want UAlbany to go FBS anytime soon. I've said it 100 times..I'd rather be Montana or Delaware than Buffalo.

 

Buffalo is on track to win four games this year. It's steady progress. UB's success on the field is good for us. Go Bulls!

 

FBS has to be UA's long term goal. It's where every flagship is at with the exception of a few New England and sparely populated plains states. The other 90% are FBS.

 

You don't win if you don't try!

 

 

I agree with you that eventually UA should probably be FBS, but not until we can win consistently at the top level of FCS. When we have 3 or 4 FCS national champsionships, then its something to discuss. If that happens sooner rather than later and there is deep rooted institutional, financial, and community support for it, then that's great. I'd just rather work out the growing pains at the FCS level then at the FBS level. I feel like there is more upside at the top of FCS then there is at the bottom of FBS, which are both the same quality level of football.

[ATL_DANE]

Can anyone show why a 20,000 seat stadium is necessary?

 

I think 15k is fine. I don't think we can go to the well to often and 15k should be plenty for quite a few years.

 

I. On Necessity

I agree with: "15k is fine. I don't think we can go to the well to often and 15k should be plenty for quite a few years."

 

Given that we can't expect another (or second) stadium to be built for a couple (or several) decades after this stadium, I think a stadium seating only 10,000 is short-sighted. As to the issue of whether a 15,000-seat stadium (or even larger) it necessary right now --- no, it is arguably not. But a stadium in and of itself is also not "necessary". Whether or not this stadium, and the seats it contains, is "necessary" right now should not be the standard by which we should examine this issue of seating capacity. Said differently, if we build a stadium only to what is "necessary" now, then we forestall that which is possibly necessary (or simply desirable) 5 to 10 years from now.

 

II. On Limiting Future Growth?

If we build a 10,000 seat stadium, are we then limiting ourselves to 10,000 seats for the next 10 years, are we not? How easy would it be to expand?

 

And for those who are advocating a smaller stadium of, let's say, 8,000 to 10,000, would those posters be comfortable, or okay, with 15,000 seats? Or do they feel strongly that, based on our attendance figures, and attendance figures of other "Division I-AA" schools, that 10,000 would adequately accommodate future growth over the next decade or two? How soon could we expect an upgrade?

 

III. A Consensus?

It seems to me, based on the foregoing posts, that most of us are comfortable with 15,000 seats to begin with, so long as the stadium is expandable to some larger and yet-to-be-determined figure in the future. Would we all pretty much agree to this? Or are there some of us who would much rather see 8,000 to 12,000 seats versus 15,000 seats?

IV. Cost

Would a 15,000 or 20,000 seat stadium cost a lot more as opposed to, for example, 12,000 seat stadium? I know NOTHING of construction or the costs of building a stadium, but it seems that once we're building it, would the cost be that much more for another 5,000 seats (perhaps, but I simply have no idea)?

 

 

*All said, I think my tentative but subject-to-being-changed vote would be for a 15,000 to 19,999 seat stadium. I'm hoping that with an increase in scholarships, and a potential automatic bid for the NEC (or a move to another conference), we will be able to generate more interest in UAlbany football and attract bigger crowds for a new stadium!

 

I vote yes.

 

15k now, as long as it's expandable to the FBS minimum. We can't build a stadium that prevents us from ever expanding. We may never make the jump but we need to have a facility with the possibility to be enlarged without being bulldozed or costing a gazillion dollars. We will have to live with this place for the next 50 years!

 

We're close to maxing out SEFCU. Let's learn the lesson of not planning ahead. What's our 20 year plan for football not just the next five?

[danefan]

I vote yes.

 

15k now, as long as it's expandable to the FBS minimum. We can't build a stadium that prevents us from ever expanding. We may never make the jump but we need to have a facility with the possibility to be enlarged without being bulldozed or costing a gazillion dollars. We will have to live with this place for the next 50 years!

 

We're close to maxing out SEFCU. Let's learn the lesson of not planning ahead. What's our 20 year plan for football not just the next five?

 

 

Absolutely! I just hope that the plan involves looking forward from TODAY, not looking forward from TWO YEARS AGO when Project 2010 was introduced. We have made huge progress in two years that could not have been taken into account when 2010 was introduced.

[Dane96]

I vote yes.

 

15k now, as long as it's expandable to the FBS minimum. We can't build a stadium that prevents us from ever expanding. We may never make the jump but we need to have a facility with the possibility to be enlarged without being bulldozed or costing a gazillion dollars. We will have to live with this place for the next 50 years!

 

We're close to maxing out SEFCU. Let's learn the lesson of not planning ahead. What's our 20 year plan for football not just the next five?

 

 

Absolutely! I just hope that the plan involves looking forward from TODAY, not looking forward from TWO YEARS AGO when Project 2010 was introduced. We have made huge progress in two years that could not have been taken into account when 2010 was introduced.

 

I believe 15k is the min attendance figure.

 

I was disappointed when I heard that 10-12 was the number we may change to. Anything LESS than 15k from the get is short-sighted. 15k...expandable to 25k-30k...is just right. Truth is...expandable to 30k means its easy to do that...but you could still add more. The impression I got is the stadium would be built at 15k, and that included around 3k bowl seats...and 12k actual seats...with only one side receiving the upper deck. The second deck....and bowl seats (which I assume can go higher than 3k)...would get us to 25k (makes sense...5-6k...and 4k respectively).

[haggyland]

I vote yes.

 

 

Cmon guys, we are only two votes away from calling the bulldozer operaters and giving them the go ahead!

 

I'll vote no.

I think University Field can take us through the next fifty years....as is.

[UAalum72]

15K attendance is correct, though it's never been enforced. I wouldn't be surprised if FBS requirements changed in the next few years.

 

danefan "When we have 3 or 4 FCS national champsionships, then its something to discuss. " This isn't English soccer with relegation.

 

Of the 29 I-AA champs, only four teams with 5 titles moved to I-A (Boise St., Marshall (2), Western Kentucky and ULa-Monroe). When the program's ready, you go; you don't need championships, just be well-run.

 

A bigger requirement for moving up is to have a good conference to enter. SunBelt or MAC membership doesn't give much advantage over the CAA.

[danefan]

15K attendance is correct, though it's never been enforced. I wouldn't be surprised if FBS requirements changed in the next few years.

 

danefan "When we have 3 or 4 FCS national champsionships, then its something to discuss. " This isn't English soccer with relegation.

 

Of the 29 I-AA champs, only four teams with 5 titles moved to I-A (Boise St., Marshall (2), Western Kentucky and ULa-Monroe). When the program's ready, you go; you don't need championships, just be well-run.

 

I see your point I just don't think being a bottom of the pack FBS school is worth it.

 

Edit:

 

you edited your post while I was typing my response.

I agree, if we ever got an invite from the Big East or similar conference it would be a different story. If the choices are CAA or MAC, I'd rather stay CAA.