CSU stadium

[Deleted member 807]

It's amazing to me that Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oregon State, Washington State and Iowa State have it so much better than CSU. I mean Ft Collins, as a city, is on even to much better footing than Pullman, Corvallis, Stillwater, Ames and Manhattan.

I know the reason. K-State, Okie Lite and ISU have been in a better conference, and have had their fortunes tied to juggernauts like Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. The Beavers and Cougars are aligned with USC, UCLA and the rest of the PAC.

The Rams have always been aligned with the wrong conference and have missed the boat on TV revenues based on top 25 ranked teams being viewed in top 10 media markets along with local markets.

At this point, the Rams are paying the price for their WAC and MWC heritage.

A new stadium is easier to build in a P5 conference, which is why all the state schools I've mentioned have better facilities sooner.

For CSU, they choose their athletic peers poorly and no new on-campus stadium is going to make up for the mistake of their regional alignment.

 

[MtnBuff]

It's amazing to me that Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oregon State, Washington State and Iowa State have it so much better than CSU. I mean Ft Collins, as a city, is on even to much better footing than Pullman, Corvallis, Stillwater, Ames and Manhattan.

I know the reason. K-State, Okie Lite and ISU have been in a better conference, and have had their fortunes tied to juggernauts like Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. The Beavers and Cougars are aligned with USC, UCLA and the rest of the PAC.

The Rams have always been aligned with the wrong conference and have missed the boat on TV revenues based on top 25 ranked teams being viewed in top 10 media markets along with local markets.

At this point, the Rams are paying the price for their WAC and MWC heritage.

A new stadium is easier to build in a P5 conference, which is why all the state schools I've mentioned have better facilities sooner.

For CSU, they choose their athletic peers poorly and no new on-campus stadium is going to make up for the mistake of their regional alignment.

CSU has never been able to become a part of the culture like those other schools have.

 

[Deleted member 807]

CSU has never been able to become a part of the culture like those other schools have.

In 1969, CSU joined the WAC, which included Arizona and Arizona State.

The Arizona schools bolted in 1978

When BYU won a national championship in 1984, the WAC earned respect.

This was a different era without cable TV, ESPN, and 24/7 sports junkies on the internet. CSU wasn't materially worse off than ISU or KSU or Iowa State or Wazzou thirty years ago.

The fatal cultural misalignment came in 1999, when the Rams joined the MWC. The 1999, 2000 and 2002 seasons were CSU's golden era, winning their new conference and enjoying entry into the top 25 and some nice bowl invitations. There was nothing wrong with CSU culture at that moment.

Soon the BCS era blossomed, along with the new media. The revenue model shifted from ticket sales to network contracts and the emergence of ESPN and national TV broadcasts. The MWC wasn't competitive with BCS conferences. CSU fell down and couldn't get up.

The "culture" that Kstate, ISU, and Okie Light lucked into was regular national broadcast games against BCS opponents. If CSU went with CU to the Big 12 in 1994, their on campus stadium would likely have the funding needed to proceed. (Look at Baylor, who opens their new on-campus toilet seat shaped stadium this season.)

But their inability to predict that the MWC was doomed in the early 90's was the event that screwed them.

If they could go back in time to the early 90's when the WAC and SWC were on shaky ground, they would have been wise to beg to join the PAC 10 along with Colorado. Or they might have thought about a deal with the devil involving the Big 12.

But hindsight is always 20-20. And CSU simply failed to see where football was going back then.

Now they would love to get a mulligan for their MWC misstep. But second chances are rare in NCAA football. And it's looking like Captain Jack's Hail Mary to build the stadium really is too little, too late.

 

[InTheBuff]

forgot to mention - you should read the comments - many who responded don't support the stadium - interesting to read

 

[HotRack]

forgot to mention - you should read the comments - many who responded don't support the stadium - interesting to read

Well, it's obvious that Ft. Fun has been Californicated/Boulderized by those comments on the article.

 

[CUFan]

I'm not sure why an on campus stadium is so important to them. I guess the hope is that a new stadium will get them noticed? Maybe it is just symbolic that they are investing in football? Probably not a bad strategy. If they show they are willing to keep trying and invest, I think someone may take a chance on them (to get at the Colorado market). Then, as Skiddy wrote, things may snowball for them once they are in a decent conference.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[dio]

This was in the Denver Post of all places:

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_26131030/csu-cant-afford-new-football-stadium

In early 2012, when the newly hired athletic director at Colorado State University, Jack Graham, announced his "big dream" to build a new football stadium on the academic campus, there had been no investigation, no feasibility studies, no conversation with the city, no impact analysis on nearby neighborhoods nor vetting that normally precede decisions about a project of this size, impact and expense.

 

[BuffHerd]

I would like to see CSU get this stadium built. I don't see them as a P12 member , but would like to see them relevant.

 

[Quattro]

I would like to see CSU get this stadium built. I don't see them as a P12 member , but would like to see them relevant.

Why?

 

[Jello Bear]

The author wishfully suggested "Otter Box Stadium". I might have bought that argument that a few years ago, but I get the impression that OB experienced a sharp taper of their revenues over the last few quarters. The phone case market is getting hit from other players (Lifeproof) and Chinese manufacturers. I doubt they're spending their marketing budget on a small market mid-tier college team. Not gonna happen, Rammie.

 

[CUFan]

Wow. If that article was about CU I'd be really bummed right now. Has Graham really been so bold to be lying much of this time? If so, he may have done a ton of long term damage.

I'd like to see CSU get the stadium built too. Having another relevant program in the state can only be good in my mind. I also root for CSU outside of one game.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Creebuzz]

The author wishfully suggested "Otter Box Stadium". I might have bought that argument that a few years ago, but I get the impression that OB experienced a sharp taper of their revenues over the last few quarters. The phone case market is getting hit from other players (Lifeproof) and Chinese manufacturers. I doubt they're spending their marketing budget on a small market mid-tier college team. Not gonna happen, Rammie.

Not to get sidetracked, but I believe OtterBox acquired Lifeproof in 2013. In any case, your basic premise is correct. Apple is selling their own cases for the latest versions of the iPhone (starting with the 5), which are carving away OtterBox's marketshare. There is stiff competition in this type of product line.

 

[Quattro]

Wow. If that article was about CU I'd be really bummed right now. Has Graham really been so bold to be lying much of this time? If so, he may have done a ton of long term damage.

I'd like to see CSU get the stadium built too. Having another relevant program in the state can only be good in my mind. I also root for CSU outside of one game.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Why is CSU being relevant only good in your mind?

 

[CUFan]

Why is CSU being relevant only good in your mind?

Gets people caring about college football around here beyond just the die hard CU fan base. Engages a large alumni base within the state. I don't see how it would hurt CU for CSU to be relevant. The more people talk about CFB here, the better for CU in my mind.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sackman]

Knutson is an uber-tool. His admonition that the CSU admin needs to tell the local business community to put up or shut up is laughable. The guy has clearly never been involved in a capital campaign. His thought process is painfully juvenile. I read that column and I envision a 2-year old throwing a tantrum because he can't get a fancy toy he wants for his birthday. He has no idea how these things work, and this column isn't going to make things better.

I would like to see them get this built. I'm very concerned about them screwing it up, and sucking public perception of athletic facility upgrades with them. It's a lot easier to point to a successful project up the road when pitching to a donor than it is to try to make the point that they are incompetent, and you're not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 807]

Wow. If that article was about CU I'd be really bummed right now. Has Graham really been so bold to be lying much of this time? If so, he may have done a ton of long term damage.

I'd like to see CSU get the stadium built too. Having another relevant program in the state can only be good in my mind. I also root for CSU outside of one game.

Both CSU and CU have to get their athletic department's financial business in order. The general voting public in Colorado believe that their tax dollars are being wasted subsidizing out of control athletic spending. Articles like this USA Today piece adds to that frustration. With over half of CSU's athletic revenue subsidized by student fees and the CSU general fund, it's easy to make the case that CSU athletics is unsustainable.

At least CU has light at the end of the tunnel. RG is closing the gap with a projected $4M deficit this year and has optimism about breaking even and paying back funds borrowed from the University general fund. This optimism was important in the Regent's vote to approve the renovation and parking structure.

CSU appears as a basket case. Only the craziest donor would want to throw good money after bad. With this article, I can only wonder when Captain Jack and Dr Frank will have worn out their welcome. The noose is getting tighter in Ft Collins.

 

[Quattro]

Gets people caring about college football around here beyond just the die hard CU fan base. Engages a large alumni base within the state. I don't see how it would hurt CU for CSU to be relevant. The more people talk about CFB here, the better for CU in my mind.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Non-CU fans aren't going to give two ****s about a MWC team

 

[MtnBuff]

With over half of CSU's athletic revenue subsidized by student fees and the CSU general fund, it's easy to make the case that CSU athletics is unsustainable.


CSU appears as a basket case. Only the craziest donor would want to throw good money after bad. With this article, I can only wonder when Captain Jack and Dr Frank will have worn out their welcome. The noose is getting tighter in Ft Collins.

CSU has no evidence that they can ever be a player at the higher levels of college football.

Their dream is to become a part of a major conference but even if they were to build and fill say a 36k stadium does that make them attractive to the PAC 12? the B12? No. They have a long history of not generating revenues. When they have been on national TV such as bowl games they haven't drawn ratings. What do they bring to the table that justifies getting a share of major conference revenue.

Csquared will go ballistic but the numbers are there. Even in the years that Lubbick had them positioned as the top BCS buster and most respected non-major conference team they had trouble averaging over 30k home attendance. They barely did it a couple times but mostly were well below. Now they are under 20k even with a team that went to a bowl last year and enthusiasm about their new coach. You are going to tell me that a new stadium will raise attendance by 75% and keep it there, not likely. Certainly hasn't happened anywhere else.

Their best bet, and one that would make much more sense financially and from a recognition standpoint would be to build a state of the art FCS stadium and instead of being a BCS doormat be an FCS powerhouse.

Give the fans a consistent winner, be able to recruit the kids that will keep them a consistent winner, and make being a fan fun.

Yes they would give up the $2-3 million they get in conference media revenue each year and they might even see a decline in attendance but that would be fairly minor. In exchange they could cut their cost of operations by easily 50% and get better results.

They aren't going to be a K-State or another miracle story. They are in a market where the Broncos dominate along with other pro sports. They are also in a market where many of the fans have no real allegiance to the local colleges, they either come from someplace else or just put their attention on Pro sports. Schools like K-State and even Iowa State don't have that pro competition and they have stronger ties because of generational fans and alumni.

My fear with CSU is that they go ahead and build their stadium then end up in default with a big, empty, white elephant. The university ends up eating over $100 million and politic chaos ensues. The result is legislation than while not the fault of CU ends up tieing CU's hands on future necessary projects.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Gets people caring about college football around here beyond just the die hard CU fan base. Engages a large alumni base within the state. I don't see how it would hurt CU for CSU to be relevant. The more people talk about CFB here, the better for CU in my mind.

You have it exactly wrong.

The CSU-CU rivalry distracts fans inside the state from focusing on what is really important in College football; THE Colorado team winning the P12 conference and playing for the national championship.

Instead we have a divided in-state population, a meaningless and low stakes in-state tilt, and two fan bases that are average to unimpressive by national standards when it comes to filling stadiums and contributing dollars towards bringing home a crystal trophy.

I would much rather see only one D1 team in the state.

CU versus Oregon
CU versus USC
CU versus UCLA

These three games should be bigger and more important than the RMS in every county in the state.

Our OOS schedule should involve playing AFA and then clubbing some combination of schools from Wyoming, New Mexico, Nebraska and Kansas.

CSU football is irrelevant already, and should slink off and die a quiet death.

I like the model in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Nebraska better. When you are in a fly-over state with fewer than 6 million people, having fewer teams brings strength in numbers that are necessary to be competitive against schools from the likes of California, Texas and Florida.

If University of Ohio fans can cheer for tOSU, and people from Marquette can cheer for Wiscy, then I have no doubt that DU, Mines, and CSU students can and should be cheering for the Buffs.

The RMS and instate CSU quibbling gets in the way of this vision.

 

[Quattro]

ymssr

 

[MtnBuff]

You have it exactly wrong.

The CSU-CU rivalry distracts fans inside the state from focusing on what is really important in College football; THE Colorado team winning the P12 conference and playing for the national championship.

Instead we have a divided in-state population, a meaningless and low stakes in-state tilt, and two fan bases that are average to unimpressive by national standards when it comes to filling stadiums and contributing dollars towards bringing home a crystal trophy.

I would much rather see only one D1 team in the state.

CU versus Oregon
CU versus USC
CU versus UCLA

These three games should be bigger and more important than the RMS in every county in the state.

Our OOS schedule should involve playing AFA and then clubbing some combination of schools from Wyoming, New Mexico, Nebraska and Kansas.

CSU football is irrelevant already, and should slink off and die a quiet death.

I like the model in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Nebraska better. When you are in a fly-over state with fewer than 6 million people, having fewer teams brings strength in numbers that are necessary to be competitive against schools from the likes of California, Texas and Florida.

If University of Ohio fans can cheer for tOSU, and people from Marquette can cheer for Wiscy, then I have no doubt that DU, Mines, and CSU students can and should be cheering for the Buffs.

The RMS and instate CSU quibbling gets in the way of this vision.

FACT

Rep

 

[CUFan]

I definitely think the CU-CSU game should end.

I also fear that we are on an island in the PAC and developing any real rivalry with SC or anyone else in conference is unlikely. This forced CU-Utah thing is flimsy at best.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[SD Buff]

Nothing would make me happier than to punt the CSU series. That being said, if we ate stuck with CSU, I would prefer them to be the Boise State of non P5 schools. The smack talk bw our fan bases about who sucks worse is good for no one. I take no pleasure in CSU being sh8tty

From phone

 

[Buffnik]

Knutson is an uber-tool. His admonition that the CSU admin needs to tell the local business community to put up or shut up is laughable. The guy has clearly never been involved in a capital campaign. His thought process is painfully juvenile. I read that column and I envision a 2-year old throwing a tantrum because he can't get a fancy toy he wants for his birthday. He has no idea how these things work, and this column isn't going to make things better.

I would like to see them get this built. I'm very concerned about them screwing it up, and sucking public perception of athletic facility upgrades with them. It's a lot easier to point to a successful project up the road when pitching to a donor than it is to try to make the point that they are incompetent, and you're not.

Yeah. It came off as him suggesting that CSU should tell its boosters, local businesses and wealthy alums that you're either with us or against us on this facilities project, so step up with a check right now or go pound sand.

I don't think Graham or anyone else in his position is dumb enough to play his hand that way, but if he did then the response would be "I understand. Kindly remove me from all CSU address books and never contact me again."

 

[Mick Ronson]

i have no issue with CSU in general. i have a couple really good buddies who went there....only mildly retarded from the experience. you can tell parts of their brain don't really work and they have a goofy cheerfulness that is cute but unrealistic in this crass world. but that's aggies for ya. affable in their way.

if CSU was any kind of player, they would be in the Big XII after the last reshuffle. when SMU is more realistic option than you, you aren't a player. but, the Texans and Okies don't think much about losing Denver as a market....as others have said. it's a Bronco world. i think the era of supply-side college football stadium expansion is over.

we had trouble paying off the east side upper deck after Barney won the Big XII.

 

[Mick Ronson]

that said, the series is boring. i don't get up for the games, really. the threat of losing is bigger than the "thrill" of winning. like many others, i'd rather use the now limited OOC game for some other opponents. in recruiting areas, for instance. i stopped going to the Bronco stadium games 10 years ago. cheaper to buy a mini keg of local beer and a couple bottles of good bourbon, have a backyard party....not deal with the morons and hassle of going to Denver. i would rather go to Ft. Collins if given the choice.

 

[buffaholic]

Yes they're on the verge of dropping down to being small-time (even smaller than they already are...), but the thing is, even if they were to miraculously build this on-campus stadium it still wouldn't guarantee that they'd become relevant.

That's my concern as well. I would like them to survive and Graham realized a long time ago that the "status quo" would put them in the FCS level sooner than later. The way things are going, you either get to P5 soon, or die. The stadium is necessary to keep them in the running. If the fans come, and the team were to somehow become relevant in a Boise State kind of way, they would probably find a way out of this. But that's a lot of things that have to line up. If it doesn't happen that way, someone has a big stadium bill to eat.

And yes, OtterBox is financially killing it still. They own the high end of the market and those things retail for like $75 ASP retail and cost about $3 to make. I've been working closely with them on some other projects and it's pretty insane.

 

[BuffG]

The saddest part is that a fairy tale from CSU's AD was a big motivator in getting our facilities up-to-date.

Otterbox is a special company for what it is: accessories. But that doesn't mean that they're willing to pay a significant chunk of 180 million for naming rights to a stadium that'll be on national TV maybe once or twice max. Most can't name another brand in that space other than otterbox & they hardly advertise. Maybe if they could write it off as charity?

That Coloradan article was just pissing into the wind--"I bet we have some alums in Silicon Valley", "Oil & gas is booming," & "Otterbox!" Ok, but who specifically & why should they care when hardly anyone else does?

 

[JJBuff]

I think, perhaps, we are all forgetting about the Lady Gaga revenue.

 

[FlaBuff]

I think, perhaps, we are all forgetting about the Lady Gaga revenue.

she will be Old Lady Gaga by the time CSU's stadium is built.