Well, This Is Bad News/good News

[Mean Green 93-98]

Well, if there is truly no hope for a new stadium within the next decade, why don't we quit worrying about it, why don't we quit posting about it, and just settle for Fouts?

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Well, if there is truly no hope for a new stadium within the next decade, why don't we quit worrying about it, why don't we quit posting about it, and just settle for Fouts?

Not a bad idea.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

And a vendor that sells kettle corn.

There has been a vendor selling kettle corn the last two seasons on the west side.

[ADLER]

Hope you're not back on that goofy, moronic stadium video (it never leaves!).

But flyeater, here is your opinion from 2 years ago.

Unless I don't know something, neither you, nor I, nor pretty much anyone we know will contribute jack squat to the bottom line in any new stadium, though for the price of game admission we'll get to enjoy it no matter how it's designed. If that's the current plan, the upper-deck looks like it has excellent sight lines to the action on the field. Not sure where the bad seats (maybe a few too many around the end zones) are. If it's such a bad deal, then be the first in line to buy season tickets for the lower deck.

I am happy that you've finally seen the light about that "goofy, moronic, stadium". Many of us recognized it as a P.O.S. when it was first unveiled.

[UNTflyer]

Wow, the negativity on the past couple pages is getting serious.

The school spent $300,000 to HKS to develop a stadium plan. They've hired a marketing firm to get the Big Corporate Donor. The school doubled its available credit for capital projects. They terminated the lease for the Radisson. These are all the facts, and they point to a stadium being built soon.

Rumor: The SGA and AD are working together to get a stadium fee vote in front of the students this school year, possibly in the fall. Todd and Riley have both said 2010 for the new stadium. That means in 6 months there has to be some kind of announcement.

[flyeater]

Here's a gift for you. It's a video from March 2004 stating that a football stadium is one of 6 major facilities planned to be completed within the next 18 months.

Click HERE for Stadium Video

It was a video produced for the University of North Texas, and the timeframe was being supported not only by the Director of Athletics but also by the President of the University. It is very clear how people could be mislead to believe that there would potentialy be groundbreaking on a stadium facility prior to 2010.

I think it has become fairly appearant that the groundbreaking for the stadium has been delayed from the original schedule. I think many fans are openly questioning if the prospects for a new stadium are any better now than they were back when this video was produced.

In the meantime construction costs have risen at an astounding rate and North Texas has lost it's only President that ever acknowledged that UNT could become a great university. He was run out by a faculty that believed existance not performance should be the basis for tenure. That same faculty has since selected their own marionette who will do absolutely nothing that makes waves.

So, what do we do? We sit and wait for some imaginary company with no history of interest in North Texas to suddenly dump tens of millions on a historically underperforming venture, or you wait for some elusive fairy to inspire all of North Texas' 150,000 alumni to suddenly start donating generously to a discarded educational appliance.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Wow, the negativity on the past couple pages is getting serious.

The school spent $300,000 to HKS to develop a stadium plan. They've hired a marketing firm to get the Big Corporate Donor. The school doubled its available credit for capital projects. They terminated the lease for the Radisson. These are all the facts, and they point to a stadium being built soon.

Rumor: The SGA and AD are working together to get a stadium fee vote in front of the students this school year, possibly in the fall. Todd and Riley have both said 2010 for the new stadium. That means in 6 months there has to be some kind of announcement.

Hope you are right, but we have been hearing the same thing over and over again with each new year it being pushed back a year. When construction starts, I will start believing it again. Until then, its just words.

[ADLER]

Well, if there is truly no hope for a new stadium within the next decade, why don't we quit worrying about it, why don't we quit posting about it, and just settle for Fouts?

I don't think enough people realize that a community's major civil projects and infrastructure are rarely built because some company donates money huge amounts of cash or by 'passing the hat for donations'.

Arlington has the Rangers ballpark. Sure it has a corporate sponsor (after construction), but the stadium was built with fees levied through reasonable tax increases.

The stadium was quickly paid off and has been a source of pride and a boon to the Arlington economy.

The City of Arlington is doing the same with the Cowboys new stadium and will almost certainly have similar results.

Dallas sat around and waited for somebody else to pay for these structures within the city of Dallas. They lost both times.

Sometimes it takes community contribution through fees to make great things happen.

[flyeater]

Here's a gift for you. It's a video from March 2004 stating that a football stadium is one of 6 major facilities planned to be completed within the next 18 months.

Click HERE for Stadium Video

It was a video produced for the University of North Texas, and the timeframe was being supported not only by the Director of Athletics but also by the President of the University. It is very clear how people could be mislead to believe that there would potentialy be groundbreaking on a stadium facility prior to 2010.

I think it has become fairly appearant that the groundbreaking for the stadium has been delayed from the original schedule. I think many fans are openly questioning if the prospects for a new stadium are any better now than they were back when this video was produced.

In the meantime construction costs have risen at an astounding rate and North Texas has lost it's only President that ever acknowledged that UNT could become a great university. He was run out by a faculty that believed existance not performance should be the basis for tenure. That same faculty has since selected their own marionette who will do absolutely nothing that makes waves.

So, what do we do? We sit and wait for some imaginary company with no history of interest in North Texas to suddenly dump tens of millions on a historically underperforming venture, or you wait for some elusive fairy to inspire all of North Texas' 150,000 alumni to suddenly start donating generously to a discarded educational appliance.

Don't take me to be so ignorant please. I've seen this presentation repeatedly, just like anyone else on here. I've also spoken to RV and many people in the university. This thing was never released to the public. Some yay-hoo in the Adept or at UNT posted it, and it got out. It was a template for a future marketing/fundraising campaign using a stadium design that was never architecturally contracted. We haven't done that until this year, remember? At the time, the AC was underway, but NOTHING existed other than this wouldn't-it-be-neato video concerning a football stadium. Darrell and coach Headrick were asked to speak on camera about what new facilities meant to a program and how they attracted athletes. RV would tell you now he erred on that 18-month thing (again, he never thought you or I would see this). There was no way in hell then, from dirt with no $, no donor and no naming sponsor, to have a new stadium in 18 months. Think about it...18 months!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Let me count the ways as to what has come true from this silly little in-house video: Of the six things he said were coming, we have the AC/practice, tennis, softball, soccer and volleyball places "on line." We don't have football, baseball, track or the academic center/library that were referenced. Wasn't the completed stuff was done within a year of the AC?

RV's on record this week as saying that he's so committed to football that he'll put the baseball program/stadium on hold. You can argue more foot-dragging, but that strategy is dead-on the right thing to do. We've got a massive endeavor ahead of us with this stadium, and at this point, baseball is just a project we can't address properly. By saying this, RV is saying you have his attention. He's putting something as important as baseball on hold for the bigger picture, but I guess you don't see that.

I really don't give a shit if you think I'm in the man's back pocket. I don't feel I've been lied to, and I've got a realistic view of what this will take at a school with virtually no support relative to its enrollment. I'm as unhappy as you are that we don't have a stadium, but I'm not the eternal pessimist/bitcher about stadium issues that permeate this board 24-7. Yeah, it was a mistake for this video to get out, but that's why I've tried (with abject failure) to get that idiotic thing to go away. It wasn't a promise of anything, just a bunch of CAD geeks messing around so UNT could see a little what-if.

[SUMG]

Wow, the negativity on the past couple pages is getting serious.

The school spent $300,000 to HKS to develop a stadium plan. They've hired a marketing firm to get the Big Corporate Donor. The school doubled its available credit for capital projects. They terminated the lease for the Radisson. These are all the facts, and they point to a stadium being built soon.

Rumor: The SGA and AD are working together to get a stadium fee vote in front of the students this school year, possibly in the fall. Todd and Riley have both said 2010 for the new stadium. That means in 6 months there has to be some kind of announcement.

Well maybe Troy Phillips is wrong then. Because...stadium in 2010....or groundbreaking for a stadium in 2010....are two totally different things. Maybe he thought they said "groundbreaking" instead of "grand opening".....

[ADLER]

Don't take me to be so ignorant please. ........

I really don't give a shit if you think I'm in the man's back pocket. I don't feel I've been lied to, and I've got a realistic view of what this will take at a school with virtually no support relative to its enrollment. I'm as unhappy as you are that we don't have a stadium, but I'm not the eternal pessimist/bitcher about stadium issues that permeate this board 24-7.

Funny, yesterday I'm getting calls because people think I'm too defensive of of the athletic director on this board and today I am being told that I am too opposed and accusing you of being in his back pocket.

As a moderate and a realist I am aware that extremists from both ends of the spectrum will likely be opposed to my views. That is something that I have learned to accept.

There are very many people from North Texas that refuse to associate with it becaue of it's failures but there are also many who are quite comfortable with the failure.

My point is, and always has been, what can be done to avoid that failure? My point has always been positive, to state that there is a method to improve the situation, some may even refer to it as fixing a problem. There is cost, but the cost of not doing it is far worse.

And when I ask how else it can be done, the only response I get is awkward silence.

Edited July 18, 2008 by ADLER

[ADLER]

All I can tell you about how this is going to get done is this: no single source of revenue will be relied on. There are three major source of funding that will make this happen.

1) Major donors and corporate sponsors. This would include your million plus donors and stadium naming rights.

2) General fundraising. All other donors.

3) Student fees.

In order for this project to happen, all must occur. Now we can debate in what order these need to happen, but they are all necessary.

The current order is 1, 3, 2. Really 1, 3 & 2. This allows for the student fee vote to occur with major funding already secured. Rather than making it seem like students fitting the entire bill, it is more of a filling in the gaps kind of deal. Same thing with opening up the campaign to smaller donors.

The opposite approach has been mentioned here as an alternative, as in get the fee first so that you have money in hand to show university support when you ask for major donations. Honestly, I think that could work too. I think it makes the student vote harder to pass, but it still probably would anyway.

So to summarize, we are currently working on getting major donors and sponsors. From all accounts that is moving forward well. The students should be approached in the fall. The combination of donations and fees allows for the bonds to be issued to pay for the damn thing. And we turn dirt in Spring 09.

Any questions? PM me. I will answer when I get back Monday.

Well, doing #3 first sure seems to be paying some dividends for UTSA. $50 Million from Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce (I'm not sure if they are getting the full $50 Million)

This is in addition to the $18 Million that Bexar County is already contributing to UTSA athletics.

Funny, none of this ever happened until UTSA showed a commitment by setting the new fee.

What do you think are the chances that alumni may now be slightly more interested in supporting their university?

[UNTFan23]

Well, doing #3 first sure seems to be paying some dividends for UTSA. $50 Million from Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce (I'm not sure if they are getting the full $50 Million)

This is in addition to the $18 Million that Bexar County is already contributing to UTSA athletics.

Funny, none of this ever happened until UTSA showed a commitment by setting the new fee.

What do you think are the chances that alumni may now be slightly more interested in supporting their university?

No where in the article does it state that UTSA has received a penny from the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. All the article mentions is what the UTSA Athletic department would like to do, which is get $50 million chamber of commerce. Perhaps you meant another article stating otherwise?

[ADLER]

No where in the article does it state that UTSA has received a penny from the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. All the article mentions is what the UTSA Athletic department would like to do, which is get $50 million chamber of commerce. Perhaps you meant another article stating otherwise?

Like I stated, I don't know how much that they will actually be receiving.

The Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce, reacting to a unanimous recommendation from its NFL/Collegiate Football Task Force, is supporting the University of Texas at San Antonio's efforts to tap into an extended venue tax to help fund a $60 million multi-sport athletic complex.

UTSA athletics officials are seeking $50 million in venue tax revenues for the complex as part of an effort to launch a Division I football program and move all of the university's sports teams into a more prestigious athletic conference.

The Greater Chamber has not settled on an exact amount it supports at this point, says spokeswoman Becky Bridges. But AT&T Inc. senior executive John Montford, who heads the Greater Chamber task force, says it would be a smart move for San Antonio to provide UTSA with the full $50 million.

"First and foremost, UTSA is of the size now that it should not have to play second fiddle to anyone," Montford says. "A top-notch athletic program could create great opportunities for the university and for the city of San Antonio."

Montford adds, "There are so many positive spin-off opportunities from this."

UTSA wants to construct the roughly $60 million sports complex on or near its main campus. It would include venues and/or support facilities for baseball, softball, tennis, soccer, track and football. The plan is for the university to provide the site for the facility and the staffing to operate and maintain it.

While UTSA teams would stand to benefit the most from the facilities, supporters say the complex could host regional and national events that would bring thousands of visitors, pumping millions of dollars into the local economy.

UTSA officials pushing the plan want $50 million from an extended venue tax to help pay for the construction, with the balance coming from private donors and other sources.

Edited July 19, 2008 by ADLER

[ADLER]

And related information of the impact of UTSA sports on the San Antonio economy and why the city and county support the university.

IED Releases UTSA Athletics Facility Impact Study

PDF Print E-mail

Read the Study: Operations, Construction, and Tourism Impacts of a Proposed Athletics Complex at the University of Texas at San Antonio

SAN ANTONIO, December 4, 2007 – The University of Texas at San Antonio’s proposed Athletic Complex is estimated to generate $193 million for the local economy through the construction of the facility and additional athletic events, within its first five years of operations and a prior three-year construction phase, according to an economic development study released today.

The study findings have been shared with the Bexar County Amateur Athletics Committee. The report was developed as a joint effort between the UTSA Institute for Economic Development and the Tourism Management Program in the College of Business. A study oversight committee of representatives from the hotel-motel and rental car industries and the San Antonio Convention and Visitors Bureau also contributed to this analysis.

UTSA asked the Amateur Athletics Committee for $50 million in September to build the 60-acre Competitive Athletic Complex that will include NCAA quality stadiums for baseball, softball, soccer, track and tennis. The Institute’s study estimates the Complex could be fully operational in September 2012. If the university decides to pursue Division I football, a football practice facility also would be a part of the Complex.

“We took a very conservative approach to calculating the impact of the new Complex,” said Bob McKinley, associate vice-president for UTSA and director of the Institute for Economic Development. “The results indicate that the facility will positively benefit the community at large and the tourism industry.”

“Progress toward UTSA achieving Tier I status and San Antonio achieving Great City status go hand-in-hand, and this Athletics Complex project is a significant step forward for both,” he said.

Tom Cannon, director of tourism management program in the College of Business and a key author of the development of the study, said the study’s projections are based on construction and operational expenditures, UTSA co-hosted athletic and community events and visitors’ spending.

The university commissioned the Institute to compile the study to provide a detailed economic and tourism-related financial analysis for the Athletic Complex. This information will help UTSA, local officials, and the public engage in better-informed consideration of this project.

McKinley pointed out that UTSA’s athletic programs already contribute more than $27 million annually to the local economy including athletic program operations and the existing sports visitor base. He added the university will provide the land and ongoing maintenance for the Complex.

This study reflects the initial five years of new UTSA and community athletic events in the Complex,” McKinley said. “An athletic facility of this kind should provide many decades of service to the university and the community. For example, the UTSA’s Convocation Center has served for more than 30 years as a center for academic, athletic and community events.”

According to McKinley, the $193 million economic impact projected by the study is in four major categories. The three-year construction period would generate a total construction impact of $120.3 million (direct and secondary spending). The first five years of operation in the new Complex with UTSA hosted athletic events would generate an estimated $54.6 million in tourism spending (visitors coming in for athletic events), plus $8.3 million for UTSA co-hosted athletic events, and $9.8 million for operation of the facility.

“These are projections, but as we’ve seen with the Convocation Center – it’s not only where UTSA plays its home basketball and volleyball games, but also a place for numerous community events,” McKinley said. “More than 285,000 people go through the Convocation Center each year. Of that total, nearly 120,000 – or about 42 percent – are attending community events co-hosted by the university.”

UTSA has proposed sharing the new Complex in a similar manner for baseball, softball, soccer, track and tennis. As the host university, UTSA has a history of working together with the City, County and San Antonio Sports Foundation to bid for and host NCAA events that bring tourism dollars to the city. The 2008 NCAA Men’s Basketball Final Four April 5-7 in the Alamodome will be the 11th NCAA Championship event hosted by UTSA in the past 11 years.

The economic impact of the NCAA events alone has been estimated at more than $200 million, according to San Antonio Sports Foundation figures. The impact of Final Fours and other NCAA events hosted by UTSA outside of the proposed Complex are not included in the study.

UTSA Athletic Director Lynn Hickey said she was pleased the estimated economic impact of the Complex is projected “to be so significant.”

“None of the proposed Complex facilities exist today anywhere in Bexar County. We will work with the City, County and Sports Foundation to recruit tourist destination events to the Complex,” Hickey said. “We hope to exceed the Institute’s projections through full utilization of the Complex by both UTSA and the community. I believe this Complex can have a significant impact on the next generation of young athletes in the greater San Antonio area.”

I wonder if Denton County and the City of Denton would be willing to do something similar. If not, why? Denton County has half the population of Bexar but the per capita income is much higher.

Officials at the University of Texas at San Antonio are wooing city and county officials, as well as private donors, to chip in for a $55 million, joint-use athletics complex that would help lure statewide sporting events and raise the university's profile in the world of college sports.

University spokesman David Gabler said the complex would be located on or near the university's Loop 1604 campus and could house soccer, baseball and softball fields and tennis courts as well as a track stadium and running trails in a park-like setting for all residents to enjoy.

"This is a win-win for San Antonio and the community overall," Gabler said. "We need to look for partners in all areas of the community to support it."

Gabler said UTSA officials see building a respected athletic program as key to its ambitions of becoming a destination university.

Most schools of UTSA's size (28,000) boast much larger athletic programs, he said.

"This rocket ride that UTSA is on is multidimensional, including academics, research, student life" and athletics, Gabler said.

The university is exploring the prospect of a Division I football team, but that team would likely be housed at the Alamodome and would not be a part of this project, Gabler said.

Edited July 19, 2008 by ADLER

[GoMeanGreen1999]

And related information of the impact of UTSA sports on the San Antonio economy and why the city and county support the university.

I wonder if Denton County and the City of Denton would be willing to do something similar. If not, why? Denton County has half the population of Bexar but the per capita income is much higher.

I think the City of Denton might be interested in doing something similar if presented in the right fashion. Are there people on campus that could present it in a way that they would go for it may be the bigger question. I would have to go back and do some research to see, but if I remember correctly, the City of Denton passed the bond issue pretty convincingly in favor to build the DISD stadium several years ago (This where UNTFlyer comes up with some info that shows it barely passed ).

Edited July 19, 2008 by GoMeanGreen1999

[ADLER]

Meanwhile at Texas State where they also have recently raised the student athletics fee.

Texas State Athletics Announces $100,000 Donation by Jerry and Linda Fields

Posted on June 27, 2008 at 1:37 pm • Print • Share

Gift will provide free ‘08 football season tickets to recent grads

Texas State athletics announced Friday that it has received a $100,000 donation from Jerry and Linda Fields to go toward The Drive’s 2008 football season ticket goal.

The donation marks the largest single contribution toward season tickets in Bobcat athletics history and will help provide free 2008 football season tickets to recent Texas State alumni.

“This is a major step forward toward our goal,” said Texas State Athletics Director Larry Teis. “We are very thankful for the Fields stepping up and hope others will do the same.”

Increased attendance and season tickets sales are among the key components of The Drive to move Texas State to the FBS level of NCAA Division I athletics.

Texas State alumni who graduated during the 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 academic years will be able to receive two complimentary 2008 Texas State football season tickets in either general admission or reserved seating courtesy of the Fields and their donation. Tickets are available on a first come, first served basis.

With the promotion, young alumni who attend the football games will also automatically have an opportunity to win a vacation for six courtesy of the Fields. Details of the promotion will be released in the next few weeks.

“We really wanted to encourage young alumni to get involved with The Drive campaign and help take our football program to the FBS level,” said Teis. “This is a great way to thank the students who supported us during the 2005 season and who more recently voted to increase student fees for our athletics budget.”

Jerry and Linda Fields both graduated from Texas State, where Linda was a Strutter. They are also currently chairing the university-wide Pride in Action Campaign. Jerry founded JD Fields & Company, Inc., a steel company based in Houston. For more information on JD Fields & Company, visit jdfields.com.

“As chairs of the Pride in Action Campaign, we think it is important to step up early and support The Drive,” said Jerry Fields. “Athletics will play a major role in the campaign, and we wanted to make a statement early. Linda and I are proud to support Texas State University.”

University President Denise Trauth said, “Jerry and Linda Fields help Texas State University in so many different ways. We are delighted that this latest gift will help our newest alumni stay connected to their alma mater and we look forward to seeing these recent graduates in Bobcat Stadium this fall.”

Texas State opens the 2008 regular season at home against Angelo State on Saturday, August 30, at 6 p.m.

The University shows a commitment, and alumni have responded, in this case it benefits performing arts.

Texas State announces $8 million gift for performing arts center

Posted on February 28, 2008 at 1:09 pm • Print • Share

From staff reports

A gift of $8 million from the PSH Foundation of Wimberley to Texas State University-San Marcos will be used to support the construction of a new performing arts center on the university campus. The gift was announced by Texas State President Denise M. Trauth today at a news conference on campus.

The PSH Foundation is named for Patti Strickel Harrison and, in gratitude for the gift, the main theatre in the performing arts center will be named the Patti Strickel Harrison Theatre.

Trauth said the center, to be built along University Drive on the Texas State campus immediately adjacent to downtown San Marcos, would serve as a “cultural gateway” between the university and the city.

“It will showcase our students and faculty, attract other talented students and faculty, and will continue building relations between the university and the citizens of San Marcos. The new performing arts center will make possible national and international production being brought to campus,” said Trauth.

Trauth called the gift “transformational” and said it will launch a drive toward the construction of the performing arts center. Harrison said she believed the time was right for the PSH Foundation to make such a gift and added she hoped the action would be a model for others to follow.

“I’ve been trying to think of what to do for years, and it seemed to me that the timing was right. Timing is everything in this life. I’d like to think that this gift will get other people off the fence to help, too,” said Harrison.

Early plans call for the performing arts center to include a 400-seat main theatre and a 350-seat music recital hall. The total area of the building is expected to be approximately 43,600 square feet. It is planned that construction will begin in fall 2011, with completion in spring 2014.

Trauth said that performing arts symbolize the intellectual foundation of every great university.

“Performing arts programs not only educate aspiring artists and scholars, they also provide students and the community with an extraordinary cultural experience. Texas State University desperately needs an appropriate stage for its tremendously talented students and faculty,” she said.

Harrison attended Texas State in 1947 and 1948. She established the PSH Foundation in 2001 as a grant making entity supporting healthy, well-being, independence, public welfare and emotional stability in Texas communities to include, but not limited to, arts and cultural affairs, education, health services, human services, public/society benefit and religious organizations. As president of the PSH Foundation, she puts special emphasis on education, health and youth in Texas.

The gift from the PSH Foundation is the second-largest single donation to Texas State in the university’s history.

The largest private donation to Texas State was the recent $20 million gift towards the College of Business Administration by Emmett and Miriam McCoy. Emmett McCoy is the retired chairman and chief executive officer of McCoy’s Building Supply Centers.

But athletics also benefitted.

An interesting year for Texas State athletics

College Athletics

From staff reports

San Marcos — It was quite an eventful athletic year at Texas State University. Since announcing the preparation to a possible move to the NCAA FBS Division in football just over six months ago, to a number of conference championships in women’s sports and the start of construction on a new baseball/softball complex, the Texas State athletic department continues to grow at a record-setting pace.

During 2007-08, Texas State received its largest donation in school history. Darren Casey made big news when he gave the first-ever $1 million-dollar donation to the Texas State Athletic Department. Mr. Casey also donated an additional $300,000.00 to the Texas State College of Business at the sme time.

Edited July 19, 2008 by ADLER

[UNTFan23]

And related information of the impact of UTSA sports on the San Antonio economy and why the city and county support the university.

I wonder if Denton County and the City of Denton would be willing to do something similar. If not, why? Denton County has half the population of Bexar but the per capita income is much higher.

The two biggest differences between Denton and Bexar is Bexar has a tourism industry that is similar to Arlington and Bexas has some big companies that are based in San Antonio (AT&T for one). Denton has ... neither.

[UNTFan23]

Meanwhile at Texas State where they also have recently raised the student athletics fee.

The University shows a commitment, and alumni have responded, in this case it benefits performing arts.

But athletics also benefitted.

Can you prove that the raising in the athletics fee resulted in the donations of $100,000 and $8 million? There was nothing mentioned in the articles that the donors made the donations due to the university's commitment to athletics.

[ADLER]

The two biggest differences between Denton and Bexar is Bexar has a tourism industry that is similar to Arlington and Bexas has some big companies that are based in San Antonio (AT&T for one). Denton has ... neither.

And I find it amazing that both the tourism and corporations have instantly sprung up since the university recently made a commitment to athletics. I bet nobody had ever visited the Alamo before this past year, and all those companies just rushed in.

Let's face facts, they've always been there and they only made a commitment to UTSA once UTSA made a commitment to succeed. It's funny how that works.

[UNTFan23]

And I find it amazing that both the tourism and corporations have instantly sprung up since the university recently made a commitment to athletics. I bet nobody had ever visited the Alamo before this past year, and all those companies just rushed in.

Let's face facts, they've always been there and they only made a commitment to UTSA once UTSA made a commitment to succeed. It's funny how that works.

I was thinking about how SA might be able to afford to give $50 million as opposed to Denton, a city that has an excellent track record of supporting its universities.

Edited July 19, 2008 by UNTFan23

[ADLER]

I was thinking about how SA might be able to afford to give $50 million as opposed to Denton, a city that has an excellent track record of supporting its universities.

What do you think is the reason that people of Denton don't support North Texas? College towns everywhere else support their college. Doesn't North Texas being a 'best buy college' endear it to the community? Are they disappointed in it's academic programs?

I just can't figure it out. What gives North Texas such a bad image?

Edited July 19, 2008 by ADLER

[Texas Stranger]

The rapid growth of Denton in the past 2 decades was not "organic", or the result of growth from within. It is from outsiders moving to a Dallas exurb. They support wherever it is they went to school before they moved here. This is referring to the non-UNT/TWU population, of course.

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

All I can tell you about how this is going to get done is this: no single source of revenue will be relied on. There are three major source of funding that will make this happen.

1) Major donors and corporate sponsors. This would include your million plus donors and stadium naming rights.

2) General fundraising. All other donors.

3) Student fees.

In order for this project to happen, all must occur. Now we can debate in what order these need to happen, but they are all necessary.

The current order is 1, 3, 2. Really 1, 3 & 2. This allows for the student fee vote to occur with major funding already secured. Rather than making it seem like students fitting the entire bill, it is more of a filling in the gaps kind of deal. Same thing with opening up the campaign to smaller donors.

The opposite approach has been mentioned here as an alternative, as in get the fee first so that you have money in hand to show university support when you ask for major donations. Honestly, I think that could work too. I think it makes the student vote harder to pass, but it still probably would anyway.

So to summarize, we are currently working on getting major donors and sponsors. From all accounts that is moving forward well. The students should be approached in the fall. The combination of donations and fees allows for the bonds to be issued to pay for the damn thing. And we turn dirt in Spring 09.

Any questions? PM me. I will answer when I get back Monday.

Thank you very much for your post. The approach sounds plausible and I hope that the timeline can be followed and that we're successful.

I know that you are on the faculty or staff but are you telling us at the behest of the Athletics Department or from you own personal knowledge? I honestly do appreciate the information and your efforts to calm the waters. I'm also curious as to why Rick V (or one of his assistants) didn't announce this to the Mean Green Club members. Or, if he felt that the information must be kept somewhat secretive, tell Harry, Lorenzo, or other MGC member so that it could be posted on the VIP board and remained quiet.

No one should expect to know most of the machinations that are guiding the succes or failure of a project but I do think that from time to time we should be assured that an effort is being made. Silence can be as condemning as having to retract information occasionly.

[ADLER]

Can you prove that the raising in the athletics fee resulted in the donations of $100,000 and $8 million? There was nothing mentioned in the articles that the donors made the donations due to the university's commitment to athletics.

The $100,000.00 donation this past momth was purely because Texas State has made a commitment to athletics. The benefactors stated that the gift is to help get young alumni involved as the university aspires to make the move to succeed at the Bowl Championship level.

The $8 million donation represents the benefit that academic departments (in this case Performing Arts) receive when alumni make an emotional attachment to their school. Patti Strickel Harrison is donating the money and the facility will be named The Patti Strickel Harrison Theatre in her honor.

The larger $20 million donation by Emmett and Miriam McCoy benefits the Business school and it will now be renamed The McCoy College of Business Administration.

North Texas is much older, has more alumni, and generally an academic reputation at least equal to Texas State.....but why are no buildings on campus named after donors? They're all named after old university presidents, with the exception of the Lupe Murchinson Hall where the donor defaulted on much of the original financial commitment.

Why is that? Why are the North Texas alumni not making an emotional attachment to the university?

Edited July 19, 2008 by ADLER