Stadium Update

[kj86]

From what I have heard what you see is pretty much the stadium as it is going to be. There will be some variations... but nothing that will completely change what you have there.

If that's the case, is the upper deck part of the initial 35K or is that a future expansion? I hope it's in the initial plans, because that makes the facility look so much more impressive.

[Travis]

If that's the case, is the upper deck part of the initial 35K or is that a future expansion? I hope it's in the initial plans, because that makes the facility look so much more impressive.

That is the initial plan...

[houstonmeangreen]

If that's the case, is the upper deck part of the initial 35K or is that a future expansion? I hope it's in the initial plans, because that makes the facility look so much more impressive.

If anything they sould espand the upper deck...take some from endzone (generally poor seating). I know when I come to games I will want to have a seat in the upper deck, not lower area. I hope they 't cheap out.

[NT_Eagle]

So perhaps we are barking up the wrong tree asking the students for help. Maybe we should work harder on getting alumni support, or have alumni meet the students in the middle

[Cerebus]

So perhaps we are barking up the wrong tree asking the students for help. Maybe we should work harder on getting alumni support, or have alumni meet the students in the middle

Posting from Ft. Worth?

[UNTflyer]

So perhaps we are barking up the wrong tree asking the students for help. Maybe we should work harder on getting alumni support, or have alumni meet the students in the middle

The students are only going to pay about 25-30%. Alumni and donors pay the rest.

[UNTLifer]

Well Texas a&m charges $0 / per hour for a athletic fee, but they don't seem to have any trouble upgrading facilities

Besides what has already been stated about A&M, take a look at the revenue they generate by being part of the Big XII and the BcS.

NT alumni have given to build the A/C, the Hall of Fame, the Tennis Facility, the Softball Facility and they will give a majority to the funding of the stadium, along with providing money for scholarships through the Mean Green Club and the Alumni Association. North Texas administration for years did a poor job of cultivating relationships with alumni and students prior to graduation thus resulting in poor giving. They are making up for lost time, or trying to. Fees and tuition at North Texas still make it the best deal around. The benefits of this stadium go along way towards increasing the exposure of North Texas, as a whole, a bring more value to your degree, or future degree if you are a current student.

NT Eagle, I take it you are against the stadium. Mind if I ask why?

[the real grad88]

If anything they sould espand the upper deck...take some from endzone (generally poor seating). I know when I come to games I will want to have a seat in the upper deck, not lower area. I hope they 't cheap out.

Alumni will meet the students in the middle. It's called season tickets...which will go up exponetially with a new stadium where people can actually be a part of the action as fans as opposed to watching the game from Sanger.

[the real grad88]

Alumni will meet the students in the middle. It's called season tickets...which will go up exponetially with a new stadium where people can actually be a part of the action as fans as opposed to watching the game from Sanger.

Actually, this post was in reply to the idea that the students are being asked to pay for this stadium by themselves.

[Green Mean]

I really think the stadium will pay for itself. I would be shocked if more people did not come to the game, students did not get more excited, and old alumni coming back and getting season tickets. I know that knowing NT maybe there are still a ton of doubters and rightfully so but as long as RV and Dr. B are on top of things, I just dont see a reason how all parties would not win. There is nothing wrong with students paying for it(if they were paying for it 100% through fees etc)...in the end it is benefiting not only the univeristy but even the students in my opinion.

[ShopMeanGreen]

Flyer, any flyers, handouts or signs planned for the day or 2 prior to voting. I would not be opposed to providing a little financial support if needed. Only if legal of course

[MeanMag]

Well Texas a&m charges $0 / per hour for a athletic fee, but they don't seem to have any trouble upgrading facilities

These schools also get a state stipend from oil revenues. Changing the stipend would require a change to the Texas Constitution. I don't quite remember what it takes to amend the State Constitution.... but i remember it being outrageous.

[NorthTexan95]

These schools also get a state stipend from oil revenues. Changing the stipend would require a change to the Texas Constitution. I don't quite remember what it takes to amend the State Constitution.... but i remember it being outrageous.

Actually it's not that difficult to change. In fact, the Texas Constitution is such a poor document that almost anything done requires a constitutional amendment. The bigger problem would be getting all the UT and ATM alums in congress to even think about those revenue.

[scotty474]

Here is another example of new facilities at other schools... I know Texas is different, but this "small" school is building a new basketball (multi-purpose venue). Guess how much it cost? $60 million How can they raise the money and we can't? I realize they are getting some funding by the state legislature. Below is a quote taken directly from NKU's website.

"We are in the process of building a $37 million, 144,000-square-foot student union building, as well as The Bank of Kentucky Center, a $60 million, 9,400-seat arena for basketball games and other events.

It is the best time to be a part of NKU."

Link to school & arena

www.nku.edu/about/index.php

and

www.bankofkentuckycenter.com/about_facts.asp

Sorry for being ignorant of the differences between how each state provides funding for their respective state funded schools. I just want a new stadium and don't care what it takes to get it this point! We need to replace Fouts!

[UNTFan23]

So perhaps we are barking up the wrong tree asking the students for help. Maybe we should work harder on getting alumni support, or have alumni meet the students in the middle

I'm being generous but maybe 10% of the 100,000 alumni living in DFW are active donors? Why else do you think our endowment is below 100 million?

Asking a group 1/3 the size of the student body to pay for the stadium while continuing to provide donations to other areas (like academics) has expectations that are way, way out of line.

[NT_Eagle]

NT Eagle, I take it you are against the stadium. Mind if I ask why?

I'm not against the stadium by any means, I just know there will be a big uproar when students find out they have to pay $150 per semester for an athletic program they don't care about, especially when they were paying just $45 before. Believe me, I want the new stadium as much as anybody, but I was just pointing out why students are / will be hesitant.

[Mean'n'Green07]

I really think the stadium will pay for itself. I would be shocked if more people did not come to the game, students did not get more excited, and old alumni coming back and getting season tickets.

I attended from '03-'07 and I can't tell you how much improvement I saw in school spirit from my freshmen to senior year. Given our projected enrollment over the next decade and a continued increase in school pride, I wouldn't be shocked if we could average at least 35k a game regardless of our opponent/record.

[UNTflyer]

Flyer, any flyers, handouts or signs planned for the day or 2 prior to voting. I would not be opposed to providing a little financial support if needed. Only if legal of course

The Senate has formed a Referendum Committee, on which I now sit. It's goal will be to market the stadium referendum and drive it home.

I think it would be highly inappropriate at this time for alumni to provide funding for referendum promotion. This riled up the anti-fee students in 2002, who saw it as an unfair push to impose a fee by groups who would not pay it.

This referendum needs to be driven by the students.

Edited September 12, 2008 by UNTflyer

[NT80]

The students are only going to pay about 25-30%. Alumni and donors pay the rest.

Actually current students are only going to pay $7 per hour more than they pay now x hours remaining until graduation. For a Senior, it won't even affect them since the increase probably wouldn't start until Fall 2009; they have no reason not to vote for it. A Junior would only pay $7 x roughly 30 hours during his senior year = only $210. Likewise a current Soph would be looking at a $420 increase until he graduates and a current Freshman only $630, or nearly the cost of my MGC membership for one (1) year.

Granted the students will be paying more toward their athletic program, but it will translate into more value in their degree in the long run.

[oldguystudent]

but it will translate into more value in their degree in the long run.

Can somebody please explain this concept to me? I know that good athletics increase applications to a given university, but I've never really seen evidence that a good football team makes one more marketable in the work place. True, there are schools with huge alumni networking bases. USC comes to mind for me, but that network was just as strong when USC sucked in the early nineties as it is today with the seemingly endless wins.

One of the things I look forward to upon graduation from UNT is the alumni base in North Texas. My degree from UNT will be worth more than my degree from UC Irvine by virtue of geography and subject matter, not by virtue of aluminum benches vs. seat back chairs.

*I'm not against the stadium. Really I'm not. I do think that there are some fallacies made both in favor of and against the stadium though.

** Would somebody please tell me what the hell I was thinking majoring in history the first time around? What's more useless than that? Art history?

[filmerj]

I just know there will be a big uproar when students find out they have to pay $150 per semester for an athletic program they don't care about, especially when they were paying just $45 before.

Maybe that will make them care more...

(** Would somebody please tell me what the hell I was thinking majoring in history the first time around? What's more useless than that? Art history? ")

RTVF.

Edited September 12, 2008 by filmerj

[Guest Aquila_Viridis]

Can somebody please explain this concept to me? I know that good athletics increase applications to a given university, but I've never really seen evidence that a good football team makes one more marketable in the work place. True, there are schools with huge alumni networking bases. USC comes to mind for me, but that network was just as strong when USC sucked in the early nineties as it is today with the seemingly endless wins.

One of the things I look forward to upon graduation from UNT is the alumni base in North Texas. My degree from UNT will be worth more than my degree from UC Irvine by virtue of geography and subject matter, not by virtue of aluminum benches vs. seat back chairs.

*I'm not against the stadium. Really I'm not. I do think that there are some fallacies made both in favor of and against the stadium though.

** Would somebody please tell me what the hell I was thinking majoring in history the first time around? What's more useless than that? Art history?

For a lot of people the athletics is an easy way to compare overall impressions of a school. From a nationwide perspective, for most people today, at best, they have no idea that the University of North Texas exists. At worst, they think of it as a tiny and/or very ineffective school. And for the alumnus, regardless of what other people think, having a competitive program would give them a sense of pride instead of shame. There is also value in that.

[ForneyGreen]

Can somebody please explain this concept to me? I know that good athletics increase applications to a given university, but I've never really seen evidence that a good football team makes one more marketable in the work place.

The concept is more along the lines of the perception that many people in the workplace have concerning various universities. Basically, universities with large athletic programs are considered "large" schools, and many associate "large" schools with being "good" schools. Universities with small athletic programs are considered "small" schools.

In the case of UNT, we are obviously a big university with many quality programs, but we are still referred to as a "small" school by most in the marketplace, and that is primarily tied to the association of athletic program size to university size.

That's just the way it is in America. If you are not an Ivy League school or one of the few nationally-recognized tech-based schools like MIT or CalPoly, then the size of your athletics programs (men's football and basketball in particular) along with the commitment level to those programs often weighs heavily toward the perception of the school.

[Daddy Dumpsalot]

Can somebody please explain this concept to me? I know that good athletics increase applications to a given university, but I've never really seen evidence that a good football team makes one more marketable in the work place. True, there are schools with huge alumni networking bases. USC comes to mind for me, but that network was just as strong when USC sucked in the early nineties as it is today with the seemingly endless wins.

The reason is because most schools, with the exception of the Ivy League schools, are identified because of their athletics. Most schools that you have heard of before are probably because they have or had a successful sports team of some sort. I think of Duke, UNLV, even Western Kentucky because of their basketball program. When you meet someone that has a degree from there you immediately recognize those schools, not because of the type of education they offer but because of their current or at one time success at sports. So what does this mean?? well it certainly gives the alumni a sense of pride in their school and that is precisely what the alumni needs to keep up with their alma mater. If the alumni have no pride in their University, chances are they won't network for anything.

Think about App. State beating Michigan last year. That one...ONE...win over a big BCS school gave them national publicity and now their potential employer has actually heard of their university...........which NEVER hurts and only helps.

*vote yes for the new stadium...vote yes for the future of UNT

[Guest Aquila_Viridis]

The concept is more along the lines of the perception that many people in the workplace have concerning various universities. Basically, universities with large athletic programs are considered "large" schools, and many associate "large" schools with being "good" schools. Universities with small athletic programs are considered "small" schools.

In the case of UNT, we are obviously a big university with many quality programs, but we are still referred to as a "small" school by most in the marketplace, and that is primarily tied to the association of athletic program size to university size.

That's just the way it is in America. If you are not an Ivy League school or one of the few nationally-recognized tech-based schools like MIT or CalPoly, then the size of your athletics programs (men's football and basketball in particular) along with the commitment level to those programs often weighs heavily toward the perception of the school.

Dude, other than my avatar, which is unquestionable in its perfection, yours is absolutely the best. I love it! By the way, Dane Cook has a good bit about Kool-Aid. It's about halfway through the material at this link: Cook.