I agree. Independent of the surrounding stadium it is a nice design. I'd like to see something similar to what we currently have but built down to the field and maybe back a few rows.
Memorial Stadium Renovation
- Status
I agree. Independent of the surrounding stadium it is a nice design. I'd like to see something similar to what we currently have but built down to the field and maybe back a few rows.
Check out Nebraska or Penn State. Both of those probably have 50k in just the endzones, if not more. Seats are easy, you can always add more seats. Adding seats that provide a good view of the game and in a way that doesn't make the stadium look ridiculous is the tough part. But both Penn State and Nebraska fail by that measure and no one seems to care.
It's not a question of how many tickets we can possibly get into people's hands.
You add more seats when the scarcity of tickets is turning away potential new fans who have money to spend from the opportunity to interact with your product at all.
The question isn't "could we potentially put another butt in a seat for our best home games with aggressive marketing?" The question is "can someone who wants to see an Illinois football game get a ticket without paying a ridiculous markup on the secondary market?"
The answer to that real question is yes and will be yes for the forseeable future, whether we're at 60k, 59k, 70k, 54k, regardless. And that's a good thing! We are the people who benefit from that! Illinois Football is an affordable good time!
And if it ever comes to the point where demand is so high that prices skyrocket and price people out, more seats will pay for themselves and as I said they are pretty easy to add.
In the meantime, getting bent out of shape about Iowa or Wisconsin or whoever having higher seating capacities and whatnot, who the heck cares? No one judges a home field advantage based on the number of seats in the place. Michigan has damn near double the seats that Virginia Tech does. It's no contest as to which is the more intimidating, exciting venue.
Couldn't have said it better myself. If you don't think we'll fill 70k with Lovie at the helm of a consistent winner.. than you don't realize just how powerful Illini Nation and Alumni are. Which is too bad. Also, I don't see Whitman allowing capacity to dip below 60k. He gets it.
A winning team is something I'm willing to pay a premium for, lol.
Even when we start winning it will still be a great deal.
Having now been to Grange Grove, and with all the new stuff going on in Champaign generally, I can't recommend an Illini Football trip enough. Seriously, if you haven't been in awhile, go check it out.
I wish you were right, but even with the recent UNC sellout we're still a long long way from filling up the place regularly, and that's even with the very creative ways that DIA has turned to for discounts, package deals, student tickets, etc. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I bet we haven't averaged over 55k since about 2008 or 2009. A couple of random sellouts here or there for big games doesn't mean we need to add seats.
I don't see any problems with going through with a renovation over the next few years even if it drops us to 58k or so. If Lovie builds a program like we expect and we can sustain a full or nearly full stadium over several years (8-10, not just another brief blip on the radar), then we can think about re-doing the north end or something else creative to add more seats. The north end is really about the only spot where you could add additional seats once the south end is done.
Unless of course they put in sufficient foundation in the south end for a possible second deck down there (long shot I'm guessing). But I'd rather see the north end get re-done anyway if the time comes - it stands out all by itself and doesn't fit nearly as well with the architecture of the rest of the stadium. Hopefully the south end will blend much better.
Again, secondary market pricing is the thing to watch, not attendance.
If we're selling out every game but you can easily go on Stubhub and get a seat for around face value, then we're at a perfect equilibrium point and shouldn't do anything.
The countervailing interests are gameday experience versus providing access to the product for new fans. And if you reach the proper balance there, you will also be at or near your revenue-maximizing point. Sheer volume of butts in seats at any price is a meaningless and silly way to look at it.
If we're selling out every game but you can easily go on Stubhub and get a seat for around face value, then we're at a perfect equilibrium point and shouldn't do anything.
The countervailing interests are gameday experience versus providing access to the product for new fans. And if you reach the proper balance there, you will also be at or near your revenue-maximizing point. Sheer volume of butts in seats at any price is a meaningless and silly way to look at it.
Interest in Illinois Football changes with the wind. When we're "good" people pack the house and show strong interest. When we're bad....well, we all know what happens.
I think Lovie has this program turned around and competing by 2019. I don't think it's unrealistic that we're drawing crowds of 60K+ consistently by then. This fan base is hungry for glory. The UNC sell out proves that.
FeelYourPaign
- So Cal
I am probably parsing words too carefully, but I think that we will be barely competent in 2019 and more fully competent and competing in 2020. Perhaps I am too much of a pessimist on the timeframe needed to rebuild a nearly bare cupboard (roster), but that is my own view on timing.
If PJ Fleck can turn a team like WMU around by his fourth year, I'm willing to bet Lovie Smith and his highly skilled staff can turn a Big Ten team around sooner...Especially one as well-positioned for success as IL.
It's not how fast, it's how well
Illinimedic
- Rochester, Illinois
I'm not as much advocating adding any seats as much as I am not reducing what we already have....twice. This will be two straight renovations within the last 10 years which will have resulted in a loss of about 10-11k seats. Just something about that I do not like. But that's just me...
Football attendance tends to lag performance more than hoops. So the crowds may not return quite as soon as you'd expect.
I think the fact that we sold out for UNC (after beating Murray State) proves the crowd will return sooner than some here may expect. People have been waiting to see the Illini win. If we had picked up a guy like Fleck I would expect attendance to lag until we were serious contenders. A guy like Lovie brings people in much sooner.
I don't want to be an attendance truther, but it's relevant for this discussion: they gave away free tickets to students and were super aggressive in pricing the tickets to move in other ways as well.
I went to the Murray State game, in good seats, for $9, from the ticket office.
Which crowd brought in more total inflation-adjusted dollars for the DIA, the sellout against UNC or the 48k who saw the dreadful Fresno State game in 2009 back in the no-discounts Guenther era? Very possible it's the latter.
Spending money to ensure a big, loud, fun crowd is a very sensible investment of money. I support that fully. But that weighs in the calculations of what to do with the stadium capacity.
I guess at the end of the day I just don't really understand why so many people consider stadium capacity to be this weird point of pride. If you really think that correlates with having "made it", go talk to a South Carolina or Iowa State fan.
The tickets for Murray State were given away because no one would pay to see that cupcake game. The UNC game was included in a bundle, but people still paid for the tickets because they want to see the Illini play under Lovie.
I'm not saying capacity is or should be a point of pride. Illinois has 13,000,000 residents and U of I has an enrollment just shy of 50k with anticipated increases in the near future. I wouldn't be surprised to see U of I with an enrollment near or above 60k by 2030.
There's a noticeable difference between a stadium that seats 60k and a stadium that seats 70k. I personally think we should strive to be in the 70-75k range. We certainly have the population and enrollment to support it. Once the Illini are relevant, the fans will return in droves.
You're talking about 2 different things here. Yes, the Lovie buzz helped sell out UNC, though as noted, there were a bunch of incentives offered as well.
I was responding to your other note about what happens in 2019 or so, based on having things " turned around". By then most of the Lovie buzz will have dissipated and people will be looking at W/L records. That's where the lag comes in.
Kinnick Stadium vs Memorial Stadium.
Kinnick seats around 70k and the energy shows it. MS feels small in comparison and it's only 10k seats. The SO went to ND and the first thing they commented on was the size of the stadium...it's small. Especially for a school as large as Illinois in a state as large as Illinois.
They're not really two different things. Right now we're riding the high of hiring Lovie. Over the next couple of years, I expect we'll see our standing in the B1G West improve and be contenders for a trip to Indy. We can't fill the stadium now because the University has allocated the minimal amount of resources necessary to keep the fb program running and that is reflected in our record and fan interest. Now that we've decided to join the big boys I don't think DECREASING capacity is the best long term decision when we are a fairly large state with a large student body.
Your horse keeps bumping his head on that cart.
Nah, I'd actually prefer we waited a few years to do any major renovations anyway. If we redo the SEZ it'll probably be decades (if ever) that we could justify redoing it. The NEZ is already pretty meh. Lets not make the same mistake twice...
No, Kinnick is enclosed and has seats dead up against the field on all four sides, has a very popular and well-developed tailgate scene, large, consistent student turnout, regularly hosts games in the afternoon and evening, and has a history of being good and the energy shows it.
We are making moves on every one of those attributes. MS will be a much better environment with a tall, steep, close-in south endzone and 1,500 fewer seats than it is currently, and that facility will attract the athletes to make it better still.
Seriously, don't sweat the top line number.
The NEZ isn't meh, it's a hair-on-fire disgrace. It is the essence of Ron Guenther's ideology in brick-and-mortar form.
Whitman doesn't hate his customers and modernity the way his former mentor did. Even if we screw up a ton of the little things that I'm hoping we fix here, it will be miles and miles better than that embarrassment in the NEZ.
Sal Iacuzzo
- Yonkers, NY
The NEZ is great at highlighting our student attendance issues.
Lol, it's bad but it's not that bad.
By no means a starchitect, but I'd prefer to see something like this instead of the renderings from 2013.
http://imgur.com/a/M77h8
That's a very crude mock up, but I think it conveys the message. The transition between the horseshoe and the existing towers on the south could use some work. I'd like to see offices/press boxes/suites going across the top. I'll leave the Kirby Ave elevation to the professionals
. Would be nice to see the seating brough to the field and maybe have the field lowered. It is great for that.
- Status