Our Glorious Athletic Director

[Consigliere]

This board has been insufferable, but great posts here by db.

Half the people calling for a feasibility study here have had to copy and paste the term to maintain its proper spelling. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. And if UM was smart, they'd have a bunch of smart, ambitious, and incentivized grad students turn in a bunch of feasibility studies -- see if any young, bright minds had any ideas they may have missed -- and at absolutely no cost to them!

/ohwait

I assume your talking to me? Why don't you just respond to my post if so?

It's not that UM isn't smart, it's that the priority is not there. There is no urgency to get this done for the program.

The thing is, you're assuming that you know what has been done behind the scenes.

You--and others--are assuming that UM admin has never taken even the most basic of steps to pursue a stadium. You guys are acting as though you're the first ones to ever think of doing a feasibility study on the issue. You're rigid in your belief that the UM admin simply doesn't care and hasn't considered its options.

IMO, that's an awful lot of poor assumptions.

I'm part of a family of alumni, I can tell you what has been asked of us. As an alumni, talking to other alumni, I can tell you what has been asked of them. We have events up here, we ask questions to influential people. It doesn't seem that there is any plan being done.

What I'm assuming is based on conversations I have had. What you're assuming is that __________. Exactly, poor assumptions by yourself.

I assume UM already did do some study awhile back (probably before 2007) and hasn't really picked it up SERIOUSLY since that time. Our comments by our AD recently are just idiotic and pathetic. They also lead to these assumptions that many of us have.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

This board has been insufferable, but great posts here by db.

Half the people calling for a feasibility study here have had to copy and paste the term to maintain its proper spelling. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. And if UM was smart, they'd have a bunch of smart, ambitious, and incentivized grad students turn in a bunch of feasibility studies -- see if any young, bright minds had any ideas they may have missed -- and at absolutely no cost to them!

/ohwait

I assume your talking to me? Why don't you just respond to my post if so?

It's not that UM isn't smart, it's that the priority is not there. There is no urgency to get this done for the program.

The thing is, you're assuming that you know what has been done behind the scenes.

You--and others--are assuming that UM admin has never taken even the most basic of steps to pursue a stadium. You guys are acting as though you're the first ones to ever think of doing a feasibility study on the issue. You're rigid in your belief that the UM admin simply doesn't care and hasn't considered its options.

IMO, that's an awful lot of poor assumptions.

I'm part of a family of alumni, I can tell you what has been asked of us. As an alumni, talking to other alumni, I can tell you what has been asked of them. We have events up here, we ask questions to influential people. It doesn't seem that there is any plan being done.

What I'm assuming is based on conversations I have had. What you're assuming is that __________. Exactly, poor assumptions by yourself.

I assume UM already did do some study awhile back (probably before 2007) and hasn't really picked it up SERIOUSLY since that time. Our comments by our AD recently are just idiotic and pathetic. They also lead to these assumptions that many of us have.

I'm also part of a family of alumni.

Alumni often don't know squat until the very last step.

Strikes me that people really have no clue how fundraising happens, how options are explored and deals are made (or not made) before the general public (including alumni) are ever informed or asked for input.

 

[Consigliere]

This board has been insufferable, but great posts here by db.

Half the people calling for a feasibility study here have had to copy and paste the term to maintain its proper spelling. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. And if UM was smart, they'd have a bunch of smart, ambitious, and incentivized grad students turn in a bunch of feasibility studies -- see if any young, bright minds had any ideas they may have missed -- and at absolutely no cost to them!

/ohwait

I assume your talking to me? Why don't you just respond to my post if so?

It's not that UM isn't smart, it's that the priority is not there. There is no urgency to get this done for the program.

The thing is, you're assuming that you know what has been done behind the scenes.

You--and others--are assuming that UM admin has never taken even the most basic of steps to pursue a stadium. You guys are acting as though you're the first ones to ever think of doing a feasibility study on the issue. You're rigid in your belief that the UM admin simply doesn't care and hasn't considered its options.

IMO, that's an awful lot of poor assumptions.

You are assuming just as much as he is.

The person you are quoting is asking if anyone can provide proof that these studies are done. The responses are nothing but assumptions that these studies have likely been done. "Likely done many times over" is what you said, i believe.

"likely" means you don't know. You are assuming. Given your assumption you think these type of studies should be a given and the duties of someone that is thorough. So if these studies were not done? What then?

I'm not assuming anything other than that the UM admin isn't stupid and does care about their jobs. It's a pretty basic assumption, and I'm willing to give the same benefit of doubt to most folks until they prove otherwise.

At no time has the UM admin ever flatly denied looking at options. Therefore I assume that they have looked at options, since that is part and parcel of their job.

Well with sports that would be a poor assumption based on the choices in the department. Like I said there probably was some study done a long time ago. Times change.

Looking at an option (years back) is not enough. How about producing a report? Prove to our stupid alumni and fans it can't be done. How about gauging interest from alumni?

 

[tokengator]

This board has been insufferable, but great posts here by db.

Half the people calling for a feasibility study here have had to copy and paste the term to maintain its proper spelling. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. And if UM was smart, they'd have a bunch of smart, ambitious, and incentivized grad students turn in a bunch of feasibility studies -- see if any young, bright minds had any ideas they may have missed -- and at absolutely no cost to them!

/ohwait

I assume your talking to me? Why don't you just respond to my post if so?

It's not that UM isn't smart, it's that the priority is not there. There is no urgency to get this done for the program.

The thing is, you're assuming that you know what has been done behind the scenes.

You--and others--are assuming that UM admin has never taken even the most basic of steps to pursue a stadium. You guys are acting as though you're the first ones to ever think of doing a feasibility study on the issue. You're rigid in your belief that the UM admin simply doesn't care and hasn't considered its options.

IMO, that's an awful lot of poor assumptions.

You are assuming just as much as he is.

The person you are quoting is asking if anyone can provide proof that these studies are done. The responses are nothing but assumptions that these studies have likely been done. "Likely done many times over" is what you said, i believe.

"likely" means you don't know. You are assuming. Given your assumption you think these type of studies should be a given and the duties of someone that is thorough. So if these studies were not done? What then?

I'm not assuming anything other than that the UM admin isn't stupid and does care about their jobs. It's a pretty basic assumption, and I'm willing to give the same benefit of doubt to most folks until they prove otherwise.

At no time has the UM admin ever flatly denied looking at options. Therefore I assume that they have looked at options, since that is part and parcel of their job.

Not doing the studies is not a sign of stupidity. There is a whole host of reasons to justify why they wouldn't need to the studies. You are like titancane in this thread building premise on fallacy after fallacy. Athletic Departments hire smart people. Smart people do their work very well. Smart people make good decisions. Smart people work hard. Together the school and staff of smart people do everything they can possibly do and what is not done is simply so because it isn't feasible.

Truth is that this is not reality. Just sticking to this college/AD realm there is very very few elite athletic departments. Intelligence does not automatically equate to correct decisions, work ethic, or even quality work. Schools do make bad hires (I am not saying James is or isn't, I don't know), Schools (the management) make bad decisions. Schools (management) are not always thorough or make excuses of why they can't do things instead of doing them.

Like i said, very few are elite, majority are average, and the rest are crap. Athletic Directors get fired all the time. Athletic departments under perform all the time. Schools have issues all the time -- whether it be scandals or whatever -- **** happens.

You are saying it is a "basic assumption" but this is simply not reality. You can't just assume elite performance, you have to see it, because like i said it is rare to be elite. ****, just by definition.

For miami to have a stadium it would require ingenuity. Perhaps it is not feasible at all. Tulane can build its own stadium. Baylor, TCU, and many many other small private schools and I have to think with some outside the box thinking miami can do it. Have they exhausted every avenue? Have they even attempted to exhaust every avenue or have they just sat on their hands under the belief it is not feasible? You are assuming that the people miami brings in are going above and beyond and, for all intents and purposes, elite. What if they are average? Just do enough to keep their job by maintaining the status quo?

 

[Consigliere]

As condescending as you are, I'll answer your question. If a guy makes a $350 million investment in a facility and wants to negotiate such unfavorable terms to the university then I guess we're screwed. But that's not how business necessarily works and Ross has never given any indication he wants to ***** the university. As a matter of fact, if the university moves out then the facility goes dormant for 6 to 7 Saturdays in the fall. That's not good business.

That is very big of you to answer. Ross didn't ***** the university, we screwed ourselves without any plan. Ross is smart and has all the leverage (at least then we had a back up plan). We will see the next set of negotiations, I can't wait. 18 years, I will hold by breath.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

I assume your talking to me? Why don't you just respond to my post if so?

It's not that UM isn't smart, it's that the priority is not there. There is no urgency to get this done for the program.

The thing is, you're assuming that you know what has been done behind the scenes.

You--and others--are assuming that UM admin has never taken even the most basic of steps to pursue a stadium. You guys are acting as though you're the first ones to ever think of doing a feasibility study on the issue. You're rigid in your belief that the UM admin simply doesn't care and hasn't considered its options.

IMO, that's an awful lot of poor assumptions.

You are assuming just as much as he is.

The person you are quoting is asking if anyone can provide proof that these studies are done. The responses are nothing but assumptions that these studies have likely been done. "Likely done many times over" is what you said, i believe.

"likely" means you don't know. You are assuming. Given your assumption you think these type of studies should be a given and the duties of someone that is thorough. So if these studies were not done? What then?

I'm not assuming anything other than that the UM admin isn't stupid and does care about their jobs. It's a pretty basic assumption, and I'm willing to give the same benefit of doubt to most folks until they prove otherwise.

At no time has the UM admin ever flatly denied looking at options. Therefore I assume that they have looked at options, since that is part and parcel of their job.

Not doing the studies is not a sign of stupidity. There is a whole host of reasons to justify why they wouldn't need to the studies. You are like titancane in this thread building premise on fallacy after fallacy. Athletic Departments hire smart people. Smart people do their work very well. Smart people make good decisions. Smart people work hard. Together the school and staff of smart people do everything they can possibly do and what is not done is simply so because it isn't feasible.

Truth is that this is not reality. Just sticking to this college/AD realm there is very very few elite athletic departments. Intelligence does not automatically equate to correct decisions, work ethic, or even quality work. Schools do make bad hires (I am not saying James is or isn't, I don't know), Schools (the management) make bad decisions. Schools (management) are not always thorough or make excuses of why they can't do things instead of doing them.

Like i said, very few are elite, majority are average, and the rest are crap. Athletic Directors get fired all the time. Athletic departments under perform all the time. Schools have issues all the time -- whether it be scandals or whatever -- **** happens.

You are saying it is a "basic assumption" but this is simply not reality. You can't just assume elite performance, you have to see it, because like i said it is rare to be elite. ****, just by definition.

For miami to have a stadium it would require to ingenuity. Perhaps it is not feasible at all. Tulane can build its own stadium. Baylor, TCU, and many many other small private schools I have to think with some outside the box thinking miami can do it. Have they exhausted every avenue? Have they even attempted to exhaust every aveneue or have they just sat on their hands under the belief it is not feasible? You are assuming that the people miami brings in are going above and beyond and, for all intents and purposes, elite. What if they are average? Just do enough to keep their job by maintaining the status quo?

Not doing the studies is certainly a sign of stupidity.

If you've got a donor base that consistently cries out for a new stadium, and you don't take even the first step to study whether you can or cannot satisfy that donor base, you are stupid.

 

[dookie blaylock]

go look at a map and try to find an undeveloped 100 acre piece of land that's less than 1 mile from a highway, all within 15 miles of campus. you can't. that's the city's leverage.

parks are public works and a sunk cost, so it's not like tropical park is designed to be a source of revenue. how much should we lease the land for? if it's anything less than $1 million/year (which would be very low), why would the city even take a sniff?

city to hold events? if someone is putting an event together and wants an outdoor venue, why would they go to our stadium when sun life (which will be overhauled by then) has 30% more capacity and easier access to the broward market? does the city have to train its own staff to run the building or are they going to pay the stadium management company to do that?

we have zero leverage because we have zero other options. we need their land, they don't need our stadium.

Why does it have to be 15 miles from campus when we play 20+ miles from campus as is?

If the City is running at a deficit, perhaps the additional REVENUE would be beneficial as opposed to just paying to run tropical park (security, police, park admin, landscapers etc.). If we lease the land, we take it from the city and we control it. It becomes our responsibility. If it is our responsibility, we pay all those parties (stadium management etc.).

The reason you hold events in different places is because your event has different requirements. If you want to have an indoor event in front of 7000 people, you don't want to book No Life. Perhaps the event coordinator wants an event in Miami and not Miami Gardens. The reason you might not want No Life is the same reason we don't want No Life. If we only use 60% of the stadium, perhaps we want a more intimate feel. If a HS wants to use it (Public Use) we could let them use it.

It doesn't have to be the city, it could be other groups as well (i.e. concert promoters). A land lease benefits everyone.

Let's not forget that Miami employs a ton of people in the Miami-Dade area. In addition, some of these people are incredibly wealthy and have a ton of influence (Berkowitz, Chaplain, Havernik etc.). It could get done.

the school wants a closer stadium if we were to build. yes, we do travel 20+ miles, but that's only because we have no other options. we bus students to games out of necessity, but it is an enormous cost that puts a serious dent in our revenue (it's 10-15 chartered buses running a continuous loop from campus to the stadium over the course of 8 hours). the orange bowl wasn't bad for travel because we had the metrorail route and used university shuttles to take students to and from the metro stop.

now if we do a land lease with the provision that the city can do whatever they want with it when there isn't a football game (as mgreen suggested), we take on the additional cost of running events (that we didn't book) and we would reap no benefits, along with having to pay for the maintenance and taking on the liability. like i said before, the city would be smart to lease us enough land to build the stadium, but keep control of the parking, which would further hurt revenue on the university's end.

 

[Consigliere]

I'm also part of a family of alumni.

Alumni often don't know squat until the very last step.

Strikes me that people really have no clue how fundraising happens, how options are explored and deals are made (or not made) before the general public (including alumni) are ever informed or asked for input.

Yes it strikes me as well. We're constantly solicited for projects that the school deems worthy. That is the key, it comes from the school. They determine the projects and priorities. They come up with the plans. How about the school leading for once? How about the school (if the answer is NO) releasing the studies proving it can't be done and allowing us to critique it? How about the school releasing the studies of what they need?

Remember the school has done all these "studies" let's see them.

 

[Consigliere]

the problem with a land lease is that the city still has the leverage and they'll still gouge. we need their cooperation more than they need ours. they could just lease us enough land for the stadium itself, but keep the controlling interest of the parking lots, which are a huge revenue generator (which is a reason why the orange bowl lease sucked so bad for us). they could (and should if they are smart) also charge a percentage of our annual revenue per terms of the lease, then collect city tax revenue on top of that. if we buy the land, we only have to pay the tax to them. they're not going to give us a lease for some negligible amount because the park is still popular with the public. if you're going to put together a capital campaign for a stadium, you play for keeps.

It depends on the length and the terms, which would be really difficult to speculate. It is always good when you have a city that needs money because they're running at a deficit.

Side note: Land leases are common where I work and land is much more scarce in my city. In exchange for developing (99 year lease) rights the tenant makes PILOT payments the city and possibly supply some affordable housing. Usually at the end of the land lease there is an option to purchase the land at a set amount.

if the city would be fine with a land lease that's not for housing or a public work, i would have to say that's advantageous.

now on the subject of feasibility studies and whether or not they have happened. paul dee was one of my professors (actually was in the last class he ever taught and he passed shortly after) and he mentioned having done them prior to our lease at sun life because the city was stone-walling on the orange bowl renovations and refused to ease up the terms of the lease that we had then. we definitely did at least one in the early 2000s, but i can't comment on whether or not they've been done since 2006.

I believe that to be the case (The study done a long time ago).

The public housing was only an example of a trade off for city land.

 

[Pentagon Cane]

If the university wants to do an updated feasibility study, then go for it. The original cost for the BUC was $48 million in 2003 dollars. The original cost for Stanford Stadium which would be a similar facility was $90 million in 2005 dollars. So as a long term effort it could have legs. That being said the SunLife renovation plans are impressive. It moves seats closer to the field in the lower bowl. The experience should be a **** of a lot better.

 

[Consigliere]

the school wants a closer stadium if we were to build. yes, we do travel 20+ miles, but that's only because we have no other options. we bus students to games out of necessity, but it is an enormous cost that puts a serious dent in our revenue (it's 10-15 chartered buses running a continuous loop from campus to the stadium over the course of 8 hours). the orange bowl wasn't bad for travel because we had the metrorail route and used university shuttles to take students to and from the metro stop.

now if we do a land lease with the provision that the city can do whatever they want with it when there isn't a football game (as mgreen suggested), we take on the additional cost of running events (that we didn't book) and we would reap no benefits, along with having to pay for the maintenance and taking on the liability. like i said before, the city would be smart to lease us enough land to build the stadium, but keep control of the parking, which would further hurt revenue on the university's end.

Let's be honest, the school wants nothing. Chartering the kids now is the same problem that would occur if we didn't have it by the metro stop. It is also a fraction (8000/45,000) of the use of the stadium. This isn't a new problem.

Like I said before the terms of a land lease are difficult to speculate because who knows what the city wants. It is an interesting idea in the end. Also, Miami-Dade isn't exactly known for their brilliance. They have a deficit and they pay costs to run tropical park. We would offer (through PILOT payments) a way to shrink the deficit and reduce the costs.

 

[Consigliere]

If the university wants to do an updated feasibility study, then go for it.

That is very big of you.

 

[Pentagon Cane]

If the university wants to do an updated feasibility study, then go for it.

That is very big of you.

Wow, and you're patronizing, too. Why don't you lead the study? You seem to know your way around Google Earth.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

I'm also part of a family of alumni.

Alumni often don't know squat until the very last step.

Strikes me that people really have no clue how fundraising happens, how options are explored and deals are made (or not made) before the general public (including alumni) are ever informed or asked for input.

Yes it strikes me as well. We're constantly solicited for projects that the school deems worthy. That is the key, it comes from the school. They determine the projects and priorities. They come up with the plans. How about the school leading for once? How about the school (if the answer is NO) releasing the studies proving it can't be done and allowing us to critique it? How about the school releasing the studies of what they need?

Remember the school has done all these "studies" let's see them.

Right...you're solicited by the university AFTER they have conducted feasibility studies, found that it's feasible, contacted big-name donors to raise start-up funds for vendors/contractors, lined up the necessary permits, put forth a design concept, etc, etc, etc.

The university doesn't contact alumni or send out a PR announcement to the gen public until they've got all their ducks in a row. They don't alert you of stuff that isn't feasibly going to happen.

 

[dookie blaylock]

the school wants a closer stadium if we were to build. yes, we do travel 20+ miles, but that's only because we have no other options. we bus students to games out of necessity, but it is an enormous cost that puts a serious dent in our revenue (it's 10-15 chartered buses running a continuous loop from campus to the stadium over the course of 8 hours). the orange bowl wasn't bad for travel because we had the metrorail route and used university shuttles to take students to and from the metro stop.

now if we do a land lease with the provision that the city can do whatever they want with it when there isn't a football game (as mgreen suggested), we take on the additional cost of running events (that we didn't book) and we would reap no benefits, along with having to pay for the maintenance and taking on the liability. like i said before, the city would be smart to lease us enough land to build the stadium, but keep control of the parking, which would further hurt revenue on the university's end.

Let's be honest, the school wants nothing. Chartering the kids now is the same problem that would occur if we didn't have it by the metro stop. It is also a fraction (8000/45,000) of the use of the stadium. This isn't a new problem.

Like I said before the terms of a land lease are difficult to speculate because who knows what the city wants. It is an interesting idea in the end. Also, Miami-Dade isn't exactly known for their brilliance. They have a deficit and they pay costs to run tropical park. We would offer (through PILOT payments) a way to shrink the deficit and reduce the costs.

at the end of the day, if we were able to make a deal that gave us not only the atmospheric advantages of our own stadium, but also the financial advantages, i'd be all for it. if we don't reap the financial benefits of our own place, then it's hard to justify taking on that big of a financial endeavor.

 

[MGreen26]

A land lease would benefit everyone.

Bingo. All of 60 seconds to come up with. What grade did Double Penetration 305 get?

the problem with a land lease is that the city still has the leverage and they'll still gouge. we need their cooperation more than they need ours. they could just lease us enough land for the stadium itself, but keep the controlling interest of the parking lots, which are a huge revenue generator (which is a reason why the orange bowl lease sucked so bad for us). they could (and should if they are smart) also charge a percentage of our annual revenue per terms of the lease, then collect city tax revenue on top of that. if we buy the land, we only have to pay the tax to them. they're not going to give us a lease for some negligible amount because the park is still popular with the public. if you're going to put together a capital campaign for a stadium, you play for keeps.

This makes no sense. If the school agrees to build, it has all the leverage. It won't build and fund the project if the terms aren't right. Tropical park makes no money right now other than Sandra's enchanted. The stadium would go where the current football field there is. High schools could still use it (that would be incredible for recruiting). Miami would get all the rake for 7 games a year. The city would get all the money for every other event. There is only upside on that deal on both ends. How again would the city have leverage to say no to that? If the terms aren't right um would say pound sand find someone else to build a facility u can use to hold events and make a pile of money.

go look at a map and try to find an undeveloped 100 acre piece of land that's less than 1 mile from a highway, all within 15 miles of campus. you can't. that's the city's leverage.

parks are public works and a sunk cost, so it's not like tropical park is designed to be a source of revenue. how much should we lease the land for? if it's anything less than $1 million/year (which would be very low), why would the city even take a sniff?

city to hold events? if someone is putting an event together and wants an outdoor venue, why would they go to our stadium when sun life (which will be overhauled by then) has 30% more capacity and easier access to the broward market? does the city have to train its own staff to run the building or are they going to pay the stadium management company to do that?

we have zero leverage because we have zero other options. we need their land, they don't need our stadium.

Your logic is scary. Right now the land makes them zero. Sunlife is a huge venue. Do you know how attractive a new more intimate stadium would be for concerts especially Latin artists given the location? The city can spend no money and have a money maker? Hmmmmm. Tough decision there. Or it can sit on the land and generate nothing.

 

[dk72]

i don't remember exact figures because this was 3 years ago, but tropical park would be the cost of the land, the cost of stadium construction, and somewhere around $14-20 million from the state to build direct on/off ramps to the stadium site off of the 826 to prevent bird and miller from clogging up. baylor's new stadium cost $266 million to build. it seats just under 45k and is probably the closest thing to what we need that we can judge costs from. i don't know what the construction cost index is for miami compared to waco, but it's definitely more expensive. also tropical park would come at extortion prices because the city has no reason to sell the land and we have no leverage to get it.

the other sites past the hammocks on the west side of the city were the cost of land, stadium construction costs, $125-175 million from the state alone to construct/expand new roads, and we actually ended up losing count of the property values of what would need to be demolished in order to widen the roads enough (it was in the hundreds of millions). that's all discounting the inevitable lawsuits from displaced businesses and homes if the state were to somehow claim eminent domain over those properties for highway road construction, which would also be fought tooth and nail by the city to begin with.

the biggest problem that we have isn't the fundraising, it's the politics. the lands out west would require the state to justify spending tons of money to displace homes and businesses as well as build roads to a stadium that would suit our needs, but isn't big enough to be a premier venue for shows/events. the potential for revenue at a site on the remote outskirts of the city isn't as high as it is at the existing stadium (sun life). tropical park is municipal and buying city land like that, especially that much prime property in the middle of an urban area, is a battle in itself. like i said, it's not impossible, but you'd have to find the right person to lobby to the right politicians, have the right timing, and have the business plan to make it a profitable venture.

"also tropical park would come at extortion prices because the city has no reason to sell the land and we have no leverage to get it."

Exactly, and that is a huge, key issue. Baylor and other such schools that got their mid-sized stadiums built have one large advantage over us. Their cities or metro areas actually work with them and view them as partners. Miami-Dade is an extremely corrupt government and business atmosphere that would ***** over their grandmothers when cutting a deal. They have no loyalty to, or interest in, UM unless they can skim a lot off the top. The OB issue was fully and completely on the city. There's no reason to believe they would be any less cut throat when it comes to any other land they own.

Is the city running at a deficit?

Has that ever made a difference to the city?

 

[dk72]

This board has been insufferable, but great posts here by db.

Half the people calling for a feasibility study here have had to copy and paste the term to maintain its proper spelling. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it hasn't been done. And if UM was smart, they'd have a bunch of smart, ambitious, and incentivized grad students turn in a bunch of feasibility studies -- see if any young, bright minds had any ideas they may have missed -- and at absolutely no cost to them!

/ohwait

I assume your talking to me? Why don't you just respond to my post if so?

It's not that UM isn't smart, it's that the priority is not there. There is no urgency to get this done for the program.

The thing is, you're assuming that you know what has been done behind the scenes.

You--and others--are assuming that UM admin has never taken even the most basic of steps to pursue a stadium. You guys are acting as though you're the first ones to ever think of doing a feasibility study on the issue. You're rigid in your belief that the UM admin simply doesn't care and hasn't considered its options.

IMO, that's an awful lot of poor assumptions.

You are assuming just as much as he is.

The person you are quoting is asking if anyone can provide proof that these studies are done. The responses are nothing but assumptions that these studies have likely been done. "Likely done many times over" is what you said, i believe.

"likely" means you don't know. You are assuming. Given your assumption you think these type of studies should be a given and the duties of someone that is thorough. So if these studies were not done? What then?

I have seen past quotes from ADs about the stadium issue and the fact that they've researched the options and found nothing that turned out to be feasible. To think that the athletic department hasn't is just asinine.

 

[canesstevealum08]

If the university was able to acquire land and profit somewhat from non football events , they'd make it happen. Additionally, money is only asked of donors after feasibility studies. Often the first donation announced is not the first one that was made,

 

[dookie blaylock]

Bingo. All of 60 seconds to come up with. What grade did Double Penetration 305 get?

the problem with a land lease is that the city still has the leverage and they'll still gouge. we need their cooperation more than they need ours. they could just lease us enough land for the stadium itself, but keep the controlling interest of the parking lots, which are a huge revenue generator (which is a reason why the orange bowl lease sucked so bad for us). they could (and should if they are smart) also charge a percentage of our annual revenue per terms of the lease, then collect city tax revenue on top of that. if we buy the land, we only have to pay the tax to them. they're not going to give us a lease for some negligible amount because the park is still popular with the public. if you're going to put together a capital campaign for a stadium, you play for keeps.

This makes no sense. If the school agrees to build, it has all the leverage. It won't build and fund the project if the terms aren't right. Tropical park makes no money right now other than Sandra's enchanted. The stadium would go where the current football field there is. High schools could still use it (that would be incredible for recruiting). Miami would get all the rake for 7 games a year. The city would get all the money for every other event. There is only upside on that deal on both ends. How again would the city have leverage to say no to that? If the terms aren't right um would say pound sand find someone else to build a facility u can use to hold events and make a pile of money.

go look at a map and try to find an undeveloped 100 acre piece of land that's less than 1 mile from a highway, all within 15 miles of campus. you can't. that's the city's leverage.

parks are public works and a sunk cost, so it's not like tropical park is designed to be a source of revenue. how much should we lease the land for? if it's anything less than $1 million/year (which would be very low), why would the city even take a sniff?

city to hold events? if someone is putting an event together and wants an outdoor venue, why would they go to our stadium when sun life (which will be overhauled by then) has 30% more capacity and easier access to the broward market? does the city have to train its own staff to run the building or are they going to pay the stadium management company to do that?

we have zero leverage because we have zero other options. we need their land, they don't need our stadium.

Your logic is scary. Right now the land makes them zero. Sunlife is a huge venue. Do you know how attractive a new more intimate stadium would be for concerts especially Latin artists given the location? The city can spend no money and have a money maker? Hmmmmm. Tough decision there. Or it can sit on the land and generate nothing.

if the solution was that simple, don't you think the city would have done something by now? they already have marine stadium that they do nothing with that was a unique, intimate concert venue, but it still sits there collecting dust despite people wanting to buy it and do something with it. tropical park is not some empty lot in the middle of nowhere. it's a public works installation in the middle of the city and is built to lose money in exchange for public benefit.