Question about Rhoads' comments regarding stadium upgrades

[Newell]

“We would like the capacity to stay close to the same,â€￾ Rhoads said of the present 56,000-seat capacity.
“I want to play in front of a sold-out program. This program, this state, doesn’t show numerically or financially that they’re going to put 70,000 in there.
“I want a design that will allow us to play in front of a packed stadium.â€￾


Do you think that represents the official policy of the school and the athletic department or is it just Rhoads voicing his opinion?

 

[megamanxzero35]

Rhoads. When questioned about the SEZ he would always say he doesn't want to hurt the game day environment. You don't need to go to 70k. But 61-63k is reasonable IMO. Just breaking the 60k barrier is big.

 

[kingcy]

He has said something like this all along. JP has also said bowling in the SEZ wont increase capacity that much. The biggest thing is it puts more real seats into JTS. It will be interesting to see if they add suites and more things to add to the fan experence

 

[CyFan61]

Rhoads. When questioned about the SEZ he would always say he doesn't want to hurt the game day environment. You don't need to go to 70k. But 61-63k is reasonable IMO. Just breaking the 60k barrier is big.

Agreed, get us to 61,000 or so and call it good.

Others are clamoring to get us "in 3rd place" in the conference; 61K essentially puts us in a four-way tie for 3rd place in capacity with Tech, West Virginia, and OSU anyway.

 

[Prone2Clone]

I think it's probably a realistic stance shared by Rhoads, Pollard, and others close to the program.

That said, I think it'd be a shame to not up capacity to at least 60K and feel confident that you can fill it. Bowling in a stadium but maintaining the same capacity takes some of the excitement out of the entire project not to mention what it says about your vision for the program going forward.

Minny's stadium is a horseshoe and seats 50K or so but is said to have expansion capacity for up to 80,000. I suppose there's always that strategy, too: It seats 56,000 now but we can add more.

 

[ThatllDoCy]

I would say going to 60,000 seats would be good plus hillsides. Probably need to add suite level type Area.

 

[Judoka]

I think somewhere between 60K and 65K sounds about right. That way even on bad attendance days the place is still mostly full and you've got a couple million extra gate for big games or if we continue to sell well against non premier teams.

 

[Newell]

Rhoads. When questioned about the SEZ he would always say he doesn't want to hurt the game day environment. You don't need to go to 70k. But 61-63k is reasonable IMO. Just breaking the 60k barrier is big.

I agree and I think Rhoads has a good idea what the capacity will be after the enclosure and is making the case for why that is the ideal number.

 

[Cycsk]

We always have the North Endzone for future expansion. I think that whatever we do in the South Endzone will be complete and unlikely to be a first phase of a larger project.

I don't think anyone is really thinking in terms of a 80-100k stadium with the general decline in attendance at college football, the limited population of our state, and the accessibility provided by other technological means. It is the combo of the game and the extra services that will define the stadium of the future. I could see us taking out seats on both sides in order to add more suites, club sections, etc. Who wouldn't have wanted to be in the club section last week with its heat lamps?

 

[snowcraig2.0]

I want to play in front of a sold-out program. This program, this state, doesn’t show numerically or financially that they’re going to put 70,000 in there.

This comment rubbed me the wrong way. My initial reaction was this:

Hey Paul, I don't want to hear your thoughts and opinions as to the limits of our fan-base which continues to ramp up year after year, when the issues with the program are clearly all about the limits of you and your staff's coaching ability and lack of improvement on the field.

You can't tell me that when we are selling 41,000 season tickets with multiple sell outs for a team with one winning record in the past 8 years that substantial growth to those numbers wouldn't occur on the heels of an 8 or 9 win season.

 

[Rhoadhoused]

I'd be very disappointed if it didn't get to 60k. I think we should get 60-63k actual seats, and only use the hillsides as overflow seating. Big games get to sell a ton of tickets, smaller games still have full stands. Maybe the little Cyclone club could use them normally, but other than that make it overflow.

 

[CyFan61]

I'd be very disappointed if it didn't get to 60k. I think we should get 60-63k actual seats

That would be an increase of 20K seats, which is almost equal to one entire side of JTS currently.

 

[alarson]

This comment rubbed me the wrong way. My initial reaction was this:

Hey Paul, I don't want to hear your thoughts and opinions as to the limits of our fan-base which continues to ramp up year after year, when the issues with the program are clearly all about the limits of you and your staff's coaching ability and lack of improvement on the field.

You can't tell me that when we are selling 41,000 season tickets with multiple sell outs for a team with one winning record in the past 8 years that substantial growth to those numbers wouldn't occur on the heels of an 8 or 9 win season.

Agreed with this. Hell, even without success we've got a long term trendline that says we're going to want to have 60k. Even just building for average attendance we want to be thinking long-term and that trend says get bigger.

And considering the student body isnt getting any smaller or any less involved with athletics, just that alone means we need to plan for more seats.

And keep in mind this chart is just *average* attendance. Given you'll have a chunk of games that would sell above your average youre leaving dollars on the table if your average hits your capacity.

Id say 65k is a good number for the stadium.

 

[isufan]

With the size of the student body and the number of young alums that are living and working in central Iowa, they need to increase capacity a little.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we need 80k seats, but I think the idea of getting to 3rd in the conference is a good one.

 

[DarkStar]

This comment rubbed me the wrong way. My initial reaction was this:

Hey Paul, I don't want to hear your thoughts and opinions as to the limits of our fan-base which continues to ramp up year after year, when the issues with the program are clearly all about the limits of you and your staff's coaching ability and lack of improvement on the field.

You can't tell me that when we are selling 41,000 season tickets with multiple sell outs for a team with one winning record in the past 8 years that substantial growth to those numbers wouldn't occur on the heels of an 8 or 9 win season.

Some days I think the fans expect more out of this program then Paul does.

In the foundation mailing he was quoted saying that ISU will never be a farm program for the NFL. I was thinking the only reason why that would be true is if you can't recruit and develop players. That is one heck of a sales pitch. Give us more money so we can still suck and will always suck.

 

[isuno1fan]

I'm starting to hope the capacity is 59,500 just to watch the nuclear explosion of feedback on here.

I don't care if capacity is 50k as long as the project is appealing to the eye.

Bigger isn't better.

 

[BBHMagic]

I think what will likely happen is they will add enough seats to get us to around 55,000-56,000. There will be general seating tickets where you can sit either in a section of the new addition or the hillsides. Most people will choose the actual seat and the stadium will look more full. For games when a ton of people show up you can still fit over 60,000 people into Jack Trice by filling up the hills too.

 

[Cycsk]

Agreed with this. Hell, even without success we've got a long term trendline that says we're going to want to have 60k. Even just building for average attendance we want to be thinking long-term and that trend says get bigger.

And considering the student body isnt getting any smaller or any less involved with athletics, just that alone means we need to plan for more seats.

And keep in mind this chart is just *average* attendance. Given you'll have a chunk of games that would sell above your average youre leaving dollars on the table if your average hits your capacity.

Id say 65k is a good number for the stadium.

Attendance is one thing. Revenue is another.

How many of our current season tickets cost less than $200 (and no donation)? The entire student section, the entire endzone section, all the hillsides, and mini-packs.

Now, how many of these will be willing to pay for tickets that cost $500 or more (including a donation)?

Our growth trajectory isn't a simple slope upwards when you factor in the increased cost of tickets in the future.

 

[Stormin]

I think what will likely happen is they will add enough seats to get us to around 55,000-56,000. There will be general seating tickets where you can sit either in a section of the new addition or the hillsides. Most people will choose the actual seat and the stadium will look more full. For games when a ton of people show up you can still fit over 60,000 people into Jack Trice by filling up the hills too.

With only 2 hills left on the north after the SEZ expansion, not sure how we fit in the 5,000 plus on those hillsides for standing room only crowds. I would like at least close to 60,000 actual seats or just shy of that. 60,000 just sounds better too.