PonyFans.com

mtrout wrote:

GHammond wrote:I was coming from the angle of b itching about a $50,000,000+ Ford Stadium upgrade.

100million. By the way, what's the markup on that?

Unbelievable to have people complaining about the investment.

We were explicitly told that this investment was necessary to move up the ranks and be eligible for the P5. We were able to pull in a $100M investment to make it happen and people complain?

Here is another newsflash. The students pack the hill against TCU, Cincy, and Houston. But nobody comes against the little teams. When we are playing against bigger opponents as part of a bigger conference, everyone will come to games, including the students. And we will be able to keep our games out of the 2:30 time period in September. When you play at 7:30, none of that other crap matters.

JasonB wrote:

mtrout wrote:

GHammond wrote:I was coming from the angle of b itching about a $50,000,000+ Ford Stadium upgrade.

100million. By the way, what's the markup on that?

Unbelievable to have people complaining about the investment.

We were explicitly told that this investment was necessary to move up the ranks and be eligible for the P5. We were able to pull in a $100M investment to make it happen and people complain?

Here is another newsflash. The students pack the hill against TCU, Cincy, and Houston. But nobody comes against the little teams. When we are playing against bigger opponents as part of a bigger conference, everyone will come to games, including the students. And we will be able to keep our games out of the 2:30 time period in September. When you play at 7:30, none of that other crap matters.

I agree with JasonB's reply. This End Zone Expansion does not focus on replacing grass with seats. It moves us to a higher class of athletic facilities, expected by a P5 Program. In summary:

"The new Garry Weber End Zone Complex will anchor Ford Stadium’s south bowl that will connect the stadium’s existing east and west gate entries. The three levels of the new complex will increase the functionality, efficiency and overall experience of Mustang football for student-athletes and fans, as well as inspire interest and investments in athletics across SMU’s campus. Team-focused spaces will include new locker rooms, a weight room, position-specific meeting rooms, a full-team auditorium and a kitchen and training table to support all of SMU’s 484 student-athletes. The new facility will also house football coaches, support staff and video and recruiting services."

It took so long. We could been working all this decades ago. I'll be excited about a P5 invite or being in a conference championship game, not building stuff because we're getting left behind and it's now 1000% obvious.

We build IPF -> Houston, UCF, Cincy get invited to Big12
UNT & Charlotte come into our conference -> We build Weber end zone complex

Amen, regarding the complaining.

I think it’s pretty darn cool, and hence posting the thread to see where we might get up-to-date views of the progress.

The renderings look pretty darn suite.

As far as the stadium expansion goes, I agree that it takes Ford from looking like a G5 stadium to a P5 level. The fact that it will still hold only 40k just shows that it sits on the campus of a small private school, Our facilities should resemble what schools like Duke, Vandy & Northwestern might have

Charleston Pony, is 40k the exact number? If not, does anyone know the exact or estimated capacity we are looking at?

crispy_taco wrote:Charleston Pony, is 40k the exact number? If not, does anyone know the exact or estimated capacity we are looking at?

Just a guess on my part. When Ford was built, it was disclosed that the design could be expanded to 45k by completing the oval, but obviously this project does not come close to doing that and capacity might only increase to something closer to 35k. That would be more than adequate if SMU is never going to join the Big XII and play against regional schools that would bring large numbers of visiting fans. We have shown that SMU on it's own won't even fill 35k seats unless we are hosting a school that brings large numbers of their own fans.

SMU's initial announcement doesn't address seating capacity and I think all the "extras" are the more important aspect of this project

https://www.smu.edu/ignited/news/gifts/ ... x-jan-2022

If we were a good team in a P5 conference, we would fill Ford for a UW or an Arizona.

I can only *imagine* how hopping the Blvd would be.

Northwestern is eliminating 12,000 seats with the new proposed stadium, from 47,000 to 35,000. With an average attendance of about 30,000, there will be more sellouts and the people getting turned away for big games will be from the opposing teams. I can get behind improving facilities but adding seats makes no sense to me.

SMU Pom Mom wrote:Northwestern is eliminating 12,000 seats with the new proposed stadium, from 47,000 to 35,000. With an average attendance of about 30,000, there will be more sellouts and the people getting turned away for big games will be from the opposing teams. I can get behind improving facilities but adding seats makes no sense to me.

They're not really adding "seats" to Ford that are anything like the bleachers in the rest of the stadium; they're all box/elevated experience seating. It's a good idea and will improve the look and feel of the stadium (closer to P5, further from G5, as others have stated).

Reducing capacity for Michigan and Ohio State fans is a good idea, but the best thing Northwestern did with the redesign is that canopy. I don't understand why almost all soccer stadiums--FC Dallas* is an outlier here in that crap stadium in Collin County--have at least a decent amount of protection from sun and rain but college football stadiums don't. I can understand the challenge of doing it for a 90,000-seat stadium but it's very doable for under 50,000. Only Baylor has a sort of canopy of CFB stadiums I have been to, and it's so wafer-thin that it really only helps the last few rows of the upper deck.

Dukie wrote:

SMU Pom Mom wrote:Northwestern is eliminating 12,000 seats with the new proposed stadium, from 47,000 to 35,000. With an average attendance of about 30,000, there will be more sellouts and the people getting turned away for big games will be from the opposing teams. I can get behind improving facilities but adding seats makes no sense to me.

They're not really adding "seats" to Ford that are anything like the bleachers in the rest of the stadium; they're all box/elevated experience seating. It's a good idea and will improve the look and feel of the stadium (closer to P5, further from G5, as others have stated).

Reducing capacity for Michigan and Ohio State fans is a good idea, but the best thing Northwestern did with the redesign is that canopy. I don't understand why almost all soccer stadiums--FC Dallas* is an outlier here in that crap stadium in Collin County--have at least a decent amount of protection from sun and rain but college football stadiums don't. I can understand the challenge of doing it for a 90,000-seat stadium but it's very doable for under 50,000. Only Baylor has a sort of canopy of CFB stadiums I have been to, and it's so wafer-thin that it really only helps the last few rows of the upper deck.

New Northwestern Football Stadium will seat 35K, open air, and be used regularly for non-FB, entertainment performances

Water Pony wrote:

Dukie wrote:

SMU Pom Mom wrote:Northwestern is eliminating 12,000 seats with the new proposed stadium, from 47,000 to 35,000. With an average attendance of about 30,000, there will be more sellouts and the people getting turned away for big games will be from the opposing teams. I can get behind improving facilities but adding seats makes no sense to me.

They're not really adding "seats" to Ford that are anything like the bleachers in the rest of the stadium; they're all box/elevated experience seating. It's a good idea and will improve the look and feel of the stadium (closer to P5, further from G5, as others have stated).

Reducing capacity for Michigan and Ohio State fans is a good idea, but the best thing Northwestern did with the redesign is that canopy. I don't understand why almost all soccer stadiums--FC Dallas* is an outlier here in that crap stadium in Collin County--have at least a decent amount of protection from sun and rain but college football stadiums don't. I can understand the challenge of doing it for a 90,000-seat stadium but it's very doable for under 50,000. Only Baylor has a sort of canopy of CFB stadiums I have been to, and it's so wafer-thin that it really only helps the last few rows of the upper deck.

New Northwestern Football Stadium will seat 35K, open air, and be used regularly for non-FB, entertainment performances

$800 million


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

crispy_taco wrote:Charleston Pony, is 40k the exact number? If not, does anyone know the exact or estimated capacity we are looking at?

Pretty sure I read that it adds 5000 seats. I wish that was 8000 to make 40000 capacity.

Dukie wrote:

SMU Pom Mom wrote:Northwestern is eliminating 12,000 seats with the new proposed stadium, from 47,000 to 35,000. With an average attendance of about 30,000, there will be more sellouts and the people getting turned away for big games will be from the opposing teams. I can get behind improving facilities but adding seats makes no sense to me.

They're not really adding "seats" to Ford that are anything like the bleachers in the rest of the stadium; they're all box/elevated experience seating. It's a good idea and will improve the look and feel of the stadium (closer to P5, further from G5, as others have stated).

Reducing capacity for Michigan and Ohio State fans is a good idea, but the best thing Northwestern did with the redesign is that canopy. I don't understand why almost all soccer stadiums--FC Dallas* is an outlier here in that crap stadium in Collin County--have at least a decent amount of protection from sun and rain but college football stadiums don't. I can understand the challenge of doing it for a 90,000-seat stadium but it's very doable for under 50,000. Only Baylor has a sort of canopy of CFB stadiums I have been to, and it's so wafer-thin that it really only helps the last few rows of the upper deck.

MLS leadership learned from minor league baseball and committed to being a family entertainment product that satisfies that consumer segment whether the team on the field is winning or losing. Shade, clean bright restrooms, and a few fun distractions to break things up for the kids go a long way.

Forward thinking ADs have brought on staff with this sort of marketing mindset and expertise, and invested in stadiums that work for multiple fan segments vs. just waiting for the team to win consistently and hope the core fanbase grows. Family entertainment is a huge, profitable market and it escapes me why SMU leadership behaves like they're somehow above addressing it.

SMU Pom Mom wrote:Northwestern is eliminating 12,000 seats with the new proposed stadium, from 47,000 to 35,000. With an average attendance of about 30,000, there will be more sellouts and the people getting turned away for big games will be from the opposing teams. I can get behind improving facilities but adding seats makes no sense to me.

If the next phase of stadium improvements includes replacing large amounts of bleachers with actual seats, this would reduce total seating capacity. Also, keep in mind, SMU oversold the TCU game so we already have a stadium that fits >32K people. The premium, client-controlled seats/suites are tickets that are already in demand and sellout.