Attention Dan Guerrero's Replacement: Fix UCLA's Football Facilities (Part 5)
by Odysseus on Nov 17, 2011 10:00 AM PST
in UCLA Athletics
Email
PrintThis is what a Stadium the size of Stanford or UNC Stadiums would look like at Drake Stadium.
In Part 1 of this series, we argued that a program of UCLA's historical stature deserves first-class facilities, especially for the football team, given the primacy of football for an athletic department's bottom line. In Part 2, we demonstrated that investing money in the football program generally can improve the bottom line for the athletic department and even the university as a whole. We also demonstrated that schools can win by putting money into the program and failing to invest in the program pretty much guarantees a lack of success. In Part 3, we looked at some of the premier facilities around the country. In Part 4, we showed how UCLA has fallen behind much of the Pac-12 in terms of athletic and football facilities. In this post, we will propose some solutions. As always, this community encourages all members to propose their own ideas as well.
Once again, this topic is timely as we will soon be looking for a new football coach and hopefully a new athletic director. UCLA needs an elite coach and a top-notch AD, both of whom will rightfully insist on facilities upgrades. Dan Guerrero is the Tom Hansen of Pac-12 ADs, presiding over an athletic department infected with resiliant and institutional rot, a diseased culture of mediocrity and an ivory tower mentality. Bruins fans are sick and tired of Dan Guerrero and the Morgan's Center's insular culture and stuck-in-the-past mindset: it's time for wholesale regime change in Westwood.
Let's address some concerns or rather some concern trolling that is sure to emerge. Inevitably, some short-sighted people will complain that we can't do it here, or assert, without providing any evidence, that other schools have more money than UCLA. Such arguments would be myths, or should we say, attempts at bamboozlement.
In 2007-2008, UCLA's athletic department was 25th in revenue, with $66 million, putting the Bruins' revenue ahead of Cal (28), Minnesota (29), Washington (33), Oregon (36), Louisville (44), North Carolina State (55), and TCU (57) all schools that are upgrading or have significantly upgraded their facilities. Additionally, with significant Pac-12 revenues arriving in the near future, and a huge and successful alumni base, money is absolutely not a legitimate excuse.
I'm sure we'll also see similar concern trolling claiming that we don't have any space. Again, this would be misguided. UCLA is building the Luskin Conference Center. Unfortunately, in a shortsighted move, UCLA is building the facility on the site of Lot 6, which would have been a good location to expand Spaulding Field:
Campus officials today announced new plans to advance UCLA's academic mission by building a centrally located conference and guest center where faculty and students can exchange ideas with scholars from across the globe.The proposed seven-story building would be located at the end of Westwood Plaza on 4.5 acres currently occupied by Parking Structure 6. Plans call for 25,000 square feet of meeting space and 250 guest rooms, which would be reserved for those attending conferences or having business with the university. Complete details are available at a website dedicated to the project.
Lot 6 seems like, at best, a questionable location for a hotel. Unfortunately the need to upgrade Spaulding was likely not considered when making this decision. However, there is space if Spaulding and the IM fields were switched, or where the tennis courts currently are, or Lot 8, although at some point, UCLA will start running out of parking. UCLA needs to start seriously considering building a new football practice and operations complex, on multiple floors, with parking underneath.
So, what are our solutions?
First and foremost, our practice facilities absolutely need to be upgraded. We need at least 2 full outdoor 120 yard fields, with normal straight uprights. We need to fix the drainage on the natural grass portion or make them both field turf. An indoor practice facility is not really a necessity in Westwood, but functional outdoor facilities are.
Second, and this is something else that needs to be done immediately. The bare minimum is Spaulding (or a replacement for Spaulding) and improving Acosta/Knapp. We need to build a new strength and conditioning center that is at least equal to what USC and Cal are doing. If they want to make it really cool, ideas like Florida's Bull Gator Plaza provide would fit well at UCLA and could really show off the history to prospective recruits (especially since under Dan Guerrero's reign of error most recruits wouldn't even remember the last time UCLA has had a season worthy of its football tradition):
Before entering the complex, fans will see a variety of tributes to Gator greats. Every consensus All-American has an 18 x 18 granite paver in the walkway with their name and year they won All-America honors. In addition, the seven Gators who have been elected into the College Football Hall of Fame are recognized in the area. A spectacular 15-plus foot bronze Gator stands at the center of the entryway, paying tribute to the 2006 National Championship Team. This statue was funded by donations from Stumpy Harris, Hjalma Johnson, and Joe LeCompte. In addition, the names of 309 Bull Gator donors are inscribed around the base of the statue.
As we mentioned in Part 1:
While UCLA did renovate the Acosta Center, to include a 15,000 square foot weight room, 8,000 square feet for athletic training and rehabilitation, and the Bud Knapp Football Center, which includes the locker rooms, equipment room, and nine meeting rooms and a team meeting room, the facilities are not in the top of the conference or comparable programs. As we have demonstrated, financially, football is the most important sport for the financial health of an athletic department, and spending on football and reinvesting in the football program makes a lot of sense.
Acosta is pretty nice, but a 15,000 square foot weight room just isn't in the same league as USC's 32,000 square foot weight room or as cool as Cal's larger (but not immensely larger) Student-Athlete High Performance Center. We're not going to say exactly what needs to be done, and a good football hire might have his own ideas (a football only complex, perhaps), but these two ideas are immediate needs.
Additionally, we've also mentioned other ideas that have been used at Stanford and Washington, such as improved student-athlete academic centers and improved training table/sports nutrition facilities.
We may also want to upgrade non-football facilities as well. Florida made nice renovations to its volleyball practice facility:
Florida's state-of the-art athletic fieldhouse facility, now named the Lemerand Athletic Center, opened in the 1995-96 academic year and underwent an $1.4-million renovation that was completed in the fall of 2006.
The $5.61 million, 46,000 square-foot facility currently houses three full-sized volleyball courts and serves as the practice facility for Gator volleyball. The building also has equipments, training and locker room areas to accommodate volleyball, soccer and track & field It includes team meeting space and coaches' offices for soccer, softball, track & field, lacrosse and volleyball.
The Men's Gym/Student Activities Center already has a capacity of 2,000. It may be worthwhile considering whether that facility could be renovated further and used for a more intimate setting (and better home-court advantage) for regular season volleyball, gymnastics, and women's basketball. Wooden Center is already being used this season while Pauley is renovated.
Finally, we come to the most controversial, most long term aspect, but really, the most important. An on-campus football stadium. Why do we need an on-campus stadium? Well, for one, the LSU-Bama game was worth $18 million to the City of Tuscaloosa. Additionally, as Baylor coach Art Briles argued, an on-campus stadium really matters for recruiting:
"There is a difference between a want and a need," Briles said this summer during one of his Bear Blitz Coaches' Caravan stops. "When you're the only (NCAA Division I) university in the state of Texas that does not have an on-campus stadium, that's a need. It's something that bothers you in the recruiting world. We can tickle each other and giggle all we want, but don't think people don't use that against us. And don't think other universities don't know, because it's true. Real doesn't lie, and that's reality."
Similarly, as Drayton McLane, a longtime Baylor booster argued:
Drayton McLane, a former Chairman of the Board of Regents (2002-04) and longtime supporter, has been a strong proponent of moving football back on campus.
"When I went to graduate school at Michigan State, the football stadium was right in the middle of the campus," McLane said in an interview last month with SicEmSports.com. "It was part of the fun with college. Baylor has not experienced that. People go west to the games, and the school is on the east side of the city, so many people won't even see the campus. For a lot of people who go to Texas A&M, Texas Tech or Texas, they get to see their stadium. Baylor is one of the most upbeat and friendly places, but people don't get a chance to see it."
A stadium would fit on campus with minimal disturbance to the IM field and the surrounding neighborhoods. In addition to the animation, below, you can also view the video (above) that shows how Kenan Stadium (UNC, capacity 60,000) and Stanford Stadium (50,000) would look on the site of Drake Stadium. There are many other stadia with similar capacities (for example, Jones AT&T (Texas Tech, 60,000) nicely blends in with Texas Tech's campus architecture), but as this .gif featuring Stanford stadium show (which is part of the video posted above), it is quite doable.
For an on-campus stadium, there is no doubt that there would be political opposition, but we should not simply give up. Dan Guerrero (or his replacement) should make it his (or her) legacy, even if it takes 2, 5, 10, or more years. If Farmers Field can get special legislation easing potential legal challenges, why couldn't UCLA do the same? UCLA, a large, extremely influential university with numerous influential alumni has political connections and can hire lobbyists, if necessary:
California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill Tuesday to expedite legal challenges to Farmers Field, Anschutz Entertainment Group's $1.2 billion proposed football stadium in downtown Los Angeles.
Senate Bill 292, which passed the California State Senate and Assembly less than three weeks ago, includes no exemption from environmental laws but would allow legal challenges to the stadium's environmental impact report (EIR) to be heard immediately in the California Court of Appeal, which would then come to a decision within 175 days.
The expedited process would bypass the Superior Court and avoid the protracted litigation AEG has been fearful of.
SB 292 should apply to a UCLA on-campus stadium as well:
Governor Brown recently signed Assembly Bill ("AB") 900 to expedite judicial review of certain "leadership projects" with hope that the streamlining efforts will improve the job market for Californians. The bills provide an incentive for applicants to move forward with their projects because any challenge to a leadership project Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") will be venued immediately in the Court of Appeal. The court will then have a maximum of 175 days to issue its decision on the challenged EIR.
To qualify as a leadership project, the project must exceed $100 million and not result in any net additional emissions of greenhouse gases. The project also must create high-wage, highly skilled jobs that pay prevailing and living wages and provide construction jobs and permanent jobs for Californians. As a prerequisite to receiving certification approval from the Governor, the applicant also must enter an agreement with the lead agency that all mitigation measures will be enforced and monitored. Additionally, the applicant bears the burden of costs for any hearing or decision before the Court of Appeal.
We should also noted that California courts have held that the university regents have virtually plenary power in regulating the university’s affairs. As such, a University’s project should not be subject to municipal regulation, and should be exempt from local zoning regulations and building codes. Regents of the University of California v. City of Santa Monica, 77 Cal. App. 3d 130 (1978).
We've also added some maps, the first one is what it would look like with just the Stanford stadium instead of Drake.
This deals with pretty much everything, except where to put the track. But the VA has already been mentioned as a potential spot for a football stadium, so it's conceivable the track could go at the VA. The VA would probably be open to it because it would be open to the public when there's no practice/meets, like Drake is now.
If and when we get into the actual architecture of the stadium, the smart plan would be to put a higher bowl and the media box on the west side, with a shorter tier of seating on the east side, so although it’s not an open end, the Royce Quad is still visible from where the cameras would be.
In conclusion, UCLA's facilities are falling behind and we need to take immediate steps to improve practice facilities and strength and conditioning. Additionally, UCLA should implement a long term plan to build an on campus stadium. It can be done, with new competent leaders for the athletic department and the football team. Go Bruins.
(Thanks to Telemachus for providing the animations and video and all the editors for their extremely helpful thoughts on this series. Thanks to commenters Jim Rogers and GilbyDM101 for providing some info used in this post.)
This is a multi-part series analyzing UCLA's facilities and the failure of the current regime to invest in facilities. Facilties Part 1 is an introductory post; Facilities Part 2 looks at how investments in football can pay off; Facilities Part 3 examines some premier facilities around the country. Part 4 looks at facilities in the Pac-12.
193 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Simply an amazing series O (and epic video T)
Well done. We will definitely have to build on this over this off-season after we have the head coaching situation straightened out.
Just great stuff all around.
A subseries for this entry
There is SO MUCH that can be discussed about this that one post simply scratches the surface of this idea. It would be fantastic and engaging to discuss many issues associated with the on campus stadium:
1. Logistics involved with parking and transportation.
2. Tailgate experiences.
3. The stadium’s design (maintain the same brick style with state of the art technology? [soundproofing that won’t disturb the affluent neighbors but increase noise within the stadium])
4. Political hurdles (list them; how to best address them; who will support us and who would be against us)
5. Financial implications (short- and longrun)
6. Recruiting implications (obvious but necessary to discuss)
7. etc….
If we can provide informative and cogent solutions to problems associated with an on-campus stadium, this should AT LEAST open up a serious discussion by influential individuals to consider this as a viable option. This post has so much potential, that it would be prudent to expand this.
Excellent job O!
Somos los Bruins poderosos...
What would be great
If members of this community also took it upon themselves to dig up more information on their own and build on O’s efforts. O just opened up the floogates. Folks can totally keep it going by diving deep into some of the subset issues you brought up. More people do it … more info will come out. We – as in frontpagers – can’t all do it on our own. We can use everyone’s help.
Agreed! Today UCLA needs vision and desire to build the a stadium fans have wanted since the 1960s or before
In the 1960s UCLA planned for a stadium, but construction was derailed in no small part by environmental and NIMBY objections. About 1/4 the original design was constructed as Drake Stadium. Today we still need to learn from past hurdles and get a complete stadium built.
Pages 112-113 of the 1966 UCLA Southern Campus Yearbook were devoted to a stadium plan; anyone with that yearbook who can scan those pages for posting? Here’s a link to a thumbnail image:
Elephant in the room: Parking
Where will 50,000 people park in Westwood?
by PrinceLucRichardMbahAMoute on Nov 17, 2011 10:21 AM PST reply actions
Besides the on campus parking garages
there are a number of nearby parking lots in Westwood Village that I am sure would love to profit from our football events. I would imagine even the Federal Building on Wilshire would have no problem opening part of their parking area up if it meant increased revenue.
Just some ideas.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
More of a small hippo than an elephant
How many students would show up to a game if it was on campus?
Let’s say 10,000.
How many more from the local surroundings?
Let’s say at least 10,000
So that leaves 30,000.
All you need is a parking + shuttle solution to make up the difference between people who show up for basketball games and who would show up for a football game. It’s not that many. And I’m not even counting public transportation.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Nov 17, 2011 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Shuttle from the federal building
They have a few thousand parking spots they don’t use on weekends.
Also, people don’t drive to games by themselves. most People have at least 2 people in their cars, many 4 or more.
You would be looking at around 15,000 vehicles, which could be handled.
by silverlakebruin on Nov 17, 2011 10:51 AM PST up reply actions
I disagree
It is a definate elephant!
Even if it is only 30,000. College football is more than just attending the game, it is an experience, and tailgaiting, and the atmosphere is part of the experience. I am a season ticket holder of 8 tickets, and I for one would not want to fight traffic to park a half a mile away in a parking structure with no atmosphere. Then have to take a shuttle to, and from the game, only to fight traffic again to leave. That does not sound like an enjoyable experience to me.
people walk half a mile from their parking spots at the Rose Bowl
A lot of people at the Rose Bowl even park at Parsons and (GASP) take shuttles!
There is traffic at the Rose Bowl (at least when we’re good, or have good attendance). Plenty of on campus stadiums have great atmospheres and good tailgating.
I really am not sure what your objection is, except maybe you like the Rose Bowl. That’s fine.
But if you don’t want to go, no one would make you. The rest of us would enjoy an on campus stadium.
Not to mention there would be plenty of tailgating available on the IM field.
Wilson Plaza, the quad, Dickson Court, are all lovely areas to set up a picnic and a very short walk to our future stadium
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
by MexiBruin on Nov 17, 2011 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
People in other cities ...
take busses and subways to sporting events every single day.
I go from LA to SD Charger games sometimes. We take a train with thousands of people. We then take trolleys from the train to the stadium and then we take trolleys back to our trains and ride the train back to Union Station.
I’ve always felt that some people value the picnic on the golf course as much as they value the football. That’s why a lot of people don’t care if the team stinks, because win or lose they still get to drink a beer and grill a sausage next to a sand trap. I’m not saying that’s you wizardofoc. But there are definitely people like that.
I for one really like to tailgate at the Rose Bowl. If I couldn’t do that, I could not endure our crappy team. But I’d sacrifice the picnic for an in-stadium experience that helped the team win more games. 65,000 people in the Rose Bowl still looks 1/3 empty. But 60,000 people on campus is electric.
Apples and Oranges
I also have gone to Charger, and Padre games. It is better, and easier to take the train, but that is not the same to me as a UCLA football game. The Federal building is probably a mile away from Drake, and it can take a half hour to get from one to the other on a normal weekend with no football game. Can you imagine what it would be like with a game. Toting a picnic basket a mile to, and from the game, and having a picnic on the IM field is not the same as setting up a tent, and BBQing a steak with wine, or a beer. If there was no tailgaiting there is no way I could handle this team. Believe me, nobody cares if the team wins, or loses more than I do. I wish I didn’t care so much because their lack of success is really affecting my life.
If we had any semblence of a good program
you wouldn’t need the tailgating to be the highlight of your saturday. Point is there are work arounds to the traffic. Yes weekday traffic in westwood is a biotch, no denying that. But, we’re talking about the 40k+ on campus AND everybody accessing the business and buildings on wilshire blvd.
A saturday game on campus wouldn’t have to deal with all of that. Saturday traffic in Westwood is not that bad and with the workarounds that have been discussed here (MetroLine, Shuttle, Surrounding parking lots) it would work.
Metro Line
will reach UCLA in a few years as well.
You would think a sizeable portion of that 50K would be students
The buildout on the hill to increase the number of students that can stay in dorms should reduce the actual number of parking spots needed.
5 days a week
A community of 40,000+ of students, local residents figure out a way to exist on UCLA campus. For 5 or 6 Saturdays a week, solutions can devised to accommodate transportation and parking arrangement for 50,000 fans (few thousand of whom will already be on or near campus as they are students).
by Nestor on Nov 17, 2011 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Fact No. 1: Parking is horrible in Westwood., always has been and always will be.
Fact No. 2: UCLA still as a zillion people park on or near campus every day.
Conclusion: People will find a way to park.
Recommendation: Put the “Oh, it won’t be possible because of parking” excuse away and never, ever bring it up again. It’s a lame excuse for taking no action.
Follow up (that's for the remaining Jim Healy fans)
I drove from Lynwood my freshman year and parked on Veteran. I then took my bike of the back of the car and rode to campus. (This was before there were bike racks on the backs of cars – my dad built mine out of the door handles from the old Lynwood City Hall, which he helped tear down. He was a laborer, not an activist, He helped tear down old City Hall when a new one was built.)
That’s one way to solve the parking problem. Also, it’s likely that people who drive to the game will have more in a car than people who drive solo to school.
I reiterate. Parking is not a problem. Put me in charge of the parking division and I’ll have a plan ready for implentation in about a half an hour. Bill and Ted could do it in less time, but there would be apostrophe violations.
Yeah parking on the weekends at UCLA is easy.
Compared to how many students and employees commute during the week, a football game would be comparable. I used to love working on weekends, easy to get around UCLA.
they manage it at Cal
where they have a similar lack of parking spaces. It can happen.
by GoldenGate93 on Nov 18, 2011 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
Historically, the biggest opposition to an on-campus stadium...
are the area’s wealthy homeowners.
the other issue is parking
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:23 AM PST reply actions
one last thing...
just looked at the bull gator facility… did you see the plaque on he Bull Gator bronze that said the facility was made possible by a generous donation from a man named… Stumpy Harris.
Gator + Generous Donation + Stumpy = Comedy Classic
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:26 AM PST up reply actions
one more thing...
if you guys want to shell out for Urban Meyer, which would be $6,000,000 per year and up, you can’t have a 50k or 60k seat stadium. You better have a 80k-90k seat stadium.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:31 AM PST up reply actions
What are you talking about?
First of all, $6M/year? I don’t think so. It’s more like $4M/year.
Second of all, who’s “you guys”?
There are many coaches who get paid a lot more than Neuheisel yet who play in stadiums much smaller than the Rose Bowl.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I think an overall package around Meyer (with staff)
Would be around 6 to 8 million. I think Meyer’s base salary depending on how it’s structured will be around 4.
Also, for revenue stream – a creative AD wouldn’t just be looking at returns from ticket gates, but also added value coming from a powerhouse program and how it’s marketed (if that AD has any sense of vision and how to comprehensively market/promote a program).
by Nestor on Nov 17, 2011 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Chip Kelly gets paid $2.8M (and sure to go up)...
… and plays in a 60K stadium. As an aside, can you imagine how amazingly loud such a stadium would be??? Wow.
He walked away from $4m per year
and that was a contract signed 3 years ago.
His market value is more than that now, do you think that he will take less for the privilidge to coach at Ucla?
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:38 AM PST up reply actions
We're not negotiating his contract in this post
A smart athletic director would do what it takes to try to get him. UCLA has plenty of money right now while the football program stinks. With an on campus stadium and a good program, money for the coaching staff really wouldn’t be an issue. This is just another excuse, distraction.
That was at Florida
this is not the SEC. If he’s interested, he should know what the market is like over here. A $4M salary would be attractive to him, IMO.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I don't know if $4 million would get it done
But I am pretty sure $5 million would. Regardless, we’re not negotiating his contract in this post.
You are right..
We are in the conference that is paid Petey Boy… $4,400,000 per year in 2009
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:43 AM PST up reply actions
A few comparisons
Petrino $ 3.7 million, stadium 75,000
Mullen $2.5 million, stadium 60,000
Patterston $3 million, stadium 44,000
Chip Kelly $2.9 million, stadium 53,000
Real estate costs...
are certainly a lot cheaper in Fayeteville, Arksansas, Starkville, Mississippi, FW Texas, and Eugene, Oregon, than they are in Westwood.
by PrinceLucRichardMbahAMoute on Nov 17, 2011 10:48 AM PST up reply actions
Please, $4-$5 million is plenty
This negative attitude is part of the reason our program is in the sad state it is in. Why does everyone always focus on reasons we can’t do things?
I think that it is the opposite...
pointing out issues isn’t a negative.. nobody is abandoning the goal… coming up with an iron clad solution makes it so the idiots in charge have less wiggle room.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:52 AM PST up reply actions
good point, bean and cheese.
We have plenty of nay-sayers who come up with reasons why things won’t work. Before poo-pooing these people, we need to come up with concrete solutions, as I think have been done fairly well with the parking issue.
Re affluent neighbors, as I recall, the area overlooking the arroyo in Pasadena (isn’t that Linda Vista) has probably as much old money as does Bel Air and Brentwood. Somehow their gripes got overcome. How did that happen? (Not a rhetorical question. Does anyone know?)
I've seen some historical documents
The Rose Bowl predated most of the home construction in the area. When it was built, it was part of the Tournament of Roses, an effort by the local business community and Pasadena’s social elites to attract visitors to their sleepy little town. “One-horse town” would be overly complimentary for what Pasadena was then.
Pasadena has (or at least had through the first half of the 20th century) vastly more old money than Brentwood and Bel-Air, which are communities of arrivistes, people who make a bundle and pay a bundle for houses in an upscale neighborhood. When old Pasadena was settled in the late nineteenth century, the hills and the arroyo were completely undeveloped, an area for hiking and outdoor recreation.
The point I'm trying to make
Is that I’m all for the idea, but we need to be thinking bigger in terms of size. 50-60k simply won’t make enough money to sustain the stadium. We’d be leaving a ton of money on the table. A BCS contender in LA can draw 90-100K every game (as SC has shown).
by PrinceLucRichardMbahAMoute on Nov 17, 2011 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
you've ignored the data on existing revenues (and pretty much all our other arguments)
and that’s when we stink. They would only go up with a good coach. Also, are you sure about USC’s attendance
That's when they're sanctioned and bowl-ineligible
I’m talking about UCLA as a perennial BCS contender. We can draw what SC draws.
The fact is, football gates are by far the biggest revenue generator for every major BCS program. Quoted from the exact same revenue article you cited:
“As the figures indicate, the athletic departments with the highest revenue typically are from schools that fill 80,000- to 100,000-seat football stadiums on autumn Saturdays and come from conferences that receive an automatic Bowl Championship Series bid.”
by PrinceLucRichardMbahAMoute on Nov 17, 2011 11:08 AM PST up reply actions
90k stadium
with about 75-80k during good years minus what we pay to the Rose Bowl.
An on-campus stadium would mean all the money goes to UCLA for tickets. Also, supply and demand guys…less tickets equals higher demand. It would suck for me as I probably wouldn’t be able to afford season tickets in a new stadium. But I’d still love to see it happen and would still find ways to make it out to a couple games a year.
yeah
again, there would be some tricky decisions in that situation – how many seats for students, and at what price, etc etc – but not insurmountable.
Also, from a development standpoint, you could organize alumni events for specific departments, or classes, built around a football Saturday, and help drive alumni giving that way.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 17, 2011 11:55 AM PST up reply actions
You have to decide
which is more important. Getting 90k-100k every game, or having an on-campus stadium.
Given that I don’t think UCLA will be a perennial BCS contender (at least that’s not my personal expectation), I don’t find that necessary.
I think an on-campus stadium provides the best experience for all involved and creates far more loyalty among students, who later become alumni who are far more likely to make donations.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
The stadium size is a debatable point
The 60K size of UNC’s stadium was used in the video as that footprint sits perfectly in Drake. Could we get a bigger capacity by digging a deeper hole, making the stadium steeper, using benches instead of individual seats? Sure. These are issues to discuss. The bottom line does not change. This idea needs to happen.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
so are state income tax issues...
but to be honest, if we are giving Doughnut Dan special mortgage assistance, it is in his contract… we can do it for the head and assistant coaches as well.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
Kudos!
This is a great series.
Having an on-campus stadium is an absolute necessity. Imagine students being able to take a 5 min walk from Sproul or the other dorms and be at your seat for a UCLA football game.
I remember watching a game on tv where the sideline reporter ran from a dorm room and made it to the student section in less than 1 minute…I think it was at Oregon St.
Could also have been at Arizona
They have a dorm under one side of the stadium seats.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Interesting Note
My father in law is big into Arizona. He mentioned to me that having student housing built into the stadium allowed the stadium to use funding that would have otherwise been prohibited for a stadium since the structure was categorized as student housing. I don’t know if the rules would be different here in California, but he did mention that there were other universities that had done something similar.
by Westwood is the best wood on Nov 17, 2011 4:08 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks, Westwood
This is the kind of thinking that gets things done.
I return to the speech given by JFK on 5-25-61 – that we would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. At that pont, we had put one guy in sub orbital flight for 15 minutes, and the Atlas rocket (needed for orbital flight) failed about 40% of the time. If we can convince someone (our new AD for example) to say that before the decade is out, UCLA will have bought and paid for a new on-campus dorm which also serves as a 60-70K seat stadium, I think we can do it.
I’m getting excited about this. And as most of you know, it’s hard to get a geezer excited about anything that doesn’t have “senior discount” or “early bird special” in close proximity to it.
This is some epic work from all concerned
Kudos.
An on-campus stadium would have many advantages, which would probably make it worth pursuing; but I would still be a little sad about not tailgating at the Rose Bowl several times each Fall, and not having the chance for crowds of 80,000+ to come out to games (which is a laughable comment right now, but needn’t be laughable if we put a decent product on the field…).
Crowds of 80,000+
happen on average twice a year at the RB, at best.
Our average attendance has been below 60,000.
And you could still do the U$C game at the Rose Bowl, or a neutral site like the new NFL stadium, split 50/50.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I thought that we were aiming high?
If we were looking to maintain average enthusiasm for the program… lets hire Toledo or Dorrell back.
The point is to elevate the program… to increase the average attendence.
Building a stadium to seat our average attendence or a little more than our current average attendence… is like building a factory that only has the capacity to meet your current demand when you are looking to expand your sales.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 10:46 AM PST up reply actions
We disagree on this
I think we can build an elite program with a stadium base of 60,000-65,000.
We can schedule a game at the Rose Bowl for special occasions every year. However, if we put together an overall, dynamic marketing plan we can rebuild UCLA to a topline program with a home stadium with that kind of capacity.
And in terms of marketing we are just not talking about attendance figures but also marketing the program to alums, fans beyond Southern California.
isn't a 65,000 seat stadium at 100% capacity
better than a 100,000 seat stadium at 2/3 capacity? You would likely be able to increase revenue a lot more from the 65,000 seat stadium if 70,000 seats is the demand than a 100,000 seat stadium. Think about it.
+1000
the best thing for a program is hard to get tickets.
Build a stadium where all the seats are great, and about 10% fewer seats than you expect to sell.
by silverlakebruin on Nov 17, 2011 10:53 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Knowing the Morgan Center
They would free up more seats by moving the Student Section into Pauley Pavillion and having the students watch the game on the Video screen. They would then justify the move by saying that the results of a survey showed that the students overwhelmingly wanted the student section to be along the sidelines.
so buy your logic, why shouldn't we build
a 250,000 seat stadium?
nice strawman...
by my logic, you build a stadium for a top program, which creates 20k alumni a year and is in of country’s largest metropolitan areas, that is on par with the other top drawing program in the country.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 11:02 AM PST up reply actions
Yup, kind of like Texas/Oklahoma
half the stadium is $C and half UCLA.
Have the game on a “neutral” site each year and add it to the rivalry tradition.
Wouldn't mind playing *Sc at the Rose Bowl or the new NFL stadium
Make it a City Championship game at a neutral site.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
We could still schedule one special game a year at the Rose Bowl
Just for the sake of tailgating etc.
Hey, I got an idea! We can schedule SEC teams for a neutral site game at the Rose Bowl w no return date!!!
haha
awesome. 6 games on campus, 5 road games and a neutral field game in the city of Pasadena.
In all seriousness, I do think this is the best of all worlds – for one game a year, bring in a program with a big national draw / traveling fanbase; would be epic, and likely a sell out if it was the one guaranteed Rose Bowl tailgate for UCLA fans.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 17, 2011 11:08 AM PST up reply actions
Make the $C game
at the Rose Bowl every year. Split the stadium so $C gets half and UCLA gets half. It can be a part of the rivalry tradition kind of like Texas/Oklahoma
Ha ha, I should have read this
I agree with you, and just posted the same above.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
lol
it would definitely add a little something extra to the rivalry.
Great Series
An on campus football stadium would be fantastic and it can be done. UCLA has many, many alums in Sacramento who would work on legislation needed to make this happen.
Amazing
Thanks for this series and this was the best of the entire series.
I Like It
My only concern would be parking but I look at what TCF Bank Stadium has done for football tradition (if not winning games anyway) for Minnesota. Just wasn’t the same for Gopher fans at the Metrodome. But I’ve been in the new TCF Bank Stadium a couple of times and it’s nice.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Nov 17, 2011 10:56 AM PST reply actions
Great Stadium
That’s a beautiful stadium. Could you imagine the open end of TCF at UCLA with this view: IMAGE
Oh God...
That would be SWEET!!
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Nov 18, 2011 4:25 AM PST up reply actions
uhm, yes, tailgating would be forbidden
Of course there will be tailgating. You see that big huge IM field right next to the stadium? What do you think would go on there during game days? It wouldn’t be IM field hockey.
I'm just saying
the issue would be cars ruining the IM field as well as trash that could potentially accumulate. I’m all for an on campus stadium but these are issues that would need to be addressed.
Cars?
who said cars would be allowed on the IM field?
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
It's not tailgating without cars.
People aren’t going to lug their tents, TV’s, food and drink to the IM field if they have to park elsewhere.
Meh, that's fine with me
eliminates all the people who only show up to the Rose Bowl to tailgate but don’t bother to actually go inside and watch the game.
isn't UCLA nominally a 'dry campus'? (with the exception of the Faculty Center)
his question isn’t a stupid one. But in the theoretical world where we can convince the administration to build an on-campus stadium, presumably we can convince them to allow tailgating as well…
by VeniceBruin on Nov 17, 2011 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
do you have any evidence that tailgating wouldn't be allowed?
The Coop was originally designed to be a bar
Fact: alcohol is allowed
on campus as long as state laws are obeyed.
Fact: the rules are pretty restrictive
From your link,
“Serving and consuming alcohol should always be complementary or secondary to the event, NOT the primary focus of the event. E.g. No Beer-Busts or Wine-Tasting etc.”
and
“All events serving, selling or having consumption of alcohol are required to have Dean, Director or Department Chair authorization”
I’m not saying this as evidence that tailgating definitely wouldn’t be allowed, but we don’t know what the policies would be at this point – and the general attitude towards alcohol in current policies is pretty restrictive. It was always a huge pain in the ass whenever I helped coordinate events on campus, and I think they would take some persuading to loosen those requirements in designated areas on a Saturday. But as I said above, there’s no reason to dream big about that if you are already dreaming big about the stadium.
by VeniceBruin on Nov 17, 2011 11:51 AM PST up reply actions
Venice
obviously making sure tailgating is allowed would be part of the process. Frankly, it seems like some people are just looking for excuses not to do this.
First, you claimed that UCLA is dry. It’s not, as I’ve proven, now you say “oh, well, it’s restrictive”. Part of the plan would be obtaining a blanket permission from the Dean, chancellor or whoever that “Tailgating shall be allowed on the dates of football home games”. Obviously, they might limit the times, designate specific areas, require compliance with state laws, but it would be allowed.
I'm in favor
just didn’t think it was stupid for BRUINase to bring it up as an issue. Apologies for my misphrasing – when I said ‘nominally’, I wasn’t trying to claim alcohol is never served on campus, which would be a ridiculous thing for me to claim when I have served alcohol on campus myself; just that current school attitudes in regards events start from an anti-alcohol standpoint – alcohol is not allowed, unless you have prior and specific permission. Tailgating would require a compelling case to shift that attitude – one that can be made, but is just another piece of the puzzle (and, as I have said, a relatively small ask relative to the bigger issues around a campus stadium)
by VeniceBruin on Nov 17, 2011 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
no problem
We realize there will be hurdles, and we’re in favor of discussing them. I just perceive a negative, can’t do attitude from some and I don’t like it. So sorry if I unfairly took it out on you.
no worries at all
and count me as someone who started off thinking this was a bad idea, but has been talked round by arguments by you and others.
That's the best news, Venice
Preaching to the choir always draws a lot of “Amens,” but it’s nice to actually change a mind once in a while.
also, don't the MBAs have keggers at Anderson?
Or they used to anyway. Again, we’ve already established that alcohol is allowed, the question is really logistical, exactly what would be allowed.
The Anderson campus was definitely not dry
As an Anderson grad, we would have weekly outdoor beer busts and plenty of career events that served alcohol. The only restriction was that we had to keep the under-21 undergrads out.
by swc89 on Nov 17, 2011 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Again an on campus stadium is a good idea
but all points that could be used to prevent such a project from taking place should be brought up in order to be ready to counter them in an objective way.
You mean like the long term lease to have UCLA football games at the Rose Bowl. There could be an out provision for either side. I think it is unlikely that there is a clause preventing UCLA from building an on-campus stadium.
It's America
just break the contract. There’s either a fee involved, or they’ll sue UCLA. Good luck suing a state institution.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
The UCLA School of Law probably has more lawyers than the Rose Bowl School of Law
But seriously folks, the cost of getting out of the Rose Bowl deal is just another cost to be factored into the equation. Our church in geezerville is building a new buliding, and has got about a quarter of the costs covered by pledges (these are serious pledges, by the way) in about a month. I think that BN could run a pledge drive and raise the funds relatively quickly to cover the costs of breaking the Rose Bowl deal if that’s the last remaining impediment to an on-campus stadium.
Tailgate in the parking lots, the IM field, the dorms, the front lawns at the sororities, the Sculpture Garden...
or have pre game parties at the restaurants in Westwood.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
I would LOVE to tailgate in the sculpture garden.
I have many happy memories from time spent there between classes.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
The Grove totally sucks
would never want an atmosphere like that at UCLA
/sarcasm
Imagine the view from the press box looking east at Janss Steps and Royce Quad
How would that look on television?
We can and should question all the issues and barriers to this idea, not to prove that this can’t be done, but so that we can find solutions and work through them and move forward. This is an incredible idea that would pay huge dividends, literally and figuratively, for U.C.L.A. This isn’t just a gag from some bloggers with photoshop skills goofing off. This is serious. This needs to happen.
It is also telling that this proposal shows up on Bruins Nation and not from the Morgan Center.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Odysseus for Pulitzer
What a fantastic series, with emphasis on “fan.” Dream big, indeed. Huge props for researching and putting together this series, O. First step is to get people talking.
As gbruin says, it’s telling that such creative thinking comes from outside the Morgan Center. Telling, too, that all the reporting of substandard football facilities, including Spaulding, over the years apparently have not made a dent in the stubborn, insular shell around the MC. Oh, good, let’s build a conference center in the perfect place to expand Spaulding.
As cynically as the “No” response in the poll is worded, I’m trying to understand why 16% think this is not a great idea.
I agree...
and I don’t mean for any of my criticism to take away from that it has been an excellent series. It has created a great discussion.
To be honest, I am pretty disgusted with Ucla from top to bottom and I am not just talking about the athletic department. It is such a poorly run organization that promotes “don’t rock the boat” thinking and actually punishes “out of the box” thinking.
It even angers me that we are talking just about an on-campus stadium or a renovation of the Acosta center.
We should have been talking about a Ucla sports complex that consists of"
1) football stadium
2) basketball arena
3) athletic department offices
4) training facilities
5) dorm integration
6) luxury suite dorms (larger w/ maid service)
7) hotel integration (w/ both bb and fb facilities).
But at Ucla, we will have 20 projects with zero integration. No out of the box thinking… AT ALL.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Great ideas, forward thinking, out of the box
attributes that our next AD should have.
I, however, am fine with the Rose Bowl. There is no better place on this planet to tailgate. Having the luxury to play in such a majestic, historic venue helps offset somewhat the negative in not having a on-campus stadium.
Just because a stadium is on campus doesn’t necessarily mean we will fill it up with students. Put a crappy product on the field, and students will find something else to do, just like at Pauley during basketball season.
I am all for upgrading our facilities, including Spaulding. We need a new coach who will change the culture and put a quality product on the field year in and year out. Do that, people will show up at the Rose Bowl, 80,000 + strong, just like they did at the Coliseum during the 60s and 70s.
I don't think students are "entitled" to much.
In fact, I think the sense of “entitlement” has gotten remarkably out of control throughout the country, but that’s a topic for another time.
I think students are entitled to some things, though. They are entitled to a life changing experience at my alma mater. They are entitled to going in as children and coming out as adults. They are entitled to have their assumptions challenged and they are entitled to challenge the assumptions of others. That’s the university experience, in my opinion. I think the uiversity experience is not limited to the classrooms. It’s the whole schmear. It’s understanding why trogans are what they are. It’s embracing the whole concept of Coach. It’s having tears well up when you watch a video of guys explaining about putting their socks on. And it’s walking from the dorm or from one of the rows over to the stadium, just like you have done for a generation to go to Pauley.
I read Nars’ discussion of the beer busses, and I remember them fondly. We did that, and it is now part of our good old days. We did it because we had to, though, not because it’s more fun to take a bus and sit in traffic. I went to basketball games at the Sports Arena, too. It’s just better going to basketball games on campus, at Pauley.
The entitlement is not just to having the athletic experience on campus. It’s having the football and basketball and everything else at the same cost as History 7A. If you’re a student, you get into a class by showing your reg card. I think that’s what it should cost to get into a football game or a basketball game.
by Fox 71 on Nov 17, 2011 4:37 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Beer Busses
One of my favorite experiences in college was taking a school bus with several “large cans of beer” to the RB. In many ways, having a captive audience of roudy fans locked up in a steel box for an hour was the best tailgate activity you could imagine.
As an undergraduate during a time of UCLA football excellence, I actually enjoyed having an off-campus stadium. I know I’m in the vast minority, but I wouldn’t have traded that experience for anything.
Now, if you had an on-campus stadium and still offered beer busses, I might be in favor…
I enjoyed those beer buses too!
But I would have also enjoyed the luxury of sleeping in an extra hour, having few cold ones from our porch on Landfair and then just walking down to the game with my friends.
+1 N!
How great would it have been or BE to pop a few and roll over to the game with other Bruins, shouting at the others tailgating, maybe grabbing a few more brews then hearing the 8 clap echo from the hills of Westwood. Can we start the campaign for this today? O this was a fantastic series and I am officially fired up for something that has to be done. ON Campus or Bust!
Good work O
Let's get a great coach first ... :-)
But yes .. we will def. ramp up conversation around this even more …. we are just beginning on this.
rofl @ beer bus to an on-campus stadium!
beer bus from strathmore & gayley to Lot 7, by way of 20 laps around campus? Better yet, 20 trips up and down Hilgard….who needs the rest of the campus!
Multi-Use
I didn’t read any of this, but why couldn’t it be an all in one facility (and use more of the adjacent land for temporary parking and other)? Why couldn’t it house soccer, track and perhaps even baseball and softball? It could also be open to student use. There’s baseball parking at the VA (and perhaps the VA would want the revene for making more available).
The key obstacle will be your wealthy neighbors. No way they were going to accept at NFL stadium at the VA; no way they’ll accept a college stadium at UCLA. Too much money and power at play there. Too bad Farmer’s Field isn’t a possiblity. Such a nice thought though.
You probably shouldn't participate in this discussion
Without taking the time to read the thoughts laid out by O.
Perhaps not
But after weighing the harm in doing so, in retrospect, I think I would still decline to accept your advice.
Don't be a smart ass
O has spent a lot of time on this and has already discussed the points you bring up. Be a little respectful instead of rehashing the same lame excuses.
Furthermore, you say:
The key obstacle will be your wealthy neighbors.Does that mean you did not go to UCLA? In which case, how would you know the cost/benefit of an on-campus stadium.
Finally: NFL stadium means 8+ games a year. College stadium 5 or 6.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
In that case
We are going to consider declining your membership on BN. If you are not going to offer the general courtesy to read a post before offering opinion, there is no need for you to be here.
by Nestor on Nov 17, 2011 3:20 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Too many negatives in that last paragraph, saudiboy
Ultimately, the decision of what to do on campus is U.C.L.A.‘s, and not the Snooty Homeowners Association of Greater Bel Air or whatever they call themselves. I’m not saying they wouldn’t try to use their considerable clout to try to keep U.C.L.A. from stopping this. I’m just saying screw them. I don’t care what they want. The number of Bruin students, alums, and fans hugely outnumbers the neighbors. What we need is their collective push. U.C.L.A. needs this. U.C.L.A. should do it.
Also, the issues of soccer and track were addressed in the article.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
If you believe that the decision is UCLA's
then anything is possible. It’s not about snoot in any event. It’s about property values and traffic. And both rule the day in LA.
Saudiboy, I am the most tolerant of anyone you'll come across in the BN
but I have had enough of your comments. Please do me a favor. Go read something, or listen to music. Anything. Just go.
Now Is the Time to Build Our New Reality
For me, this topic could not be more timely.
I watched the Utah game with friends in Pasadena. One, was very knowledgeable about college football, nationwide. He’s a past chairman of the Rose Committee (or whatever it’s called) and is on the board of the College Football Hall of Fame. In both capacities, he has visited most major campuses and knows their programs and facilities well.
Obviously, I was not thrilled with the Utah game and started talking about needing to change our entire culture.
He said something to the effect that “UCLA has some of the worst facilities in the country” and then discussed the practice field. I brought up Wisconsin and how much an on campus field means to that student body — and the fact that my heart still yearns for one in Westwood. I lamented the lost opportunity right after I graduated to build one on campus.
Interestingly, he said that the reason we did not get an on campus stadium was that Buffy Chandler (of the LA Times family) opposed it. I know, brother Fox, that you recall that the students voted against it. That’s not my recollection. I remember that the death punches came from the neighborhood. And, now I learn that Chandler was working behind the scenes.
We talked about whether one would be possible now — and he thought that it would be prohibitively expensive. Were we in Texas or Oklahoma, with all of he oil barrons or wealthy trial lawyers, we might have a donor who could foot the big bill as has been done in those states.
I wonder whether our entertainment stars are at the same wealth level and whether there is one of them out there who would step up.
I am thrilled with this series of posts. They are timely and extremely well done.
There is absolutely no reason to back away from raising these issues, forcefully, now. We talk about culture change as applying to people. It’s much more than that. It’s the entire milieu surrounding the programs — and facilities are a big part of that.
What a major statement it would be to clean house and then build a new one, both figuratively and literally on campus.
Good work to all who have contributed.
sjh
Jackie Robinson/VA
Just a thought, but is there land enough to build over in the VA, near Jackie Robinson field? It would be near the future subway line…
Or, if building at Drake, maybe they could add light rail line to the new subway line from downtown. Last thing you want to do is get 50000 people driving into Westwood. That would absolutely kill the project. If they could include mass transit they might be able to get a favorable Environmental Impact Statement…otherwise, all those rich people who live above Sunset would never allow a stadium to get built. They have a lot of money they could devote to defeating such a project.
Subway also Stopping at UCLA
There’s going to be a Westwood/UCLA stop as well as a VA stop. The future subway only adds to the argument… let’s not worry about parking.
not so much worried about parking as i am about congestion
50000+ people driving to UCLA, which is pretty much a cul-de-sac, would clog up the surrounding areas horribly. You have to remember, they would all be driving in and out at the same time…dumping 25000 or so vehicles onto streets (really don’t know how many, since a lot of students will walk).
that being said, the subway line with a terminus at wilshire isn’t close enough for alumni to walk…there should be a trump line to/from any stadium…sort of like an airport tram line, if you have ever been on one.
by BruinInSeattle on Nov 17, 2011 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
It won't be that many people driving to UCLA
10 to 20 thousand will already be in the area.
Also, if you already know that parking and traffic is going to suck, you plan accordingly. Car pool + public transportation.
The walk from the end of the parking lot at the Rose Bowl is farther than from Wilshire to Drake.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
+ people don't all come and leave at the same time
there are those that like to show up for a full day of tailgating and some who show up right before kickoff.
Same for exit. Some leave right after the game (or 4th qtr) while some like to stay and wait for traffic to die down. I’d probably be one to walk down to a bar in westwood and keep the night going.
Thursday ESPN Games
I’m not worried about Saturday’s so much, as people below noted you plan ahead, it’s the Thursday night EPSN game. It would likely only happen once every other year, but that would suck. Those games start at 6pm PST. Not a good time for the Westside traffic.
we can deal
With once every other year
by Odysseus on Nov 18, 2011 4:09 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
The "rich people" may not have to spend a dime
Let’s not forget that there is a major, level 1 trauma and tertiary care medical center literally walking distance away from where this stadium would be. Traffic can be a nightmare for basketball games; for a football game possibly 5 to 6 times in magnitude for traffic congestion, we’re not only talking about an inconvenience to the “rich folk”, but possibly putting lives at risk as well by delaying ambulance transport. This argument could be enough to kill the project altogether (no pun intended). Food for thought….
Occupy Drake
didnt mean to offend you with “rich people” comment. but those with money, have a lot of power.
however, your argument about the medical center is a good one.
by BruinInSeattle on Nov 17, 2011 2:30 PM PST up reply actions
Traffic is generally uni-directional...
meaning there is generally only traffic on 1 side of the street.
and to be honest, there is probably no city in the U.S. with worse city planning than Boston and the surrounding area. narrow streets with large granite medians and shoulders packed with parked cars. generally, they don’t have much problem because people aggressively get over for emergency vehicles.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 2:51 PM PST up reply actions
only 5 - 6 home games a year
…and during those games, they could designate the road leading to the ER as hospital only.
by BruinInSeattle on Nov 17, 2011 4:14 PM PST up reply actions
View the tailgating as an OPPORTUNITY
Some have expressed concerns that there might not be enough room to tailgate or to park before a game.
Even if you believed this were true, I actually think this could work to the ADVANTAGE of the university and its various colleges and schools. Instead of assuming that everyone wants to park as close to the stadium as possible, consider the potential to use the the ENTIRE CAMPUS, and view that as a positive thing.
Imagine if many of the schools or departments had their own functions, near their own schools. I have a BA in History and an MFA in Film, so I’ll use my background as an example.
What if either of those departments were to organize their own functions on a Saturday. I’d park in the lot nearest the film department or Bunch Hall, I’d wheel my cooler and such down to the lawn near those departments, and then I’d get to hang out with other Bruin alumni from my respective schools. You could have North Campus gatherings, South Campus gatherings, etc. And each of these departments has the opportunity to reconnect with their alumni, which has the positive effect of making those alumni feel more connected to the school, and more like to give them money.
The bottom line is, as beautiful as the Rose Bowl and surrounding Pasadena are, when I visit there I am not reminded about what I love about UCLA.
When I visit UCLA, that’s when I’m reminded of what I love about UCLA.
Great series. Love the enthusiasm. Love this idea.
Red Sanders Stadium, good. Jackie Robinson Stadium, also like.
I've only been to a couple of away football games (Cal and ND)
and one of the things I remember most about those trips is being able to tour the campus as I was walking to the on-campus stadium.
I don’t think many fans of visiting schools that come to see their team play against UCLA at the Rose Bowl actually step foot on the campus. UCLA is a beautiful campus and it sucks that visiting fans don’t get to walk around campus unless they go out of their way to see it.
Good maps, but forgetting a big thing..
Namely, that the stadium doesn’t exist on its own and in addition to the physical structure of the stadium itself, there’s also the issue of fitting in area around the stadium for entry/exit/etc. If you look at the google map of Stanford Stadium, you’ll see that the overall footprint of the stadium complex – stadium and the immediately surrounding exterior areas – is nearly double the size of the footprint of the stadium itself. Looking at, say, the Rose Bowl (for comparison) and the area between the gates and the stadium itself is probably another 25%.
Not saying that a well-designed stadium couldn’t fit nicely into the space, but it’s not quite a perfect fit.
Good points Joe
But again the video and graphics are starting point of a conversation, brainstorming on an issue that clearly overwhelming majority of this community is passionate about and supportive of. We’d love to get more drilled down thoughts from folks with acrchitectural and design background.
The idea here is about to kick start brainstorming. Identify the issues and figure out how to address them. We are not going to take the old approach of not exploring a topic just because people keep bringing up same old stale TPs.
by Nestor on Nov 17, 2011 3:30 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I thought the stadium would be rotated 90 degrees
I kind of like one end zone left relatively open so that there could be the wonderful view of the campus. That might wipe out the IM field, but maybe the IM field and Spaulding Field could just get reversed. I hastily add that I don’t care which way it faces – I just want it to be there.
That would be a great view of the campus.
But the noise level would go pretty far down. Unless I am missing something from this angle.
Interesting illustration, but keep this in mind:
You must keep in mind that it would be HIGHLY politically incorrect with the student body to remove even a fraction of the intramural field for a venue that will be used 6 – 7 times a year. Also, keep in mind that there is a recently-built $50 million parking structure underneath the intramural field.
There is roughly 530 feet between the edge of intramural field and the sidewalk on Charles Young Drive. Given that distance, an east-west orientation makes the most sense (400 feet for the playing field, 120 feet for bleachers behind the west end zone).
Given the limitations of the site, a model for a new UCLA stadium could be a simplifed (i.e., “cheaper”) version of new Soldier Field, with less suites and built only on three sides.
A couple of weeks ago...
there was a post on the BRO premium board from a UCLA fan who gave a detailed account of a dinner he had with a Top 5 donor from a rival Pac-12 school. That donor was a former athlete at that school and very involved within that school’s AD.
He reported that the other Pac-12 school views Dan Guerrero as the worst AD in the league, comparing him to Tom Hansen as Pac-10 commissioner. Said they simply cannot believe the way things at UCLA are run, how bad the football program and it’s facilities are, etc. Cannot believe that the fan base tolerates the current climate surrounding UCLA athletics.
Also said that if UCLA ever hired a “Larry Scott” type AD, the UCLA community would finally realize just how bad an AD Guerrero has been in his tenure here. Obviously, they hope Guerrero is a UCLA lifer.
Unless UCLA gets that Larry Scott type AD, I can’t see a scenario where a stadium gets built on campus. This would take someone with tremendous vision and enormous passion who really takes the long view on a project like this, who’d be willing to devote years of their lives dealing with all the politics, finances, etc. Does that sound even remotely like Dan Guerrero?
"Even if God is dead, you still gotta kiss his ass" - Tony Soprano
Its a reason why
We are pushing for an eventual wholesale regime change in Westwood. The narrative has already shifted a lot due to relentless pressure from here in recent months.
We have taken some heat from some deadenders here and there but our thoughts are resonating. We don’t think its a coincidence that our traffic and membership numbers are going through the roof.
by Nestor on Nov 17, 2011 3:45 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Interesting. However, short of some sort of scandal, I"ve not seen anyone articulate a clear path,
or definitive plan to force the AD or Chancellor out. These are UC Regent issues. This is a Gov. Jerry Brown issue. Losing games and sub par facitities don’t have the force of political pressure. We seem to have forgotten the firestorm that came with Pete Dalis… yet no extrication. The campus, at large, would have be be galvanized. We Can’t Be The Only Ones Who Care.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins!
NBA: Where Greed Happens. RIP 10/10/11.
Makes you wonder
Dalis was a direct reaction to how powerful Morgan had become. The academic side wanted to make sure that a Morgan would never happen again.
With that in mind, perhaps the academics knew exactly what they were getting with Guerrero and wanted someone tepid they could control.
It's already been talked about, and it won't happen.
It would be great to have an on campus stadium, but it would be impossible. There’s no room for parking and traffic would ruin everybody. The local Beverly Hills residents, who are rich, powerful, and have influence, would never allow it.
Classic example
Of an utterly worthless stale response that adds nothing to a robust discussion.
by Nestor on Nov 17, 2011 3:49 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Two legs good - four legs better!
Or was it the other way – four legs good, two legs better. You get my point.
Have you read any of the comments before this?
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Great Write Up, O!
It is pretty compelling evidence. It also blows me away how a few ‘cranks’ on the internet can dig up all the pertinent facts and apply them to a well reasoned feasibility study; while it’s doubtful the Morgan Center would even go so far as to put together a feasibility study.
Great discussion, as well from the BN community. I swear it’s fanposts like this that I love to read, because I walk away feeling enlightened.
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all the time thing. You don't win once in a while; you don't do things right once in a while; you do them right all the time. Winning is a habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. ~ Vince Lombardi
Speaking of DG....I am sure glad he is on top of the basketball
issues as he is repeatedly quoted by Andy Katz in a recent article. His expertise knows no bounds…
Here you go...
“We struggled coming out of the gate,‘’ UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero said. "Ben is still trying to figure out how to use the personnel. Jerime [Anderson] didn’t play in the first game. Reeves didn’t play in the second game. He doesn’t have the full complement of his players. We look to play inside out. We look to feed the post. Guys have to convert or dish and hit open shots. But that has manifested itself in the way Ben thought. We’re getting the looks. But people aren’t knocking down the shots. It’s not that the perimeter players are taking bad shots. They are taking good shots but not making them. "
"Even if God is dead, you still gotta kiss his ass" - Tony Soprano
link
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/blog//name/katzandy
"Even if God is dead, you still gotta kiss his ass" - Tony Soprano
DG/ Chancellor Block should be sent a link of this story.
Not that they care enough or would do anything. But hey, it wouldn’t hurt
Do it
He should get a bunch of emails with this link, in fact.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Hey, remember this idea?
I’m the guy who came up with the proposal for a temporary, one-game-a-year stadium at drake, as seen here: http://www.bruinsnation.com/2010/11/2/1788755/lets-play-one-game-in-drake
I think my idea works perfectly with the ones shown in this post. Start with a temporary stadium as a “one time only” thing, then do it once a year for a few years, then when everyone sees how awesome it is, build the consensus for the permanent stadium. I think it’s a great way to ease the arguments of the antagonistic parties.
Thanks once again for such a comprehensive post – keep ’em coming!
I remember that post.
That was a great idea, and was part of the inspiration for the project above.
But I’m not a fan of going half way. You’re absolutely right about playing football in Drake. And we should do it all the time.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
Now, about traffic and parking...
Parking: In addition to on-campus parking, there are numerous spaces at both the Federal Building and VA. The Federal Building is scheduled for a major remodel, and I believe they are building additional parking as well. As for the VA, each year it is used as the shuttle parking lot for the LA Open at the Riviera Country Club. They already are willing and able to use their location as a shuttle lot.
And hey, what about all those office buildings on Wilshire that are empty on Saturday? That’s thousands more spaces available.
As for traffic, what if we make all parking on or near campus pre-paid, with each ticket getting a pre-determined entry time. Entry times would be staggered throughout the day to relieve congestion. When you get your tickets, you’ll book your parking time and lot (perhaps at different price points) just like getting a seat at the Arclight.
Fenway Park has no parking
There is room for about 10 cars under the right field grandstand, and it costs $70 or so a game to park. (All figures based on attendance at one game about three years ago.) But they put 38K in the stands game in and game out. If we have a stadium and a good team, parking wille be a detail, not a problem.
You can park at the gas station...
about 500 yards away for like $50. seriously.
everyone takes the T to Fenway. same thing for TD Garden.
by beanandcheeseburrito on Nov 17, 2011 7:00 PM PST up reply actions
Ditto Wrigley
But Boston and Chicago have terrific transit systems.
I'M SOLD
I forgot exactly how long ago it was but a few months ago when the issue of an on campus stadium was brought up, I was one of the detractors. Not that I didn’t want an on campus stadium, but I believed that it was an impossible dream. I brought up the issues of parking, of the neighbors, of where we even put the thing. Of course, I was immediately countered by others. Yet try as I might, I could not envision an on campus stadium ever being a realistic goal.
However there was something about watching that video and actually visualizing a stadium on campus that made something click. As I read through the comments I found myself on the opposite side of the arguments, realizing that all of the points made against an on campus stadium now seem weak and insubstantial.
Anyway, rather then reply to all of the comments individually here are a few of my thoughts. Some of these points have already been touched on and I just wanted to expand:
1. Money: Revenue comes from more than just ticket sales! People have mentioned how a smaller stadium means less money, how expensive a stadium would be, etc. First of all, let’s imagine that UCLA IS playing well and hitting the 75-80k range in ticket sales. Now let’s say that we have around 15k cars a game for a 60k stadium. So we’re losing 15-20k in ticket sales but the parking already makes up most of the difference. There would also be greater alumni donations (more on that later). Add to that the premium on ticket prices, the concession profits, and the HUGE increase in Bearwear sales at Ackerman every game and from a pure money standpoint I think you at the VERY least break even with the revenue we generate now.
2. Parking: This was one of my biggest reasons why I thought a stadium wouldn’t work. However as others have noted, every single weekday thousands of people come through UCLA, and UCLA handles it all. Granted the extra numbers will be tough, but beyond on campus parking, there are so many local options. The Federal building for one, as well as all of the underground parking at all of the buildings on Wilshire. These lots aren’t as obvious because you can’t see them above ground, but there’s a pretty good amount of parking underneath those large office buildings. Add to that the amount of students who no longer need to drive to the games, shuttles which can be arranged to various local pick ups in heavily UCLA populated areas such as Culver City and Santa Monica, and the new rail (which even with all of the delays it will still get done before our stadium) and parking no longer is a problem.
3. Neighbors: Yes, the residents might put up some opposition but here’s a point which I don’t think I’ve seen mentioned – Football games in Westwood would REVITALIZE Westwood Village. If you’ve driven through Westwood lately it’s quite depressing. The streets are dead, stores are shutting down (rest in peace roll-inn sandwiches), and there is just an overall feel that the bright lights of the Fox Theater are a relic of the past. Don’t you think the Westwood businesses would advocate and fight for a stadium to be built? The Chamber of Commerce? Think of all the $$$ a stadium would bring to the area. Old town Pasadena is barely biking distance to the Rose Bowl and look at how much a gameday livens up the town.
4. Alumni connection: I’ve made the trek up north for a few of the games against our sister school in the Bay, and one HUGE thing I noticed was how much alumni/student interaction there was. My roommate was in a fraternity, and we would go to the Cal chapter of his house before the game. Every gameday all of the alumni go to their houses to tailgate. The students supply the grill and the vicinity, while alumni bring food, booze, and baked goods. It was such a cool concept and felt like one big community. I could go on forever about this, but I think we can all agree that we can work on building greater passion amongst UCLA Alumni.
5. The tailgate experience: I hate to mention the school across town, but when I was in high school I was on the debate team, and $c would host a tournament every year. The one year I went the tourney coincided with homecoming. Suffice it to say, the campus was one large playground. Think about tossing around a football in the sculpture garden, flipping burgers in Wilson Plaza, sipping Coronas by the inverted fountain. And say the school does decide it would wreck the campus by letting people tailgate everywhere, how about setting up tailgating areas? All of the plazas, for example, and up and down Bruinwalk, and all of the decks by Ackerman. There are many solutions that can be worked.
6. Location of stadium: WATCH ABOVE VIDEO
With all that said, here’s hoping the dream comes true.
#3 is huge
The Westwood businesses would be a major backer of something like this.
greg in denver, U.C.L.A. guy for life - BruinsNation.com
If there already was an on-campus stadium...
then the $1.50 sub sandwich shop in Westwood would still be open and would likely have a line around the corner after each game.
Look up Stanford Stadium on the net
I found a Wikipedia article but it sounded authoritative. The article said that demolition of the old stadium started on 11-26-05 and the new statdium opened on 9-16-06. So figure the construction time at a year. Frankly at “Under Construction Like Always,” the project might not even be noticed.
I was surprised at the cost. $90 million, according to the article. Would you like a nice donation of around 10 to 20% of that cost? Sell the naming rights. I read an article from the Sports Business Journal daily by Jim Bentubo, Associate Editor (dated 8-31-07) in which he talks about naming rights. The article is called “Colleges Forgoing Millions In Naming-Rights Deals.” According to this article, the deals already done four years ago include:
Minnesota TCF Bank Stadium 25 yrs, $35M
Maryland Chevy Chase Bank Field at Byrd Stadium 25 yrs, $20M
Central Florida Bright House Networks Stadium 15 yrs, $15M
Troy Movie Gallery Veterans Stadium 20 yrs, $5M
Texas Tech Jones AT&T Stadium 25 yrs, $20M
Syracuse Carrier Dome Indefinite, $2.75M*
Another article I read said that naming rights were valued based on the size of the TV market (hmm, is LA a large market?) and the amount of national exposure (hmm, do we get beat down regularly on national TV?). So I don’t see why we couldn’t start the bidding at $25M up front, plus maybe $5M a year for 20 or so years? Farmers is putting up something like $700M for a stadium that hasn’t been built in a city which has no team. A smart businessperson (and that’s not me by a mile) could maybe finance the entire stadium based on naming rights alone. I would happily suffer having our games at Parsons Construction Field located on the UCLA campus.
This can be done, Bruins. And it can be done at no cost to the taxpayers. And it can be done better than the Pauley business was done.
I would make a substantial contribution (well, substantial for me anyway) to the the Stadium Construction Committee, but there would be one condition. No current employee of the school could be on the committee. I would allow no douchy Morgan Center bureaucrats to hose things up.
Great idea
I have to the Stanford the last 3 times we were in Palo Alto and I just envied their on campus students. Instead of a 6 hour time commitment to going to the Rose Bowl, students can just head over to on campus last minute and spend only 3 hours watching the game. I do think 2 home games, big non conference game, eg Texas and the suc or big pac12 game should be at the Rose Bowl. There would be over 60000 fans at the game if we are top 25 caliber. On campus games are great for wazzu, oregon st. , san jose st. Games
by UCLA Championships Made Here on Nov 17, 2011 6:41 PM PST via mobile reply actions
we would have to approach parking like the Getty
remote site with a tram/bus of some kind. it would really be a snafu for college/residential activities. But hey, with an on campus stadium, the majority of the fans would be able to walk to the games. I don’t think that should be underestimated. If all I had to do was roll out of bed and go the game instead of the rose bowl bus, i would have gone to a lot more as a student.
by Strathmore&Gayley on Nov 17, 2011 6:43 PM PST reply actions
Parking shouldn't stop a stadium
Parking should not get in the way of an on campus stadium. There are over 20,000 parking spots controlled by the university on or near campus not to mention the available spots off campus at businesses in Westwood, at the VA, etc, or the planned subway station. As long as its managed correctly, so that only on campus residents, and essential personnel (medical workers & some others) can remain in the lots on Saturday gameday, there should be plenty of parking within easy walking/shuttle distance from campus.
For comparison, Qualcomm stadium in San Diego (capacity 71,000) has 18500 spots, plus service from mass transit, and very few fans who go to games there live within walking distance.
Jerry and George had an idea which should have been implemented in New York, and it would work in Westwood.
There’s going to be a subway station at Wilshire and Westwood. I say put in the Seinfeld/Costanza Memorial Moving Sidewalk up the hill into the school before the game, and back down after the game.
There is no need to thank me, Bruins. I’m just doing my job.
There is a huge architectural opportunity with the stadium
I will leave it to the more graphically skilled to do a rendering, but a stadium which incorporates the style and motifs of Royce Hall would be an architectural landmark.
If you have been to the stadiums in Arles or Verona and seen how a stadium ringed with arches can look, and you incorporate the Romanesque patters of Royce, the stadium would be stunning.
I envision a stadium more like Franklin Field at Penn, which is a compact urban stadium where the fans are on top of the field, and it incorporates the architecture of the campus at the same time. I would much rather see that then a modern-styled stadium.
http://www.touropia.com/gfx/d/roman-amphitheaters/verona_arena.jpg
http://www.sanmarinocarealestatehomes.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/ucla-royce-hall.jpg
Powder to the People
Don't let Drake limit you.
Turn the stadium, center it and you can make it plenty big, 70-80 thou easy. The energy and excitement would revitalize a moribund Westwood and change the culture and dynamics 180 degrees.
Red Sanders field with a statue of Jackie Robinson in a Romanesque motif bringing the world to the beauty of UCLA and Janns Steps.
The pics and concept are stunning. It must be done.
Clean house. Hire Urban. Resurrect Bruin football and Westwood. This is the kind of out of the box thinking that Los Angeles and UCLA deserve. Can you imagine the exponential increase in donations to the school? Priceless.
Hell, we hosted an Olympics and built a Coliseum in the Thirties, didn’t we? So we can sure add this jewel in the teens of the 21st Century. It just takes vision and leadership.
Great article.
Telemachus or Odysseus.
Did you guys develop some other alternative plans? Just would like to see some other options. They are so cool! Great job you guys.
You guys got it all WRONG!!!! Think out of the box a little
Instead of building a stadium at UCLA that would small, cramped, and missing the Rose Bowl’s historic appeal, move UCLA to the Arroyo Seco in beautiful Pasadena. Think about it, it’ll be like tailgating every day, on your way to class! No more 405 traffic! Ya, the Arroyo might be a little small for a new campus, but I figure you can always cut out the arts majors be fine. Here is my vision for the new campus! 
Which motif to copy
http://www.planetware.com/i/photo/university-of-california-at-los-angeles-ucla-los-angeles-ca176.jpg
I always thought this was the coolest design on campus which could be copied to a football stadium.
Powder to the People
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
