Teams which no longer draw the crowds they used to should reduce their present stadiums making their crowds of today look better and have more sitting closer together. Should they ever beginning having great seasons again, they can do like Georgia Tech did reopen the parts they closed off.

Gormley was pretty much under water after Katrina. How much damage did it sustain?

There are rumors floating around that the people at Rice, in conjunction with Major League Soccer, may renovate the facility, downsize it, add luxury suites, go to a natural surface (the playing area at the stadium would have to be widened somehow), and allow MLS all revenues to their events if, as recently rumored, the San Jose Earthquakes make the move to Houston. For MLS, mind you, this is one of several options they're mulling over, and the rumored move isn't 100% certain.

I think I read that the SuperDome is projected to be operational again by Sugar Bowl on Jan 1, 2007.

So Saints and Tulane would have to endure another year of being nomads....

???

Uh, methinks you have Tech confused with someone else, or that was something that took place looooooong ago. Bobby Dodd used to be 60k, but was downsized to ~ 48k once the track was no longer being used and one end was sacrificed for offices, locker rooms, weight facility, etc. Renovations completed 3 years ago upped it to current 55k, eliminating seating behind columns, improving facilities and replacing the temp seating in the end zone with a less-than-attractive huge permanent section. I don't recall sections ever being closed off.

Not a "new" stadium, but it'll feel a little like it once this and the next phase or two are completed.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051202/NEWS03/512020376

http://www.broncosports.com/athletic_excellence.asp

That's nice but when is Idaho going to get a new stadium?

Pounder, those are actually some very nice plans. FWIW, I know the folks from Tech and Clemson realy enjoyed their trips to Boise, first time for many of them to see real snow or mountains.

I've said before one of BSU's biggest hurdles to acceptance from the BCS folks is their status as a metro university, one with limited research and advanced academics. I realize that they don't need to compete with the flagships, but what is the prognosis regarding advancing the mission of the school?

I understand Fresno is working to upgrade their status, particularly in regards to medical fields. I think they're hoping to surpass the ratings and favors currently offered to SDSU as their ticket to the MWC. I'd love to see BSU or Idaho keep the pace, personally.

Dang... that didn't take long.

http://www.stanfordstadium.com/webcam/webcam1/

UCF announced approval to build a NEW 45,000 seat stadium on campus with it's opening set for 2007.

By the way, Georgia Tech did a couple of years ago reduce its capacity and last year or so went back to the original capacity. Me thinks I may be correct.

I see what you're saying now.

The renovations to Bobby Dodd were a two-phase effort completed in the off seasons of 01/02 and 02/03. The first phase included a) the demolition of the temporary stands on the north end and b) the renovations to the east stands that eliminated seating behind columns and introduced new suites and premium seating. Though the lower bowl of seats around 3/4 of the field was completed before the next season began it was not enough to make up for the net loss of seats, so capacity was, in fact, lower for one year. From roughly 48 to 44, I believe. The rest of the addition to the north end was completed the next year.

Your original comment of "reopen(ing) the parts they closed off" suggested they had simply cordened off excess seating, like some schools within pro stadiums will do. That's where I was confused: Nothing was closed off, but for a year the stadium had reduced capacity.

A little wrinkle in the plans in Boise...

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060124/NEWS0104/601240373

The current football stadium has the running track, and Boise has hosted a couple NCAA T&F championships in the last 10 years with supposedly "record" crowds. The new track stadium would get currently held high school games and track meets out of Bronco Stadium and off to a new facility which, by my recall, is about 5 blocks away, across the Boise River.

What the article doesn't say, but what the AD has already been heard to say in the last two days, is that seats will then be added to Bronco Stadium... by digging in and building DOWN. They say they can add 10,000 seats this way. When this was discussed three years ago, water table problems were identified as a deal breaker, however, it appears some engineers have figured out a solution to that problem.

Of course, this is all dependent on passage of a school bond issue in Boise. Idaho and Taxes always makes for squeamish discussions. Recent results have been a little better. We'll see.

The bond passes 70-30 on Tuesday!

The current projection for a new track stadium at Boise is 2009, then the dig-down and expansion of Bronco Stadium is projected for 2010. Um, call that optimistic... but at least the ball has started rolling.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/235/story/71872.html

This is kind of slipping into the news today, far behind a rather large pay increase for Chris Petersen (which is NOT from state general fund money, yet still has to be approved by the Idaho State Board of Education).

This story doesn't really clear up the immediate issue with the turf, which is regarded as a safety hazard by everyone involved. It sounds like the issue will be addressed. The talk is that a new turf is being considered... and it would have to be removable in sections in order to accomodate basketball games in the Kibbie Dome. (The current turf rolls up in the conversion of that part of the dome to Cowan Spectrum)

The intriguing thing here is the possibility of adding to one end of the building (or something similar) for a new basketball arena. Heck, attendance at Idaho for basketball is currently so poor that they could be playing at old Memorial Gym... but that's a VERY old facility. I don't know if the request for the conceptual architecture includes accomodating the 3,600 seats for the Dome that is also talked about or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tad_Gormley_Stadium

Reggie Bush to the rescue. The stadium is back in service. Tulane should play most if not all of their games there. It is only a 17 minutes drive (5 Miles) from campus and allows tailgating which should make it a much more popular venue for the average rowdy Southern football junkie. An on campus stadium would likely not allow that and the Superdome does not.

It seats 26,500 there --- If you think about what are reasonable numbers for Tulane to draw, it seems like MOST of their games should be played there with special games in the Sugar Bowl. Tulane could sell out fairly regularly and become a hot ticket in town. Honestly, playing there would be a best case scenario for Tulane, IMO. The only thing that could possibly make it better would be if the city added a few more bleacher sections and got it up to 32K or so. That would be an IDEAL size for a small private like Tulane in an NFL shadow. Heck, Tulane should have a fundraising drive with their Alumni to make that happen.

I wonder if CUSA says it is too small for a member school to use as their home feild or if dressing rooms/facilities are not considered up to CUSA snuff. Very Possible. Again, if that is the case, Tulane Boosters should make those upgrades happen.

Frankly, for similar reasons, if UNO ever decided to take up football again as a IAA school, that stadium would also work very well for them as they are a similar distance away in the other direction.

I think we can call it a trend now. "Right-sizing" of stadiums is the shape of things to come. Significant stadium seating reductions were darned near unheard of in the past, but Rice and Stanford have both taken steps to dramatically reduce stadium capacities in their overbuilt on campus stadiums recently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_Stadium

Rice with an enrollment of 3K had a 70K stadium. They don't even have 70K alumni!!! Not that it was their fault, the city built a state of the art stadium for them as a reward for their football excellence back in the day.

Anyhow, they reduced the seating to 47,000 with fancy tarps and the like which makes it about what TCU's stadium seats. IMO they should hire a could of guys to actually REMOVE that excess seating over the next year and reduce it even further --- to about 35K, but the tarps are a dramatic improvement in fan perception. Do not be suprised to see Rice as a regular favorite in whatever league the Texas private's are in for the foreseeable future.

Getting an appropriately sized stadium on or near campus that opens the possibility of sellouts is the key to being a healthy FBS school, IMO. Sellouts still are not possible, but Rice has taken the first step and is a TON closer to healthy IA football financials today.