Yulman Stadium (Benson Field)

The main discussion board for everything Tulane athletics related.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

HoustonWave wrote:
sader24 wrote:Any Tulane fan who shows any support for Scott Cowen whatsoever supports the end of the football program whether they realize it or not. He should've been run out of town in 2003.
Exactly. Cowen is a disingenuous liar. Otherwise, at best, he's just a misguided dumba$$. Either way, he's doing tremendous damage to Tulane--both in image and substance.
And I'll say it again, that's why we need to start asking tough questions and making noise. If we let Cowen continue to go down this path, all that will be left is a 2nd tier liberal arts school with a $50K price tag and that ain't gonna fly.

Let's do something.


golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14287
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

Tulane had an indoor practice facility...when the Riley center was built Favort Fieldhouse was suppose to be converted to an indoor facility...but alas..somebody needed an assigned parking space !!!!
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
TURVS71
Swell
Posts: 2151
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:01 am
Status: Offline

Sure is nice to see the Saints banners in the Superdome.
Wait. Someone stole the TULANE banners!!!
I'm sure we said. "take them down." We don't mind.
'Here's a song for the Olive and the Blue"
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

I don't think there's anything sinister going on. I believe there is a rule somewhere about signage. I seem to remember this coming up in previous sugar bowls. I could be wrong, though.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 26749
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

But a packed Dome for a college game sure looked good. No sterile environment tonight.
Best bowl game I saw so far.
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

tpstulane wrote:But a packed Dome for a college game sure looked good. No sterile environment tonight.
Yep. It's amazing what a few butts in the seats will do for atmosphere.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

1ndabag wrote:
tpstulane wrote:But a packed Dome for a college game sure looked good. No sterile environment tonight.
Yep. It's amazing what a few butts in the seats will do for atmosphere.
Riiiiiight. $80M can build an average stadium or it can make Tulane football into a powerhouse in the Dome.
sader24
Tsunami
Posts: 5695
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm
Status: Offline

Agree wholeheartedly. Could you imagine what 80 mill would do for this football program if we didn't waste it on a 30K stadium?
Fred Dowler
Riptide
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:33 pm
Status: Offline

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/20 ... s_on-.html

I strongly disagree.

This really should not be a topic unless the program is already winning consistently and drawing numbers of fans game after game.

If the program isn't winning then a new stadium will not help.

Revenues will still be peanuts and then the school will be saddled with costs that it isn't having to bear right now.

Not only that but the whole article here misses the point.

The first thing that needs to be done are changing the mindset of the school. "Bring the athletes in who can help us win..." has to be the goal. Reality must be faced and smoke and mirrors practices stopped. The coaches have to be able to recruit from the same pool of athletes as the other C-USA programs. If they have to change admissions practices and adopt the same standards as these other programs and establish athlete-friendly majors programs then so be it. If they can't bring themselves to do that then they might as well just forget and you can close the book on Tulane being able to be viable and competitive in 21st century Div. 1 football and basketball.

A new stadium or rather the non-ending talk about it is just more smoke and mirrors designed more to get people to donate and enable the same-old same-old to keep going and will not really help at this point.

Wait until there have been about 5-6 bowl seasons in a row and then redo the analysis and see how it works out...but please leave it alone until then but rather focus on what needs to be right now.
Tulane sports: small football stadium, very small basketball arena, w̶i̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶g̶r̶a̶m̶s̶, h̶o̶n̶e̶s̶t̶y̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶a̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ , but, hey, now there's tailgating.
User avatar
Bigschtick
Riptide
Posts: 3292
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:57 am
Location: Tucson, Az.
Status: Offline

I would love to see a new stadium but like you said, it will not happen unless and until we change the "mindset" that involves getting rid of this nonsensical "Tulane Model" and that probably requires getting rid of Dickson and Cowen! I ain't holding my breadth nor am I opening the wallet at this point!
Speak softly but carry a bigschtick! In Sumrall We Trust!
RWR
Swell
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm
Status: Offline

Turvs- Did you tell her you don't agree w/a 25,000 seat stadium and she just chose to leave that out?
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

Tammy Nunez is just awful. I would rather no beat writer at all than her. She is without question the worst we've had in my lifetime.

I love this little gem:
The Tulane fan base’s demand for an on-campus football stadium is at an all-time high, and Cowen and Dickson know it.
Really? Based on what does she put forth that little nugget as fact? Did she take a poll? No. She's just printing as fact what she is being told by the Cowen/Dickson regime. Let that sink in. She's stating that the fans are clamoring for a stadium because that's what she was told by the two boobs running things.

So, under the cover of objective "journalism," she's regurgitating what the failed Cowen/Dickson regime wants to be reported as objective fact. That's not journalism. It's propaganda. I don't think Nunez is complicit with the idiots in charge, she is clearly not smart enough. I just think she is lazy and not very good at what she does.

The stadium issue is the reddist of red herrings. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the disgraceful condition of Tulane football. The blame for that lies SOLELY with SCOTT COWEN and his flunky Rick Dickson. The bogus stadium issue is simply a means by which Scott Cowen seeks to shift focus and blame from himself and his failed, stupid policies, to alums and fans. It's our fault that Tulane football is the worst program in the country because we haven't ponied up enough money yet. See how the flim flam man works? And Nunez goes right along like a zombie.

It's as plain as day. Unless you're a thick skulled pseudo-journalist.

Hey, Tammy, THINK!! ASK SOME QUESTIONS!! STOP TAKING DICTATION FROM COWEN/DICKSON AND PASSING THEIR TALKING POINTS OFF AS JOURNALISM!! WE'RE NOT STUPID!!

Sorry for the yelling, guys, but it's all infuriating. In an economy like this how do such incompetents keep a job?

Turv I won't do a dissection of your comments but this one quote stuck out for me, "I heard Scott Cowen said that [a stadium] is now a priority, so I guess I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt as to what he said."

I bet you wish you had that one back. He has done NOTHING to merit the benefit of any doubt. In fact, just the opposite. Any objective observer of the Cowen regime could only conclude that he is not to be trusted, at all, in anything he says.

I don't know who this Hertz guy is and I don't care. But he's obviously still gulping the Cowen flavored Kool Aid.

Here's a little nugget:

"He [Hertz] said he understands fans’ frustration over the perceived slow pace of fundraising for a football stadium, but he never would have donated major dollars without trusting the administration’s vision."

Who is upset over "the slow pace of fundraising for a football stadium"? And what "vision" would that be Doug? The Tulane model? The Division III vision which is really the fantasy of your buddy Scott Cowen? The "we're tied at the hip with TCU" until they actually succeed wildly then "we're not the same as TCU, we're better" vision? That one? The "higher admission standards so we can avoid arrests of student athletes" then have former student athletes sitting in prison anyway vision? The latest wheelbarrow full of bullsh!t coming out of the administration whose stock in trade is bullsh!t, the "Playbook?" That vision Doug?

Do you see the meme continuing here? Reread the quote above. Trust the "vision," and donate dollars. That's the whole approach and has always been the approach under Tulane's present con-man president. All Cowen has to come up with is "vision," and we have to pony up money. And he has the luxury of not really having to actually DEFINE any vision with specificity or in any way where he can be held accountable. Then when all continues to fail, it's our fault because we didn't support Cowen's "vision" with even more money.

I won't waste anymore of my Sunday commenting on the rest of Hertz's idiotic remarks. With a handful more dupes like Hertz on board 'ol Scotty boy might be able to scrape up a few bucks, not that he'd be smart enough to do anything useful with it.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
User avatar
RobertM320
Green Wave
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Covington, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Segari hardly blinked as the leaders addressed about 150 fans in the open forum, stating the university is increasing its football budget for this season by 45 percent, though no official numbers were released.
-------

I have a question. I thought it was cleared up a couple of days ago that the "45% increase" was over a 4 year period (FY2007-FY2011)? So why does Tammy repeat a statement that is already known to be false? I have to believe that maybe it IS true that she really doesn't put much effort into her reporting.
TURVS71
Swell
Posts: 2151
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:01 am
Status: Offline

I stand by what I said.
'Here's a song for the Olive and the Blue"
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

Fred Dowler wrote:http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/20 ... s_on-.html

I strongly disagree.

This really should not be a topic unless the program is already winning consistently and drawing numbers of fans game after game.

If the program isn't winning then a new stadium will not help.

Revenues will still be peanuts and then the school will be saddled with costs that it isn't having to bear right now.

Not only that but the whole article here misses the point.

The first thing that needs to be done are changing the mindset of the school. "Bring the athletes in who can help us win..." has to be the goal. Reality must be faced and smoke and mirrors practices stopped. The coaches have to be able to recruit from the same pool of athletes as the other C-USA programs. If they have to change admissions practices and adopt the same standards as these other programs and establish athlete-friendly majors programs then so be it. If they can't bring themselves to do that then they might as well just forget and you can close the book on Tulane being able to be viable and competitive in 21st century Div. 1 football and basketball.

A new stadium or rather the non-ending talk about it is just more smoke and mirrors designed more to get people to donate and enable the same-old same-old to keep going and will not really help at this point.

Wait until there have been about 5-6 bowl seasons in a row and then redo the analysis and see how it works out...but please leave it alone until then but rather focus on what needs to be right now.
Given how many problems this program has, a stadium is not a high priority and a stadium that seats any number less than 35K would be a complete disaster.

The morons in charge cannot be allowed to make the decision regarding a stadium as they do not understand college athletics.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

1ndabag wrote:Tammy Nunez is just awful. I would rather no beat writer at all than her. She is without question the worst we've had in my lifetime.

I love this little gem:
The Tulane fan base’s demand for an on-campus football stadium is at an all-time high, and Cowen and Dickson know it.
Really? Based on what does she put forth that little nugget as fact? Did she take a poll? No. She's just printing as fact what she is being told by the Cowen/Dickson regime. Let that sink in. She's stating that the fans are clamoring for a stadium because that's what she was told by the two boobs running things.

So, under the cover of objective "journalism," she's regurgitating what the failed Cowen/Dickson regime wants to be reported as objective fact. That's not journalism. It's propaganda. I don't think Nunez is complicit with the idiots in charge, she is clearly not smart enough. I just think she is lazy and not very good at what she does.

The stadium issue is the reddist of red herrings. It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the disgraceful condition of Tulane football. The blame for that lies SOLELY with SCOTT COWEN and his flunky Rick Dickson. The bogus stadium issue is simply a means by which Scott Cowen seeks to shift focus and blame from himself and his failed, stupid policies, to alums and fans. It's our fault that Tulane football is the worst program in the country because we haven't ponied up enough money yet. See how the flim flam man works? And Nunez goes right along like a zombie.

It's as plain as day. Unless you're a thick skulled pseudo-journalist.

Hey, Tammy, THINK!! ASK SOME QUESTIONS!! STOP TAKING DICTATION FROM COWEN/DICKSON AND PASSING THEIR TALKING POINTS OFF AS JOURNALISM!! WE'RE NOT STUPID!!

Sorry for the yelling, guys, but it's all infuriating. In an economy like this how do such incompetents keep a job?

Turv I won't do a dissection of your comments but this one quote stuck out for me, "I heard Scott Cowen said that [a stadium] is now a priority, so I guess I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt as to what he said."

I bet you wish you had that one back. He has done NOTHING to merit the benefit of any doubt. In fact, just the opposite. Any objective observer of the Cowen regime could only conclude that he is not to be trusted, at all, in anything he says.

I don't know who this Hertz guy is and I don't care. But he's obviously still gulping the Cowen flavored Kool Aid.

Here's a little nugget:

"He [Hertz] said he understands fans’ frustration over the perceived slow pace of fundraising for a football stadium, but he never would have donated major dollars without trusting the administration’s vision."

Who is upset over "the slow pace of fundraising for a football stadium"? And what "vision" would that be Doug? The Tulane model? The Division III vision which is really the fantasy of your buddy Scott Cowen? The "we're tied at the hip with TCU" until they actually succeed wildly then "we're not the same as TCU, we're better" vision? That one? The "higher admission standards so we can avoid arrests of student athletes" then have former student athletes sitting in prison anyway vision? The latest wheelbarrow full of bullsh!t coming out of the administration whose stock in trade is bullsh!t, the "Playbook?" That vision Doug?

Do you see the meme continuing here? Reread the quote above. Trust the "vision," and donate dollars. That's the whole approach and has always been the approach under Tulane's present con-man president. All Cowen has to come up with is "vision," and we have to pony up money. And he has the luxury of not really having to actually DEFINE any vision with specificity or in any way where he can be held accountable. Then when all continues to fail, it's our fault because we didn't support Cowen's "vision" with even more money.

I won't waste anymore of my Sunday commenting on the rest of Hertz's idiotic remarks. With a handful more dupes like Hertz on board 'ol Scotty boy might be able to scrape up a few bucks, not that he'd be smart enough to do anything useful with it.
+1. Good rant.
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

TURVS71 wrote:I stand by what I said.
That's certainly your call. When the benefit of the doubt you offer Scott Cowen ends in disappointment, I promise I won't say I told you so. ;)
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
Fred Dowler
Riptide
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:33 pm
Status: Offline

TURVS71 wrote:I stand by what I said.
There is a difference between wanting Tulane to have a different place to play football and viewing some new playing venue as "the whole key to survival of the program."

Maybe it would be nice one day, emphasis on "one day."

And it's far from clear, still, that an on-campus playing venue for football really would be practical or add that much value to the program.

Maybe they could squeeze in some 25,000 seat "Tad Gormley uptown" structure (and in moving away from the Superdome and into such a building thoroughly brand the Tulane program as small-time) on campus somewhere somehow.

How is there room for something larger than that, though? Where??

Some people may say that a smaller stadium that makes tickets scarcer makes demand stronger.

Nonsense.

The only thing that will happen is the existing regulars getting to sit closer together.

Playing in Tad Gormley did not make more people interested in Tulane football. All that that exercise accomplished was to give the ones who were clamoring to be able to tailgate and have the experience of seeing a game played somewhere different what they said they were wanting.

The only way to make demand for tickets stronger is to win and really prove that the school and the program are intent on winning.

And then if they built a stadium on campus then where would tailgating be going on? In the parking garage? A big change??

If, if, if somewhere down the road the football team is winning year after year and the interest is really growing then maybe what could work would be for the school to buy some property somewhere for about a 45,000-50,000 seat stadium and also for enough parking.

But all in all, it's a lot more of a luxury item right now than a key to survival.

We all know that Tulane needs to work a lot harder at getting the better athletes into the program and having them stay eligible. That right there is the actual key to survival. Who knows if Tulane is really committed to doing that? That's something that they've still not said will really change... and after all they just admitted that for all these years that they didn't care about winning. Just now they say that they care about winning but it's as if they are pretending that winning will happen just because they say that they care about winning.

The stadium talk may well be and probably is just another ploy from the same people who've long avoided earning peoples' interest by providing an actual consistently winning product.
Tulane sports: small football stadium, very small basketball arena, w̶i̶n̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶p̶r̶o̶g̶r̶a̶m̶s̶, h̶o̶n̶e̶s̶t̶y̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶o̶u̶n̶t̶a̶b̶i̶l̶i̶t̶y̶ , but, hey, now there's tailgating.
User avatar
JTLiuzza
Swell
Posts: 1264
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:10 pm
Status: Offline

I think you nailed it, Fred.
The second commandment has not been abrogated.
sader24
Tsunami
Posts: 5695
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:35 pm
Status: Offline

The Superdome doesnt keep people away, the losing keeps people away. Our best attended season ever was in 1979 and that was a Superdome season. At the end of the day I would like to be a top 20 program playing in a 50,000+ seat stadium on or around campus. However, to simply believe that building a stadium will cure all ills is a mistake. To build a 25,000 seat stadium is a death sentence. I think you have to start at no less than 37,500 with room and plans for expansion when it calls for it. Also, I remember a game 99 on Labor day weekend at USM. It was a day game and 98 degrees outside 100 miles NORTH of here. At least 10 Tulane fans had to be carried out of the Upper Deck for Heat Exhaustion, Heat Stroke, etc. I eager to see how all of these stadium proponents react in September and early October when we're playing at 2:30 in 95 degree weather with 7,000 people in a 25,000 person stadium. We have to get the winning corrected first and worry about a stadium second. This administration is great at distractions and unless they have definitive plans this is another distraction.
gbgreenie
Surge
Posts: 968
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:12 pm
Status: Offline

I strongly disagree we need a oncampus stadium but it needs to hold at least 35,000 and I believe it will. We will never have full student participation without an campus stadium. The students are the heart of a fanbase in College Football. As the Student Population continues to grow this will be a bigger base for a fanbase. Other fans will come back into the fold once we get Sat. nite football on campus including the Neighborhoods around campus. This area also will be a base for new fans. When I park and walk to a baseball game I hear residents asking what time is the game. Because it is walking distance they go to the game. Wake up those against a OCS you are totally wrong.
User avatar
NOLABigSteve
Tsunami
Posts: 5007
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:00 am
Location: New Orleans, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Not to hijack this thread, but posted a new topic earlier about the debate of an OCS vs. IPF. Just wanted to hear the different opinions out there regarding the facility issue.

OCS vs. IPF : The Facility Debate
Roll Wave!
Tulane University c/o 2003
Football Defensive End '99, '00, '01, '02
2002 Hawaii Bowl Champions
School of Engineering (Computer Science)
User avatar
Green Wave
Swell
Posts: 2208
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:44 am
Status: Offline

RobertM320 wrote:
Segari hardly blinked as the leaders addressed about 150 fans in the open forum, stating the university is increasing its football budget for this season by 45 percent, though no official numbers were released.
-------

I have a question. I thought it was cleared up a couple of days ago that the "45% increase" was over a 4 year period (FY2007-FY2011)? So why does Tammy repeat a statement that is already known to be false? I have to believe that maybe it IS true that she really doesn't put much effort into her reporting.

She was reporting what was taking place at the time she was interviewing Segari. Tammy provided the qualifier at the end:

"though no official numbers were released."

She did her job.
ROLL WAVE!
RWR
Swell
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm
Status: Offline

No she didn't. The numbers were released in the playbook which clearly show the 45% increase was over 4 years.
User avatar
RobertM320
Green Wave
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Covington, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

RWR wrote:No she didn't. The numbers were released in the playbook which clearly show the 45% increase was over 4 years.
My thoughts exactly. The sentence describes what Segari was seeing and hearing at the time, and he was NOT hearing about a 45% increase this season. She knew that but put it in the article anyway.
"That mantra is the only consistent thing that never needs to ever change for the rest of this program’s existence because that is all that matters & as long as that keeps occurring, everything will handle itself" -- Nick Anderson
Post Reply