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

DfromCT wrote:
JDTulane wrote:Anyone arguing butts in seats isnt up from the dome nasnt been to a game in both (aka JJ). 100x more students even if half leave early. Remember the days where <20 came?! I do. JJ the more you bash the stadium having never been to it the more I skip your posts.
Dead on accurate. There's more than the "few thousand" fans that came to the Dome. Heck, we had a Homecoming against Army a while back that you could literally count the people in the stadium. I went up to the second level, where less than 100 people were. The lower level was maybe 5% full. They announced attendance at 7 or 8k, when in reality there was maybe 1000 people there.

How can someone that hasn't been to a game in the stadium claim it hasn't made gameday experience better? There's other claims in his post that are unsubstantiated as well, particularly about being outdrawn by U-La-La fans. Most posts after the game said we had more fans, though many thought it might be approaching 50/50.
You missed the point entirely so I will repeat it.

The "gameday experience" is not relevant to this discussion. The question is whether Yulman stadium is well suited for getting Tulane football from where we are now to where we need to be. It's not a "victory" if attendance went from 2K in the Dome to 4K at Yulman. We need 25K-30K regularly, and there are significant outstanding questions as to whether or not Yulman helps or hurts that effort.

BTW anywhere close to 50/50 on fanbase/attendance is an indicator that the gameday experience is not good enough to "draw" fans who live less than 2 hours away, which is where the ULL fans drove in from.


golfnut69
Wild Pelican
Posts: 14233
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:38 am
Status: Offline

any word on the new "Donation"
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 !
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

golfnut69 wrote:any word on the new "Donation"
Actually, that's the reason why I brought this up. What is this "donation" earmarked for?
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6255
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JDTulane wrote:Anyone arguing butts in seats isnt up from the dome nasnt been to a game in both (aka JJ). 100x more students even if half leave early. Remember the days where <20 came?! I do. JJ the more you bash the stadium having never been to it the more I skip your posts.
Dead on accurate. There's more than the "few thousand" fans that came to the Dome. Heck, we had a Homecoming against Army a while back that you could literally count the people in the stadium. I went up to the second level, where less than 100 people were. The lower level was maybe 5% full. They announced attendance at 7 or 8k, when in reality there was maybe 1000 people there.

How can someone that hasn't been to a game in the stadium claim it hasn't made gameday experience better? There's other claims in his post that are unsubstantiated as well, particularly about being outdrawn by U-La-La fans. Most posts after the game said we had more fans, though many thought it might be approaching 50/50.
You missed the point entirely so I will repeat it.

The "gameday experience" is not relevant to this discussion. The question is whether Yulman stadium is well suited for getting Tulane football from where we are now to where we need to be. It's not a "victory" if attendance went from 2K in the Dome to 4K at Yulman. We need 25K-30K regularly, and there are significant outstanding questions as to whether or not Yulman helps or hurts that effort.

BTW anywhere close to 50/50 on fanbase/attendance is an indicator that the gameday experience is not good enough to "draw" fans who live less than 2 hours away, which is where the ULL fans drove in from.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT? F*cking joke.
DfromCT
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13004
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6255
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

DfromCT wrote:EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
I suggested to others not to perpetuate the JJ stadium nonsense, then I go and do it, sorry folks.

Enjoyed the game this weekend. Even walking through campus and into the stadium is enjoyable enough to make it worth it. Have to keep winning, I trust Fritz. Still concerned about the QB situation, however
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

DfromCT wrote:EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
FYI if we have to go back to the Dome for ANY number of games then how is Yulman financially feasible? I know personal attacks towards me are more satisfying than debating substantive points but that does remain the giant elephant in the room. Even 1 game per year is 17% of the intended revenue.

You can't really suggest I'm "bashing" anything, much less than gameday experience, if I'm trying to debate the financial aspects and the recruiting aspects.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JDTulane wrote:Anyone arguing butts in seats isnt up from the dome nasnt been to a game in both (aka JJ). 100x more students even if half leave early. Remember the days where <20 came?! I do. JJ the more you bash the stadium having never been to it the more I skip your posts.
Dead on accurate. There's more than the "few thousand" fans that came to the Dome. Heck, we had a Homecoming against Army a while back that you could literally count the people in the stadium. I went up to the second level, where less than 100 people were. The lower level was maybe 5% full. They announced attendance at 7 or 8k, when in reality there was maybe 1000 people there.

How can someone that hasn't been to a game in the stadium claim it hasn't made gameday experience better? There's other claims in his post that are unsubstantiated as well, particularly about being outdrawn by U-La-La fans. Most posts after the game said we had more fans, though many thought it might be approaching 50/50.
You missed the point entirely so I will repeat it.

The "gameday experience" is not relevant to this discussion. The question is whether Yulman stadium is well suited for getting Tulane football from where we are now to where we need to be. It's not a "victory" if attendance went from 2K in the Dome to 4K at Yulman. We need 25K-30K regularly, and there are significant outstanding questions as to whether or not Yulman helps or hurts that effort.

BTW anywhere close to 50/50 on fanbase/attendance is an indicator that the gameday experience is not good enough to "draw" fans who live less than 2 hours away, which is where the ULL fans drove in from.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT? F*cking joke.
Please point out where I suggested we go back to the Dome full time. You won't be able to because I never did that.

Also, this discussion is about more than Yulman Stadium, but the rest of the facilities strategy and athletic department budget that Yulman was supposed to generate cash flow for.
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6255
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JDTulane wrote:Anyone arguing butts in seats isnt up from the dome nasnt been to a game in both (aka JJ). 100x more students even if half leave early. Remember the days where <20 came?! I do. JJ the more you bash the stadium having never been to it the more I skip your posts.
Dead on accurate. There's more than the "few thousand" fans that came to the Dome. Heck, we had a Homecoming against Army a while back that you could literally count the people in the stadium. I went up to the second level, where less than 100 people were. The lower level was maybe 5% full. They announced attendance at 7 or 8k, when in reality there was maybe 1000 people there.

How can someone that hasn't been to a game in the stadium claim it hasn't made gameday experience better? There's other claims in his post that are unsubstantiated as well, particularly about being outdrawn by U-La-La fans. Most posts after the game said we had more fans, though many thought it might be approaching 50/50.
You missed the point entirely so I will repeat it.

The "gameday experience" is not relevant to this discussion. The question is whether Yulman stadium is well suited for getting Tulane football from where we are now to where we need to be. It's not a "victory" if attendance went from 2K in the Dome to 4K at Yulman. We need 25K-30K regularly, and there are significant outstanding questions as to whether or not Yulman helps or hurts that effort.

BTW anywhere close to 50/50 on fanbase/attendance is an indicator that the gameday experience is not good enough to "draw" fans who live less than 2 hours away, which is where the ULL fans drove in from.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT? F*cking joke.
Please point out where I suggested we go back to the Dome full time. You won't be able to because I never did that.

Also, this discussion is about more than Yulman Stadium, but the rest of the facilities strategy and athletic department budget that Yulman was supposed to generate cash flow for.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT?

Again, what's your point? Either make the best of it or honestly just stop repeating the same POV over and over and over again. I mean seriously you don't see how absurd your constant harping has become?
TXWave88
Surge
Posts: 627
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:58 am
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JDTulane wrote:Anyone arguing butts in seats isnt up from the dome nasnt been to a game in both (aka JJ). 100x more students even if half leave early. Remember the days where <20 came?! I do. JJ the more you bash the stadium having never been to it the more I skip your posts.
Dead on accurate. There's more than the "few thousand" fans that came to the Dome. Heck, we had a Homecoming against Army a while back that you could literally count the people in the stadium. I went up to the second level, where less than 100 people were. The lower level was maybe 5% full. They announced attendance at 7 or 8k, when in reality there was maybe 1000 people there.

How can someone that hasn't been to a game in the stadium claim it hasn't made gameday experience better? There's other claims in his post that are unsubstantiated as well, particularly about being outdrawn by U-La-La fans. Most posts after the game said we had more fans, though many thought it might be approaching 50/50.
You missed the point entirely so I will repeat it.

The "gameday experience" is not relevant to this discussion. The question is whether Yulman stadium is well suited for getting Tulane football from where we are now to where we need to be. It's not a "victory" if attendance went from 2K in the Dome to 4K at Yulman. We need 25K-30K regularly, and there are significant outstanding questions as to whether or not Yulman helps or hurts that effort.

BTW anywhere close to 50/50 on fanbase/attendance is an indicator that the gameday experience is not good enough to "draw" fans who live less than 2 hours away, which is where the ULL fans drove in from.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT? F*cking joke.
Please point out where I suggested we go back to the Dome full time. You won't be able to because I never did that.

Also, this discussion is about more than Yulman Stadium, but the rest of the facilities strategy and athletic department budget that Yulman was supposed to generate cash flow for.
You are trying to make this another rant about Cowdick and their failures. You deem this stadium as a failure, but what do you expect Mike Fitts and Troy Dannen to do about it? They are in charge now. They inherited the facility (and accepted the jobs knowing it was there). If you were Troy Dannen, what would you do to resolve what you describe? You can continue to discuss the previous regime's failures, but how does that help today and tomorrow? I am curious to hear what your opinion is as you are clearly passionate about this subject.
User avatar
RobertM320
Green Wave
Posts: 9887
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Covington, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
FYI if we have to go back to the Dome for ANY number of games then how is Yulman financially feasible? I know personal attacks towards me are more satisfying than debating substantive points but that does remain the giant elephant in the room. Even 1 game per year is 17% of the intended revenue.

You can't really suggest I'm "bashing" anything, much less than gameday experience, if I'm trying to debate the financial aspects and the recruiting aspects.
Here's the real answer. Its not my problem to worry about whether or not Yulman is financially feasible. That's what Mike Fitts and Troy Dannen get paid to figure out. And as of this point, I trust them both enough to make something out of nothing.
"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
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
mbawavefan12 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:
JDTulane wrote:Anyone arguing butts in seats isnt up from the dome nasnt been to a game in both (aka JJ). 100x more students even if half leave early. Remember the days where <20 came?! I do. JJ the more you bash the stadium having never been to it the more I skip your posts.
Dead on accurate. There's more than the "few thousand" fans that came to the Dome. Heck, we had a Homecoming against Army a while back that you could literally count the people in the stadium. I went up to the second level, where less than 100 people were. The lower level was maybe 5% full. They announced attendance at 7 or 8k, when in reality there was maybe 1000 people there.

How can someone that hasn't been to a game in the stadium claim it hasn't made gameday experience better? There's other claims in his post that are unsubstantiated as well, particularly about being outdrawn by U-La-La fans. Most posts after the game said we had more fans, though many thought it might be approaching 50/50.
You missed the point entirely so I will repeat it.

The "gameday experience" is not relevant to this discussion. The question is whether Yulman stadium is well suited for getting Tulane football from where we are now to where we need to be. It's not a "victory" if attendance went from 2K in the Dome to 4K at Yulman. We need 25K-30K regularly, and there are significant outstanding questions as to whether or not Yulman helps or hurts that effort.

BTW anywhere close to 50/50 on fanbase/attendance is an indicator that the gameday experience is not good enough to "draw" fans who live less than 2 hours away, which is where the ULL fans drove in from.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT? F*cking joke.
Please point out where I suggested we go back to the Dome full time. You won't be able to because I never did that.

Also, this discussion is about more than Yulman Stadium, but the rest of the facilities strategy and athletic department budget that Yulman was supposed to generate cash flow for.
WE R NOT GOING BACK TO THE DOME FULL TIME. HOW DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THAT POINT?

Again, what's your point? Either make the best of it or honestly just stop repeating the same POV over and over and over again. I mean seriously you don't see how absurd your constant harping has become?
What's amazing is that I have to repeat for at least the second time that I did not anywhere suggest going back to the Dome full time. Wasn't the point of Yulman the extra cash flow? Given that didn't happen, now what? Please see if you can answer without a personal attack.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

TXWave88 wrote:
You are trying to make this another rant about Cowdick and their failures. You deem this stadium as a failure, but what do you expect Mike Fitts and Troy Dannen to do about it? They are in charge now. They inherited the facility (and accepted the jobs knowing it was there). If you were Troy Dannen, what would you do to resolve what you describe? You can continue to discuss the previous regime's failures, but how does that help today and tomorrow? I am curious to hear what your opinion is as you are clearly passionate about this subject.
I'm not trying to go on a "rant" about anything. Yes Cowen and Dickson made any and every mistake in the book and I think everyone agrees on that. The reasons why Yulman was built did NOT come to pass now that we're 3 years in. It hasn't helped the program and in areas like recruiting it might be hurting the program. These aren't rants but facts and observations based on 3 years. We can't just keep sweeping $80M mistakes under the rug because people are sick of the discussion. I am very much interested in a discussion about "where do we go from here?"

We badly need an overhaul of the non-gameday facilities, but now we don't have the money or real estate for that. It's not clear what role Yulman/Dome had in the Big 12 discussion, but it definitely came up. That seems relevant to this discussion too.

I don't really have the answer as to where to go next and am curious to see what Dannen is announcing with his major donation this week. Hence where Dannen thinks the next investment needs to go.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

RobertM320 wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
FYI if we have to go back to the Dome for ANY number of games then how is Yulman financially feasible? I know personal attacks towards me are more satisfying than debating substantive points but that does remain the giant elephant in the room. Even 1 game per year is 17% of the intended revenue.

You can't really suggest I'm "bashing" anything, much less than gameday experience, if I'm trying to debate the financial aspects and the recruiting aspects.
Here's the real answer. Its not my problem to worry about whether or not Yulman is financially feasible. That's what Mike Fitts and Troy Dannen get paid to figure out. And as of this point, I trust them both enough to make something out of nothing.
Ok, that's fair. Then you should stop posting about football because it's Willie Fritz' job to figure that out if you want to go that route. This is a forum for discussion. This is a third rail topic for a variety of reasons. People want to avoid uncomfortable topics.
User avatar
RobertM320
Green Wave
Posts: 9887
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Covington, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

Football is entertainment. The financial juggling of a university athletics budget is not. I'm here for the entertainment.
"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
mbawavefan12
Tsunami
Posts: 6255
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:17 pm
Status: Offline

Most of all, any current issues have a lot more to do with the hiring of CJ over anything else. Only RD claimed Yulman was going to be a huge solution to our problems. The gameday atmosphere remains much better, that has not been disputed by anyone who regularly attends games.

Have a night.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

mbawavefan12 wrote:Most of all, any current issues have a lot more to do with the hiring of CJ over anything else. Only RD claimed Yulman was going to be a huge solution to our problems. The gameday atmosphere remains much better, that has not been disputed by anyone who regularly attends games.

Have a night.
1) I think we can all agree that there isn't enough talent on the current squad and recruiting has taken a significant slide over the past 3 years. Getting rid of CJ is not "solving" our talent problem.

2) No, it was Cowen/DIckson/the Board/Yulman/Benson/etc that bet $80M on Yulman being the solution to our problems. This was the basis of a 5-10 year facilities plan that combined for $120M. You are sticking your head in the sand if you believe otherwise.

3) I don't know of anyone, including myself, suggesting that "gameday atmosphere" isn't better than at the Dome, so I think maybe we should remove that talking point from the discussion. But well played with the more subtle personal attack.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

RobertM320 wrote:Football is entertainment. The financial juggling of a university athletics budget is not. I'm here for the entertainment.
OK I would think the football program's facilities strategy might be of relevance to football but that's just me. There are other topics to post in not titled "Yulman Stadium".
DfromCT
Wild Pelican
Posts: 13004
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Stamford, CT
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
FYI if we have to go back to the Dome for ANY number of games then how is Yulman financially feasible? I know personal attacks towards me are more satisfying than debating substantive points but that does remain the giant elephant in the room. Even 1 game per year is 17% of the intended revenue.

You can't really suggest I'm "bashing" anything, much less than gameday experience, if I'm trying to debate the financial aspects and the recruiting aspects.
You mentioned Gameday experience in your post that started this offshoot of the thread. Now that you've been called out as having WRONG information and NEVER HAVING EXPERIENCED GAMEDAY ON CAMPUS, you change your tune, saying it's not what you're trying to debate. Nice, you could be as two faced as the GOP and Dem candidates we'll hear from later tonight, JJ.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
User avatar
tpstulane
Top of the WAVE
Posts: 26668
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:56 pm
Status: Offline

Tailgating on campus story
http://blog.nola.com/sponsored/2016/09/ ... e_tha.html
Tulane Greenbackers president Mike Johnston and member Mitch Compeaux said the move back on campus was a return to their childhood memories. And creating fun memories seems to bolster how Sherry described the social/community/family aspects in his tailgating study.

"The experience on campus trumped anything that we had before," Compeaux said. "We have a season pass on a tent, so we get there three, four hours before kickoff and enjoy ourselves. We have catered food, and it's just a great experience for everyone. I love it on campus. The tailgating part adds so much to the event, and I'm able to share with my kids a part of my childhood."

Johnston, a 1976 Tulane graduate, has been with the Greenbackers since its inception in 1980 and said it's great to see more and more families discover the joys of tailgating.

"It is very family-friendly," he said. "It opens up tailgating to the entire Uptown community. It's just a great atmosphere on campus. The students have some prime spots too, so it's really growing for everyone. A lot of us have great childhood memories of games on campus, so it was special to come back on campus."
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

DfromCT wrote:
jonathanjoseph wrote:
DfromCT wrote:EXACTLY RIGHT MBA. We're not going back to the Dome full time in my lifetime. And we're both arguing with a person that just loves to stir the pot with his same old bashing of a facility and gameday experience he's never been a part of.
FYI if we have to go back to the Dome for ANY number of games then how is Yulman financially feasible? I know personal attacks towards me are more satisfying than debating substantive points but that does remain the giant elephant in the room. Even 1 game per year is 17% of the intended revenue.

You can't really suggest I'm "bashing" anything, much less than gameday experience, if I'm trying to debate the financial aspects and the recruiting aspects.
You mentioned Gameday experience in your post that started this offshoot of the thread. Now that you've been called out as having WRONG information and NEVER HAVING EXPERIENCED GAMEDAY ON CAMPUS, you change your tune, saying it's not what you're trying to debate. Nice, you could be as two faced as the GOP and Dem candidates we'll hear from later tonight, JJ.
jonathanjoseph wrote: Anyone got a counter argument at this point? Don't use "better gameday experience" because it hasn't increased attendance. Please don't attack me personally, because that's an admission that you don't have a counter argument.
There's the quote. I mentioned it as a caveat to not being relevant to this topic so I've been two faced about nothing.

While I am agreeing that people find the gameday experience is improved, there is still the question of what's next and what needs to be fixed. Umpteen people have noted that I've never been to a game at Yulman but nobody has put forth a suggestion as to how to get people, like me, to the games.

The ACTUAL attendance at Yulman suggests that the gameday experience isn't enough to draw the casual fan. This isn't my opinion but a fact based on actual attendance. The fact remains, Yulman was the plan and it doesn't appear to be working. It was supposed to help with recruiting and cash flow and it seems to have had the opposite effect on both. So the question remains, since this was "the crown jewel", what needs to happen to start getting casual fans and out of town alumni to show up for football games. And another question that remains is, what facilities are needed to improve recruiting.

Whatever the answer is, it doesn't include an insult directed at me.
User avatar
RobertM320
Green Wave
Posts: 9887
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
Location: Covington, LA
Contact:
Status: Offline

jonathanjoseph wrote:
RobertM320 wrote:Football is entertainment. The financial juggling of a university athletics budget is not. I'm here for the entertainment.
OK I would think the football program's facilities strategy might be of relevance to football but that's just me. There are other topics to post in not titled "Yulman Stadium".
Yes, I'd like to know more about what their strategy is regarding BUILDING facilities. But how they're going to fit it in the budget is for Troy Dannen, Mike Fitts and the BOA to figure out, not me. I'm more interested in what Willie Fritz, Mike Dunleavy, Lisa Stockton, Tim Jewett and Jim Barnes are going to do to win games THIS SEASON.

As for Yulman being "the plan", it was RD and SC's "plan", not TD and MF. They didn't create it, they inherited it. Now its up to them to fix, modify, or scrap as needed to get where we need to be. I'm not stressing about it because I'm confident they'll find a way to make lemonade out of this lemon.
"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
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

tpstulane wrote:Tailgating on campus story
http://blog.nola.com/sponsored/2016/09/ ... e_tha.html
Tulane Greenbackers president Mike Johnston and member Mitch Compeaux said the move back on campus was a return to their childhood memories. And creating fun memories seems to bolster how Sherry described the social/community/family aspects in his tailgating study.

"The experience on campus trumped anything that we had before," Compeaux said. "We have a season pass on a tent, so we get there three, four hours before kickoff and enjoy ourselves. We have catered food, and it's just a great experience for everyone. I love it on campus. The tailgating part adds so much to the event, and I'm able to share with my kids a part of my childhood."

Johnston, a 1976 Tulane graduate, has been with the Greenbackers since its inception in 1980 and said it's great to see more and more families discover the joys of tailgating.

"It is very family-friendly," he said. "It opens up tailgating to the entire Uptown community. It's just a great atmosphere on campus. The students have some prime spots too, so it's really growing for everyone. A lot of us have great childhood memories of games on campus, so it was special to come back on campus."
TPS, with all due respect, that's just some rah-rah BS. It may "open up tailgating to the entire Uptown community" but in reality the Uptown community isn't showing up in numbers that make a difference. And more importantly, it's the national alumni who need to be engaged. Those with childhood memories of Tulane Stadium have obvious reasons to believe in it but there's a problem today that needs to be answered with something other than nostalgia.

Can Willie Fritz win with the talent on hand? If so, is that enough to bridge the gap? What to make of what looks like a very poor recruiting class, and three consecutive years of declining recruiting rankings? If the talent on hand isn't enough, and recruiting is taking a step backwards, where are we headed?

FYI I can tell you that next year's football team will take a step back from wherever we end up this year.
jonathanjoseph
Green Wave
Posts: 9299
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Status: Offline

RobertM320 wrote:
As for Yulman being "the plan", it was RD and SC's "plan", not TD and MF. They didn't create it, they inherited it. Now its up to them to fix, modify, or scrap as needed to get where we need to be. I'm not stressing about it because I'm confident they'll find a way to make lemonade out of this lemon.
I am 10000% in agreement with your statement here.

I have the utmost confidence in Fitts/Dannen to fix/modify/scrap the plan as best as can be expected. The challenge is that Cow/Dick spent this $100M+ to cement their failed vision for athletics into place. The problem is you are talking about years or decades and hundreds of millions of dollars to fix that kind of problem, if it is indeed a problem. Hence why it might make sense to toss around some ideas.
User avatar
Eaglewave
Swell
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 11:36 am
Status: Offline

We have to win games people. Period. If we start winning, we will be able to keep solid crowds in Yulman.
Ball Sumrall!
Post Reply