Miami AD Blake James

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Please re-read my post. I said that if they felt it feasible, "they'd make owning our own stadium--either on- or off-campus--a priority and would make long-term plans to achieve that goal."

And you're certainly entitled to your opinion, though you must admit that it's far-fetched to think that the leaders and business heads of the university and the athletic department are so incapable and idiotic as to not even examine the prospect of owning our own stadium.

My bad about the stadium (on or near campus), my assumption is they have not went into an full analysis of an off campus stadium. I base this on the current ADs comments, the lack of notification to the alumni of said search (it would end a lot of questions) and the track record.

Why is it so far fetched? Has every business decision been so good?

The Hospital for one seems to be a disaster. Business heads make mistakes all the time.

It's far-fetched because you're not simply talking about one person, one president, or one AD. We've had several AD's, two presidents, and dozens of financial and operations gurus pass through our halls over the past 40 years or so. They've had thousands of meetings with donors, fans, staff, city planners and zoners, local government officials and such. And yet none of them has seen fit to make a major push to own our own stadium.

Yes, bad business decisions happen all the time. But different regimes don't often come to the same conclusion (eg that building our own stadium is not worthy of pursuing) unless there's some merit to that conclusion. Generally, bad business decisions don't get replicated over and over; good ones do.

 

[Consigliere]

Please re-read my post. I said that if they felt it feasible, "they'd make owning our own stadium--either on- or off-campus--a priority and would make long-term plans to achieve that goal."

And you're certainly entitled to your opinion, though you must admit that it's far-fetched to think that the leaders and business heads of the university and the athletic department are so incapable and idiotic as to not even examine the prospect of owning our own stadium.

My bad about the stadium (on or near campus), my assumption is they have not went into an full analysis of an off campus stadium. I base this on the current ADs comments, the lack of notification to the alumni of said search (it would end a lot of questions) and the track record.

Why is it so far fetched? Has every business decision been so good?

The Hospital for one seems to be a disaster. Business heads make mistakes all the time.

It's far-fetched because you're not simply talking about one person, one president, or one AD. We've had several AD's, two presidents, and dozens of financial and operations gurus pass through our halls over the past 40 years or so. They've had thousands of meetings with donors, fans, staff, city planners and zoners, local government officials and such. And yet none of them has seen fit to make a major push to own our own stadium.

Yes, bad business decisions happen all the time. But different regimes don't often come to the same conclusion (eg that building our own stadium is not worthy of pursuing) unless there's some merit to that conclusion. Generally, bad business decisions don't get replicated over and over; good ones do.

If they fully exhausted the search for our own stadium, wouldn't they announce that they did the search and it is not an option. It is on the minds of many alumni and fans. Too me, since the media and alumni often ask about it, I would put them at ease and explain that based on XYZ it is not an option.

Let's just end this at this...we believe different things.

 

[dk72]

..and you ASSUME that it was not examined and that it was not a priority. I've seen comments from Shalala about how they've looked into options and none of them make fiscal sense. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but you have no more information than anyone else on how much the school has looked into it.

Show me these comments.

I don't think it is a priority, why do you think it is a priority? We only have little tidbits from Blake James on and the renovations

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/15/3182815/miami-hurricanes-excited-about.html

Here is our great quote from our AD

"In all seriousness, as I said before, there isn’t anyone who would enjoy an on-campus stadium more than I would, but it’s not a realistic situation to even discuss. We don’t have the land for it, and if we did have the land, there just isn’t the infrastructure in this place. We’re playing in a first-rate facility that is in the process of only getting better and I’m confident that we’re putting our student-athletes into a premier facility in the country and with the new additions we’re going to put our fans into an environment that will be even better. I’m not going to say it’s going to ever create anything what the Orange Bowl was, because those were special days and games that I would go to at the OB but I think it’s going to create a much different environment and an atmosphere that will much more closely resemble the atmosphere we had at the Orange Bowl."

Here is the problem, why does it have to be ON CAMPUS? Can't it be near campus, the OB wasn't on campus. We can have our own place off-campus. This quote above irks me because he said "ON CAMPUS" almost as if they did not look at a near campus stadium. As an alumni of UM, I know that an ON CAMPUS stadium is next to impossible. How about a near campus stadium? Was this fully examined?

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

 

[Consigliere]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

 

[Fzac75]

Get this straight for all you who don't live here, or for those of you who do but have no clue about Coral Gables and the inner workings of the city of Coral Gables. THERE IS NO WAY NO CHANCE NO HOW NO POSSIBILITY EVEN IF **** FROZE OVER AND L RON HUBBARD IS RIGHT THAT A STADIUM WILL BE BUILT IN THE CITY OF CORAL GABLES!

Yes I obnoxiously put it in caps for emphasis, I apologize slightly, it is obnoxious, but it has to be said. Whenever any of you want to get into this ridiculous discussion that goes nowhere over the stadium, just know that forget about on campus, it will not happen, the city of Coral Gables will never allow an on campus football stadium, they wont permit it.

Who said Coral Gables? Why not outside, was the OB in Coral Gables? It is the off-season, this is what people talk about. If you don't want to talk, then don't post on the subject.

Since the renovations to No Life Stadium failed, what is next? We just live out the next 15 years of our lease. That is the plan. Wonderful!

What about the land we own by the zoo, just leave it undeveloped?

Firstly the point of on campus is that every time this discussion pops up, there are those who always mention on campus, for them is who it is directed to. If there is to be an intelligent discussion regarding this, let us start with an understanding of where they are located, and where a viable geographical location for a stadium would be.

I understand it is the off season and why not kill the time with a lively debate on the stadium, I have no problems with that, and it allows for some good venting of frustration over lack of a University owned stadium. Perfectly understandable.

Yes the university does own land at the zoo, but a stadium there geographically speaking would be suicide. Understand, geographically speaking, Joe Robbie Stadium is perfectly situated, there is no better location to attract and bring the fans that the University has from Dade, Broward and Palm Beach. There just isn't, and regardless of where the stadium is, you cannot compare a University of Miami football game experience to that of other Universities. It doesn't exist, it will not exist, it's what really makes what the University of Miami has done in football remarkable, because it is not like that at other Universities. The University of Miami football team is treated like a professional sports franchise here in South Florida, it is like any other event here, if it is worth investing your hard earned dollar then have a brand field a team that is worth putting your money into. South Florida it is not about the experience it is about the product. Those of us that care about the experience the tailgating and all that are the minority, which is why location is huge for the University, the team needs to have a location that is situated well enough to be able to tap into as many of those fans who will go regardless of record.

But make no mistake, if the team is mediocre, it does not matter where the stadium is it will still be half full. And I don't blame those fans for not going either, it is ignorant and wrong to criticize those "smart" consumers who will not spend their money on a crappy product. Unfortunately I am not that smart, I am with the Dolphins finally, but not with the Canes.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

 

[1CN]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Do you know Ross (Miami dolphins owner) pays the Canes 5 million (a season to play in SUNLESSLIFE Stadium)
that's our coaches staff annually salary

 

[The Franchise]

Get this straight for all you who don't live here, or for those of you who do but have no clue about Coral Gables and the inner workings of the city of Coral Gables. THERE IS NO WAY NO CHANCE NO HOW NO POSSIBILITY EVEN IF **** FROZE OVER AND L RON HUBBARD IS RIGHT THAT A STADIUM WILL BE BUILT IN THE CITY OF CORAL GABLES!

Yes I obnoxiously put it in caps for emphasis, I apologize slightly, it is obnoxious, but it has to be said. Whenever any of you want to get into this ridiculous discussion that goes nowhere over the stadium, just know that forget about on campus, it will not happen, the city of Coral Gables will never allow an on campus football stadium, they wont permit it.

Who said Coral Gables? Why not outside, was the OB in Coral Gables? It is the off-season, this is what people talk about. If you don't want to talk, then don't post on the subject.

Since the renovations to No Life Stadium failed, what is next? We just live out the next 15 years of our lease. That is the plan. Wonderful!

What about the land we own by the zoo, just leave it undeveloped?

Firstly the point of on campus is that every time this discussion pops up, there are those who always mention on campus, for them is who it is directed to. If there is to be an intelligent discussion regarding this, let us start with an understanding of where they are located, and where a viable geographical location for a stadium would be.

I understand it is the off season and why not kill the time with a lively debate on the stadium, I have no problems with that, and it allows for some good venting of frustration over lack of a University owned stadium. Perfectly understandable.

Yes the university does own land at the zoo, but a stadium there geographically speaking would be suicide. Understand, geographically speaking, Joe Robbie Stadium is perfectly situated, there is no better location to attract and bring the fans that the University has from Dade, Broward and Palm Beach. There just isn't, and regardless of where the stadium is, you cannot compare a University of Miami football game experience to that of other Universities. It doesn't exist, it will not exist, it's what really makes what the University of Miami has done in football remarkable, because it is not like that at other Universities. The University of Miami football team is treated like a professional sports franchise here in South Florida, it is like any other event here, if it is worth investing your hard earned dollar then have a brand field a team that is worth putting your money into. South Florida it is not about the experience it is about the product. Those of us that care about the experience the tailgating and all that are the minority, which is why location is huge for the University, the team needs to have a location that is situated well enough to be able to tap into as many of those fans who will go regardless of record.

But make no mistake, if the team is mediocre, it does not matter where the stadium is it will still be half full. And I don't blame those fans for not going either, it is ignorant and wrong to criticize those "smart" consumers who will not spend their money on a crappy product. Unfortunately I am not that smart, I am with the Dolphins finally, but not with the Canes.

It wouldn't be half full if they built a stadium that reflects the size of our actual fan base. UM should not be playing in a 75k seat stadium. It makes the program look like a joke when we play on TV.

Too many UM fans are too readily accepting of the "we can't do it" mantra. I've see too many private universities build stadiums, and I've seen Don Donna raise too much money to think that UM building a stadium is a pipe dream.

 

[Consigliere]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the inability of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations. I think in 2007, things were different. Now we have watched a miserable game day experience, better financials in the athletic department and the sport change.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

 

[Consigliere]

Get this straight for all you who don't live here, or for those of you who do but have no clue about Coral Gables and the inner workings of the city of Coral Gables. THERE IS NO WAY NO CHANCE NO HOW NO POSSIBILITY EVEN IF **** FROZE OVER AND L RON HUBBARD IS RIGHT THAT A STADIUM WILL BE BUILT IN THE CITY OF CORAL GABLES!

Yes I obnoxiously put it in caps for emphasis, I apologize slightly, it is obnoxious, but it has to be said. Whenever any of you want to get into this ridiculous discussion that goes nowhere over the stadium, just know that forget about on campus, it will not happen, the city of Coral Gables will never allow an on campus football stadium, they wont permit it.

Who said Coral Gables? Why not outside, was the OB in Coral Gables? It is the off-season, this is what people talk about. If you don't want to talk, then don't post on the subject.

Since the renovations to No Life Stadium failed, what is next? We just live out the next 15 years of our lease. That is the plan. Wonderful!

What about the land we own by the zoo, just leave it undeveloped?

Firstly the point of on campus is that every time this discussion pops up, there are those who always mention on campus, for them is who it is directed to. If there is to be an intelligent discussion regarding this, let us start with an understanding of where they are located, and where a viable geographical location for a stadium would be.

I understand it is the off season and why not kill the time with a lively debate on the stadium, I have no problems with that, and it allows for some good venting of frustration over lack of a University owned stadium. Perfectly understandable.

Yes the university does own land at the zoo, but a stadium there geographically speaking would be suicide. Understand, geographically speaking, Joe Robbie Stadium is perfectly situated, there is no better location to attract and bring the fans that the University has from Dade, Broward and Palm Beach. There just isn't, and regardless of where the stadium is, you cannot compare a University of Miami football game experience to that of other Universities. It doesn't exist, it will not exist, it's what really makes what the University of Miami has done in football remarkable, because it is not like that at other Universities. The University of Miami football team is treated like a professional sports franchise here in South Florida, it is like any other event here, if it is worth investing your hard earned dollar then have a brand field a team that is worth putting your money into. South Florida it is not about the experience it is about the product. Those of us that care about the experience the tailgating and all that are the minority, which is why location is huge for the University, the team needs to have a location that is situated well enough to be able to tap into as many of those fans who will go regardless of record.

But make no mistake, if the team is mediocre, it does not matter where the stadium is it will still be half full. And I don't blame those fans for not going either, it is ignorant and wrong to criticize those "smart" consumers who will not spend their money on a crappy product. Unfortunately I am not that smart, I am with the Dolphins finally, but not with the Canes.

It wouldn't be half full if they built a stadium that reflects the size of our actual fan base. UM should not be playing in a 75k seat stadium. It makes the program look like a joke when we play on TV.

Too many UM fans are too readily accepting of the "we can't do it" mantra. I've see too many private universities build stadiums, and I've seen Don Donna raise too much money to think that UM building a stadium is a pipe dream.

Chise let me check your math

Currently 45/72 full at no life

Possible 55k stadium would be 45/55

So both are half full, oh wait.

I swear our fans kill me with their negative attitudes and can't do spirit. If we wanted it, Donna could do it.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the abilities of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the abilities of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

 

[Consigliere]

I'll have to see if I can dig them up, I read it quite a while ago. They were posted by an alumnus who had a discussion with Shalala during a fundraiser or some other such event.

The quote you cite from the CURRENT AD doesn't really support your position. So what if he says it's not a realistic situation to even discuss. That is quite likely because it HAS been discussed in the past, under other ADs, and the financials and logistics simply don't work out. Saying that we are now playing in a first rate facility is what any good AD would say, given that he doesn't want to bad-mouth our current stadium when we have no other viable options.

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the abilities of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

Please note I edited my post.

As an alumni I understand both perspectives (if true), but I don't think it was a priority then and it isn't now. I understand that we should not just take on this heavy burden but evaluate properly. I just don't believe it was a priority.

Also the buyouts hit us hard, not sure where you got your info. Finances are dramatically different, no buyouts and more revenues (i.e. better pay from tv contracts). Things are very different and much better.

As for me getting involved, things are chaotic with my work schedule. In a few years, i intend to be a part of the alumni committee up here in the northeast and take it to the streets. Just dont hold your breath. Watch out for me and Strauzer.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

You can dig up all the hearsay you want.

The quote supports the attitude of the school towards our own place IMO. A simple "STFU we have exhausted all means to find our own stadium but it is not in the cards at the moment" would work.

Once again so past regimes didn't bring it up, it means no stadium in the future. I am speaking of Blake and the school now, the past is done.

Also No Life is not a first rate facility for the University of Miami. It may be great for the Dolphins and pro football but we play college football and the gameday environment reflects that.

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the abilities of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

Please note I edited my post.

As an alumni I understand both perspectives (if true), but I don't think it was a priority then and it isn't now. I understand that we should not just take on this heavy burden but evaluate properly. I just don't believe it was a priority.

Also the buyouts hit us hard, not sure where you got your info. Finances are dramatically different, no buyouts and more revenues (i.e. better pay from tv contracts). Things are very different and much better.

As for me getting involved, things are chaotic with my work schedule. In a few years, i intend to be a part of the alumni committee up here in the northeast and take it to the streets. Just dont hold your breath. Watch out for me and Strauzer.

I'm not sure that you do understand both perspectives as you claim.

It doesn't matter whether we're on better financial footing now than we were in '07. What matters is whether building a stadium will make us more money in the long run than playing our games in Dolphin Stadium. And in that sense, little has changed since '07. Property values have fluctuated a bit, but are rising back to early 2000's levels and construction costs have risen. We'd still generate the same 50k average attendance at either place, so there will be little, if any, added revenue from ticket sales to cover not just initial construction costs but also the ongoing (and rising) costs of maintenance and renovations.

 

[Consigliere]

Ironically, just 6 years ago when we moved into Dolphin Stadium, Shalala issued a statement that comes **** close to what you claim would work.

"I want to assure all members of our University community—students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, donors, friends—and the tens of thousands of fans who regularly cheer us on, that we looked exhaustively into every aspect of the choices in front of us, and that your needs figured prominently in our final decision."

Somehow, I have a feeling that's not good enough for you.

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the abilities of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

Please note I edited my post.

As an alumni I understand both perspectives (if true), but I don't think it was a priority then and it isn't now. I understand that we should not just take on this heavy burden but evaluate properly. I just don't believe it was a priority.

Also the buyouts hit us hard, not sure where you got your info. Finances are dramatically different, no buyouts and more revenues (i.e. better pay from tv contracts). Things are very different and much better.

As for me getting involved, things are chaotic with my work schedule. In a few years, i intend to be a part of the alumni committee up here in the northeast and take it to the streets. Just dont hold your breath. Watch out for me and Strauzer.

I'm not sure that you do understand both perspectives as you claim.

It doesn't matter whether we're on better financial footing now than we were in '07. What matters is whether building a stadium will make us more money in the long run than playing our games in Dolphin Stadium. And in that sense, little has changed since '07. Property values have fluctuated a bit, but are rising back to early 2000's levels and construction costs have risen. We'd still generate the same 50k average attendance at either place, so there will be little, if any, added revenue from ticket sales to cover not just initial construction costs but also the ongoing (and rising) costs of maintenance and renovations.

I do get it, it is not to complex. Just a cost benefit analysis.

As for revenue, how about naming rights, full revenue (instead of a split) ability to generate more from other events. So even though attendence is the same, we keep more of the pie and have the ability to generate other revenue from events and advertising. I also get the increase in expenses.

Things are much different from 2007. Believe what you want.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Yes because nothing has changed since 2007. Nothing like two buyouts of coaches (coker and clark), the realization that there is no life at sun life and the abilities of the Dolphins to scam the tax payers into necessary renovations.

Things change, things need to be reevaluated.

I think a new committee must be formed.

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

Please note I edited my post.

As an alumni I understand both perspectives (if true), but I don't think it was a priority then and it isn't now. I understand that we should not just take on this heavy burden but evaluate properly. I just don't believe it was a priority.

Also the buyouts hit us hard, not sure where you got your info. Finances are dramatically different, no buyouts and more revenues (i.e. better pay from tv contracts). Things are very different and much better.

As for me getting involved, things are chaotic with my work schedule. In a few years, i intend to be a part of the alumni committee up here in the northeast and take it to the streets. Just dont hold your breath. Watch out for me and Strauzer.

I'm not sure that you do understand both perspectives as you claim.

It doesn't matter whether we're on better financial footing now than we were in '07. What matters is whether building a stadium will make us more money in the long run than playing our games in Dolphin Stadium. And in that sense, little has changed since '07. Property values have fluctuated a bit, but are rising back to early 2000's levels and construction costs have risen. We'd still generate the same 50k average attendance at either place, so there will be little, if any, added revenue from ticket sales to cover not just initial construction costs but also the ongoing (and rising) costs of maintenance and renovations.

I do get it, it is not to complex. Just a cost benefit analysis.

As for revenue, how about naming rights, full revenue (instead of a split) ability to generate more from other events. So even though attendence is the same, we keep more of the pie and have the ability to generate other revenue from events and advertising. I also get the increase in expenses.

Things are much different from 2007. Believe what you want.

Do you really believe that naming rights, full revenue, etc were not capitulated when Donna made that statement in '07? How would any of that differ now?

Things are no different from 2007. Believe what you want.

 

[Consigliere]

We're going round and round about this, so I'll just stop at this:

You keep looking at it from a fan-friendly perspective (eg, SunLife isn't a fun environment), and I'm trying to illustrate to you the administrative perspective (SunLife makes us money, and a new stadium would be a heavy financial burden that likely would not make us money). The two are obviously different, and the admin is obviously going to focus on the financial aspect.

The finances haven't changed dramatically in 6 years. Coker and Clark's buyouts were offset by paying peanuts to Shannon and Golden (for his first year). And the lack of renovations to SunLife doesn't impact UM's pocket book. There's little to re-evaluate.

But you're welcome to form that committee if you want, chief.

Please note I edited my post.

As an alumni I understand both perspectives (if true), but I don't think it was a priority then and it isn't now. I understand that we should not just take on this heavy burden but evaluate properly. I just don't believe it was a priority.

Also the buyouts hit us hard, not sure where you got your info. Finances are dramatically different, no buyouts and more revenues (i.e. better pay from tv contracts). Things are very different and much better.

As for me getting involved, things are chaotic with my work schedule. In a few years, i intend to be a part of the alumni committee up here in the northeast and take it to the streets. Just dont hold your breath. Watch out for me and Strauzer.

I'm not sure that you do understand both perspectives as you claim.

It doesn't matter whether we're on better financial footing now than we were in '07. What matters is whether building a stadium will make us more money in the long run than playing our games in Dolphin Stadium. And in that sense, little has changed since '07. Property values have fluctuated a bit, but are rising back to early 2000's levels and construction costs have risen. We'd still generate the same 50k average attendance at either place, so there will be little, if any, added revenue from ticket sales to cover not just initial construction costs but also the ongoing (and rising) costs of maintenance and renovations.

I do get it, it is not to complex. Just a cost benefit analysis.

As for revenue, how about naming rights, full revenue (instead of a split) ability to generate more from other events. So even though attendence is the same, we keep more of the pie and have the ability to generate other revenue from events and advertising. I also get the increase in expenses.

Things are much different from 2007. Believe what you want.

Do you really believe that naming rights, full revenue, etc were not capitulated when Donna made that statement in '07? How would any of that differ now?

Things are no different from 2007. Believe what you want.

The stability of the athletic department as i mentioned earlier is much different. Miami Dade is bleeding and could use the project more than ever as well.

This is a waste of time.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

Please note I edited my post.

As an alumni I understand both perspectives (if true), but I don't think it was a priority then and it isn't now. I understand that we should not just take on this heavy burden but evaluate properly. I just don't believe it was a priority.

Also the buyouts hit us hard, not sure where you got your info. Finances are dramatically different, no buyouts and more revenues (i.e. better pay from tv contracts). Things are very different and much better.

As for me getting involved, things are chaotic with my work schedule. In a few years, i intend to be a part of the alumni committee up here in the northeast and take it to the streets. Just dont hold your breath. Watch out for me and Strauzer.

I'm not sure that you do understand both perspectives as you claim.

It doesn't matter whether we're on better financial footing now than we were in '07. What matters is whether building a stadium will make us more money in the long run than playing our games in Dolphin Stadium. And in that sense, little has changed since '07. Property values have fluctuated a bit, but are rising back to early 2000's levels and construction costs have risen. We'd still generate the same 50k average attendance at either place, so there will be little, if any, added revenue from ticket sales to cover not just initial construction costs but also the ongoing (and rising) costs of maintenance and renovations.

I do get it, it is not to complex. Just a cost benefit analysis.

As for revenue, how about naming rights, full revenue (instead of a split) ability to generate more from other events. So even though attendence is the same, we keep more of the pie and have the ability to generate other revenue from events and advertising. I also get the increase in expenses.

Things are much different from 2007. Believe what you want.

Do you really believe that naming rights, full revenue, etc were not capitulated when Donna made that statement in '07? How would any of that differ now?

Things are no different from 2007. Believe what you want.

The stability of the athletic department as i mentioned earlier is much different. Miami Dade is bleeding and could use the project more than ever as well.

This is a waste of time.

You're right, this is a waste of time. You keep shifting the focus from the central issue of whether our own stadium would generate more money for UM. It's clear that Shalala et al evaluated it in 2007, and found that it would not, otherwise they would have tried to do it. Nothing has occurred since 2007 that would make it a more viable money-making option for UM.

 

[Consigliere]

I'm not sure that you do understand both perspectives as you claim.

It doesn't matter whether we're on better financial footing now than we were in '07. What matters is whether building a stadium will make us more money in the long run than playing our games in Dolphin Stadium. And in that sense, little has changed since '07. Property values have fluctuated a bit, but are rising back to early 2000's levels and construction costs have risen. We'd still generate the same 50k average attendance at either place, so there will be little, if any, added revenue from ticket sales to cover not just initial construction costs but also the ongoing (and rising) costs of maintenance and renovations.

I do get it, it is not to complex. Just a cost benefit analysis.

As for revenue, how about naming rights, full revenue (instead of a split) ability to generate more from other events. So even though attendence is the same, we keep more of the pie and have the ability to generate other revenue from events and advertising. I also get the increase in expenses.

Things are much different from 2007. Believe what you want.

Do you really believe that naming rights, full revenue, etc were not capitulated when Donna made that statement in '07? How would any of that differ now?

Things are no different from 2007. Believe what you want.

The stability of the athletic department as i mentioned earlier is much different. Miami Dade is bleeding and could use the project more than ever as well.

This is a waste of time.

You're right, this is a waste of time. You keep shifting the focus from the central issue of whether our own stadium would generate more money for UM. It's clear that Shalala et al evaluated it in 2007, and found that it would not, otherwise they would have tried to do it. Nothing has occurred since 2007 that would make it a more viable money-making option for UM.

It is amazing how you keep going, my position is laid out just agree to disagree and move on without shots or more attempts to prove your point.

 

[CaneInHeelCountry]

I do get it, it is not to complex. Just a cost benefit analysis.

As for revenue, how about naming rights, full revenue (instead of a split) ability to generate more from other events. So even though attendence is the same, we keep more of the pie and have the ability to generate other revenue from events and advertising. I also get the increase in expenses.

Things are much different from 2007. Believe what you want.

Do you really believe that naming rights, full revenue, etc were not capitulated when Donna made that statement in '07? How would any of that differ now?

Things are no different from 2007. Believe what you want.

The stability of the athletic department as i mentioned earlier is much different. Miami Dade is bleeding and could use the project more than ever as well.

This is a waste of time.

You're right, this is a waste of time. You keep shifting the focus from the central issue of whether our own stadium would generate more money for UM. It's clear that Shalala et al evaluated it in 2007, and found that it would not, otherwise they would have tried to do it. Nothing has occurred since 2007 that would make it a more viable money-making option for UM.

It is amazing how you keep going, my position is laid out just agree to disagree and move on without shots or more attempts to prove your point.

I keep going because I believe that your POV insults the intelligence of everyone involved with UM admin, including Blake James and Shalala. You insinuate that neither of them--nor anyone else involved with UM admin--is smart enough to have undertaken the most basic and rudimentary examination of the situation, and that they have no concept of how the business world has or has not changed since 2007. It smacks of the kind of uninformed arrogance that UM fans are (in)famous for, unfortunately.

Look, we all wish we were back in the OB, and that the city had pulled through and renovated the old girl as was agreed. Short of that, we all wish that we could have a nice stadium to call our own, something close to campus that would get loud on gameday. But if the financials don't work out, they don't work out. And it would seem to me (and to an objective observer) that Shalala and James and every AD and president before them have examined the situation and come to the same conclusion...that Dolphin Stadium is our best bet financially for the next 7-10 years at a minimum, no matter how unfortunate that may be in terms of fan experience.

I'm sure that they monitor the situation, and if the winds change (say, SunLife really starts to negatively affect attendance and revenue, or contract renegotiations don't go smoothly in the few years remaining on our lease) they'll make it a priority to get our own stadium. Till that time, we can sign petitions and get in the ear of Shalala and James as much as we want, but it just seems petty and ****y to blame them for things of which you admittedly don't have any knowledge. Just keep in mind that one of the biggest reasons that we're on better financial footing now than we were in 2007 is because of the sweet revenue deal that Shalala was able to get us at SunLife.

And with that, I'm really done. I'll agree to disagree now, lol.