McGuirk Upgrade

Whip'ing the program back into shape.
Berkman
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4651
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Mooresville, NC
Contact:

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by Berkman » Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:01 pm

I know for a fact that when the stadium was built they supposedly put in a foundation (s) to be able to build a second deck on the east side at some time in the future. Have no idea if such a foundation would meet present building codes.

User avatar
Steve81
Senior
Posts: 1416
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 5:53 pm
Location: North Quabbin Region

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by Steve81 » Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:07 pm

This is a dream to complete phase one for 2020, when we host Army at McGuirk.

Everything is done in phases. Don't know the cost of phase one but there is a huge difference between phase one and the completed 62M JMU expansion.

Let's focus on getting our Phase One done similar to JMU Phase I. Yes doing phase one in our case may reduce the number of seats, but that could be made up for with end zone seats and the structure needed to hang the Video board on. This is not about McGuirk expansion, but improving the fan experience! It will lay the foundation when expansion happens and a phase two and three could be justified with additional funding from new conference revenue. Phase one is on all of us (not one donor or state funding) and improving the fan experience!

One thousand fans pledging $500 a year for five years is 2.5M. We will need help and we need to have collective goal. Not sure how JMU did it but think they must of gotten a portion from increased student athletic fees. Perhaps a $80 increase in athletic fees will bring in 2M every year.

Before
Image

Completed:
Image

architect:
https://www.moseleyarchitects.com/highe ... h-stadium/

This is phase I <------------<<<
completed:
Image

Article :
http://www.nbc29.com/story/13009074/jmu ... -expansion
The first phase of James Madison University's $62 million expansion of Bridgeforth Stadium is nearly finished ahead of the football season home-opener on September 4. JMU invited chamber of commerce members from Augusta County and Harrisonburg to take an insider's tour of the halfway-expanded stadium Wednesday night.

Megan Argenbright, a JMU alum, was among the first to see the changes that other fans will see in a few weeks.

"They're just going to be blown away," she said.

Demolition crews tore down the westside grandstands at the end of the 2009 football season. That has all been rebuilt. The Dukes will open the 2010 season with new bleachers, a club section made up of gold-painted seats, additional bathrooms, and room to fit several hundred additional fans.

"All the seats in the stadium, there's much more room between the aisles," said JMU Director of Athletics Jeff Bourne. "It's just more customer-friendly."


Construction will pause while the team plays its season in Bridgeforth. Then, phase two of the expansion begins. A suite level, top-tier deck of bleachers, and a new press box will rise to a total of 13-stories high. The finished Bridgeforth will increase capacity from 15,000 fans now, to 25,000 for the start of the 2011 football season.

McKinney
Junior
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by McKinney » Sun Jan 07, 2018 3:50 pm

I found some interesting videos on how USC and LA Rams share a stadium as well as the changes made between Giants and Jets games.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c0u80sROUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRBbvSxXvmI

If we have to go to Gillette full-time at any point in the future (conference stadium capacity requirements but lack of funding for new stadium/expansion, McGuirk is condemned, etc.) I'd like to see more of an effort in making the razor feel like home, and not just playing in the Patriots' stadium. To my knowledge, the farthest changeover done was playing with no paint on the field (like at The Battle of the Bay State game), but I also know I've also seen plenty of games with Patriots logos.

I understand this is probably a money issue and there are more important things we could spend it on. Obviously, I'd prefer a full stadium decked out in Patriots logos over a cavern with Minutemen logos, but it would be appreciated.

Here's some pictures of stadiums shared between FBS and NFL teams.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Ryan McKinney - Class of 2019 - @mckinney2019

photoman
Senior
Posts: 876
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:25 pm
Location: Attleboro

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by photoman » Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:21 pm

@McKinney- Are you trying to say that the "UMass" transformation via segments of tattered maroon tarps they zip-tied to a fence at Gillette was somewhat lacking?

McKinney
Junior
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by McKinney » Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:23 pm

photoman wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:21 pm
@McKinney- Are you trying to say that the "UMass" transformation via segments of tattered maroon tarps they zip-tied to a fence at Gillette was somewhat lacking?
:D :lol:
Ryan McKinney - Class of 2019 - @mckinney2019

69MG
Hall of Fame
Posts: 6988
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:07 pm
Location: Western Mass

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by 69MG » Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:00 pm

^^ Good one Photoman. This discussion has made me realize how little was done to make Gillette seem like a "home" game.

pk77
Freshman
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 12:05 am

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by pk77 » Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:15 pm

I am still confused why people think putting 60 to 70 million into a stadium makes any sense when the Patriots allow us to use their stadium for premier games. From a viewing standpoint and ease of fans to get to games and tail gating you can't beat Gillette. Besides the money to build the stadium, you will also need money to improve roads and parking. I can remember when everybody was saying, "playing games at Gillette would attract recruits" !
Lets put the money towards making our team better and hiring top notch assistant coaches and not the low tier coaches that we have been forced to hire due to finances. Let's put 100 % effort and finances in getting this team to be more competitive and then we can easily convince the state to allocate money for a new stadium. I know i have posted this a couple of times, but is everybody happy with the talent level of our assistant coaches. I am not saying that they are bad people, but they lack the experience to coach up players. Whipple was forced to go the cheap route with the coaching staff and was forced to also be the offensive coordinator to save money. Until we invest our money into the coaching staff this team is not going to reach the heights we would all like to see. So i wrap up with two questions.......(1) do you feel we have the level of talent needed at the assistant coach levels and (2) do you agree that we need to spend money to find an offensive coordinator to allow Whipple to focus on being a head coach ( based on all the comments I see on this site and everybody complianing about his play calling) your answer better be yes?

So please find a way to get the coaching staff some money and get some top level assistants and ones that have the strong recruiting backgrounds. it is always easier to get the state to allocate money for a stadium when you have a winning team and you can prove that people will go to games, So far we have not done either !

McKinney
Junior
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by McKinney » Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:21 pm

69MG wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:00 pm
^^ Good one Photoman. This discussion has made me realize how little was done to make Gillette seem like a "home" game.
It is a shame they didn't do more. Another thing I wish they had done was to tackle FBS football more as a university system than just the Amherst campus. I know that Meehan has been supportive of FBS, but it would have been nice if we had marketed the program as representative of all UMass campuses (since that's typically the role of any flagship institution). Things like making student tickets and transportation available from all campuses, especially seeing how there are ~45,000 system students within under an hour from Gillette (with ~17,000 @ UMass Boston under 30 minutes without heavy traffic).

I'm not sure how this would work, but we might have been able to finance it as a system as well.

Would I have preferred the option of building a $120M on-campus stadium (cost of Rentschler Field with inflation, although unlikely that we'd get the funding)? Of course, but they also could have done more with Gillette than they did.
Ryan McKinney - Class of 2019 - @mckinney2019

minutefanjsf
Senior
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:17 am

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by minutefanjsf » Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:48 pm

It might not cost anything to play at Gillette, but the school makes very little money there, especially if the crowds get bigger. The deal is structured to protect us and help with low attendance. The reward, if attendance increases, goes to Kraft.

minutefanjsf
Senior
Posts: 1257
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:17 am

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by minutefanjsf » Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:53 pm

minutefanjsf wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:48 pm
It might not cost anything to play at Gillette, but the school makes very little money there, especially if the crowds get bigger. The deal is structured to protect us and help with low attendance. The reward, if attendance increases, goes to Kraft.
http://www.masslive.com/umassfootball/i ... ement.html

McKinney
Junior
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by McKinney » Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:04 pm

PK, not sure coaching staff should be discussed on the stadium thread, but I'll give you my two cents anyway.
pk77 wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:15 pm
(1) do you feel we have the level of talent needed at the assistant coach levels
I don't know for all assistant coaches, but I've done some basic analysis comparing offensive line performance and special teams performance. We stack up at #122 and #119 accordingly. #78 and #106 when adjusted for compensation, but that's not too helpful of a stat (as I'll explain later) other than determining good candidates that we can afford to hire. The special teams coordinator is being replaced in this offseason so I hope to see an improvement there.

In case you're wondering there's only a 3% correlation between assistant pay and performance for offensive line coaches and a 5% correlation for special teams coordinators. Granted increasing compensation will allow us to attract more qualified and proven candidates, but paying more does not necessarily guarantee better position coaches. Ultimately that depends on the judgement of the hiring manager (Whipple).
pk77 wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:15 pm
(2) do you agree that we need to spend money to find an offensive coordinator to allow Whipple to focus on being a head coach ( based on all the comments I see on this site and everybody complaining about his play calling) your answer better be yes?
Yes.
Ryan McKinney - Class of 2019 - @mckinney2019

User avatar
MJatUM
Hall of Fame
Posts: 3728
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:46 pm
Location: Attleboro

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by MJatUM » Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:40 pm

McKinney wrote:
Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:21 pm
It is a shame they didn't do more. Another thing I wish they had done was to tackle FBS football more as a university system than just the Amherst campus. I know that Meehan has been supportive of FBS, but it would have been nice if we had marketed the program as representative of all UMass campuses (since that's typically the role of any flagship institution). Things like making student tickets and transportation available from all campuses, especially seeing how there are ~45,000 system students within under an hour from Gillette (with ~17,000 @ UMass Boston under 30 minutes without heavy traffic).

I'm not sure how this would work, but we might have been able to finance it as a system as well.

Would I have preferred the option of building a $120M on-campus stadium (cost of Rentschler Field with inflation, although unlikely that we'd get the funding)? Of course, but they also could have done more with Gillette than they did.
The idea of opening up student tickets at Gillette to students from the entire UMass system is definitely interesting. Good idea even if I don’t exactly know how impactful the numbers from the other campuses would have been.

photoman
Senior
Posts: 876
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:25 pm
Location: Attleboro

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by photoman » Mon Jan 08, 2018 8:41 am

For a number of reasons I don't think the "whole system" approach will be an easy sell. I'm guessing here, but if you're a student at UM Lowell, Dartmouth or Bridgewater State etc, you've likely got little connection to the "flagship campus" and wouldn't really care what they're doing as far as sports are concerned.

User avatar
InnervisionsUMASS
Hall of Fame
Posts: 13373
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 1:32 am
Location: Milford, MA
Contact:

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by InnervisionsUMASS » Mon Jan 08, 2018 8:46 am

If it gets 5 more people in the door, it worked. But I agree that there isn't much of a connection there.
Stop waiting for UMass to do something big and help UMass do something big. - Shades

McKinney
Junior
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:12 pm

Re: McGuirk Upgrade

Post by McKinney » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:03 am

photoman wrote:
Mon Jan 08, 2018 8:41 am
For a number of reasons I don't think the "whole system" approach will be an easy sell. I'm guessing here, but if you're a student at UM Lowell, Dartmouth or Bridgewater State etc, you've likely got little connection to the "flagship campus" and wouldn't really care what they're doing as far as sports are concerned.
Well Bridgewater State isn't part of the UMass system, but I get your point. It would be a hard sell, but the idea would be to build a culture over the long term. You better believe that there are Badgers fans at UW–Milwaukee, Tarheels fans at UNC-Wilmington, etc. Not everyone, but they do exist. To IV's point if it gets 5 more people through the door it's done its job.

This is also important from a culture standpoint because the other system schools have close to double the in-state retainment rate. ~40% Amherst alums in MA, ~75% at all other campuses (I'll firm up those numbers when I get home). Embracing the system is a step towards embracing the state as a whole, "casual fans" (those without a direct connection).
Ryan McKinney - Class of 2019 - @mckinney2019

Post Reply