Build a new RAC NOW,only smaller,with more premium seating.

[bac2therac]

Originally posted by RU-ROCS:

Originally posted by bac2therac:
The TP plan was pie in the sky and TP was part of the Rice fiasco so blame him

A new RAC is not needed...first priority practice center

Bac-

I'll predict now that Julie's more ambitious Athletes Glen project never gets done and what eventually does get done will look much more like Pernetti's "pie in the sky" plan to add on to the RAC. Time will tell, but from what I hear, donors are more supportive of Tim's concept. Julie has won me over with her hard work and determination, but I think your anti-Pernetti bias is misplaced.

the problem is that all of the Olympic sports are at MAAC level as well. Aggs is right, it was suicide entering the Big 10...but football was shoved through even though we are an embarrassment infrastructure wise in every sport but football. I am assuming that Julie may be thinking its easier to tie in a project on Busch that will be able to get donations from football to al the Olympic sports..thats why basketball would be there...and just raising money for bball alone may be difficult.

The TP plan didn't move for 3 years..money pledged more like than money he had. why did the project not have a start date or a construction firm. I questioned it back then and everyone said relax we are building it..no we didn't. The whole idea of a giant screen in front of the RAC is sure pie in the sky....RAC improvements for seating and expansion have to wait..the practice facility needs to be dealt with first and foremost.

 

[Exit117]

To those that think we should put money into the RAC, sadly it's ranked #335 out of #350.Build the practice center first, then a new arena. I wouldn't put another penny into the RAC,sorry, that's my feeling.

Arena's

 

[Upstream]

Originally posted by Exit117:
To those that think we should put money into the RAC, sadly it's ranked #335 out of #350.Build the practice center first, then a new arena. I wouldn't put another penny into the RAC,sorry, that's my feeling.

That's one guy's opinion. Back in the pre-Fred Hill era, when the RAC regularly rocked, it was ranked as a top-10 arena by ESPN.

 

[Knight_Light]

Originally posted by Exit117:
To those that think we should put money into the RAC, sadly it's ranked #335 out of #350.Build the practice center first, then a new arena. I wouldn't put another penny into the RAC,sorry, that's my feeling.

That's certainly one way to go about.

A radical idea that might end up with best of both worlds:

Rutgers and the County build a 10,000 seat premium event center that will bring in scores of events to the area YEAR ROUND while currently using the RAC.

After the Event Center is completed, RENOVATE the RAC into multiple sport, multi-floor of Men's and Women's Basketball Practice Facilities, scores of new offices, weight training rooms, plus would have room to build another practice facility for another sport or two. That's what some other schools have done with their old arenas (UCF did that with their 16 yr old arena, turned it into a multi-floor, Men's & Women's Basketball Practice facility, plus a volleyball practice/small 1,500 seat arena venue that is also used for multiple shows/events during the year).

Maybe even use a corner/side of the renovated building to use as an Indoor Driving Wall for the Golf Team.

RU Baseball has indoor batting cages but does softball too? If not, use small arena in renovated building for new indoor softball batting cage/pitching areas.

Cities have used "Event Center" tag lines as a way to bring in new public facilities to areas, even when it was mostly being built for a main sport's tenant. (Puts the emphasis on bringing new shows/events to the community, making it easier for politicians to sell local bonds/funding and/or same with Univ BOG's too...as they can sell the notion of year-round revenue projects to help cover costs).

Because any new arena in the area can't compete with the ROCK, there are so many concerts/shows/events that don't need 17,000-18,000 seats nor have the $$$ for high rent costs. (Think GSAC year-round).


Use new 10,000 seat arenas in Evansville, Indiana and the upcoming new 10,000 seat Arena being built in Chicago for their Convention Center area and DePaul as "models" of what new public/private "Event Centers" can do for a community and a Univ.
This post was edited on 3/2 8:23 AM by Knight_Light

 

[srru86]

Originally posted by _dave_:
Has Piscataway signaled that they would embrace concerts in a new arena? If concerts were part of the business plan then the arena would have to be built across the river.

I don't know where this notion that Piscataway has any sort of veto on programming in a state facility comes from. The town can't tell RU what to do or how to do it. Is there some informal agreement, who knows?

The bigger issue is because our arena floor is also the practice floor for Men's & Women's hoops, plus baseball and some others, we can't give over the space to a concert promoters to spend a day setting up the stage, a day to perform and a day to break down, from November to March. We can't have concerts in the summer because no AC.

Solution - Build a Practice Facility!

Then put AC in the RAC

 

[ru66]

bac--construction firms were contacted and a general contractor was being considered

 

[bac2therac]

Originally posted by ru66:
bac--construction firms were contacted and a general contractor was being considered

but no contract or no shovel dates...for 3 years after it was first announced

maybe Julie does not want to do it that way, simple as that.

 

[seels2662]

I agree that a practice facility with offices should be done first. That alone will be north of 10 million dollars probably.

Then the offices behind 118 should be changed to premium booths. Lockerooms should also be completely redone. Building facade, other bells and whistles I am probably not thing about, etc. I bet would cost another 10 million total. A new arena to me is crazy for at least another 10-15 years. But 20 million for everything, if the right donors step up, I think shovels can be put in the ground in less than 5.

 

[srru86]

Originally posted by Knight_Light:

Auburn's recently built new college arena that seats 9,121 is a good blue print on how to increase Revenue while decreasing seating capacity (seats about 1,500 less than their old coliseum).

That Auburn arena is awesome. I wish we could do that. We need to do that, but how many things are different here...

Mobile Press Register from 2008

The arena was slated to cost $92.5 million, although lower-than-expected construction bids might make the final total smaller.

The initial funding plan called for the university to issue about $60 million in tax-exempt bonds. The annual debt payments would come out of the athletic department's budget. Any remaining money would come from private donors.

- We'd never see a project come in under budget
- We can't currently use tax exempt bonds because of internal decisions and external pressure.
- We don't have enough revenue to pay back those bonds because we are still paying off the stadium and don't yet get full revenue share from B1G.
- Can we raise 30 mil? that would be a huge, huge step up for us.

 

[Upstream]

Originally posted by ru66:
bac--construction firms were contacted and a general contractor was being considered

Really? They didn't have a construction timeline. They didn't have blueprints. They didn't even have an agreed-to design. The fund-raising brochure that was released (5 months before Pernetti was fired) had drawings of multiple, differing concepts. When I raised concerns about one of the drawings at that at the time, I was told it was just a conceptual piece, and designs wouldn't be put into place for quite a while.

 

[Upstream]

Originally posted by Upstream:

Originally posted by ru66:
bac--construction firms were contacted and a general contractor was being considered

Really? They didn't have a construction timeline. They didn't have blueprints. They didn't even have an agreed-to design. The fund-raising brochure that was released (5 months before Pernetti was fired) had drawings of multiple, differing concepts. When I raised concerns about one of the drawings at that at the time, I was told it was just a conceptual piece, and designs wouldn't be put into place for quite a while.

So I guess ru66 was just blowing smoke out his butt again with his claim

 

[bac2therac]

Thank you for that piece of info...too many people are writing narratives that his plan was close to fruition

 

[Scarlet Shack]

I can confirm Also what upstream wrote

I got that info as well

 

[Exit117]

So, with what I've heard from those in the know in this thread,does Julie have a concept of a new or renovated RAC to sell to the big time donors,or just a pie in the sky, give me your money and trust me?

 

[PiscatawayMike]

At the most recent CC meeting, Julie said she doesn't believe in throwing out a bunch of "might be" and "could be" plans to the general public. She joked that she has more architectural drawings lying around her office than she knows what to do with (perhaps a subtle dig at TP?). She said when official plans are ready they will be released. She told the gathering at the meeting that she hoped it would be about this time next year.

 

[ru66]

bac and others--to use your often quoted statements--"can't you read"--I said contacted and being considered--and this is true

 

[ru66]

by the way those "drawings" cost more than a $ million and were more than just someone's sketches--get real--you can attack pernetti all you want but he did have a vision/plan which many of us embraced--the current vision we now have is one of waiting and scrathing heads until planning committees come up with something--best way to not get things done or stall is to form a committee

 

[RutgHoops]

Originally posted by ru66:

by the way those "drawings" cost more than a $ million and were more than just someone's sketches--get real--you can attack pernetti all you want but he did have a vision/plan which many of us embraced--the current vision we now have is one of waiting and scrathing heads until planning committees come up with something--best way to not get things done or stall is to form a committee

What a waste of money for "those drawings cost more than a $million".

As someone in Real Estate development you do NOT spend that kind of money on drawings until you have a funding plan in place. Drawings are expensive. Architects are expensive. Spending that kind of money so you have something to take to potential funding sources (donors) is beyond half-baked.

I remember commenting on these boards when I saw the plans that this had to be "real" because you'd have to be a fool to spend that kind of money without the funding in place for the project. Alas.

Julie is doing this right. She is doing this the way RE Developers do it every day in the "real world". YOU DO NOT spend $2MM on drawings and THEN go look for equity financing. Good gosh. There are 50 reasons why that is arse backwards.

 

[ru66]

well as reported over $15 million was pledged--my point was they weren't mere drawings on julies desk but REAL plans

 

[RutgHoops]

Originally posted by ru66:

well as reported over $15 million was pledged--my point was they weren't mere drawings on julies desk but REAL plans

Are saying the drawings cost RU no money? Or was this $15MM figure "pledged but not donated"? Because, not to be a wise arse, I can't pay my architect with "pledged" as they tend to only accept real money. And architectural drawings are certainly part of any RE project, so this should have been more than "pledged" before RU engaged an architect.

 

[ru66]

the actual plans were paid for by over an actual $1million collected for and paid to the architect--the other $15 was pledged for construction

 

[wheezer]

my thoughts are that a new RAC or a vastly improved RAC is a better move than a new practice facility, but I understand why some think otherwise....just my opinion

BUT, I think support for either a new RAC or new practice facility will be met with strong opposition because we cannot fill the RAC now as it is....and that is all you would hear from the opponents of RU in general

at least with the football stadium we had that window of opportunity to expand, when we had a
waiting list for new ticketholders.....no such luck with the bb program.

 

[bac2therac]

Originally posted by ru66:

by the way those "drawings" cost more than a $ million and were more than just someone's sketches--get real--you can attack pernetti all you want but he did have a vision/plan which many of us embraced--the current vision we now have is one of waiting and scrathing heads until planning committees come up with something--best way to not get things done or stall is to form a committee

then what a colossal waste of money for RU....$1 million on several drawings...all kinds of scattered plans in the ADs office

sounds like we spent $1 million for nothing

 

[ran12]

The RAC may be bad but from that list of arenas we're certainly not alone. I have faith that JH will get us there and it'll be something to be proud of or complain about, who knows. Either way there will be plenty of opinions, I'm sure.

 

[RUJMM78]

Until I see shovels in the ground I have no faith that anything will happen other than more losing seasons and lame excuses about the difficulty in attracting donors willing to fund a practice facility.For all the season ticket holders who have seen mostly disappointment for decades the short term future is bleak.The status quo is okay because the team is generating a positive return even while losing.

 

[Upstream]

C'mon, 66. There were no real plans or blueprints. There were just conceptual drawings.

Notice in the top picture, there are tunnel entryways through the student section, which is divided into two tiers. Also, there is corner seating, and the section that would correspond to current section 111 has been eliminated. In the seating chart in the bottom picture, there are no tunnels and the student section is not tiered. There is no corner seating. The section that would correspond to current section 111 has been widened to 8 seats, while the sections corresponding to current sections 112 and 113 have each been narrowed to 13 seats across, and an entire row of seating has been eliminated from what currently exists at the RAC.

So, I asked the obvious questions about the differences between the drawings. I asked if seats would be eliminated in the 100 level sidelines (which happens in both renditions), since it makes no sense to eliminate seats for which Rutgers can charge a premium and move donors to the 200 level. I asked about if the concourse would be extended behind the student section (assuming the tunnels lead somewhere) and if building out on that side of the RAC would require realigning Hospital Rd. I asked a lot of other questions about a lot of other aspects of the various drawings I was shown.

I was told that the drawings were just conceptual at that point and once Rutgers raised money and received feedback, then plans would be drawn up.

But you keep believing that there were plans in place. Everyone else believes that you are so full of sh** that your eyes are brown.

 

[BuggsyRU]

Originally posted by MADHAT1:

Originally posted by Jim_from_RU:
Stfu '66

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Let 66 talk and while we all are at it, maybe wonder why Lesniak isn't talking about him standing up in the State Legislature
asking for a vote on helping RU MBB fund a practice facility.
Maybe we should be asking, if Lesniakis so concerned, why hasn't he contacted the Rutgers AD and asked for a meeting
to find out exactly what the RU M&WBB programs need when he asks the NJ Legislature to help fund the upgrades those programs need.
Giving statements to media outlets is fine, but the statement really needed is the one Lesniak should make to his fellow State Legislators.
Unless he does that, don't expect any help from him, only talk.

Come on.... you can't be at all serious. Are you really saying it's Lesniak's job to go to the AD and "ask her" what she needs, so she can do her job....rather than it being Hermann's job to go to the politicians to ask them to offer financial support?

Is it his job to fundraise for Rutgers athletics.....or is it the job of the Rutgers Director of Athletics to fundraise for Rutgers athletics?

Seems to me you're asking Lesniak to do Hermann's job.

 

[RUfan1979]

Many of us made and honored pledges to the RAC renovation fund based on the plans Tim presented.

 

[ruman]

These were freakin great
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Exit117]

Originally posted by Upstream:
C'mon, 66. There were no real plans or blueprints. There were just conceptual drawings.

Notice in the top picture, there are tunnel entryways through the student section, which is divided into two tiers. Also, there is corner seating, and the section that would correspond to current section 111 has been eliminated. In the seating chart in the bottom picture, there are no tunnels and the student section is not tiered. There is no corner seating. The section that would correspond to current section 111 has been widened to 8 seats, while the sections corresponding to current sections 112 and 113 have each been narrowed to 13 seats across, and an entire row of seating has been eliminated from what currently exists at the RAC.

So, I asked the obvious questions about the differences between the drawings. I asked if seats would be eliminated in the 100 level sidelines (which happens in both renditions), since it makes no sense to eliminate seats for which Rutgers can charge a premium and move donors to the 200 level. I asked about if the concourse would be extended behind the student section (assuming the tunnels lead somewhere) and if building out on that side of the RAC would require realigning Hospital Rd. I asked a lot of other questions about a lot of other aspects of the various drawings I was shown.

I was told that the drawings were just conceptual at that point and once Rutgers raised money and received feedback, then plans would be drawn up.
I'd love this renovated RAC. What would this add as far as seating goes?
But you keep believing that there were plans in place. Everyone else believes that you are so full of sh** that your eyes are brown.

 

[seels2662]

Originally posted by RUfan1979:
Many of us made and honored pledges to the RAC renovation fund based on the plans Tim presented.

I want to make sure this doesn't get unnoticed...are you saying that you were part of the $15M? You sent in the money regardless of the fact that the conceptual drawings were thrown out the window?

 

[bac2therac]

that money probably got used to pay off the new scoreboard and lighting

 

[ru66]

http://www.app.com/story/sports/college/rutgers/2014/05/20/rac-renovation-plan-evolving/9347441/
http://skcom.rutgers.edu/development/release.asp?prID=11722
This post was edited on 3/9 12:15 PM by ru66

 

[RUfan1979]

yes

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by higgins3:
A new RAC is not needed. The RAC is fine.


A practice facility is needed.

Most importantly, the team must win. If you have a 10-20 Rutgers, a practice facility isn't going to sway someone over exactly.

Couple new bathrooms, an exterior enhancement, better lighting and the RAC is a great facility.

Priority 1. Should be a new coach
Priorty 2. New practice facility
Priority 3. New arena.

Its not that we need a new arena now, its that we should ahve one at some point in the next couple of decades. So when we are making these plans we need to consider that the RAC Is going to either need a major overhaul or a complete new arena. In other words - dont build something that will severely hem in the future plans.

 

[BuggsyRU]

Originally posted by bac2therac:

Originally posted by ru66:

by the way those "drawings" cost more than a $ million and were more than just someone's sketches--get real--you can attack pernetti all you want but he did have a vision/plan which many of us embraced--the current vision we now have is one of waiting and scrathing heads until planning committees come up with something--best way to not get things done or stall is to form a committee

then what a colossal waste of money for RU....$1 million on several drawings...all kinds of scattered plans in the ADs office

sounds like we spent $1 million for nothing

Stop down playing what Tim Pernetti did. If you think TP was no where near getting the project done, your clueless.

He had a vision. He had people willing to pledge and donate money/...a lot of money..... to Rutgers, to get it the renovation done.

What the hell has Hermann done that is even remotely close to that?

She has nothing to show. Not even a drawing on a friggin napkin.

She is "hoping" to have a plan in about a year from now? And that satisfies you, right?

What kind of $hit is that?

And you're tearing down Pernetti for actually wanting to get it done, and taking t steps to get it done?

What stupidity.

And you're happy to just go along with her.....then in a year, she will say, "we will hopefully" have some plans to unveil in the spring of 2017....and you'll believe her.

 

[bac2therac]

trust me you are wrong. Pernetti had plans...actually several drawings...none of them concrete and none with shovel dates or contract with construction companies. It wasn't moving quickly pre Rice firing that's for sure. He raised some money and there was money pledged but this was not coming to fruition because there was not enough money.

Now you can scream and curse all you want if that makes you feel better

 

[Knight_Light]

Originally posted by bac2therac:

trust me you are wrong. Pernetti had plans...actually several drawings...none of them concrete and none with shovel dates or contract with construction companies. It wasn't moving quickly pre Rice firing that's for sure. He raised some money and there was money pledged but this was not coming to fruition because there was not enough money.

Now you can scream and curse all you want if that makes you feel better

He was promoting a vision about his plan to improve basketball facilities....and thats what you have to do to get a campaign going (do studies, research, come up with eventual multiple options...then obviously decide on final designs and then kick off public campaign).

Don't think anyone had suggested a final complete approved timeline for all upgrades (there wasn't one), but TP knew it was a priority (after stadium expansion was done) and he was "working the room" (i.e. top donors, etc..) to start getting the buy-in for new upgrades.

It takes time...and TP was doing the ground work that was necessary ("getting his hands dirty") by meeting with key boosters to hopefully kick start that project.

Obviously with TP's departure...any "selling" of possible project died...but hopefully Julie, after being at Rutgers for almost 2 years (22 months), realizes that RU Hoops is sooooo far behind almost every P5 school, let alone dozens and dozens of non-P5 schools in regards to Basketball Facilities and starts working the "room" hard to make sure that's not the case in 2-3 more years.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

This is mindless

Tim was getting this moving and got the rug pulled out from under him

However....
1.) there weren't any set in stone plans...bexause
2.) it was not clear how much the fundraising would ultimately net

Even if tim was here NOW...IMO...the shovel would not have been in the ground yet

 

[derleider]

Originally posted by Knight_Light:

Originally posted by bac2therac:

trust me you are wrong. Pernetti had plans...actually several drawings...none of them concrete and none with shovel dates or contract with construction companies. It wasn't moving quickly pre Rice firing that's for sure. He raised some money and there was money pledged but this was not coming to fruition because there was not enough money.

Now you can scream and curse all you want if that makes you feel better

He was promoting a vision about his plan to improve basketball facilities....and thats what you have to do to get a campaign going (do studies, research, come up with eventual multiple options...then obviously decide on final designs and then kick off public campaign).

Don't think anyone had suggested a final complete approved timeline for all upgrades (there wasn't one), but TP knew it was a priority (after stadium expansion was done) and he was "working the room" (i.e. top donors, etc..) to start getting the buy-in for new upgrades.

It takes time...and TP was doing the ground work that was necessary ("getting his hands dirty") by meeting with key boosters to hopefully kick start that project.

Obviously with TP's departure...any "selling" of possible project died...but hopefully Julie, after being at Rutgers for almost 2 years (22 months), realizes that RU Hoops is sooooo far behind almost every P5 school, let alone dozens and dozens of non-P5 schools in regards to Basketball Facilities and starts working the "room" hard to make sure that's not the case in 2-3 more years.

Which is what Hermann is doing, except unlike Tim P, shes not spending a million dollars to get a design firm involved BEFORE she has significant funds for the project.

Tim P was working on this from the time he got here, and he only got basically to the vision stage. Julie has been here for less time, and seems to be at the same point.

But people are ripping Hermann and saying Tim was on the verge of getting it done (getting what done exactly for $15 million is an open question - certainly not all of the stuff that was in his plan.)