ADVERTISEMENT

Hobbs’ Response After Multiple Sellouts, Decrease Capacity

The problem is the state is putting up more money than anyone else. Do you think they would foot the entire bill? Besides, with all the complaining on this board, it's clear we lack enough support to raise the money to build things the right way. $30 for parking is enough to cause a riot on this board. 🤣

The complainers

Fast And Furious Money GIF by The Fast Saga

Think you’d have to do a bond issuance and pay it back from athletic revenues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cubuffsdoug
Are you telling me that an architect with a several hundred million dollar job in hand can’t come up with a way to keep a home court advantage!
Unfortunately THAT architect and the MONEY men will be working together. The main thing on the table will be how to get the most ROI possible, and also how to most effectively maximize revenue. On the backburner is how to keep the electricity of our arena alive - it's a factor, but money will far win out when coming up against keeping the culture of the RAC alive. Unfortunately the answers to both of those questions are in conflict with what makes JMA special and the intangibles (that are actually immeasurable when it comes to $, but should be factored in) that come with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #1 RUFan
The reality is there are no great options.
THIS is the truth. We have such a small arena that I think what could very possibly happen is that changes will be made to take away the vibe of the RAC AND the changes that are made will not really yield enough revenue for it to be worth it. It will be the ultimate RU SCREW and a Lose/Lose!
 
Is is possible to leave seating as it is on the sidelines and student section and build out fancy stuff on the open end? You could stack suites and seats on top of each other and blow out the wall where the current concessions are. What makes the RAC loud stays and you’d probably increase capacity. Then build the big lobby with concessions and bathrooms and maybe a bar/restaurant that is open pre game and for away games for hoops and football into the green lot.
 
I know it’s sacrilege but I do think our home court advantage is somewhat overrated (personally think all of them are).

Yes it’s great - when the team is playing great.
When the team isn’t playing good - it’s not.

We lost 4 home games to end last season when the team was fighting for a tourney berth.

Doesn’t matter how great the home court advantage is - if the players aren’t making shots then it doesn’t really matter.
I'm trying to understand this crazy logic of yours. I looked at the last 3 years plus the few games into this year. Our record at home is 42-13 which is a 76% win record. Our record away is 12-23 which is 34% win rate. How do you figure there is no home court advantage?

And anyone who watches this team play can tell we play with much more confidence at home.
 
It’s not hard.

Step 1. Update the seats all the way around the court. Maintain the same seat numbers.

Step 2. Paint the student section red.

Step 3. Add seating to the corners and close the arena in slightly.

Step 4. Bring back section 118. Paint the seats red.

Step 5. Create a luxury box area above section 118.
 
200 million?? Where is that number ftom!?

NJ earmarked 100 million for RAC upgrades and practice facility. I’m guessing the upgrades to the RAC will be at least 1-200 million - Illinois did a comparable upgrade 10 years ago that cost 160 million. They went from 16k seats to 15 and change.
 
Let's be more modest with our premium seating ambitions so to increase our overall capacity. We could gain 1.5K to 2K seats if the four corners were filled, current loge seating optimized, second floor offices converted to seating, and student section optimized. Then, cannibalize 1200 seats for 200 premium seats for a net gain of 500 to 1K.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Degaz-RU
NJ earmarked 100 million for RAC upgrades and practice facility. I’m guessing the upgrades to the RAC will be at least 1-200 million - Illinois did a comparable upgrade 10 years ago that cost 160 million. They went from 16k seats to 15 and change.
I thought the 100 mill the state had in the budget was for the new indoor football practice facility and the rac -- you are correct
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUGiddy777
I'm trying to understand this crazy logic of yours. I looked at the last 3 years plus the few games into this year. Our record at home is 42-13 which is a 76% win record. Our record away is 12-23 which is 34% win rate. How do you figure there is no home court advantage?

And anyone who watches this team play can tell we play with much more confidence at home.
Agree and can't believe that someone here is poopooing the HFA of the RAC.

And besides our own view - when commentators or anyone else associated with NCAAMB talks of the RAC(or JM Stadium) it is aww of how the atmosphere is with only 8k in the house.
 
I just think it’s embarrassing to have a 8k arena. Would have thought we at least push towards 9k
No opposing coach ever says its a small arena. They complain that its a hornets nest. No problems with 8k people. In a perfect world we would have 10k but I understand the need for some club seating.
 
Is is possible to leave seating as it is on the sidelines and student section and build out fancy stuff on the open end? You could stack suites and seats on top of each other and blow out the wall where the current concessions are. What makes the RAC loud stays and you’d probably increase capacity. Then build the big lobby with concessions and bathrooms and maybe a bar/restaurant that is open pre game and for away games for hoops and football into the green lot.
I believe what you’re describing was in the original plans under Pernetti, which would have upped the capacity to 10k , plus adding the necessary bathrooms and concessions.
 
We really need to be careful here and strike a balance on what the market demand REALLY says can be sold …and what our ticket base is

I sit in the 100s…And I can tell you that most of the fan base in rhe 100s is NOT spending the type of money that the club seats and luxury boxes at the prices they are talking in the questionaire …

A lot of the seats on the court side are NOT filled by sold tickets . This is first hand account …

So this additinal revenue is coming from new business and a few high donors for how many seats . 100? Maybe 200? It’s not 700-1000…..

And are we giving a club experience that equal to the garden , Barclays or the prudential center ?

Yes …we need the revenue …but I’m not so sure that the new revenue growth is coming from these type to justify the cost unless it really sone at a moderate level

People cherris the RAC for the 2 1/2 hour game experience …not for the glass of woe and cheese .

Add a club for before and after rhe game , , a few luxury boxes in the offices above the ticket office …and 1000-1500 seats and make this place the next and better Cameron stafiin

The arojosohere and winning with top kids wining games will push ticket prices and required donations uo for 2000 -3000 seats in the 100 level
 
Is is possible to leave seating as it is on the sidelines and student section and build out fancy stuff on the open end? You could stack suites and seats on top of each other and blow out the wall where the current concessions are. What makes the RAC loud stays and you’d probably increase capacity. Then build the big lobby with concessions and bathrooms and maybe a bar/restaurant that is open pre game and for away games for hoops and football into the green lot.
This is just too obvious a solution. Why isn't this being considered? So infuriating that they would even consider f'ing up the RAC
 
Are you telling me that an architect with a several hundred million dollar job in hand can’t come up with a way to keep a home court advantage!
Nothing will compare to the RAC. Name another arena like it?
 
Hate to say it but it seems anything we build new in this area just sucks. The one exception, may be Citi Field. I just can't see us building new and able to keep the same home field which is also part mystic as it is the noise- which is intense.

There is a real need to increase revenue, sucks it may cost seats to current holders but there doesnt seem a way around it. And then dress up concession and bathrooms.
Agreed MetLife is a shitshow, Yankee Stadiun underwhelming though I like the PRU could have done more with it
 
Last edited:
When the RAC opened in 1977, it sat between 9k and 10k. Over time, the RAC had to meet certain codes and new laws such American Disability Act. That reduces the capacity. Now revenue is the problem. To earn enough revenue, Rutgers may have to sacrifice total capacity for revenue-generating seats that are fewer in number. That revenue will help Rutgers to compete with other schools.

Unless fans take a step to contribute to the a new arena or pay more (tickets, parking, donations, etc ) to improve Rutgers' current situation, things will remain the same. People are upset with current Rutgers officials, but the root of the problem lies with Freddy G, and previous school presidents. It may serve all of us fans, alumni, and supporters to move in the same direction for once and do what is necessary for the long-term health of the program.
Blaming Freddy G - that was decades ago - Do you realize we are in the B1G. You cant be that clueless can you?
 
NJ earmarked 100 million for RAC upgrades and practice facility. I’m guessing the upgrades to the RAC will be at least 1-200 million - Illinois did a comparable upgrade 10 years ago that cost 160 million. They went from 16k seats to 15 and change.
Not sure what your point is - 15000 > 7700. If RU spends 200 million for the plan that the AD floated people should go to jail.
 
Blaming Freddy G - that was decades ago - Do you realize we are in the B1G. You cant be that clueless can you?
We are lucky to be in the BIG after a decade plus of Mulcahy and the Pernetti with McCormick getting us on that course AFTER Gruninger, Blaustein, and Lawrence left the department in neglect. We got held up somewhat by Barchi and Hermann because they had a mandate to stop athletic bleeding. Hermann struggled with raising money and Barchi was focused on med school integration. All this led to where we are --- in a deep financial hole and slowly digging out. But the lack of investments when they should have been made is going to be painful to overcome. Until that dent gets made in the next few years, donors will have to step up to build a new stadium. Bottom line, until we get more balance in the athletic program, building a new area will cost way more money than had their been an ounce of vision 30 years ago to start that process back then. So yes, blaming the administration for lack of vision and execution 30 years ago is warranted. Of course, you can make a difference if you want to start the ball rolling with a $10M donation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cubuffsdoug
Blaming Freddy G - that was decades ago - Do you realize we are in the B1G. You cant be that clueless can you?
That dude did everything to remain small time. If you don't think his lack of actions played a role, you're no connecting the dots to Rutgers' problems. He passed on a chance to be a part of the Big East led to the mess Rutgers was in. Freddy G passed on the opportunity to secure a bowl bid in 1992. If Graber didn't go over Freddy G's head straight to the state, there would be no new Rutgers Stadium. This dude was the biggest roadblock to Rutgers advancing in sports. Rutgers didn't start investing in the facilities and on-field product until Mulcahy became the AD. The facilities were never addressed back then and the bill has come due.

How about them clues?
 
We are lucky to be in the BIG after a decade plus of Mulcahy and the Pernetti with McCormick getting us on that course AFTER Gruninger, Blaustein, and Lawrence left the department in neglect. We got held up somewhat by Barchi and Hermann because they had a mandate to stop athletic bleeding. Hermann struggled with raising money and Barchi was focused on med school integration. All this led to where we are --- in a deep financial hole and slowly digging out. But the lack of investments when they should have been made is going to be painful to overcome. Until that dent gets made in the next few years, donors will have to step up to build a new stadium. Bottom line, until we get more balance in the athletic program, building a new area will cost way more money than had their been an ounce of vision 30 years ago to start that process back then. So yes, blaming the administration for lack of vision and execution 30 years ago is warranted. Of course, you can make a difference if you want to start the ball rolling with a $10M donation.
Morgan Freeman Applause GIF by The Academy Awards
 
THIS is the truth. We have such a small arena that I think what could very possibly happen is that changes will be made to take away the vibe of the RAC AND the changes that are made will not really yield enough revenue for it to be worth it. It will be the ultimate RU SCREW and a Lose/Lose!
And again - a result of Rutgers trying to do big time athletics on the cheap when they built it initallly back then
 
Last edited:
There is no reason why the RAC could not be expanded to
10,000 if they open up behind each basket and built upward and still have room to accommodate for suites. The fact Hobbs is going to spend significant money and not expand capacity for a program that is on the rise is a travesty. The facility still will be outdated even after spending 150 million. Do it right and do not take shortcuts!!
 
Think you’d have to do a bond issuance and pay it back from athletic revenues.
A bond issue for major facilities is a certainty, unfortunately at generation-high interest rates. The debt will not be paid using athletic revenues. Instead, the university will pick up the tab. Incremental revenues generated by athletics will be used to fatten coaches’ bank accounts, not service debt.

Who do you think pays the football stadium debt, the athletics department or the university? Of course, the university. The expansion has not come close to earning the revenue needed to service the debt.
 
A bond issue for major facilities is a certainty, unfortunately at generation-high interest rates. The debt will not be paid using athletic revenues. Instead, the university will pick up the tab. Incremental revenues generated by athletics will be used to fatten coaches’ bank accounts, not service debt.

Who do you think pays the football stadium debt, the athletics department or the university? Of course, the university. The expansion has not come close to earning the revenue needed to service the debt.
I don’t think that’s true Charlie
 
Not sure what your point is - 15000 > 7700. If RU spends 200 million for the plan that the AD floated people should go to jail.

The point was that the Illini did an in place upgrade that appears to be comparable in scope to ours and the cost was 160 million, so given location and that that was a decade ago, 200 million seems about right for what’s planned. You could probably build a new arena for 5-600 million.
 
We really need to be careful here and strike a balance on what the market demand REALLY says can be sold …and what our ticket base is

I sit in the 100s…And I can tell you that most of the fan base in rhe 100s is NOT spending the type of money that the club seats and luxury boxes at the prices they are talking in the questionaire …

A lot of the seats on the court side are NOT filled by sold tickets . This is first hand account …

So this additinal revenue is coming from new business and a few high donors for how many seats . 100? Maybe 200? It’s not 700-1000…..

And are we giving a club experience that equal to the garden , Barclays or the prudential center ?

Yes …we need the revenue …but I’m not so sure that the new revenue growth is coming from these type to justify the cost unless it really sone at a moderate level

People cherris the RAC for the 2 1/2 hour game experience …not for the glass of woe and cheese .

Add a club for before and after rhe game , , a few luxury boxes in the offices above the ticket office …and 1000-1500 seats and make this place the next and better Cameron stafiin

The arojosohere and winning with top kids wining games will push ticket prices and required donations uo for 2000 -3000 seats in the 100 level
Shack nails it.

I get that the survey is asking about ALL of the different potential luxury items that COULD be done, but it’s highly unlikely that they will ALL be done. That’s what the survey is for — to determine the fan base’s interest in the various options.

My hope is that the survey reveals that there is not much interest in people paying $200 to $800 per seat, per game, just to have a a club suite at mid court that would take away from the atmosphere.

Sure, build in a few rows of premium “loge” seating with access to a “Bunker Suite” that doesn’t impact seating at all; but the rest of the club suites should be in the end zone where the offices are currently located.

Then use the rest of the funds to:

1. Install new seats throughout the arena:

2. Build out a new wider concourse that encircles the court and that has new bathrooms and concession stands;

3. Build a new entrance outside of the current building footprint (to provide room for the new concourse);

4. Build out a new Section 118 to mirror the size of the student section, plus fill in all four corners with seating (maybe incorporate SOME premium seats within the new section);

5. Build club suites above the new section 118, where the offices are located;

6. If there is some demand for additional premium seating, sure, like I said above, build into the top of the 100s a few rows of premium loge seating with access to a Bunker Suite.

This is all we truly **NEED** for an enhanced experience for 95% of the true Rutgers fanbase.
 
A bond issue for major facilities is a certainty, unfortunately at generation-high interest rates. The debt will not be paid using athletic revenues. Instead, the university will pick up the tab. Incremental revenues generated by athletics will be used to fatten coaches’ bank accounts, not service debt.

Who do you think pays the football stadium debt, the athletics department or the university? Of course, the university. The expansion has not come close to earning the revenue needed to service the debt.
Depends on how you look at it. RU would never have been invited to the BIG without the stadium expansion. Care to guess the per year revenue difference between the AAC and the BIG?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scarlet83
I'm trying to understand this crazy logic of yours. I looked at the last 3 years plus the few games into this year. Our record at home is 42-13 which is a 76% win record. Our record away is 12-23 which is 34% win rate. How do you figure there is no home court advantage?

And anyone who watches this team play can tell we play with much more confidence at home.
Easy answer would be that both are due to us being far away from a lot of the rest of the conference. Longer travel times for teams to get to us, and we have longer travel times on the road.

Anyway I don't think we really need to expand the arena capacity. I don't think there's a gigantic appetite for Rutgers basketball even now. I'd rather sell out 8000 seats than have 10000 people a game in a 16000 seat arena.
 
Perhaps the RAC’s ugliness creates the home court advantage. After visiting teams see the arena then enter it like rats they are in so much cognitive pain it breaks their concentration on the court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MiloTalon13
Thank you for your response but I cannot understand it. Could you write in different words we understand?
I am sure you can find it but I think we needed to average attendance that was around 40-42k to break even on the expansion. We have done that easily most years. You framing that in a negative light is pretty stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scarlet83
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT