UConn adding 2000 seats for Michigan game

Submitted by HELLE on March 26th, 2013 at 10:43 AM
"The University of Connecticut plans to add more than 2,000 temporary seats to its 40,000-seat football stadium for September’s game against Michigan." I stumbled across this article and it made me think, why are they adding "temporary" seating instead of permanent? Their stadium has been 90% full the last four years. I understand that their conference situation is up in the air but they must still have aspirations of building their football program. It seems like a small expansion would be a step in that direction. Maybe I just don't comprehend the cost of 2000 temporary vs 2000 permanent. http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2013/03/15/sports/doc5143a9cfa2…

Comments

Hardware Sushi

March 26th, 2013 at 10:48 AM ^

Haha I hate you UConn. I hope you lose by 70 for not playing in a bigger stadium.

Texas high schools add more than 2000 temporary stands for big games. That is embarrassing.

MAgoBLUE

March 26th, 2013 at 11:40 AM ^

You're going to be frequently disappointed if you use Texas as your expectation for national football fandom.  Especially in comparison to Connecticut.  Now women's basketball on the other hand. . . 

Michigan Eaglet

March 26th, 2013 at 10:53 AM ^

I don't understand why they won't let Michigan buy out the contract and all money they would have made and play at somewhere like the Meadowlands. They already know the game will sell out, so why not make more money and give your game more national apppeal? I know that they have to approve it at the state level, but they're literally turning down free money at this point.

Farnn

March 26th, 2013 at 10:59 AM ^

Worst tickets on Stubhub are already $100 for the Michigan game.  I'm close to splurging on some of the better tickets for $300 each and at this point it seems like it's too late to switch venues and such as season ticket packages are already being sold.

French West Indian

March 26th, 2013 at 11:31 AM ^

It's not just about the AD's bottom line.  Hosting a big event is also an economic boost to the community (all the hotels, restaurants, shops) and this game probably ranks as a rare event for Uconn that will bring in outsiders and give the school & community some excellent added exposure.  Connecticut is a small state that doesn't have a huge natural fanbase like Michigan or Ohio and there is also a lot of competition in that part of the country for sports entertainment dollars.

Why give away all of that added value (to the Meadowlands & northern New Jersey for example) just for a few extra dollars upfront?  In fact, it's even a bit worse than that because if you play the game off campus you are also sending your students & fans on a road trip to spend their money elsewhere while turning your own home into something of a ghostown.

Needs

March 26th, 2013 at 11:51 AM ^

I don't think Yale has any interest in renting their stadium out. It doesn't need the money and there was an incident last year or the year before when one or two students died while tailgating for the Harvard game (think they were run over by a truck while drunk). 

Needs

March 26th, 2013 at 11:46 AM ^

I think it all has to do with the fact that the stadium was built with financial support from the State of Connecticut.  As such, the legislature's made a big deal about UConn playing their games at Rentschler so that all the associated income and tax revenue (hotel taxes, sales taxes, etc) remains in the state. 

Needs

March 26th, 2013 at 1:10 PM ^

Here is the situation:

UConn is a state school.

UConn has to deal with the state legislature for its funding.

The state legislature underwrote the Rentschler Stadium with state dollars.

The state legislature wants all UConn games to be played in the stadium that it paid for so that Connecticut's citizens can reap the associated tourism revenues.

Ergo, UConn will not play the game in New Jersey.

WolverineHistorian

March 26th, 2013 at 1:06 PM ^

The Iowa loss you could blame more on Lloyd, as we kept doing that roll out punt all day and every time Iowa got closer and closer to blocking it. The commentators on TV even asked why we kept using that punt and sure enough, the Hawks blocked it and it set up an easy TD. Even so, our receivers were wide open on almost every play during our last drive and Navarre overthrew them every time.

The Oregon game was nothing more than a clusterfuck of special teams distaters. The Ducks blocked a punt for a TD, returned a punt for a TD and a couple other stupid things happened as well, I don't have the heart to look it up.

But that Oregon team was mediocre at best. After that game against us, they lost their next 3 games by scores of 55-16, 20-6 and 59-14. Then 2 weeks later, they lost 42-10.

funkywolve

March 26th, 2013 at 5:11 PM ^

That was such a downer.  UM was up something like 12-6, had to put together a nice 4th quarter drive and was attempting a FG to go up 2 scores.  Washington blocks the FG and returns it for a TD.  One or two plays after the kickoff Navarre throws a pass to Perry out in the flat.  It bounces off of Perry's hands and is intercepted and returned for a TD.  Within a matter of minutes (and probably less than a minute on the game clock) UM went from possibly being up 15-6 to being down 20-12.

WolverineHistorian

March 26th, 2013 at 6:16 PM ^

UGH!!!!!!!!!  I just relived it. 

The irony is I was excited on that field goal attempt.  We make it, and the game is all but done.  Washington couldn't do crap against our defense.  A 15-6 lead in the 4th quarter in that game would have been no different than a 42-6 lead. 

Even on the radio, Beckman and Brandstatter were commenting on how tired the Washington players looked, breathing heavy and looking like they had no fight left in them.  Then the punt was blocked, returned all the way, and a little of me died inside. 

Tyrone Biggums

March 26th, 2013 at 9:37 PM ^

I went to that Oregon game, if memory serves me correct I think we were trying a fake punt and we fumbled, like on our 20yd line. They scored easily on the ensuing drive. The first half was a comedy of errors. The only redeeming factor for me was that you could leave the stadium and they sold beer in the field house directly next door. We outplayed them the second half it was too little too late though, they held us on a game winning drive attempt and proceeded to run out the clock.

 

yzerman19

March 26th, 2013 at 12:15 PM ^

I remember Dan Fouts going absolutely apeshit over a one yard run on third down that was ruled to not be a TD that replay indicated probably broke the plane, and UM blocking the following FG attempt and running it back for a TD.  Dan Fouts was going ballistic on the non-TD call and Kieth Jackson had to talk him down.  "Easy buddy that's the alumni talking."  I have never liked Dan Fouts since then and take great pleasure in all those AFC championship games he lost. 

Lionsfan

March 26th, 2013 at 11:10 AM ^

Unless they start selling single game tickets, I don't think this makes a difference. Forcing people to buy season tickets if they want access to the UM game is just being stubborn

NY wolve Old Guy

March 26th, 2013 at 11:31 AM ^

I just bought 4 tickets for the family...I have been waiting for tickets to become available.

I think the opposite...prices are only going up.  As we get closer,  tickets will be scarce for this event.   The reason they are keeping the game in Storrs is that they want the event on campus, and everyone will want to be there.  And it will be an event...I bet it will be described as the biggest football game ever played in Connecticut.  Draw on Uconn fans, New York and Boston crowds.  And in a small stadium.

I didn't even know the tickets were on Stub Hub -- I have been looking at Craigslist periodically and haven't seen it listed.  As we get closer to September, I am guessing the tickets will be some student tickets, and few decent seats.  UConn fanbase has been waiting for this game for years.  And face value?  Hmm...you can only get this game as part of season ticket package, so the face is actually skewed for all the other games you don't want (I actually looked into buying UConn season tickets too.)

Anyways, I have 4 tickets, now, and if I overpaid by $100 a seat or whatever, small price to pay for certainty for me and kids.

NY wolve Old Guy

March 26th, 2013 at 12:26 PM ^

I just went to UConn season ticket window, and i basically paid for season tickets.  Literally, I could order season tickets (even with the required seat donation) and paid  same amount as I just did on Stub Hub.  I suppose, if I wanted to go long Uconn football tickets and try to sell the other gamesd for $10 or $20/ticket (maybe), I could have come ahead.

 

So, if you are looking now, definitely check out the season ticket option.  If I had not just bought them, I would have bought seasaon tickets to ensure delivery, authenticity, etc.

State Street

March 26th, 2013 at 11:34 AM ^

This is ridiculous.  Great UConn, you increased your capcity by 2000.  Tickets will still be ridiculously expensive, Michigan alums will fill up way more than 50% of the available seats, and the stadium still wont be on your campus.

There is, however, a perfectly viable 80,000 seat venue similarly off campus that would be able to accomodate the demand.  But that would make too much sense.

Fitz

March 26th, 2013 at 12:03 PM ^

Yeah, it's really too bad that UConn isn't willing to move a home game in their stadium to a larger location that is farther from their fanbase and campus in order to appease all the vistor's fans.

They have a nice, pretty new stadium that is located near the heart of their fanbase in East Hartford. Sorry to have to break this news to you but people in CT don't care about football as much and there's no need for them to have a larger stadium. They bus their students to the game so off campus isn't as much of an issue.

Fitz

March 26th, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^

Doubling revenue by moving the game to either Boston or NY is a moot point since they increase their own costs and the state loses out on increased sales and use taxes. Playing the game at Yale Bowl only adds about 25k tickets while also adding the cost to rent out the stadium and probably decreasing revenues from consession since I'm pretty sure they don't sell beer there. Also, since New Haven is easy to get to by train from NYC I doubt many of those people would be coming and staying the night before/after in a hotel which also hurts tax revenue.

Could they increase the money from playing the game some place else? Probably. The point is that there are very few UConn fans who are clammoring for them to move a marque game away from their home stadium. There's a lot whining that goes on on these boards about Dave Brandon and the B1G doing things solely for the purpose of increasing revenues at the expense of the fan experience and tradition. Maybe people should take a step back and see that UConn is doing something to treat their fans to a better experience at the expense of revenues and quit their complaining. This is not Michigan's game to control, it's UConns if you didn't want to play the game in CT you shouldn't have signed the contract.