UC doesn't sell out because the team has sucked since Huggins left.  This is turning into the same old argument over Riverfront Stadium.  The Bengals were in the Superbowl in in 1989, the Reds won the world series in 1990, they would have won it again in 1994, they were in the NLCS in 1995, then suddenly they "couldn't win" in Riverfront Stadium.  Well both teams got new stadiums, neither have done jack squat in the ensuing 15 years, the Bengals were regularly having games blacked out for years, and nobody pays attention to Reds games at the Reds games.  People pay attention to the commotion between innings, then revert to checking their phones during the game. 

 

People loved Riverfront Stadium until they were told to hate it.  I'm nostalgic for it because there was nothing to do there other than watch the game.  Now people go to games, take photos of themselves looking like they're having fun, post them on Facebook, then are like a lizard sunning themselves on a rock as the likes come rolling in. 

 

They haven't sucked since the first years Mick took over.

UC doesn't sell out because the team has sucked since Huggins left. 

 

Do you follow college basketball?  You're probably not even aware that UC has made it into the NCAA tournament for 5 consecutive seasons.

I get why UC is doing this on campus, and it makes a lot of sense.  The bread and butter of college attendance for most schools are two things--students and alumni.  UC had a strong base of non-alumni fans in the Huggins years, but that base seems to have eroded a bit.  In basketball especially, you have to be a serious program to draw a ton of support from the general public and have what is essentially a pro-team type of following, and very few schools do that.  (UK and U of L are good examples.)  The right move is to provide the best possible gameday atmosphere, and provide an experience that is comparable to the other high-end college basketball experiences in the area.  And I don't mean timeout breaks, or halftime entertainment, or whatever--I mean good, comfortable seats with good sight lines; good beer and food choices; plentiful bathrooms; and nice concourses that you can actually move around on.  If UC can do that--no matter where it is--their attendance should improve and, more importantly, it will be a better experience for the fans who do attend. 

 

Huggs always said Cincy is a pro town. People want pro like amenities at their venue also. The shine rubbed off of 5/3 a long time ago, then throw in the total rebuild of the program and some left the building. In Bloomington or W. Lafayette aint nothing else to do but even older BIG arenas are getting renovated.

Michigan and Illinois did it. There are many sports fans with a lot of money connected to UC...........UC sold out all of their suites ranging from a commitment level of $500,000 to $1.5 Million. These are people that when Mike Thomas was the AD, they never understood are not going to sit next to Joe Sixpack.

UC did Nippert right, the club area is a wall of glass opening up to the field view, flat screens, bar service, outdoor beer patio on the roof.

 

UC will get a significant bump in suite and premium seating "new" season ticket buyers with a renovated 5/3. Including the upper level that will also have a club area.

UC doesn't sell out because the team has sucked since Huggins left. 

 

Do you follow college basketball?  You're probably not even aware that UC has made it into the NCAA tournament for 5 consecutive seasons.

 

And they will be preseason ranked top 20, with probably Mick's best team to date. UC also got a couple of bad draws over the last 5 years,

UConn in round 2 who won the title, and last year drawing UK.

I get why UC is doing this on campus, and it makes a lot of sense.  The bread and butter of college attendance for most schools are two things--students and alumni.  UC had a strong base of non-alumni fans in the Huggins years, but that base seems to have eroded a bit.  In basketball especially, you have to be a serious program to draw a ton of support from the general public and have what is essentially a pro-team type of following, and very few schools do that.  (UK and U of L are good examples.)  The right move is to provide the best possible gameday atmosphere, and provide an experience that is comparable to the other high-end college basketball experiences in the area.  And I don't mean timeout breaks, or halftime entertainment, or whatever--I mean good, comfortable seats with good sight lines; good beer and food choices; plentiful bathrooms; and nice concourses that you can actually move around on.  If UC can do that--no matter where it is--their attendance should improve and, more importantly, it will be a better experience for the fans who do attend. 

 

Huggs always said Cincy is a pro town. People want pro like amenities at their venue also. The shine rubbed off of 5/3 a long time ago, then throw in the total rebuild of the program and some left the building. In Bloomington or W. Lafayette aint nothing else to do but even older BIG arenas are getting renovated.

Michigan and Illinois did it. There are many sports fans with a lot of money connected to UC...........UC sold out all of their suites ranging from a commitment level of $500,000 to $1.5 Million. These are people that when Mike Thomas was the AD, they never understood are not going to sit next to Joe Sixpack.

UC did Nippert right, the club area is a wall of glass opening up to the field view, flat screens, bar service, outdoor beer patio on the roof.

 

UC will get a significant bump in suite and premium seating "new" season ticket buyers with a renovated 5/3. Including the upper level that will also have a club area.

 

No doubt.  Having been to the luxury boxes at several venues, I can safely say that the experience in the old Shoemaker was not up to snuff with going to a Reds game or Cintas.  That will definitely help.

 

(I don't think you and I are disagreeing about anything here, actually.) 

 

UC doesn't sell out because the team has sucked since Huggins left.  This is turning into the same old argument over Riverfront Stadium.  The Bengals were in the Superbowl in in 1989, the Reds won the world series in 1990, they would have won it again in 1994, they were in the NLCS in 1995, then suddenly they "couldn't win" in Riverfront Stadium.  Well both teams got new stadiums, neither have done jack squat in the ensuing 15 years, the Bengals were regularly having games blacked out for years, and nobody pays attention to Reds games at the Reds games.  People pay attention to the commotion between innings, then revert to checking their phones during the game. 

 

People loved Riverfront Stadium until they were told to hate it.  I'm nostalgic for it because there was nothing to do there other than watch the game.  Now people go to games, take photos of themselves looking like they're having fun, post them on Facebook, then are like a lizard sunning themselves on a rock as the likes come rolling in.

 

So, so wrong.

 

UC fans LOVE to use Huggins as an excuse for everything. They have made the tournament 6 times post Huggins.

 

The Bengals made the playoffs 7 times in the 30 years they played in Riverfront Stadium. They have done the same 6 times in just 14 years at PBS. Not exactly "jack squat".

 

The Reds were not the best NL team in 1994. In fact, they weren't even a top 5 team in MLB in winning percentage. To say they "would have won" the NL World Series is ridiculous. They made the playoffs twice in the last 24 seasons they played in Riverfront. They have made it now 3 times in the first 12 seasons at GABP.

 

I'm sorry you don't seem to enjoy sporting events anymore. Just wanted to provide some facts.

 

UC doesn't sell out because the team has sucked since Huggins left.  This is turning into the same old argument over Riverfront Stadium.  The Bengals were in the Superbowl in in 1989, the Reds won the world series in 1990, they would have won it again in 1994, they were in the NLCS in 1995, then suddenly they "couldn't win" in Riverfront Stadium.  Well both teams got new stadiums, neither have done jack squat in the ensuing 15 years, the Bengals were regularly having games blacked out for years, and nobody pays attention to Reds games at the Reds games.  People pay attention to the commotion between innings, then revert to checking their phones during the game. 

 

People loved Riverfront Stadium until they were told to hate it.  I'm nostalgic for it because there was nothing to do there other than watch the game.  Now people go to games, take photos of themselves looking like they're having fun, post them on Facebook, then are like a lizard sunning themselves on a rock as the likes come rolling in.

 

So, so wrong.

 

UC fans LOVE to use Huggins as an excuse for everything. They have made the tournament 6 times post Huggins.

 

The Bengals made the playoffs 7 times in the 30 years they played in Riverfront Stadium. They have done the same 6 times in just 14 years at PBS. Not exactly "jack squat".

 

The Reds were not the best NL team in 1994. In fact, they weren't even a top 5 team in MLB in winning percentage. To say they "would have won" the NL World Series is ridiculous. They made the playoffs twice in the last 24 seasons they played in Riverfront. They have made it now 3 times in the first 12 seasons at GABP.

 

I'm sorry you don't seem to enjoy sporting events anymore. Just wanted to provide some facts.

 

Neither the Reds or the Bengals have won a single home playoff game since the new stadiums were built.  No playoff game has been won by either team in Cincinnati since The Reds in 1995.  So The Reds haven't won a playoff game at home since 1995 and the Bengals haven't since 1990 or 1991.  The Reds had significantly higher attendance as a percentage of the metro's population in the 1970s and 80s.  The metro's population, depending on how you calculate it, is between 25-50% larger in 2015 than in was in 1975.  Seasonal attendance in actual numbers is about the same. 

 

 

 

 

^I recall seeing a TV program in '94 that used a computer that predicted the Reds to win that year. (20/20 or Dateline or something.) I remember because that was the first year I really followed baseball when I was 12 and I loved that team. http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/mlb/reds/2014/07/26/cincinnati-reds-baseball-strike/13217505/

I get why UC is doing this on campus, and it makes a lot of sense.  The bread and butter of college attendance for most schools are two things--students and alumni.  UC had a strong base of non-alumni fans in the Huggins years, but that base seems to have eroded a bit.  In basketball especially, you have to be a serious program to draw a ton of support from the general public and have what is essentially a pro-team type of following, and very few schools do that.  (UK and U of L are good examples.)  The right move is to provide the best possible gameday atmosphere, and provide an experience that is comparable to the other high-end college basketball experiences in the area.  And I don't mean timeout breaks, or halftime entertainment, or whatever--I mean good, comfortable seats with good sight lines; good beer and food choices; plentiful bathrooms; and nice concourses that you can actually move around on.  If UC can do that--no matter where it is--their attendance should improve and, more importantly, it will be a better experience for the fans who do attend. 

 

Huggs always said Cincy is a pro town. People want pro like amenities at their venue also. The shine rubbed off of 5/3 a long time ago, then throw in the total rebuild of the program and some left the building. In Bloomington or W. Lafayette aint nothing else to do but even older BIG arenas are getting renovated.

Michigan and Illinois did it. There are many sports fans with a lot of money connected to UC...........UC sold out all of their suites ranging from a commitment level of $500,000 to $1.5 Million. These are people that when Mike Thomas was the AD, they never understood are not going to sit next to Joe Sixpack.

UC did Nippert right, the club area is a wall of glass opening up to the field view, flat screens, bar service, outdoor beer patio on the roof.

 

UC will get a significant bump in suite and premium seating "new" season ticket buyers with a renovated 5/3. Including the upper level that will also have a club area.

 

No doubt.  Having been to the luxury boxes at several venues, I can safely say that the experience in the old Shoemaker was not up to snuff with going to a Reds game or Cintas.  That will definitely help.

 

(I don't think you and I are disagreeing about anything here, actually.) 

 

Same page jdm.

Here is a 5/3 renovation animation video. I am sure a new one will be created down the road this gives one a decent idea of how radically different the inside of the building will look. Big improvement.

http://www.wcpo.com/money/local-business-news/uc-athletic-director-makes-the-case-for-on-campus-arena

I'm going to miss the $100 season tickets though.

^^Amen to that!  I've had season tickets for the past 5 seasons in the $100-$150 total price range near midcourt (upper level), and I'm already mentally preparing myself for my ticket cost to double (or even triple) once the renovated arena reopens.

Fox Sports 1/2 hour show on Nippert.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thlRqRxxoYc&feature=youtu.be

Fifth Third Arena Project Receives Board Approval

 

CINCINNATI - The University of Cincinnati Board of Trustees approved Tuesday an $87-million, privately funded renovation of Fifth Third Arena, home of the Bearcats men’s and women’s basketball and volleyball teams.

 

“It’s a transformational day for UC Athletics and the University,” Director of Athletics Mike Bohn said. “We are inspired by the passionate engagement from the Board of Trustees, campus leadership and key constituents who are making a bold commitment to our athletic program and the campus community.

 

“The cost of the project has grown due to complexities associated with renovating a 26-year-old building in line with our plan to construct a state-of-the-art arena that will be among the finest on-campus facilities in the nation.”

 

Construction is scheduled to begin in April 2017 and be completed in fall 2018.

 

Proposed improvements to the facility, built in 1989 and originally named the Myrl H. Shoemaker Center, include the creation of a 360-degree seating bowl, new HD scoreboard, ribbon boards, sound system, an LED lighting system which will allow for enhanced gameday presentation, new restroom and concession facilities, a new upper-level concourse with its own fan amenities, expanded food and beverage options and a new main entrance and plaza with centralized ticketing and guest services. The renovated arena also will feature upgraded locker room spaces, expanded premium seating options, including a courtside club, arena club and concourse club as well as enclosed suites, loge seating, a new Bearcats Lounge and super suites."

Yet another Nippert Stadium renovation and expansion?

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/02/15/nippert-expansion-possible-if-uc-joins-big-12/80405222/

That seems like a waste of money. Why not just use Nippert for the regular smaller profile games, and when you play Texas, Oklahoma etc. use Paul Brown Stadium? I really feel like UC needs to use the sports infrastructure downtown more often and are hurting themselves by ignoring it (and yes I'm also talking about a fully renovated US bank arena). There is more room for parking and tailgating at the banks and its easier to access for everyone except those who already live around campus. Phase 1B of the streetcar could help alleviate the problem of getting students downtown as well and along with the new law school could really create a need to connect downtwon/uptown.

The last thing I'd want is to play at PBS multiple times a year. That place has no character or energy. Nippert needs to be embraced. It's one of the oldest stadiums in football.

I also love Nippert, which is why I don't want to further mess with it just in hopes of getting a Big 12 invitation. We should leverage Paul Brown to get into the Big 12, and if necessary we can look at adding to Nippert down the road when it is deemed necessary and realistic (and after a few years of making Power 5 conference money). Outside of WVU, Texas and Oklahoma I don't see the need to have a larger stadium, so is it worth it to further add onto Nippert for maybe 3 games per year? And that is if they would all play every team every year, unlike the other power conferences which rotate their schedules every year. If they add schools and add a championship game, you would probably get an east/west conference schedule so we might only see one (WVU) game per year in Paul Brown. And if you fill Paul Brown with rowdy college football fans of UC and WVU, the stadium WOULD have energy.

I agree with ucgrady[/member], it just seems nuts right after Nippert has been renovated to turn around and build another renovation that would make Nippert redundant with Paul Brown Stadium.

 

That and the Bengals might leave anyway if the NFL expands to global cities like London Mexico City etc. And we'd be left with a big empty stadium.

 

That and football popularity might decline with concussion scandals and spotlight hogging referees.

 

That and MLS is starting to demand their own dedicated stadiums now correct?

 

That and another NCAA conference realignment might happen at the drop of a hat since greed for TV revenues knows no bounds.

 

Im a sports fan too, but would it be ok if Cincinnati bucked the trends jumped off this crazy sports merry go round for a second?

I'd LOVE it if we all just stopped investing so much money in sports. Sports are a form of entertainment and shouldn't become a financial burden for a city/county/school/etc.

 

Let the Bengals leave. Tear the stadium down and expand The Banks which will be a longterm asset instead of a longterm burden.

 

Nippert is fine the way it is. Continuously expanding it for a handful of moments each year isn't necessarily an intelligent use of money. Invest it in other sporting facilities that can benefit students more directly.

^I don't think tearing down PBS would ever be a wise move even if the Bengals leave. It would still be a huge asset trying to attract large conventions, events, etc. As much mixed-use new urbanism development as you could fit in the stadium's footprint couldn't replace the amount we've already invested into the stadium.

How often is PBS used for non-football gatherings that can't fit elsewhere? When is the last time an event that happened here actually hinged on whether or not PBS was available? What events here other than Bengals games have ever had an audience large enough to fill PBS?

 

If something is losing you money and it were to theoretically no longer be needed for its intended purpose, does keeping and maintaining it really make sense when you could replace it with something that would at the very least bring money in instead of only sending money outward like the county currently does for the stadium.

PBS is rarely used for non-game events but that might be due to terms that allow the Bengals to dictate much of that schedule.

If the Bengals left and PBS were torn down, the county would potentially be in a situation where they were still paying off a building after it had been demolished. I think the debt service would dwarf whatever maintenance costs would be for a stadium that would be essentially mothballed except for ~20 concerts or events a year.

 

As for Nippert, If UC got invited into the Big 12, I would support another expansion, but only after a few years of increased revenues and consistent sellouts. Under no circumstances should UC ever play league games at Paul Brown Stadium. Texas and Oklahoma should have to play UC at Nippert like everyone else. They already play Baylor and TCU at stadiums that seat just 45,000 – only 5,000 more seats than Nippert. There’s also a much higher potential for UT and OU fans to go to those stadiums as the fan base overlaps in those locations – there aren’t a whole lot of UT and OU fans in Cincinnati. I don’t think the capacity is as big a problem as many make it out to be, and now that Nippert has modern amenities and a modern press box, capacity is the only benefit PBS has over it.

 

Urbanist idealism aside, PBS isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Nippert will never leave the university. Talk of PBS being demolished isn't relevant to this discussion. Let's just stop.

 

If adding another level on the east side of Nippert gets us into the Big 12, I would be happy for them to do this. I don't want the view of Lindner Center or Dieterle Vocal Arts building to be obstructed. Both of those are no-go's in my opinion.

 

I also don't think the attendance of a college sports stadium should really be all that important in attracting players or fans. Hopefully UC can avoid increasing capacity and still make it into the Big 12. I agree that American football is likely at its peak right now in popularity, so I wouldn't want UC to spend too much on an additional expansion. But I would be fine if they spent some money expanding it to reach the Big 12. I'm actually shocked how cheap the renovation of Nippert was (80 something million).

 

As for MLS, they don't really know what they want. They claim they want all MLS-specific stadiums, but their actions haven't always reflected that (Seattle Sounders, NYCFC's temporary home, DC United [though they are now building a new one], Portland Timbers). With enough money, an MLS team could probably convince MLS to let them use a different stadium.

The stadium has served as a concert venue only once, on August 3, 1975 hosting The Ohio River Rock Festival (Aerosmith, Black Oak Arkansas, Blue Öyster Cult, Foghat, Mahogany Rush, Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, REO Speedwagon, and Styx; admission was festival seating/general admission, attendance 32,000 est. according to local radio broadcasts).

 

Betcha whole lotta weed got smoked at this one. FWIW I saw John Cougar and maybe The Kinks at the Armory Fieldhouse, 80-81?

 

Nippert would be an excellent concert venue.

 

^Wiki. That festival was hosted there and created consternation afterward due to behavior. But it was far from the only concert ever held there. Several concerts were held there throughout the 1960s and 1970s.  CSO had summer series there in the 60s.  Edgar Winter Group (and Frampton's Camel) had the gates crashed in July 1973. Grand Funk Railroad a week later in 1973...which also had riotous behavior.

If the Bengals left and PBS were torn down, the county would potentially be in a situation where they were still paying off a building after it had been demolished. I think the debt service would dwarf whatever maintenance costs would be for a stadium that would be essentially mothballed except for ~20 concerts or events a year.

 

As for Nippert, If UC got invited into the Big 12, I would support another expansion, but only after a few years of increased revenues and consistent sellouts. Under no circumstances should UC ever play league games at Paul Brown Stadium. Texas and Oklahoma should have to play UC at Nippert like everyone else. They already play Baylor and TCU at stadiums that seat just 45,000 only 5,000 more seats than Nippert. Theres also a much higher potential for UT and OU fans to go to those stadiums as the fan base overlaps in those locations there arent a whole lot of UT and OU fans in Cincinnati. I dont think the capacity is as big a problem as many make it out to be, and now that Nippert has modern amenities and a modern press box, capacity is the only benefit PBS has over it.

 

 

Publicly owned sports stadiums are often demolished before they are paid off.  Riverfront Stadium was financed with 40-year bonds but was torn down in year 32.  The new sales tax swiftly paid off the old bonds.  Paul Brown and Great American were financed with 30-year bonds.  As there were various issues during their respective construction periods, I assume that the last GABP bonds are probably scheduled to mature in 2033.  The half-cent sales tax is not required by law to sunset after those bonds are paid off, but I assume that the public will demand its expiration at that time.  We can then have a public debate re: levying a replacement tax (perhaps less than 1/2 cent) that might fund their maintenance and new county projects. 

 

 

That and the Bengals might leave anyway if the NFL expands to global cities like London Mexico City etc. And we'd be left with a big empty stadium.

 

If the NFL expands globally, all signs indicate it would do just that - expand.  The NFL would never remove American football from highly profitable American media markets en masse.

There's always the chance that soccer could continue to gain strength in the U.S. and Paul Brown could eventually host FC Cincinnati if the Bengals move elsewhere.

I don't know why all of these people are assuming that the NFL will expand to Europe and that The Bengals are somehow on the short list of probable exports.  The logistics of expanding to Europe are formidable, with an entire division (not just 1 or 2 teams) needing to move to make it really make sense.  There would have to be 4-5 teams in Europe that could play each other twice per year in order to cut down on travel problems.  But even then, none of them can do a live Monday night game, and the logistics of wild card week would be totally nuts.

 

Again, The Bengals are in a totally different situation than most NFL teams because the majority owner owns 99.9% of the shares.  Mike Brown bought out the last minority shareholder of any significance in 2011 for something like $150 million in cash.  There is no possibility for a minority shareholder rebellion of the sort that took down Art Modell.  Further, the Bengals have been owned by the same family longer than any other NFL team.  It's unlikely that Brown's daughter will give a damn about making more money than they already have pouring in every year.  Why sell to someone who would move the team?  If Mike Brown really wanted to drown in cash, he could sell the team right now.  Obviously that's not what motivates him. 

Doesn't UC football still draw relatively paltry numbers? I seem to remember seeing tons and tons of open seats on the handful of games I checked out on TV in years past. With virtually no football history to bank on (no golden years ala Pitt or Miami), and a current program that has stagnated or declined, I just don't see the market for UC football growing, even if they get added to he Big 12. UC needs to focus on building better academic facilities and student housing rather than more athletic facilities, IMO.

Doesn't UC football still draw relatively paltry numbers? I seem to remember seeing tons and tons of open seats on the handful of games I checked out on TV in years past. With virtually no football history to bank on (no golden years ala Pitt or Miami), and a current program that has stagnated or declined, I just don't see the market for UC football growing, even if they get added to he Big 12. UC needs to focus on building better academic facilities and student housing rather than more athletic facilities, IMO.

 

Right now, the football program is fairly heavily subsidized. If UC could get into the Big 12, a lot more TV revenue would come their way. Obviously they would increase total spending after that to get better recruits and more attendance, but it wouldn't increase by $20 million annually (what UC will see if they make it to the Big 12). This would give them much more money going directly into football so that they can spend less other revenue on football and add it to academics, dorms, etc.

 

I think UC's football program would jump in attendance the minute they get into the Big 12. This past year was a bad year for looking into the stand because, on top of underperforming, almost every home game was really cold or pouring rain. Attendance has been declining since the peak of 2010-ish when they almost made it to the National Championship Game. Not sure how much attendance declined, but it did better with the renovation this year.

 

EDIT: According to wikipedia, attendance peaked in 2010 (the year after we almost went to the NCG) and went up this year from last despite our poor performance.

 

2006: 30,373

2007: 30,246

2008: 31,965

2009: 33,957

2010: 35,064

2011: 32,293

2012: 29,138

2013: 31,770

2014: 28,719

2015: 31,770

Doesn't UC football still draw relatively paltry numbers? I seem to remember seeing tons and tons of open seats on the handful of games I checked out on TV in years past. With virtually no football history to bank on (no golden years ala Pitt or Miami), and a current program that has stagnated or declined, I just don't see the market for UC football growing, even if they get added to he Big 12. UC needs to focus on building better academic facilities and student housing rather than more athletic facilities, IMO.

 

They just had their highest attendance average ever, last year.  So, no.

 

Edit: Per this site http://cincyontheprowl.com/2015/11/17/build-will-come-uc-sets-program-attendance-record/ the attendance record for 2015 that was just set was 37,096, don't know about Ryan's numbers.

UC Football this past season averaged just over 37,000 per game in Nippert despite their record.

I wonder where wiki got their data

Their attendance numbers are accurate if you click on the 2015 season page, but not the overall football program's page. Weird. 37,096 average according to the season's page. Checks out. I edited the wiki page to reflect the correct number

UC signs $70M contract for Fifth Third Arena renovation

May 16, 2016, 7:18am EDT

Erin Caproni

Digital Producer

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

 

The University of Cincinnati has signed a developer for the renovation of its on-campus arena.

 

Skanska USA and Megen Construction have signed a $70 million contract to renovate Fifth Third Arena.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/05/16/uc-signs-70m-contract-for-fifth-third-arena.html

UC just released a hype video for the renovated Fifth Third Arena:

 

Here's a screencap showing what looks like the latest rendering of the main (east) entrance:

 

UC making another big change at Nippert Stadium

Feb 8, 2017, 12:20pm EST

Steve Watkins

Staff Reporter

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

The University of Cincinnati is making another investment in recently renovated Nippert Stadium to replace its outdated scoreboard.

 

UC will spend between $4 million and $6 million to install a new video board system this year in time for the football season that kicks off Aug. 31, athletic director Mike Bohn told me.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/02/08/uc-making-another-big-change-at-nippert-stadium.html

^I'm glad to hear that an updated sound system is also part of the upgrades. The current sound system at Nippert is really inadequate for a stadium of that size. I'm not a sound engineer, but it seems like a distributed network of smaller speakers would be much better than the current set up where all of the speakers are clustered behind the score board.

It sounded so much better calling it the Shoemaker Center or "The Shoe" for short.  It sounded more sports oriented and cool.  Fifth Third Arena sounds like it plays off people who failed math class.

It says a lot that all of the exterior imagery in that video was of Downtown Cincinnati, and it featured no footage of Uptown or even UC's campus.

UC picks temporary basketball home for Fifth Third Arena renovation

 

Parking is another advantage. BB&T Arena has large parking decks right next to the facility. U.S. Bank Arena has an attached parking garage, but its downtown location would have meant most fans would need to park at any of several lots and garages within a radius of the arena.

 

Man, if only there was some way we could link US Bank Arena to UC's campus with a transit system that could carry large numbers of people...

UC picks temporary basketball home for Fifth Third Arena renovation

 

Parking is another advantage. BB&T Arena has large parking decks right next to the facility. U.S. Bank Arena has an attached parking garage, but its downtown location would have meant most fans would need to park at any of several lots and garages within a radius of the arena.

 

Man, if only there was some way we could link US Bank Arena to UC's campus with a transit system that could carry large numbers of people...

 

For the article to suggest that parking is a challenge at USB is a stretch. It is located next to the Banks garage and numerous surface lots to the east.

It sounded so much better calling it the Shoemaker Center or "The Shoe" for short.  It sounded more sports oriented and cool.  Fifth Third Arena sounds like it plays off people who failed math class.

 

The name "The Shoe" for an athletic venue was already taken a long time before 5/3 was built.

You can ignore everything except this as to why they are playing at NKU next year:

 

"Harris said U.S. Bank’s ask was “minimal.’’ Bohn said NKU’s ask was far less."

Source:  http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2017/02/14/doc-can-you-blame-uc-saying-no-us-bank-arena/97916982/

 

A very capable arena that will maximize profit for UC.  Seems like a no-brainer for a temporary season.

 

With Bevin's cuts to Kentucky's higher ed, NKU might have been willing to rent the place for super-cheap just to get some unexpected money coming in. 

Fifth Third Arena Project Update #1

 

 

http://www.gobearcats.com/collegesportslive/?media=551847

Second Phase Of Nippert Stadium Scoreboard Project Underway

CINCINNATI – The second phase of a project to enhance the fan experience at the University of Cincinnati's Nippert Stadium, focusing on the sound system, is underway, the department of athletics announced.

 

Crews started work in early January to reinforce the structure which supports the videoboard at Nippert. Work will continue over the next few months on both the structure and later installation of a new sound system with project completion is scheduled for late March 2018.

 

http://gobearcats.com/news/2018/1/23/football-second-phase-of-nippert-stadium-scoreboard-project-underway.aspx

^That is good news, as the previous sound system was definitely lacking. I'm a bit nervous that it appears that all of the speakers will be integrated into the video/score board. I'm not a sound engineer, but it seems like it would be better to have speakers distributed throughout the stadium, so that each speaker doesn't need to be as loud, improving clarity AND ensuring no part of the stadium is uncomfortably loud. But maybe I'm wrong and you can get the necessary clarity and volume with all the sound coming from a single source. Anybody know if this is a typical setup for good sound systems in stadiums?

New 5/3 Arena update...