Spin

I had classes at the JAR well after the Dialer was built.

Funny you should mention that as the CCC has a full sized floor. Yet the crowd looks closer to the action than at the JAR, I was there for many indoor soccer games (a different sport from futsal) and arena football. The stage makes it a poor design for sporting events, if that wasn't there it would be very close to the capacity Akron needs. it's also showing it's 63 years if you look past the renovations. One unique feature of the complex is the performing arts center "attached" to the civic center has a parking deck as a roof. That is very convenient, but would probably be cost prohibitive today.

I was looking at pics of "arenas" and this one looks earily similar to the JAR. Maybe less people in the bottom section, but more in the top. Welcome to Orrville High School

OK I see what you're saying. Take your expected crowd and figure that to be 70% of what capacity your building should be. That might be a good way to look at it. I just think we're going to see a big increase in attendance the day we move out of that band box. Even in the JAR attendance increased 10% overall and 15% in conference games last season. Cavs attendance increased 26% when it moved from Cleveland Arena to the Richfield Coliseum.

Comparing college basketball to NASCAR (which has been run into the ground by Brian France) is ridiculous. If a new venue doesn't get more fans in the seats, then explain the huge attendance growth when the Cavs moved to the Richfield Coliseum. When the Indians/Aeros moved to Canal Park. When the Tribe moved to Jacob's Field. And going by attendance percentages in the SEC means nothing without either attendance figures or seating capacity. How about some real figures? This is the same market that had (not one but the only two profitable) indoor soccer teams in the 80's. We broke AA baseball attendance records and drew more fans than all but 5 AAA teams. Broke Arena Football records (and was the only profitable franchise in the AFL-AFL2 era). This market will support a winner. You just have to reach them, and you have to give them a suitable place for adults to go watch.

Attendance has gone up over the Rubber Bowl era. The problem was I-a-don't-know Ball. You have to have an entertaining product in your venue. Perfect example, during the Ted Stepien era I was at Cavs games when there were 1500 other fans there. A week later the Force had 18,000. Those Cavs games were classic, we sat in the loges, and the security guard came over and shot the shit with us. He was lonely. We sat with Howie Chizek. Try that now... Anyway, there is no lack of Cavs fans now...

To do that you would need to know whether the superleague is made up of the top 32-36 programs, or entire conferences (no matter how shitty half of the programs are). I gotta tell ya, I'm excited about the whole thing if the first option happens, and we wind up with the Pitts, WVU's, Cincys, and Indianas. Spring or fall.

The biggest reason for bad attendance IS the JAR. For any number of reasons.

Good video. I missed it when it was out. Funny watching the end zone celebrations, knowing the No Fun League has clamped down even more on them. And after watching that, Trump is still a doush nozzel.

At least it didn't get you in the nose. That was the first and last play I ever made as a goalie. It still hurts to think about.

Hmmmmm, then Freshmen could get in...

The USFL did have teams go out of business. I remember specifically the San Antonion Gunslingers having their jerseys repossessed and they were sneaking into a high school training facility after dark to practice. Several teams had trouble making payroll. But like you said, all start-up leagues have those issues. The NFL has lost something like 60 franchises maybe? Including Akron (the first champs), Canton, Portsmouth, Hammond, Rochester, Dayton, Muncie, Rock Island. The Chicago Bears started out as the Decatur Staleys. Green Bay was independant until the NFL's second year. What killed the USFL (the same thing that kills most leagues, including the NHL almost) was rampant spending on player contracts. A couple owners decided to go into a bidding war for college grads and then NFL free agents. The same thing killed otehr leagues like the NASL, WFL, ABA, MISL-1, that and overexpansion killed the IHL (home of the Cleveland Lumberjacks). If you go back to the Federal League, it's killed leagues in every sport. The decision to go to the fall was the last straw. Attendance was increasing in most markets, ratings were edging upward. But the attendace didn't jump with the player salaries. Some, like Donald, thought going head to head with the NFL would force a merger. it worked for the AFL, ABA, and WHA, right? Wrong. They did win an anti-trust case against the NFL and was awarded $3.76.

I see college football heading more and more toward a 32 team league, probably with paid players. Traditional bowl games will be gone. So will the conferences (seriously, does anyone really believe the Indianas and Kentuckys and Colorados are REALLY going to be allowed in just because they were in a legacy conference???). There's going to be mass realignment when those left out are going to finally look at geography and travel expenses when the big boys leave. I think it's kind of fun thinking about a conference/division made up of Akron, Can't, Miami, Ohio, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Marshall, BG, and Toledo. Dang that would be fun, something Akron could grow into and one day seriously compete for the whole thing. Hell we might even play on cable systems other than TimeWarner To the east there would be about 10 schools to make up another conference. To the west, a midwestern division amde up of the remnants of the B1G and MAC. I would guess tOSU, Michigan, NWern, Nebraska, and maybe Wisconsin of Penn State sucked up into the superleague. That's how I see it playing out. The moral of the story is there are several ways this brave new world could work out, and none of them include Akron or any other MAC school being invited. If you're building for bowl games and the money schools lose at most of them,. and an invite to a legacy conference someday, that's all going to be gone. What will be left are the real college football programs, without the professionalized "college" football programs. The real college programs are going to pick up a lot of fans turned off by the NFL's minor league. If that's the scenario, a 32 team superleague (minor league NFL), then I don't see any reason to jump to spring football. If they do keep the conferences intact, including the ragtag Illini and Demon Deacons, leaving the MAC, WAC, CUSA, and Mountain West, that would be a different story,..

That's a whole different angle there. How about I build an arena off campus, and I let the Zips play there and schedule whenever they wanted. But the university has to pay me if it's otherwise a money loser? Hell yeah I want in on that deal!!!

Multipurpose meaning a floor space big enough to host any arena event. I'm looking at the sustainability of the arena itself, in either case a venue that does not cost the university much needed funds. The rec part is a good selling point for a new arena, and also something very few universities are able to provide prospective students. You have to sell this to a wide audience. But since they haven't tried that route yet and seem hell bent on getting in bed with the county (at an unknown cost), that whole concept is moot.

Agreed. Best case scenario is a university built university owned structure that not only has a first class basketball arena but also educational and recreational facilities for all students. It would be ON CAMPUS, accessible to all students, and would also bring alumni ON CAMPUS. It would also be capable of holding non-university events which would bring revenue into the building's budget to help pay for it. Bringing more outsiders ON CAMPUS to show them we are not Buchtel College anymore. There's talk of needing more classroom space and the need for more building. I attended class in Memorial, the JAR, and the Info. My class at Memorial had to be moved as there were too many students for the room size. Multipurpose is a key. It needs to be for recreational purposes. Use it for rec soccer one night a week in the winter. Intramural and open. I had some great times as a teen at the Force Fitness Institute playing open soccer. Students (even those less-athletic) love that chance to get out and play. Other events, been over that ad nauseum what you could host. The indoor soccer thing got me thinking of youth soccer leagues. Open the thing up on Satuday mornings in the winter, charge each participant and fan, and run tournaments for all the different age groups. It's the perfect demographic to do this with, and it gets a lot more eyes on the campus itself. So, how do we pay for it? Sponsorships helped pay for the football and soccer stadiums. If you have a venue that's open 200 times a year, that's a lot more exposure for a sponsor. How else? US. Nobody has tried this idea. How do I know? I HAVE NEVER BEEN ASKED!!! Have any of you been approached by the U to donate money to a new arena project??? I would much rather help build a facilty for the U by the U at the U, and will never support a limited use county run waste.

Yep, Zips Hockey had a heck of a time scheduling games, often starting at 11pm and running well past midnight. Even when we hosted the conference tournament. They still packed the house BTW. I've seen public skates late at night that were absolutely packed. But I try not to mention ice or hockey because that causes heads to explode here for some reason.

Guess you missed my posts earlier in the thread where I showed the different events that require a bigger floor, and how it all works without hockey (which I don't care if they had ice or not). If you're going to criticize other posters, at least know what the hell they're talking about.

I wouldn't mind it if they designed it so it was capable of holding the events the typical arena can handle. But they're not, so it can't handle a fraction of the events, and they want me and you to pay for it. Earlier in the thread I laid out how many events Youngstown's arena needed to break even, how many events you can host on a full size arena floor, and how many events you can host on a basketball gym floor. If the university, the city, or the county want to do it right, I am all for it. I'll gladly pay the tax or make a contribution to a proper university-built facility on campus. If they want to get in my pockets for their typical myopic half-assed waste of money, they're going to have a fight.

I thought that too. Pair that up with the limited events that you can have with the limited design, and the U could wind up eating a LOT more than they bargained for..

There are two different costs of the building. The cost of building it The cost of operating it, if the income doesn't cover the expenses. No matter what the taxpayers are paying the loan on the cost of building it. When (if) the operating company loses money, the U will cover those costs. So let's say the building needs to book 100 dates to cover expenses and break even. If it only books, say, 20, it's operating at a loss. The University would cover those losses. Meanwhile the building loan is still being paid by the taxpayer.

The argument is they/we don't want to pay for it in the first place. That's what you have to counter. The initial construction cost.

The anti-gym groups have a hell of a head start. I haven't heard anything pro- outside of this forum.

https://www.facebook.com/nonewtaxes2014 http://www.the-news-leader.com/opinion/2014/07/16/letter-opposes-summit-county-sales-tax-increase http://www.twinsburgbulletin.com/opinion/2014/06/26/letter-author-opposes-summit-county-sales-tax-hike http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2014/04/24/7190/akron-proposes-spending-7m-on-college-arena-getting-less-than-nothing-in-return/

We knew this was coming... "Two groups oppose Summit County sales tax increase" http://www.ohio.com/news/local/two-groups-oppose-summit-county-sales-tax-increase-1.504138