PBS vs Nippert

[AAABearcat]

With the 2010 schedule having the Bearcats play Oklahoma at Paul Brown Stadium and attendance on the rise; how viable an option is playing home games at PBS?

IMHO; some advantages/disadvantages

Advantages PBS:
modern stadium
More seating/more revenue
restroom/concession


Advantages Nippert:
Not on campus/students can't walk to game
College atmosphere
Mike Brown doesn't get any money.

I do not think that expanding Nippert is a satisfactory solution to increased demand for tickets, the area is still too confined.
I think if the rent is right and demand for seats is there, then PBS is the logical solution. I would like to see how much revenue the Oklahoma game brings in and compare that to a sold out Nippert game. Atmosphere and the campus setting at Nippert are an experience that should not be missed; but money is what fuels football and the disparity in revenue is a powerful arguement for PBS.

[swg]

Good thread.
I think if UC can fill up PBS with students and diehard fans, then the college feel that you have with Nippert could be there. Nippert is a great stadium, but concessions and restrooms are awful. However, walking to the game after going to Daniels Bar would be a hike.

[Mopper]

No to moving to Paul Brown, just no. I can handle a couple of games here or there at PBS, but the majority of games should always be played at Nippert. UC has developed one of the best home field advantages in the Big East conference over the past 4 years, to the point where UC has a 12 game winning streak in Nippert Stadium, one of the longest in the nation, UC is also 12-5 at home since joining the Big East. Yes Nippert Stadium does need to be renovated and expanded. The ceiling for an expanded capacity is idealistically 50,000 or 45,000 in more realistic terms. That is not huge, but the demand is there. If money is your primary concern there are other options besides moving down town. Expanding Nippert and including 2,500 loge or club seats would be a financial bell weather for the Athletic Department. Currently students don't pay for tickets, that's 5,000 seats for which the Athletic Department currently receives no direct revenue on game days. If you start low with prices for student tickets, at 10 or 15 dollars per game. If they did that for next years home schedule it would bring in between 350,000 and 525,000 dollars of revenue for which they were previously receiving nothing. If demand for tickets remains high after expansion they can continue to raise prices. Another alternative method is to increase seat licencing fees. If improving the bottom line is the goal there are plenty of tools at the disposal of the athletic department to do just that while keeping games at Nippert.

[Thegreatone]

NO DEBATE HERE!

Nippert and it isn't close.

I love Clifton and Nippert is the best stadium I have been too. Love the surrounding area.

Right in the heart of campus is unique.

[swg]

Hard to beat a college campus. If the consensus is that Nippert is it, then they need to seriously upgrade the facilities, and figure out a way to widen the area near the concessions so that the flow of traffic doesn't get bottled up.

[lumberjack]

need to play at Nippert. All games. Its college football and home field advantage. Fix it up but play at Nippert.

[Little Danny]

Originally Posted by Mopper

No to moving to Paul Brown, just no. I can handle a couple of games here or there at PBS, but the majority of games should always be played at Nippert. UC has developed one of the best home field advantages in the Big East conference over the past 4 years, to the point where UC has a 12 game winning streak in Nippert Stadium, one of the longest in the nation, UC is also 12-5 at home since joining the Big East. Yes Nippert Stadium does need to be renovated and expanded. The ceiling for an expanded capacity is idealistically 50,000 or 45,000 in more realistic terms. That is not huge, but the demand is there. If money is your primary concern there are other options besides moving down town. Expanding Nippert and including 2,500 loge or club seats would be a financial bell weather for the Athletic Department. Currently students don't pay for tickets, that's 5,000 seats for which the Athletic Department currently receives no direct revenue on game days. If you start low with prices for student tickets, at 10 or 15 dollars per game. If they did that for next years home schedule it would bring in between 350,000 and 525,000 dollars of revenue for which they were previously receiving nothing. If demand for tickets remains high after expansion they can continue to raise prices. Another alternative method is to increase seat licencing fees. If improving the bottom line is the goal there are plenty of tools at the disposal of the athletic department to do just that while keeping games at Nippert.

Agree 100%. With the financial pitfall the University finds itself in, they need to get started on increasing revenue ASAP.

Wht do you think about a third option: A new Stadim in Burnett Woods or on another spot adjacent to Campus? I have seen studies that indicate it could be cheaper to go this route instead of remodeling the Nip. Also, we are capped at the 45K-50K mark at Nippert. A new stadium would give the option of possibly future growth in capacity if necessary.

[Mopper]

the actual cost of a new stadium in Burnett Woods would probably be cheaper, just for the stadium. UCF just built a brand new 45,000 seat stadium for 55 million dollars. But the process of getting permission to construct a stadium on that spot would take a long time and raise the overall cost significantly

[scooper]

I love Nippert. Been to games at ND and OSU. Both great atmospheress, There's just something about Nippert. I love the intimacy of it and the way campus rises around it. Hell, I wish the Bengals would move back there.

Get it to 45,000 and add a few boxes if possible. That's big enough.

[BearcatAlum1]

I'm for big games at PBS and smaller attended games at Nippert.