Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Thursday, Jan. 27, 2011 | 6:57 a.m.
Neal Smatresk
Plans for a domed stadium near the UNLV campus will be released at a news conference set for next week, Sun columnist Jon Ralston reported this morning.
UNLV confirmed last week it is in discussions with Los Angeles billionaire Ed Roski as part of a "public-private partnership" to build a multipurpose sports and entertainment complex near campus.
Ralston reported this morning that those plans will be announced Tuesday during a news conference at the Silverton Casino Hotel and Lodge, which Roski owns. UNLV officials have been informed of the event and invitations are expected to be sent out to various officials, Ralston said.
UNLV President Neal Smatresk said in a statement last week that "this is an attractive proposition. UNLV long has been interested in bringing UNLV football to the main campus."
Ralston first reported last week that Roski was interested in partnering with UNLV to build a domed stadium near campus.
Roski, a billionaire who ranked 524th on Forbes' list of the world's billionaires in 2008, has recently garnered headlines for his efforts to bring the NFL back to Los Angeles.
A representative for Roski last week said discussions were under way, but had declined to comment further.
Sooo is this guy Roski paying for the dome? If not and he is going halves then where is UNLV getting their half when all we hear about is how broke the school systems are here in Nevada. Is a dome really necessary when UNLV football sucks or is this a promise to Hauck to get him here away from Montana.
Domed?? Domed?? Domed?? NOOOOOOO!!!!!!
Domed stadiums are the WORST. Especially in college football. Idaho plays in a dome and that place is the worst college football venue in the country!
I'm 100% for building a stadium closer to campus. But a dome?? Come on. Of course they'd have to figure out a way to screw it up somehow.
Nancy have you ever heard of the NFR and the money that it brings to our city. We will lose the Rodeo and the money it brings to our city, I for one work in the service industry and rely on events such as these. This arena would keep this event in our city as well as bring the possibility of many more like it that could also help UNLV be not so reliant on state funds.
And just where is the money that is going to pay for this coming from ????????
rem92 says that the stadium will "help UNLV be not so reliant on state funds."
Only if the amount of revenue UNLV gets exceeds what they have to pay for it. Those domes cost at least a billion dollars.
Maybe the stadium will help tourism. Good. Then let's call it a subsidy for the tourism industry. Why should we pay for it with the little money that has been set aside to educate our children and future workforce?
Somehow I think that this Roski character is savvier than UNLV officials and will somehow make UNLV pay for his own profits or absorb most of the risks involved in the project. Maybe I'm wrong. But I'd like to see how UNLV (and hence the taxpayer) is suppose to come out ahead in this.
Let's be realistic. The Strip Casinos are the main advocates against any kind of stadium on the strip. By aligning himself with UNLV, Roski has effectively eliminated the opposition. The Strip Casinos can't afford the bad PR of trying to block a University stadium. I'm interested to see what the split on this partnership is and the proposal for funding.
Hey, Sandoval - can you lend these folks a dime?
That is fine as long it is financed 100% by Roski. He can afford it.
You got to spend money to make money. Good idea, and manny_k these domes are not 1 billion unless you go all out in the design.
Las Vegas can't just sit back and not keep these venues relevant and expect to get attractive events to come here. We got to keep up with the Joneses.
If a deal can be done that benefits all...and I mean all..I have no issues other than do not make it domed. True domed stadiums went out with the Astrodome. Either do a retractable ala Phoenix, Houston or just an open stadium. Domed stadiums tend to be very sterile environments. Football was meant to be played outside.
Just how much of this "public-private partnership" will be public. What is the cost to the taxpayers?
Shouldn't the system of higher education be more focused on educating rather than playing?
The stadium being domed is so they can possibly use it for events for the 6 or 7 months out of the year when it is well over 100 degrees here.
Not all domed stadiums are awful. Brent, citing the dome Idaho plays in as a rule for how bad domed stadiums are is ridiculous. They started playing in that dome in 1975. I'm sure design, technology, etc... has improved in those 35 years.
I agree that for most people, the idea of putting up any money for this stadium with the economic climate in this country, especially in Nevada, seems ridiculous. However, it is important to look at things from a long-term perspective. The Thomas & Mack Center is one of the Top 5 grossing arenas in the entire country! That is largely because it is located in Las Vegas and people want to come here for all sorts of reasons. The NFR is a HUGE money maker for the entire city every year when it rolls in. As rem92 pointed out, we will lose that event to Dallas at some point unless we provided a newer, more attractive venue in the near future. This stadium will be just that.
As far as the UNLV football aspect of things, having a new stadium on or near campus will certainly increase the viability of the program. While most of you simply point to the fact that UNLV football is not good, the reality is that the potential to improve in a place like Las Vegas is great. A huge part of success is recruiting, and the fact that when a football recruit comes to UNLV to tour the campus, he has to take a 20-30 minute car ride to see the stadium, which really is outdated compared to even the average college football "stadium." If anyone is paying attention, Bobby Hauck is putting together a pretty solid recruiting class this year and being able to pitch a brand new stadium to potential recruits will certainly help in his efforts. Everyone knows the big money in college athletics comes from football and if UNLV can even make the jump into being an average team that competes for bowl-eligibility each year, the increase in money generated by the program will increase exponentially.
Again, for anyone to look at this and not be a little weary about the fact that some public funds will be used for this stadium is unrealistic. However, the long-term earning potential of a project such as this is enormous.
@unlvrunninrebels
Fine. But what if NFR goes to Texas anyway?
What I'd like to see is some honest and realistic accounting. What will happen to UNLV if the dome doesn't bring in the money expected?
If a stadium will so obviously bring in lots of money, then why has no one done it yet? Is UNLV really the best organization to run what would essentially be a huge business that has noting to do with education?
Make it retractable. Best of both worlds. One of the best fall, winter, spring climates in the world is in Vegas. Take advantage of it. Don't make it a climate controlled indoor environment because the summer is hot. Football is priority #1. The weather is perfect in the fall.
Yes, we are all hurting financially but this sounds to be a glimmer of hope which this city needs. Let's wait to see what is presented next week before we are all nay-sayers. I'm all for the stadium but I will also continue to support UNLV athletics no matter where they play. As for the comments concerning "a business and UNLV not being able to handle the responsibility", you really need to look at the bottom line finances of the T&M, cox and sam boyd. The fact is the University is more than holding their own in this category and a sparkling new arena would be the crowning jewel. I hope this concept goes forward, not only for UNLV football but for the entire city's well-being.
Depending on how the deal shakes out, it could be a boon to the lagging construction industry. The Governor should be chomping at the bit with tax incentives to hasten this deal along.
I hope this happens! I sure won't miss the drive to Sam Boyd Stadium and windy, dusty tailgates (on days I didn't make it on the Star Nursery grass field) or melting in the bleachers during a September game. I think it's great that dorm students can just walk over to a game. That will create such a great team spirit and that would be a huge recruiting tool.
In the words of one of my mentors, a VP at NFL Properties: "Football is meant to be played on grass and exposed to the elements."
UNLV should just eliminate the football program. Every year we listen to the high hopes and every year the team stinks. Put that money into education.
Agree with MikeLange. In regards to our future and the draw of events, look no further than what Dallas has done. Hosted fights, major college football games and now the Super Bowl. The NFR certainly is in their list of events to go after, and this will help us keep it. Regarding the state of UNLV football. We do have what I hope to be a good coach and with a new stadium, one will lead to another. Build the stadium, and the players will come. We are close to being a major college sports town, this will help us get over the hump...
Got priorities?
http://www.thewesternwrangler.com/2011/0...
You're missing the Big Picture here, folks.
Has to be domed because you can't play Major League Baseball outdoors in the summer in Las Vegas for obvious reasons.
Likewise, if you want to fit in the NBA and the NHL in the winter time, you can't do that in an outdoor stadium either.
Line 'em up:
MLB in the summer, along with concerts
Rebel football, LV Bowl, eventual MWC football championship, the NFR, the NBA, the NHL, special college football and basketball events in the fall and spring
Mix in some big time boxing (Pacman vs. Mayweather)and UFC.
And knowing what suckers they are on Maryland Pkwy, Mr. Roski will get not only the land the stadium is built on for free, but UNLV will probably kick in the 50 acres it owns where SBS presently sits, which Roski can later redevelop for the tear down costs of SBS.
Pretty sure that might make Mr. Roski some return on his investment.
"Public-private partnership" in Nevada means the public-partner pays for everything and the private-partner keeps all of the profits.
When I lived in Oklahoma City the same issue was raised about a facility to replace the aging Myriad, where the National Finals Rodeo was held at the time. The NFR people approached the city about a better facility, the city plead poverty and the arena wasn't built. The NFR left for Las Vegas and the city lost countless revenue over the years. Now that the NFR is long gone the arena that could have saved it has been built - the Ford Center, home to the NBA Thunder.
Las Vegas can either replicate the example (and fate) of Oklahoma City, or actually construct a facility that will bring in revenue and make people want to come here for something other than gambling and clubbing.
The stadium isn't going to be for baseball as far as I can tell. I just can't imagine a fall evening, comfortable 70 degrees, sun setting...and you're stuck indoors watching a game meant to be played outdoors. Throw in the plastic field and you know where I stand. Making it retractable or partially retractable like Phoenix and Houston still makes it viable for summer events, indoor events and climate controlled if need be.
I'm thinking Carrier Dome, Metrodome and wanting to throw up.
notice how public is first in public-private financing plan. climate for raising taxes in nevada / vegas is toxic -- there is no way any public money will be approved by voters. the billionaire can seemingly afford it and/or tap his fat cat buddies, there is no need for my taxes to be raised for this project. i hope it gets built as we need the construction jobs, but unless it's 100% privately funded i don't see how that will happen.
I think our new governor should definitely roll out the red carpet with tax incentives, but NO PUBLIC MONEY!
also, any dome built in this day and age should have a retractable roof. i would be shocked if this was not the case. the technology for these buildings has improved greatly. i dont think it adds tremendously (relatively speaking) to the cost.
No frickin' way! If he wants a stadium, he can pay for it himself.
I'm surprised to see all of the negative reactions to something like this. I've been a proponent of an NFL-style stadium near UNLV and The Strip since I arrived in Las Vegas.
First of all, the stadium and property improvements would likely cost somewhere between $450 and $800 million (based on the costs of new domed stadiums in Phoenix and Dallas). Assuming it will seat about 80,000 people, that translates to a maximum cost of $10,000 per seat.
If building a stadium like this meant Vegas could host events like BCS Bowl Games, the NFL Pro Bowl, pre-season NFL games, World Cup Soccer events, the NCAA Final Four, major music concerts, ESPN's X Games, and maybe even the Super Bowl (all events that will attract hundreds of thousands of new tourists to Las Vegas), the revenue multiplier for Clark County would be enormous.
Every new tourist who comes to Vegas for an event that would previously have been hosted elsewhere pays for his seat at the arena, an airplane flight in/out of McCarran, 3-4 nights at a hotel on The Strip, 8-10 meals at our restaurants, 5-6 taxi trips, 1-2 shows, and hundreds or thousands of dollars in gambling or other entertainment revenue. That one new tourist who comes to a big-ticket event here easily spends several thousand dollars and generates hundreds of dollars in revenue for the city and county.
Also, having a major stadium near campus would improve recruiting efforts for the football team (for both players and coaches), would likely improve the competitiveness of the football program, and would help improve UNLV's national exposure and reputation (consider Boise State's reputation change in the last decade). A stronger reputation will allow the university to attract better students and better faculty, which helps the overall quality of education.
Finally, a stadium like this would require thousands of new construction jobs for the next 3-4 years and would create hundreds or thousands of new full- and part-time jobs for administrators, marketing teams, retailers, etc.
The main difference I see with a stadium like this in Vegas is that it will attract far more tourists to its major events and will rely less on the locally-generated revenues to sustain it. Vegas is already the entertainment capitol of the world; this will push us into a more diversified entertainment offering grouping and help establish Vegas as a major player in a new arena.
newcomer: no one disputes that this is a good idea that could generate income for Las Vegas in ways you describe and beyond ... but the issue is financing and there is just no way this moves forward if it hinges on a tax hike -- that is the issue, not the long term benefits. people are concerned about paying their bills this week, not hosting BCS games in 5 years. by your logic, every town should green light all sorts of huge projects but that's just not living in the real world. ask the folks at City Center.
orca: good point but again, that's just not today's reality. tough to make a case for tax hike in this climate today, 15% unemployment (real number is way higher), everyone underwater on their homes, lots of people teetering on declaring bankrupcty, one medical bill away from a disaster. timing is hugely important in life, don't you agree? well, timing could not be worse for this and again it seemms those involved should and could find a way to get it done without raising taxes.
I agree that few of us want to be burdened at this time with additional taxes to fund anything, but failing to invest in a project that will generate billions of dollars in local revenue (and one that will create thousands of local jobs) is myopic.
If we want the tax revenue that would be generated over the next 20-30 years from a stadium like this, then we might need to bite the bullet and invest in the future.
If we say there are approximately 1 million taxpayers in Clark County and half the stadium would be financed with public funds, we'd be looking at about $200-300 per taxpayer over the next 3-5 years. The additional $40 to $100 per year could be collected relatively painlessly through a temporary hike to the local sales tax.
Once the stadium is paid for, the County would reap revenues (even if all stadium revenues were kept by the private sector) for years to come as new tourists flock to Vegas to view big-ticket events in a warm, exciting, and easily-accessible city that has the capacity and diversity to host some of the world's biggest events.
I appreciate the respectful counterpoints by Chief_Wigum. (It's becoming rare to have a conversation in these comment areas without name calling and immaturity.)
One major difference I see between a project like this and City Center is that BCS bowl games, the Super Bowl, NFL games, and college football games (at solid programs) still sell out in today's economy. People flock to these events regardless of what it costs.
People aren't coming to City Center because it's not a sufficient draw to fly across the country just to see a new hotel and gamble. They are flying across the country, however, to follow their teams and to see world-class sporting events.
Like everyone here, I'd rather see this paid for exclusively with private money, but I still see value in it as an investment for public funds given that our K-12 education, higher education, roads, and other services would be supported by new streams of hotel and entertainment revenue for years to come.
The stadium is not going to be big enough to attract NFL games. This stadium is going have seating similar to Syracuses Carrier Dome. This stadium is not being built to attract NFL, pro bowl or other bowl games. I believe I read 40-50k seating. Far too small except for UNLV games. No baseball either.
Mike, not that this is important, but that top grossing arena stat refers to "non-sporting events." Certainly impressive, but misleading. The T&M will never gross as much as an arena like the Staples Center which plays home to several professional teams.
If it's really being built to seat 40-50k, then it seems like a waste of time/money. If it's only intended to serve UNLV football, then I'm absolutely against any public financing.
The University of Phoenix Stadium in Phoenix hold 78,000, and it hosted the BCS Championship and Fiesta Bowl this year (likely attracting more than 300,000 tourists and media members to PHX within a three-week period).
Vegas is already one of the greatest destination cities in the country. If we added an NFL-style stadium to host the world's biggest sporting events, I think we'd immediately be on the BCS bowl circuit and would have a real legitimate shot at events like the NFL Pro Bowl and even the Super Bowl. Without world-class events to draw in revenue from tourists, the public would be (1) financing the stadium and (2) providing the revenue to UNLV sporting events. This would be built by and sustained by local money, which would fail to leverage our city's core strengths for hosting enormous events.
i need to be in the meeting on how they plan to fix the traffic to and from the stadium! They gotta fix the mess that is called "gettin to the Mack"
Roski will pay a major portion of the cost and he'll get naming rights. They've talked about an adjacent hotel and retail/eating establishments. UNLV will bond their portion and pay it back out event revenue and their portion of the hotel and retail leases. There may be a local sales tax financing district but it will be limited to nearby businesses who feel the business generated will be worth the cost. As for local residents, if you don't want to pay the additional one cent sales tax, don't go to these businesses - simple enough. People are right about TMC being a revenue generating success. The same people will be handling the new stadium so I'm confident it will pay it's way.
As for a retractable dome - that would add about 50% to the construction cost. That's not worth it for being open a few events/days a year. Maybe not an NFL team or major bown but the NFL All Star game, rodeo, boxing, concerts, NCAA regional tournament site, and the list goes on.
It's going to make a lot of local people and businesses very happy, I assure you.
@Newcomer
That's what I remember reading. 40-50K seating. I might be wrong but I do not think there is enough available land on the UNLV campus to do anything more.
If you're thinking NFL games, MLB games, Bowl games...you're way off. Isn't going to happen. This is a stadium built for UNLV football. Don't think there is a need for 75k seating.
If you are looking at this proposal as a world class facility on par with Phoenix, Houston...you need a new prescription. Isn't going to happen based on reports.
@newcomer:
Do you honestly think that a stadium is going to be filled with tourists for all the games?
""Chairman of the Board of Regents James Dean Leavitt confirmed preliminary details about the proposal, which specify the capacity of the arena at around 42,000 seats, to be used for UNLV sporting events as well as for others not related to Rebel sports.""
There you go.
@ShannonK:
Yes, I absolutely think world-class events (BCS Bowls, NFL Pro Bowl, Super Bowl, World Class Soccer events, NCAA Final Four, ESPN X-Games, etc) would fill up the stadium with tourists. -- I don't recall seeing many Arizona or Arizona State fans in the crowd during the BCS Championship game between Oregon and Auburn; I'm pretty sure those were tourists. Also, I don't know how many Dallas Cowboys fans we'll see in the crowd on Super Bowl Sunday when the Packers and Steelers play in Texas.
@TomD1228:
If it really is going to be a domed version of Sam Boyd Stadium, then I think we're really missing the boat. I love the idea of bringing the stadium closer to UNLV to help the university, but a plan like that would not be anything like what I envisioned with an NFL-size stadium that could host bigger events.
Is there no land where we could build an NFL-style arena similar to what Phoenix has in their dessert? Do our city/county/state leaders not see the revenue that would be generated by world-class sporting events with hundreds of thousands of tourists coming to Vegas for 2-5 nights to view an event? I don't see why the casinos aren't on board, either. Fans who come to a major sporting event would spend 2-5 days in our city and just 4 hours in the stadium...where do you think they'll spend the rest of their time?
Its a stadium being built for UNLV events, possibly the rodeo and NCAA final four. Other than that no NFL, no baseball, no Bowl games. If they don't raise taxes to fund it, I'm fine with it. If sales tax goes from 8% to 9% or gas tax increase to pay for it I'm against it. This stadium in its current configuration is NOT going to be a huge moneymaker for Las Vegas. Too small to attract big events. It will boost construction jobs short term but you have to weigh that against rising taxes.
Antigov says:
"UNLV should just eliminate the football program. Every year we listen to the high hopes and every year the team stinks. Put that money into education."
Just in case you didn't know... even though the football team stinks the school still gets at least 2 million from the Mountain West Conference. Also, you should know football is a major money maker in college athletics. It's even bigger than basketball. UNLV has always wanted to be big time in both athletics and education. Getting rid of football wont make UNLV big time. Most major universities including the Ivy League schools field a football team. Look at what the University of Utah did. Football at Utah was never relevant before 2004. Since then they've been a roll. For that reason they were invited to join the PAC-12 Conference. The PAC-12 includes schools such as UCLA, USC, California, and Stanford. All of which are big time in athletics and academics. UNLV would kill to be a part of the PAC-12. Utah will soon reap the benefits of being in the PAC-12. Both academically and athletically. I'll bet Utah's research funding will rise exponentially due to the fact they're in the same breath as UCLA and Stanford. Also the money generated by their athletic department will also eventually be self sustaining.
Heck, even look at Boise State. They not a huge acadmic school but look at what football has brought to the university. Football at Boise State has brought in more money into the university and brand recognition. Everytime ESPN's SportCenter mentions Boise State it's free advertising!
So my point is, getting rid of football is not the solution. Helping to revive UNLV's football program by building a new stadium will only help. UNLV's football teams have always stunk but you have to start somewhere.
Get rid of the athletic department, its $26 million budget and $7 million subsidy from the state. No more sports.
Use the $7 million to subsidize lab fees. Make education the sole mission of the university. Make UNLV the model for the nation.
Turrialba:
Not happening anytime soon. I don't see Texas or Ohio State getting rid of their football teams in my lifetime. You can say make it a model for the nation but it will never happen. Whether you want to believe it or not good athletics programs help boost academics and enrollment at a university.
Turrialba:
I should also add both Ohio State and Texas spend in excess of $75 million on their athletic programs. Both are also very fine academic and research institutions. So putting $7 million back into UNLV academics instead of athletics probably won't do that much.
look at that pic of Neal....is he laughing at us?
Hey Mike, I'm a native of fifty years. Since when is it over 100 degrees for 8 to 9 months of the year. Do a little research before you make such a dumb comment.
How do athletics boost academics?
All I see is that it creates a separate class of individuals. Few student participate relative to the size of enrollment.
$7 million per year is about $250 per student. Not astounding, but it is something.
The future of the Nevada is not the UNLV athletic department.
This is a MUST DO for UNLV both in terms of athletics & economics. An on campus stadium could give Rebel football the legitmacy it seeks & provide the final pillar to make the athletic dept financially independent.....which frees up more funding for academics. The key will be what kind of role UNLV will play in the construction & thus what kind of relationship UNLV enjoys once it is completed...meaning, will they be tenants or part owners? They need to be owners and thus get a piece of whatever event rolls thru there. If not, I'd be skeptical too. I also find it ironic that the same people who advocate dumping the athletic program and/or demanding that UNLV not pay a dime....were probably the same ones standing and cheering for Obama Tuesday whenever he advocated "investment" in our future. What the heck do they think this is?!!
@djonian81:
I don't think a domed stadium at UNLV is what President Obama was referring to.
If you still have to ask how athletics helps academics, you are completely lost and probably will never get it.
Who is this clown Turrialba, Bob Maxon?
If you get rid of the athletic department, student fees can be reduced (some portion of the fees support the athletic department)
If a special tax district is created to fund this new stadium complex, will the builders/developers be required to pay the additional sales tax on the materials needed to build this complex since it will be in the new tax district?
Nice line JahReb. I take it you don't have an answer to my question.
JahReb - Athletics helps create an identity for universities. It is an invaluable recruiting tool. Prospective students see the university on TV and they start to identify with the face-painted students in the bleechers. Whether the prospect is a jock or a 4.0 honor student, athletics is usually the hook that brings them in.
There is a high correlation between doing well in sports and enrollment. Applications are noticably higher after a team goes to a bowl or deep into March Madness. More applications means a school can be more selective and bring in better students. At the same time, more students means more tuition so much of the economic impact for a university isn't counted on the athletics side.
LOL Turrialba= Bob Maxson.... Now that's funny. If you have to ask "Who's Bob Maxson?" you haven't been in Las Vegas long enough to offer an opinion on this subject. Honestly I thought we healed the wounds of Education vs Athletics at UNLV over the last 20 years. The athletic dept is just now recovering from that fiasco. UNLV carved off it's face 20 years ago to try and be an example to the the rest of the nation in attempting to dismantle its cash cow basketball program. How did that work out for you guys? Not to well by the looks of your continued dependence on the government teat for your existence. Hey UNLV take a little advice from the only dept there to come close to turning a profit. The one that 20 years ago was off the government dole and performing in the black. You know, the one you dismantled and has taken itself 20 years to move back into a profitable position in spite of your neglect and derision. Turrialba please continue to live in that fantasy land of UNLV competing with the Stanfords and Berkleys of the world. The reality we all live in believe competing with the Boise States and TCUs and BYUs requires us to build a state of the art on campus football/multipurpose facility that helps our UNLV Athletics department to realize the goal that was ripped from it 20 years ago by your ilk. Financial independence.
@ Turrialba:
If you want to know how athletics affects education, ask Auburn and Oregon how much soft money and alumni donations are pouring into their coffers as a result of their football teams' performances this season. (...not to mention the millions of dollars in revenue from the BCS bowl games.)
Alumni stay connected and give back more for a school that performs better in athletics.
I was thinking having a degree from an accredited university that one is proud of; that would provide a springboard to a real career might be the goal.
Not the University Studies program at UNLV and other such programs, which are the repository for student athletes or athlete students.
The people in this town have the university they deserve--fifth rate and little hope for improvement.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2...
obviously Turrialba doesn't know much about our new athletic director. The guy was able to turn the University of Arizona athletic program into a self sufficient entity that does not require public financing. Which is also the goal at UNLV.
Obviously, the new athletic director has a big fat salary and two university vehicles. Maybe he can turn the academic programs around when he is done.
There is no way to make someone like Turrialba understand the connection... They are an extremist...
Look at Cal, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Notre Dame, the list goes on and on and on...Rich in athletic tradition... And arguably some of the better colleges in the US... Even Harvard and Princeton were defined by their football teams back in the 20s... And still have athletics to this day...
Your right Turrialba we can go the route of the University of Phoenix... They don't have athletics!!!
Turrialba:
I think you get the point about athletics and education. Right? You can think about like a pessimist or you can think positive and think long term.
Turrialba::
I might be a little biased because I'm an alumni of UNLV but I want my UNLV to eventually be a first tier university and not the third tier university that it currently is.
Hey Grapes2000, my comment says 6-7 months, not 8 to 9 months. I guess we can take that as proof that you are a native of 50 years because you obviously can't read. Please learn how to read before you try to pick apart anything anyone else ever writes.
The temperature does often stay in the mid-90's to hundreds from about late-April to late-September. I guess I didn't think I needed to point out that the statement was essentially made to imply that in order to host events there for a large portion of the year, a dome is not a bad idea.
As long as it's private money, have at it. I think the days of high dollar stadiums at taxpayer expense are done, at least for awhile. Unfortunately, these days are all about cuts, and new stadiums are certainly a luxury better suited to better times. Very few stadiums make a profit, unless it's an older, paid for place like Dodger Stadium, etc. (Dodger Stadium was built with private money, by the way). The KingDome in Seattle, and the SilverDome in Detroit are typical examples of why public money shouldn't be spent on a stadium.
So if the billionaire ponies up, let him name the stadium whatever he wants and enjoy the game!
A lot of people who post here seem to plan to attend football games and other events at the proposed new stadium. The question I have is how many want their kids to enroll in UNLV?
Any public finances would proably come in the form of a sales tax on the stores and shops located on the property and perhaps a 1/2% increase in the hotel- motel tax.Unless your renting a room to cheat on your husband or wife, you proably won't be paying this tax and if you don't want to attend any functions at the new stadium, you won't be paying any of the sales tax.
"domed" or "doomed"
Can this doom, uh...dome be converted into a homeless shelter?
Just looking ahead, just looking ahead...
Where will the cars park?
Wow... there are some very short sided people who have left posts in here...
The freaking "tax district" they are talking about would raise you taxes exactly $0 if you never went to the stadium or one of the nearby businesses. Once the bonds are paid off, UNLV will only have to pay maintenance cost on the new stadium (exactly like the T&M) which = MORE MONEY FOR THE UNIVERSITY!!!
Yeah this sounds like a horrible idea. In fact lets just go ahead and tear down the T&M, Cox, SBS and all other things that make some of you mouth-breathers all pissy when you wake up in the morning.
Charlie42,
If it was so simple then everyone would be for it. However, bond issues would have to be backed-probably by the state. This is great if the project comes in under budget and gate receipts cover the stadium. What I want to know is what happens if the project comes in $100m over budget or gate receipts fail to cover the $20-30m a year repayments or the building needs other forms of tax-payer bailouts.
I want to know as a tax paying citizen, what this might mean for the area. I do not want to see the state saddled with a $200m debt that results in property/business/sales taxes increases.
I am all for a world class stadiums for the local economy, but I want the extent of public liability to be debated freely. State wide bond issues have to be paid for, they aren't free money.
Love the stadium idea, BUT make Mr. Richski pay for the whole damn thing. These public/private "partnership" deals never seem to work well for the public. Think: Al Davis.
Blocking off Swenson is such a bad idea! The traffic is bad already during an event. They would be creating a nightmare! Take away their 'preffered parking permits' and watch them change it up fast!
Turrialba:
"Get rid of the athletic department, its $26 million budget and $7 million subsidy from the state. No more sports.
Use the $7 million to subsidize lab fees. Make education the sole mission of the university. Make UNLV the model for the nation."
That is the most ridiculous comment on so many levels. How do you make a statement like that and then argue on the side of education in the same sentence? Shall I say oxymoron? I'd like to know where you received "your" education at Turrialba, so I know where not to have my kids enroll.
The on campus stadium is a no brainer...this should of happened 20 years ago when athletics could have easily afforded it. That is before education elitists like Turrialba, Maxson, effectively killed the revenue giant UNLV Basketball once was and doomed a once rising university to the dark ages.
Academics would be lightyears ahead if weren't for those brain trusts!
@Show--It is very easy to make the argument. The purpose of the university is education. The athletic department is extra baggage that the public supports with tax dollars. This wouldn't be so objectionable if the state were not in dire straits financially and the education system as a whole a disgrace.
It is really a matter of priorities. The university this fifth rate academically. The proposed stadium will do nothing th change this If you think the university exists to provide athletic events, I suppose the basketball program in the 1980s looks pretty good. It made money. I Is this why we have intercollegiate sports to make money? The people in this town have the university they deserve.
BTW--you are embarrassing yourself with these comments.
Correction--
This wouldn't be so objectionable if the state were not in dire straits financially and the education system as a whole a was not disgrace.
@Turruabla
Let's give you some education:
1) 60% of college freshmen ever earn their Bachelor's degree. (only about 30% do so within five year.)
2) The graduation rate for NCAA student-athletes is currently 79% and that is with four years.
3) Student-Athletes usually have a 'B' average.
4) The UNLV Athletic Department, it's players and coaches are credited with bringing billions of dollars to the Las Vegas economy.
5) While not currently self-sufficient on it's face. The 7 million short fall does not take into account state and county the sales taxes, room taxes, and state event fees that aren't funneled directly back to the University but rather end up in State and County Coffers. These more than cover that shortfall.
6) Neither are the taxes raised by the employees who have jobs because of the events related to UNLV Athletics
7) UNLV's Athletic Department's revenue is currently the fastest growing in all college athletic's up 85%.
8) The only public funds being suggested for this facility would be raised through bonds, repaid from the taxes collected from the new facility alone, thereby being funded through those actually using stadium.
9) While there are direct academic and fiscal benefits of an Athletic Department, one can't point to any DIRECT academic or financial benefits of, say, the university's janitorial staff. However, no one would argue their services should be eliminated.
bgh1986
The athletic department has a budget of $26-27 million. This paper reported that $7 million of the athletic department budget was provided by the state.
Student contribute almost $2 million in student fees toward the athletic department.
The athletic department offers 17 intercollegiate sports--lets assume these sports involve 1000 students total--or about 3.5 percent of UNLV's student body of 28,000. Very few students participate in intercollegiate athletics relative to the size of the student body.
As for the athletes, their academic achievements, they will exist with or without the athletic department. As for the economic benefits you cite, you have to wonder why we perpetuate a system where the athlete gets paid zero for his or her labor, even though you claim they bring economic benefits to the economy. The university does not exist for the athletic department
The value of the athletic department is way overstated. The domed stadium is a waste and distracts from the purpose of the university which is to educate students.
I called UNLV a fifth-rate university twice in this thread and not one person has challenged me on this statement.
Another article in this rags indicates that big tuition increases are coming due to budget cuts.
UNLV then wants to build a domed stadium in the middle of the worst economic downturn in the state's history (a public-private partnership) Mention closing the athletic department and folks get all bent out of shape.
This is such a thing as human capital. The comments here Say a lot about what is wrong in this town and the priorities we have for our kids.
@Turrialba...Now it's you who is embarrassing yourself.
If you don't get the fact that the UNLV Athletic department provides more revenue to the state than it takes, then you are a lost cause. While the overall financial benifit Las Vegas sees from the NFR alone is 50 million dollars; specifically the state tax revenues from ticket sales on the NFR is nearly 3.5 million dollars. That does even consider then state's revenue from visiting cowboy's room taxes. Once you add the PBR, the Las Vegas Bowl and the various other events held at the T&M plus the state revenues from rooms these events create, the 7 mil. is quickly overshadowed.
"As for the athletes, their academic achievements, they will exist with or without the athletic department." That statement show nothing but ignorance. If the student-athlete were simply a student they would have the same graduation rates and GPA as regular students. Not the superior ones they now have. That doesn't even address all the SAs that wouldn't be able to attend college at all without an Athletic Scholarship.
"Very few students participate in intercollegiate athletics relative to the size of the student body." Participation in college athletics stems far beyond the team athletes. School teams create a sense of community that involves most of the student body. And that, my friend, is the thing thar no one can put an price on. Like it or not, a schools athletic teams are monumental in creating its identity, and attracts students that will never wear a uniform. We would lose many top-notch students if we didn't have one.
If you can think of a reason to eliminate a program that more than pays for itself in both the financial, academic a social arenas, I would be anxious to hear it.
As it is you really haven't offered a single reason to take away the college opportunity from the SA of UNLV. Nor have you provided an offset for the dramatic financial hit Las Vegas and Nevada as a whole would suffer if we eliminated Athletics.
@bghs1986
If the athletic department is such a boon to the economy, let's cut off the subsidies from the state ($7.0 million per year) and from student fees ($2 million). No problem. The athletic department can stand on its own or fall on its own. It can underwrite its own stadium in an athletic department-private partnership. No need for public funds.
Let's face sports doesn't do squat for the average student struggling to make it through and pay tuition, while working a job. This fantasy that sports is central to the student experience is a fiction.
If you want to watch games go to a casino or bring professional sports to town. Don't force me to pay for it, when the education system is in need of fixing (you haven't taken me up on my comment about the academic standing of UNLV)
@Turriabla....I haven't addressed UNLV's academic standing, because your proposal to eliminate athletics, isn't going to make it it any better. I've already shown how taxes directly attributed to UNLV Athletics more than compensate for the $7.0 million that the department receives and at its currently pace the department may soon not even need that. Still you call for the elimination of department without any thought to the consequences.
"This fantasy that sports is central to the student experience is a fiction." Exactly what do you base this assumption on. I challenge you to attend a Notre Dame, Michigan, or even Harvard football game before you make such a claim.
"Sports doesn't do squat for the average student." While there is plenty of evidence that you are wrong here. Let's assume you are right. Even if the only ones to benefit from college sports are the athletes and coaches, why is that a problem?
I could make that claim about any department at UNLV. The Drama department is not self-sufficient and never will be. With less than 200 students it benefits .003 percent of the student body. So why is this department funded? Since the entire university is self-funded, exactly what standards do you think we should use to justify keeping any program.
I dare you to find another department that has the same positive socioeconomic affects on the community, and a group of students that can match the academic achievements of the student-athlete. Other than, "I just don't like it," you haven't produced one solid reason that Athletics is less valuable to a college than any other department. Meanwhile I can give you $50 million worth of reasons the department has been a good thing both UNLV and Las Vegas.
@bghs1986
The university claims that its benefits to the community are about 3-4 times the costs .
"According to Chancellor Dan Klaich, every $1 of state support for higher education equals $4.39 in economic activity in Nevada." (see article on horsford in paper today)
This is certainly evidence that other departments pull their weight and then some.
Tell what good does it do the community when 80 percent of the football and basketball team major in university studies and wind up with a worthless degree? What a waste of resources. (See citation above)
The problem is that you equate the athletic department with other academic ventures. If the athletic department closes, the university will go on. The athletic department cannot exist without the university. So what if the department goes.
The athletic department doesn't do squat for the average student except take his/her money for the student fee. You have cited no evidence to the contrary except your assertion that some exists.
I am surprised that given the state of education in this town, that more emphasis is not placed on academic achievement. But the Romans had their recreation as the the Las Vegans.