Pure fantasyland wishful thinking: IF VT manages to get into SEC or B1G...
... do you think that we would ever look into finding a way to fit an additional 4,368 or more seats into Lane Stadium to push the capacity over 70,000? If you're going to compete in those leagues, you need to have BIG stadiums.
In the SEC, Texas A&M - 102,733; LSU - 102,321; Tennessee - 101,917; Texas - 100,119; Alabama - 100,077, etc. At our current 65,632, we would have the 12th largest stadium, only ahead of Mississippi, Missouri, Kentucky, Mississippi State, and Vanderbilt.
In the B1G, Michigan - 107,601; Penn State - 106,572; Ohio State - 104,944; UCLA - 92,542; Nebraska - 87,000, etc. At our current 65,632, we would have the 11th largest stadium, only ahead of Purdue, Illinois, Oregon, Indiana, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland, and Northwestern.
Now, I don't have any expectation that we would jump up to an 80,000 seat stadium shortly after becoming a member of one of these two conferences, but it certainly would be nice to break that 70,000 seat threshold, and move up from the bottom 25% in stadium size in each of them.
Of course, the demand would have to be there in order for it to even be considered. But, consider this - Even with the poor records we've been having the last few years, and operating in a perceived low-interest conference, we have been regularly selling out Lane for most games. You'd have to think that participating in one of the perceived "super conferences" and with improved play, there might certainly be sufficient demand to add 5 - 10 K additional seats.
I'm sure all of these dream scenarios have been discussed internally within our Athletic Department, but it might be a fun exercise to discuss here. Have at it.
55 Replies
Anything is possible, even expanding the stadium or reducing seating such
as what UNC did by installing stadium seats where bleacher types once existed If any expansion were to occur regardless of what conference VT plays in, it will have more to do with demand
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
Has anyone established that stadium seats are physically possible? The
places I have seen them installed are in SHALLOW stadiums where you have more depth in each row. We achieved the steepness in Lane in part (I assume) by reducing the depth of each row.
Obviously, I’m no engineer.
(In response to this post by anotherdamnyankeehokie)
Good point, I know that on the west side, the bleachers at the top were
removed and some type of stadium seat exists there as "indoor/outdoor" club patrons Effectively retrofitted from existing levels. In the SEZ , that was all new so the concrete row can be wider. In Cassel the seats were replaced where the rows are narrow and steep
(In response to this post by Femoyer Hokie)
1y
Talk about a death sentence.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
E
EDGEMAN
1y
(In response to this post by SpeakToDamien)
1y
beginning. However, if the program wants to truly get better as a whole, then it must be willing to truly challenge itself each week in all aspects of the game.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
We will not be great again until Nit Whit heads off into the sunset
We need an AD good at one thing and one thing mainly, raising MONEY. He's an administrator with no juice.
(In response to this post by VTHokie2000)
1y
luxury of having a new AD when it has the opportunity to join either the Big Ten or SEC. If the SEC were to come calling today and Whit is still the AD, then I do think VT should say "yes" to the invitation (assuming the GOR was a moot issue) because VT may not have another opportunity to find a seat at the P2 table. VT didn't carpe diem in the late '90s when the SEC was looking to expand to 16 members and VT used the interest to leverage full membership in the Big East in exchange for recommitting to the Big East Football Conference. VT may or may not have carpe diem which allowed Mizzou to join the SEC. If VT doesn't express interest in joining the SEC, even in an informal conversation, then VT could be looking at a three strikes and your out type scenario.
Now if VT doesn't have its heart set on participating in "big time college athletics," then that is a different kettle of fish. I may not like it or agree with it, but I can live with it. It just means waiting for the P2 to decide what path they are going to go down and the dust to settle so the remaining FBS, FCS, and non-football schools can decide their future. I'm just tired of VT trying to live in both worlds.
(In response to this post by MrBayAreaHokie)
1y
May get filled by visiting fans.
But do you really want to have another 4500 visiting fans in the stadium?
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
Parking garages built over existing parking lots is the most likely I think
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
We could have the “Bruce Smith Firewood Sale” fundraiser to
support NIL.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
1y
I would keep the North Endzone bleachers as-is and build a huge Torgeson Bridge-type structure behind the NEZ bleachers. There's a small footprint available between it and the practice field, so going up and over may be a way to maximize the space. Fill the inside of the bridge with luxury suites, football offices, a turret for Skipper to be seen in Lane.
Penn State has their video board on the moon comparing it's height above the field. VT could build a new one above the SEZ and it would still be lower than PSU. I also like how Bama has 4 smaller video boards in the corners of their stadium.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
Absolutely think the 4 corner video boards could easily be worked out. Love
the Bridge idea. To be but to be practical though, that Scoreboard will likely be obsolete by the time an expansion is warranted, so I would remove it & use the SEZ design. However make all current Outdoor club seats now be bleachers, eliminate luxury boxes and used the covered area contain "club seats" that might even have heaters in the ceiling like Buffalo Bills have on their second tier covered seating. As to the "road" behind the stadium between the practice field, it probably can still exist and if not the concourse floor can be used to drive vehicles through as needed when the stadium isn't being used
(In response to this post by Victor Tango)
+1 for the cannon on top of the bridge!
(In response to this post by Victor Tango)
I
I85Hokie
1y
Our stadium is slightly larger than that of Missouri, a school that is also comparable to VT in enrollment. It’s easy to think that we could have got that SEC bid instead of them, but that’s a whole different story.
Regardless, the size of our stadium is more than adequate, and it’s the largest college stadium for quite a distance in any direction. The closest ones that are bigger would be Clemson’s stadium to the south, Tennessee’s stadium to the west, and Penn State’s stadium to the north.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
All the schools you listed are either much larger enrollments of student, much larger groups of living alumni, or located in/near large metro areas.
VT doesn't match up in any of those. We are smaller than the larger schools by a lot. We don't have massive numbers of living alumni, and our location is over two hours from any larger metro area. We don't check any box for needing a stadium expansion.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
E
EDGEMAN
1y
Thought they were smaller...much smaller.
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
I never intended to compare us to -just- the schools with huge enrollment and living alumni counts, with stadium sizes above 100,000. Those were just shown for illustrative purposes. If you'll look at my post again, you'll see that I mentioned the 70,000 capacity mark as something to shoot for, not something in the 100,000 range.
I'm specifically thinking about schools who are peers to us in both enrollment and living alumni, and with relatively non-urban locations. Indeed, some of these are of even smaller enrollment, fewer living alumni, AND more remote than VT. Those schools' stadium capacities are:
(For comparison, Virginia Tech - Capacity 65,632; students 35,600; alumni 292,000)
Arkansas - Capacity 76,212; students 32,100; alumni 162,000
Auburn - Capacity 88,043; students 33,000; alumni 225,000
Clemson - Capacity 81,500; students 28,700; alumni 180,000
Iowa - Capacity 70,585; students 31,400; alumni 301,000
Nebraska - Capacity 90,000; students 23,600; alumni 216,000
Oklahoma - Capacity 86,112; students 29,200, alumni 250,000
South Carolina - Capacity 77,559; students 34,900; alumni 310,000
Tennessee - Capacity 101,915; students 36,300; alumni 275,000 (Now, this one is obviously an outlier, but UT's enrollment is comparable to VT's and their living alumni are even less than VT's.)
So, I don't think it's unreasonable, at all, to aspire to have at least a marginally similar stadium capacity as some of those. Something in the 70,000 to 80,000 range is certainly not an unreasonable reach for a university of our size and geographical location as compared to these peers.
** Edited by Culpeper Hokie at 11/1/2024, 1:50:08 PM
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
on the numbers...The GT number is suspicious given living alum, so thinking that includes a robust online program? Kinda like Liberty being the largest VA university?
(In response to this post by HokieAl)
1y
(In response to this post by VT757to276)
1y
I honestly don't understand how they retain their accreditation.
** Edited by Culpeper Hokie at 11/1/2024, 3:41:25 PM
** Edited by Culpeper Hokie at 11/1/2024, 3:42:43 PM
** Edited by Culpeper Hokie at 11/1/2024, 3:43:51 PM
(In response to this post by RVAHokie05)
1y
Their swim facility is very nice. We went there last spring for my daughter’s swim team championship. Very impressive facility from what I saw.
Such a strange place with tons of money but lacking the “school” quality.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
You don't expand a stadium to get competitive.
You get competitive to drive a need for expansion.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
I'll be the first to admit that KU's attendance follows their performance on the field, so over the years, dismal would be the term I would choose. Without even looking, their football viewership numbers probably coincide with dismal.
Yet, because of their brand, they were vetted for the Big 10, as they have the academics, are a flagship University, fit geographically with Nebraska, and of course, the national branding that comes with being a basketball blue blood.
The Big 10 told them why they were not invited, so what do they do? KU listened, and I assure you, having an 80K - 100K seating capacity was not what they told KU.
Next year, KU will play in their new stadium (renovated), and it will be pretty cool.
There is nothing wrong with Lane, but if you are going to change anything, it will be the fan experience, with chair backs, food, amenities, revenue increasing suites, and anything else that will increase attendance, and be worth it to the fan buying those tickets. It's not how expensive it is to attend the game, it's whether or not the fan's experience creates value other than a win or a loss.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
H
hokieZ71
1y
2) want to see good football.
That is all it takes. We sold games out during Pry’s 3-8 season simply because we liked the direction of the program, post-Fuente. VT would sell out for the rest of my life if we averaged a 8-4 record every year. Have a few 6-6 seasons, but also a few 10-2 seasons and that’s all we care about.
The KU fanbase might need more amenities. (And I understand that) The VT fanbase just needs a winning football team.
(In response to this post by Big12 guy)
1y
That would get them further consideration from the Big 10. Ot shows a willingness to commit big time dollars to their football program.
The amenities are a sign of the times, as almost all new stadiums have similar things that give the fans a better experience and value.
VT is not unique in that they want good football. Full energetic stadiums enhance the fan experience, whether it's 50,000 or 100,000.
(In response to this post by hokieZ71)
I'd expect a s stadium expansion if we end up in the P2. 72k minimum.
We will get many more in attendance just from road fans, not to mention the increased attendance from current Hokies fans, and perhaps an expansion of our fanbase in the region.
I think if you build another upper deck in the NEZ like the one in the SEZ, that would take Lane to about 72k, correct?
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
required fire and safety access road. If VT wanted to build an upper deck in the NEZ, then could it be built in current space so no part of the structure is built over the access road? It is a question worth asking because VT may not be able to turn the access road into a tunnel due to the existing codes/laws.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
E
EDGEMAN
1y
Not sure we would get that many, but we would have additional luxury boxes.
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
1y
Lane is big enough as-is.
In the era of universally televised games in HD on 95 inch 4K flat screen TVs that weigh 30 pounds you can get at Wal-Mart for $1200, it would be a disgusting waste of money to expand a 68k seat college football stadium that doesn't even "sell out" half the time anyway, is rarely actually full even when it does sell out, and 1/3 of the seats are usually empty by halftime regardless. If anything, they should decrease overall seating capacity and focus on improving the overall experience and aesthetics.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
I mean WAY.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
As a bean counter, he does not see adding average seating for the masses. He feels that more premium experiences make more revenue per capita for the investment. IF there were a 4,700 additional seating constructed, he wants to create a 'luxury area/box area on the east side right in the middle of seating and take away average seating for that 'box effect.
Also, he's on the feeling that facility enhancements in the world of NIL and Transfers are not that important, capital projects aren't that big a deal. Its more important to maximize NIL and heck with the capital. He's argued that most NFL stadiums are 65-70k, and NIL world is just like the NFL... and that goes back to premium seating and the NFL is all full of that. For example Tenn Titans new stadium indoor/outdoor stadium is only about 65K but packed full of premium opportunities. Cost over a billion dollars. Titans aren't losing money/
I agree with your idea of expansion, but under Whit's leadership, I dont see that going anywhere.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
S
Stech
1y
seating. It’s more money, and easier to fill during down times. The biggest money as we all talk about, is TV/digital viewership, but an important part to recruiting is selling out the stadium, the empty seats look awful on TV and for visiting recruits.
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
1y
They actually have no problem on the premium offerings for boxes and services. I can see them make a business case, of reducing scott to 45000 with 'very exclusive luxury boxes, with wine tasting, bars, fine catering, close in parking for the exclusive owners, so they dont have to deal with the masses. They would sell it out.
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
O
ombandit
1y
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
S
Stech
1y
zone. The money is in premium seating, and that’s probably why they moved the students IMHO.
PS Look at the Indiana Stadium, same architect, so there is a remote possibility of closing the corners, but we would seriously have to start winning National Championships in football (yes plural) to have that kind of demand.
PSS The P2 needs to expand to 48 for us to get an invitation, and IMHO they will do that, but what do I know?
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
1y
If Lane was built right now, it would be different. Currently the seating of the east and west end don't meet egress requirements for both existing and handicapped. During the study for the south end zone, I heard the architect/engineers and building code that if the end zones were connected, VT would ve required to also modify the existing seating to comply. That would be wider aisles and rows. and also reduced number of seats.
I see small independent permanent wings independent of the south west or east sides if possible. Then you have to do an economic analysis that for the additional seating based on the construction costs, would it be a sound business return of investment.... which I dont think the math would work
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
very probably where they are going.
One question, didn’t once they bring in bleachers for the corners? Or am I just remembering a thought I had about it, thinking why not?
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
1y
It was a madhouse too. I think security had a 'discussion' about crowd control. (which I think its the same overreaction as sugar cookies)
IF VT ever got invite to a Power 2 conference, would the institution and community be able to handle it. Hords of fans coming in, very passionate. could the airport handle all those private jets flying in?? Or can Blacksburg handle a high demand entertainment expansion downtown? (with a mayor who said, that blacksburg was just fine before VT) agh!!!
(In response to this post by Stech)
S
Stech
1y
and that area needs it. No way the power brokers would turn that down. Maybe they would even run an interstate from Richmond to Blacksburg too. make it easier for Southwest Virginians to get to the Capitol where the tax money is allotted. I don’t live in Southwestern Virginia, but that should have been done decades ago. It would be good for them, and even better for the state. North Carolina has used their east west interstate to develop the Triangle, Greensboro-Winston Salem, and Charlotte, while Virginia has its three economic power houses in the eastern part of the state and barely developed the Southwestern part of the state, if you compare them.
** Edited by Stech at 11/1/2024, 12:19:27 AM
(In response to this post by 1947Sunbowl)
1y
is the highest it will ever be.
(In response to this post by Culpeper Hokie)
V
Vippie1
1y
the marginal ticket revenues increases by expanding the stadium are a proverbially drop in the bucket compared to the tv revenues.
actually a better chance that they would lower capacity by creating more suites, club levels then ever expanding capacity again.
(In response to this post by RVAHokie05)
1y
(In response to this post by RVAHokie05)
1y
and put the students and band in the endzones
(In response to this post by reestuart)
1y
about having a real seat and cupholders. So much more enjoyable for me.
(In response to this post by Windows NT)