Michigan game (Oct. 19th)

#26      
Fighter of the Nightman
Illini2010-11 said:
I disagree completely with this idea.

1) I do not like the idea of making our seating capacity even smaller for the purposes of looking like a sellout on tv
2) Some actually purchase seats under the overhang on purpose. On sunny days when it is hot, the upper East Balcony is almost unbearable. I have front row seats on the East Balcony, and because of the sun and heat on Homecoming, we had to move and stand under the overhang with my 19-month old (and there was near full capacity under there due to the heat and sun). We ended up watching most the second half in a standing room only environment, and that was fine with me

3) Continue to win and this will not be an issue worth discussing. Almost all seats will be filled. Win and they will come.
Click to expand...
Regarding point #1, I have long supported closing off those seats AND not reducing capacity. We desperately need that capacity transferred to a replacement structure for the Horseshoe to tie the stadium together aesthetically, IMO.
 
#28      
Illini2010-11
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Regarding point #1, I have long supported closing off those seats AND not reducing capacity. We desperately need that capacity transferred to a replacement structure for the Horseshoe to tie the stadium together aesthetically, IMO.
Click to expand...
I guess I don't understand why these seats should be "closed off". If people are willing to buy those seats instead of balcony seats, then I am completely fine with that. Some simply like being protected from the environment on hot and sunny days, or windy/rainy days, and I do not see why we should close off that option to fans (even if it has a slightly obstructed view). The reasoning I seem to deduce is that it optically looks bad to have those seats filled instead of balcony seats. The solution to that is to get consistently good and sell all seats, not take away seats to get to capacity.

I also don't understand why a future Horseshoe construction must replace the current options. You can add that construction and leave the East side alone.
 
#29      
Fighter of the Nightman
Illini2010-11 said:
I guess I don't understand why these seats should be "closed off". If people are willing to buy those seats instead of balcony seats, then I am completely fine with that. Some simply like being protected from the environment on hot and sunny days, or windy/rainy days, and I do not see why we should close off that option to fans (even if it has a slightly obstructed view). The reasoning I seem to deduce is that it optically looks bad to have those seats filled instead of balcony seats. The solution to that is to get consistently good and sell all seats, not take away seats to get to capacity.

I also don't understand why a future Horseshoe construction must replace the current options. You can add that construction and leave the East side alone.
Click to expand...
Regarding the bolded, the idea is that for any structure impressive enough to fix the Horseshoe we might need that extra 7k in capacity. If we don’t “steal” it from the seats under the overhang, we’d have a capacity closer to 70k after renovations to the SEZ. I’d love for that to be appropriate for us again, just not sure we’re there yet!
 
#30      
Dkayak
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Regarding the bolded, the idea is that for any structure impressive enough to fix the Horseshoe we might need that extra 7k in capacity. If we don’t “steal” it from the seats under the overhang, we’d have a capacity closer to 70k after renovations to the SEZ. I’d love for that to be appropriate for us again, just not sure we’re there yet!
Click to expand...
But by the time we can fund a horseshoe replacement we should need more capacity.
 
#31      
SIllini1975
Illini2010-11 said:
I disagree completely with this idea.

1) I do not like the idea of making our seating capacity even smaller for the purposes of looking like a sellout on tv
2) Some actually purchase seats under the overhang on purpose. On sunny days when it is hot, the upper East Balcony is almost unbearable. I have front row seats on the East Balcony, and because of the sun and heat on Homecoming, we had to move and stand under the overhang with my 19-month old (and there was near full capacity under there due to the heat and sun). We ended up watching most the second half in a standing room only environment, and that was fine with me

3) Continue to win and this will not be an issue worth discussing. Almost all seats will be filled. Win and they will come.
Click to expand...
I agree. Our seats are in 207. My son is autistic and couldn’t take the heat on Homecoming. The option to bail and go under the overhang allowed us to stay and let him enjoy the game.
 
#33      
orange100
Illini2010-11 said:
I would be extremely frustrated if it did not sellout.

1) 100 Year Celebration
2) Defending National Champs in town
3) Very competitive Illinois team (likely attempting to secure bowl berth) in national spotlight

It would be a failure as a fanbase, if we did not make this a sellout.
Click to expand...
Trust, it will be "announced" as a sellout no matter what.
 
#36      
IlliniInBuckeyeState
Updated Sellout Watch for Michigan. With probably ~1,000 tickets left for this game (based on radio reports and an email from the DIA), this game will be a sellout.

1727867607650.png
 
#38      
OrangeBlue98
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Regarding the bolded, the idea is that for any structure impressive enough to fix the Horseshoe we might need that extra 7k in capacity. If we don’t “steal” it from the seats under the overhang, we’d have a capacity closer to 70k after renovations to the SEZ. I’d love for that to be appropriate for us again, just not sure we’re there yet!
Click to expand...
Totally agree on NOT expanding capacity for the time being. I’ll always be in the camp of having a sold out stadium instead of a larger stadium if I have to choose one. A sold out and loud stadium is always better for atmosphere and crowd noise.

As a soccer fan, I think MLS is doing it right in terms of building smaller stadiums. Many places could have built much larger stadiums, but they’ve intentionally chosen to build smaller so they don’t sacrifice in-stadium atmosphere. If I’m priortizing any changes for Memorial Stadium right now, I’d always pick atmosphere over more capacity.

One day, I hope this is a much more difficult choice!
 
#39      
Fighter of the Nightman
OrangeBlue98 said:
Totally agree on NOT expanding capacity for the time being. I’ll always be in the camp of having a sold out stadium instead of a larger stadium if I have to choose one. A sold out and loud stadium is always better for atmosphere and crowd noise.

As a soccer fan, I think MLS is doing it right in terms of building smaller stadiums. Many places could have built much larger stadiums, but they’ve intentionally chosen to build smaller so they don’t sacrifice in-stadium atmosphere. If I’m priortizing any changes for Memorial Stadium right now, I’d always pick atmosphere over more capacity.

One day, I hope this is a much more difficult choice!
Click to expand...
I agree, but I am SOMEWHAT in the middle. For example, I think Minnesota building a new stadium with barely over 50k in capacity is kind of hilariously lame, haha. However, I think 60k is more than respectable if the layout is appropriate. Right now, we have way too much "structure" between the end zones, and the Horseshoe looks comparatively unimpressive and out of place ... and that's my main problem. You could make a much, much bigger LOOKING Memorial Stadium that doesn't add a single seat.
 
#41      
ChiefGritty
Fighter of the Nightman said:
For example, I think Minnesota building a new stadium with barely over 50k in capacity is kind of hilariously lame, haha.
Click to expand...
And of course Northwestern's new stadium will be only 35,000.

That's the trend in the entire American sports industry, fewer seats and more suites and other premium opportunities. The idea is that generates the highest revenue because it maintains ticket scarcity that can justify high prices and wrings the most possible out of the rich luxury crowd.

It's antithetical to the ethos of college football and everyone is whistling past the graveyard of how it reflects declining interest in spectator sports generally, but hey, whatever makes the next fiscal quarter's balance sheet look the best is a necessity that can never be questioned and no other choice could ever be possible.

Anyway, my lukewarm take is that Memorial Stadium is pretty much fine the way it is and bigger and more excited crowds will reveal that. There are certainly some tweaks that could be beneficial. But what we have is a venue that feels stately and classic in a pretty unique way and is surrounded by more nearby tailgating space than most other schools. We're in good shape.
 
Last edited:
#42      
Fighter of the Nightman
ChiefGritty said:
And of course Northwestern's new stadium will be only 35,000.

That's the trend in the entire American sports industry, fewer seats and more suites and other premium opportunities. The idea is that generates the highest revenue because it maintains ticket scarcity that can justify high prices and wrings the most possible out of the rich luxury crowd.

It's antithetical to the ethos of college football and everyone is whistling past the graveyard of how it reflects declining interest in spectator sports generally, but hey, whatever makes the next fiscal quarter's balance sheet look the best is a necessity that can never be questioned and no other choice could ever be possible.

Anyway, my lukewarm take is that Memorial Stadium is pretty much fine the way it is and bigger and more excited crowds will reveal that. There are certainly some tweaks that could be beneficial. But what we have is a venue that feels stately and classic in a pretty unique way and is surrounded by more nearby tailgating space than most other schools. We're in good shape.
Click to expand...
Agree with almost everything, but I will throw one last comment regarding the hill upon which I will certainly perish, lol.

THIS is as stately as it gets, IMO...

64f00aaa7ac4f.image.jpg

memorial_stadium__large.jpg


... but this (again JMO) would look pretty underwhelming in any stadium, let alone next to such beautiful and classic looks that define the other 75% of Memorial Stadium:

10339688_HVXG8XA7i46PJwVEOi70GuMn-NhRjhYXD6MHD01g95o.jpg


I cannot see a good argument for not fixing up the Horseshoe as soon as funds are available - a limitation we all acknowledge. At best, it's comically far from the field, and any defense of this distance comes across to me as a desire by some to be contrarian and just maintain the status quo for no good reason. At worst, it's jarringly less attractive than every other element of the stadium and looks like the engineers accidentally finished the south end zone seats using plans that were meant for a random MAC school, haha.

So I guess I agree Memorial Stadium is "pretty much fine" today ... I mean, I love the place. I just think it's begging to be an iconic venue that non-Illini fans identify as one of the coolest in the conference given its unique architecture and history, and the Horseshoe is the main thing holding that back.
 
#43      
Illini2010-11
ChiefGritty said:
And of course Northwestern's new stadium will be only 35,000.
Click to expand...
They have to do that. They do not want games where 40,000 Ohio State or Michigan fans show up at their stadium (yes an exaggeration). Also, they have a smaller alumni and student base than a lot of other B1G schools. A smaller environment makes perfect sense there.

I just shake my head a little when we worry about making our stadium too big. Back in the 1980s, there was no issue getting over 70,000 to attend a game (and well over 75,000 on a consistent basis). If the team starts to win consistently, I expect the crowds to largely come back (we have been so mediocre as a program that fans are largely staying away). We did average nearly 62,000 (close to capacity) a game in 2008, until the program began to crumble around Zook. If the stadium was to renovate a bigger horseshoe section, and got capacity to around 70,000, it would be a similar capacity to what the stadium had before the Illinois Renaissance Program was completed in 2008. I remember a lot of grumbling about reducing the capacity to 62,000 back when I was student at the time. Now we are possibly grumbling about getting capacity closer to what it was before?

I am in the camp of no major structural changes needed right now, but if revenue started to really flow in (meaning the team is getting good consistently) requiring some updates (and more capacity), I could see the need to add seats back in the horseshoe, all while keeping the rest of the stadium as is. No need to change the East Main at all. It is architecturally beautiful and historic, and I would hate to see it get modified to look similar to the West Main.
 
#44      
SampsonRelpenk
ChiefGritty said:
Anyway, my lukewarm take is that Memorial Stadium is pretty much fine the way it is and bigger and more excited crowds will reveal that.
Click to expand...
The best Memorial Stadium atmospheres I've experienced in my lifetime (early 30s) were in 2007 when capacity was 57-ish thousand, the west side was affixed with miles of ugly plywood, and piss troughs still ruled the day. It's because we were good and played good opponents! That's ~80% of it!
 
#45      
Fighter of the Nightman
Illini2010-11 said:
They have to do that. They do not want games where 40,000 Ohio State or Michigan fans show up at their stadium (yes an exaggeration). Also, they have a smaller alumni and student base than a lot of other B1G schools. A smaller environment makes perfect sense there.

I just shake my head a little when we worry about making our stadium too big. Back in the 1980s, there was no issue getting over 70,000 to attend a game (and well over 75,000 on a consistent basis). If the team starts to win consistently, I expect the crowds to largely come back (we have been so mediocre as a program that fans are largely staying away). We did average nearly 62,000 (close to capacity) a game in 2008, until the program began to crumble around Zook. If the stadium was to renovate a bigger horseshoe section, and got capacity to around 70,000, it would be a similar capacity to what the stadium had before the Illinois Renaissance Program was completed in 2008. I remember a lot of grumbling about reducing the capacity to 62,000 back when I was student at the time. Now we are possibly grumbling about getting capacity closer to what it was before?

I am in the camp of no major structural changes needed right now, but if revenue started to really flow in (meaning the team is getting good consistently) requiring some updates (and more capacity), I could see the need to add seats back in the horseshoe, all while keeping the rest of the stadium as is. No need to change the East Main at all. It is architecturally beautiful and historic, and I would hate to see it get modified to look similar to the West Main.
Click to expand...
It's also worth noting that the 2007 season likely could have drawn way more fans per game. However, due to renovations, capacity was only about 58k that year:

CarmoniGreen.jpg


There is no reason our attendance would not grow significantly with consistent success. After all, we have gone from 35k fans per game to over 50k fans per game in barely two seasons. Just compare us to Iowa ... a program that has had enough success to convince fans to make attending a game a habit. Before anyone gives me the "no pro sports in Iowa!" excuse, their basketball attendance is even worse than our football attendance on a comparative basis. Fans show up for a winning program in 99.99% of cases.

1. Illinois has over 35,000 undergraduate students and over 56,000 total students. Compare that to only 22,000 undergraduates and 31,000 total students at Iowa, who draws 69,000+ every game.

2. The Champaign MSA has over 235,000 people. Compare that to just 180,000 in Iowa City. If we expand it to MSAs within a reasonable drive, it might look something like this:

897,000 for Iowa (Iowa City, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Waterloo/Cedar Falls, Dubuque)
1.25 million for Illinois (Champaign, Bloomington, Peoria, Springfield, Danville, Decatur)

3. Iowa has about 300,000 living alumni, and WAY more of them live out of state than Illinois alumni based on the stats I have seen. Meanwhile, UIUC itself has over 500,000, with the U of I System having nearly 850,000.

Even if we take it on faith that Iowa has this insurmountable edge when it comes to support from non-alum fans instate (which I would certainly dispute at least for Central Illinois vs. Eastern Iowa; Chicagoland is another story), simple math just says there are at LEAST as many "potential Illini fans" as Iowa fans. If we start winning 7+ games per year, we can absolutely get significantly more than 60,000 fans at our home games.
 
#48      
illiniE
redwingillini11 said:
I'm surprised we aren't doing a stripe out for the Michigan game. You would think the stripes in the stadium to match the stripes on the uniforms would be a no-brainer.
Click to expand...
Stripe outs never seemed to work. Too confusing for fans to know what color to wear. And I want to wear orange to the game.
 
#49      
Illini2010-11
illiniE said:
Stripe outs never seemed to work. Too confusing for fans to know what color to wear. And I want to wear orange to the game.
Click to expand...
Not only that, every time there seems to be a "stripe out", there seems to be weird or cold weather, which requires the fan to wear a jacket or sweater. I have my fair share of orange jackets and sweaters, but I lack in the blue department (why have blue when you can have orange?). Stripe outs are much easier to pull off at basketball games in SFC.
 
#50      
Fighter of the Nightman
^ RE: the themed games, I am TOTALLY on board with the perspective that was prevalent in the mid- to late 2000s that EVERY Illini home game in any sport was a de facto "orange out." That seems to have waned with fashion trends in the last 10-15 years, though. I would at least be curious what a "navy out" at Memorial Stadium would look like. While not quite a monolithically navy crowd, this old photo of a Bears MNF game the year they played in Champaign might give us a taste of what it could look like:

SP_NFL_014_LG.jpg


I feel like for a night game, that could actually look really cool and intimidating.

EDIT: Tracked down a picture of that random basketball game in 2012 where we did a "Blue Out" at Assembly Hall, lol ... not as cool for hoops, I must admit:

5960630.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Back