The Cotton Bowl Renovation --> Cotton Dome

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 23 January 2006, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Big D

Deloss Dodds's comments in that article sound ominous. I bet there down in Austin right now doing the math on what makes more sense: 1) Expanding Royal-Memorial stadium further (100K+ capacity and new luxery boxes) or 2) Re-upping with Dallas to play in the Cotton Bowl. The loss of the significant contibutions from Longhorn Foundation members who want UT-OU tickets every year would be significant and UT must be weighing the loss of those contributions with the additional money it can make with even more seating and luxery boxes in Austin. Dallas should amend its renovation plans to include luxery boxes as this could put significantly more money in both schools pockets which would tilt them toward continuing to play in Dallas.

I just spoke with a co-worker that has season tickets at R-M. Texas is only going to partially expand one end of the stadium. This partial expansion will easily make the 100k capacity. They will skip the endzone section for now.

The stadium is designed to expand much further, by building over both endzones and expanding the upper deck 3/4 around the stadium, easily a 150,000 seat stadium when finished, maybe more.

Does anyone on this forum have the plans for Royal-Memorial. If what my coworker is telling me is true. Dallas is waisting our time again.

**rantanamo** · 23 January 2006, 07:03 PM

The current "expansion" is on the west side suites and press box. From what I understand, they are filling the gap between the decks and creating better suite views. The next expansion will start after Disch-Falk's expansion/renovation is complete. It will tear down the north endzone horseshoe and rebuild it closer to the field. I'm not sure if they will do the upper deck on that section at that time or if it will be a later addition. Those expansions will apparently send the stadium well over 90,000. The last stage will be the south endzone, which will supposedly happen within the decade. That all should total around 115,000.

Current

Future at 114,000

From UT's masterplan document.

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 23 January 2006, 07:51 PM

the pics didnt load, just a red x in a box. Could you post em again rantanamo?

or do you have link?

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 23 January 2006, 08:26 PM

From Wikipedia:

Darrell K. Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium in Austin, Texas, USA is home to The University of Texas at Austin Longhorn football team. The current official stadium capacity is 80,082, but an attendance record of 84,082 people occurred in 1999 during a game against the University of Nebraska. As of 2005-2006, the stadium is undergoing renovations, with stage one consisting mainly of updates in concordance with newer fire safety codes and stage two consisting of seating expansion in the north end zone.

The stadium was commissioned to replace Clark Field and its old wooden bleachers. Originally, named Memorial Stadium and built in 1924, the new stadium had a capacity of 27,000. It was designed as a dual-purpose facility with a 440-yard track surrounding the football field.

Memorial Stadium was dedicated to the memory of all University alumni who had died in World War I. Since, the stadium has been rededicated to all alumni in all American wars. The University of Texas honored legendary football coach Darrell K. Royal in 1996 by officially naming the stadium after him. In 1997, in recognition of UT law school alumnus and benefactor Joe Jamail, the University named the football playing field Joe Jamail Field.

The stadium has been expanded several times since its original openning, most recently in 1999. The stadium is currently undergoing rennovations that do not include expansion of the seating capacity, though additional expansion is being considered.

$15 million dollars have been allocated by the Board of Regents for stadium renovations. Stage one, beginning November 14, 2005, involves updating Bellmont Hall — which sits in the west end of the stadium — to meet newer safety codes set by the Austin Fire Department. Also included are water sealing the stadium and the expansion of both the Centennial Room and eight-floor press box.

The university is currently raising funds for stage two, which is to include north end stadium expansion. Under the plan, a new tier of seating would be built to connect the east and west upper decks. This addition may also offer space for cheering facilities, loading dock, gymnasium and additional seating. Phase II will also include updating the existing north seating area to meet newer safety codes

Here's a big pic of Royal Memorial from Google:

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 23 January 2006, 09:03 PM

From Wikipedia:

The Gaylord Family - Oklahoma Memorial Stadium is the on-campus football facility for the University of Oklahoma in Norman, Oklahoma, United States. The official capacity of the stadium following recent renovations is 82,112. The record attendance for the stadium was set during a 2005 contest against Texas A&M University with 84,943 attending.

The first game played at the site was in 1923 with the Oklahoma Sooners prevailing over Washington University (MO) 62-7. The football field was named Owen Field in honor of then football coach Bennie Owen. The stadium is still popularly referred to as Owen Field. When stands with 16,000 seats were added on the west side of the site in 1925, the new stadium was named Oklahoma Memorial Stadium in honor of university students and personnel that died during World War I. Major additions to the stadium after the opening included adding stands on the east side in 1929, closing in the north end of the stadium to make the stadium a horseshoe shape in 1949, the addition of south end bleachers in 1957, and the addition of an upper deck on the west side in 1975. The most recent expansion and renovation of the stadium occurred in 2003 when an upper deck and suites were added to the east side increasing the capacity to its current figure. The major contribution towards this expansion was made by the daughter of Edward K. Gaylord, resulting in the renaming of the stadium to the current name. The stadium also received a facelift at this time as they bricked over the stadium to more closely match the look of the other buildings on the campus. Minor renovations continued in 2004 with the cosmetic renovations being completed. Also at this time the areas outside the stadium were redone to include a reflecting pool, which replaced the one that had been filled in during the 1949 expansion and a new memorial listing the names of Sooners killed in war.

[1]

Also at the south end of the stadium is the Barry Switzer Center. The facility was built in 1999 and houses the football locker room, coaches offices, the football conditioning center, and a museum dedicated to the history of Oklahoma football.

Heres a pic from Google:

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 23 January 2006, 09:06 PM

From Wikipedia:

Kyle Field: Original Home of The 12th Man

Originally built in 1927 and 1929, Kyle Field was named for Edwin Jackson Kyle, who served as Texas A&M's dean of agriculture and athletic council president.

The stadium was expanded in 1967 to include two decks of grandstands, and the third decks were added to the east and west sides in 1980. The Aggies played on grass through the 1960s, Kyle Field switched to artificial turf in the early 1970s. Grass returned to Kyle Field in 1996.

In 1999 the $32.9 million Bernard C. Richardson Zone raised the capacity of Kyle Field to 82,600 making it the largest football stadium in the state of Texas. "The Zone" also brings the fans in the north end zone 65 feet closer to the action on the field of play.

Kyle Field and its amenities continue to expand with the addition of the Bright Football Complex on the south end of the stadium. The facility opened in Fall 2003 and includes a players' lounge overlooking Kyle Field, dressing rooms, one of the largest training and rehabilitation facilities in the country[citation needed], and a state-of-the-art academic center.

In 2004, Texas A&M's Athletic Director Bill Byrne announced an ambitious master plan for the athletic facilities. After its upgrade, the now open end of Kyle Field would look similar in design to the current "Zone", located in the north end of the field. The stadium will contain big screens at each corner and seat 150,000 fans. This addition will make Kyle Field the largest football venue in the nation. The master plan is expected to take 10 years to complete.

Kyle Field is often regarded as one of the hardest stadiums for visiting teams to play in. It is ranked as the #4 college football stadium in the nation by the Sporting News. [1]

LOCATION: College Station, Texas
CAPACITY: 82,600
BUILT: 1927, 1929
CURRENT OWNERSHIP: Texas A&M at College Station
SURFACE: Natural Grass
LARGEST CROWD: 87,555 (November 23, 2001)

Heres a pic from Google:

**St-T** · 23 January 2006, 09:10 PM

^Ags better start winning some games if they are going to get 150k in the stands.

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 23 January 2006, 09:14 PM

I think we should bulldoze the Cotton Bowl and start over. 98000 seats isnt going to be big enough. Why not think big, real big, largest stadium on the planet big, 275000 seats. Considering the two "Foot" ball sports that are popular here and our expanding population, I don't think its an unrealistic idea. Lets build something world class. World Cup Soccer, Super Bowl, Olympics capable venue.

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 24 January 2006, 04:58 PM

great pics rantanamo

**rantanamo** · 24 January 2006, 08:57 PM

Can the Cotton Bowl compete with this?

no.

Can the Cotton Dome, and improved Fair Park, Light Rail/Buses, The State Fair, Dallas entertainment areas, Dallas hotel capacity and tradition?

Yes. This is what Dallas should be focusing on: The whole package.

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 24 January 2006, 11:45 PM

The UT alumns/fans I talked to at work suggest its too little too late for Dallas. Their concerns are:

1. Number of seats. There are never enough for all the fans that have 2000+ dollars a seat to burn, not to mention the droves of peasants that only have a
$1000 that cant afford a seat.

2. Corporate Boxes. Thats where the real money is and thats what the colleges want, money. They can make money at their own stadium, they won't come here if they have to take a hit.

3. They are tired of an old run down P.O.S. stadium. Their words, not mine. They think its obvious Dallas and its citizenry do not respect the tradition or the significance of the game by the neglect of the Cotton Bowl and lack of financial committment or even trivial maintenance.

4. They think the City of Dallas is a joke. Austin offers the same corporate restaurants and entertainment as "Big D". Dallas isn't different anymore. They can do the same thing at home.

5. They say that Fair Park is not an incentive anymore. Their isn't enough parking or places to do tail gate parties. Some racist comments, but legit, about not parking off Fair Park grounds. Supposedly not safe, or a perception that it isnt.

My personal reaction to my coworkers comments is theyre high on their money, they are insanely obsessed with their winning team, they want their cake and eat it too (stadium revenue). They (the UT alumn) represent a very large (huge) and extremely wealthy block of fanatical sports fans that Dallas should by all means and all costs fight to keep.

**rantanamo** · 25 January 2006, 12:14 AM

I will respectfully disagree with them on the last 3 points.

- Austin is a joke comparatively in the amount of entertainment. And I love Austin
- Tailgating? Where do they park for UT games? Tailgating is simply not a huge thing in Austin. There's no room.
- You simply can't replicate the State Fair for a game setting. The amount of UT alumns and fans that show up that weekend simply destroys a normal game weekend. That's what the rivalry turns into with a home and home. Anyone thinking otherwise is simply on LSD or something.
- DKR still doesn't have many suites. It still won't have many for another decade.
- Despite the whole luxury box revenues thing, If Dallas agreed to pay them $5 million for the one game, UT would stand to make more for that one game. Patrons pay for their suite already. Would they raise the price if the OU game is added? I don't think they can, since home games vary in number and prices seem to remain the same. $5 million would beat the hell out of rents for that week.
- POS stadium for 4 hours, one week of the season. As many on hornfans have mentioned, suck it up. Would you rather lose the atmosphere of the game?
- If the Cotton Bowl completes its renovation, it will outnumber the seats in DKR for probably the next 5-10 years.

**Lakewooder** · 25 January 2006, 03:03 PM

Did you see the recent letter to the editor from the UT fan who said the Rose Bowl was in much worse shape than the Cotton Bowl?

**rantanamo** · 25 January 2006, 03:26 PM

^I've heard some comments that it wasn't in great shape, but never heard it compared to the Cotton Bowl. Its possible that it is. In all honesty, I think the whole issue is people with incomes several times that of the average Horn, not getting what they want out of a Cotton Bowl game. I guess its no different than the NFL. I always thought college football was a different monster. Not anymore I guess.

**tamtagon** · 25 January 2006, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by Lakewooder

Did you see the recent letter to the editor from the UT fan who said the Rose Bowl was in much worse shape than the Cotton Bowl?

Seems like UCLA alum have had a hard time getting improvements at the Rose Bowl. Several years ago, I remember a co-worker proclaiming victory when bleachers were replaced with more comfortable seats, even though stadium capacity decreased. I never understood why UCLA hadnt built a new westside stadium.

**hamiltonpl** · 25 January 2006, 03:47 PM

If the arrogant SOBs at UT want us to spend $100 million bucks for a stadium that they play ONE GAME A YEAR in, and it's still not enough -- they need to go back to Austin and NEVER LEAVE. No stadium other than their own will ever meet their expectations.

Let's all go to Austin and make them pay for a hundred million dollar facility that Dallasites use once a year. Then build a huge park around it that can be used once a year by all Texans.

There are no more "Longhorns" at UT. Only b!tches and sons of b!tches.

**DallasStar** · 25 January 2006, 03:58 PM

If private investors wants to come in and tear down the cotton bowl and build a super luxury retractable roof dome with luxure suites and a fancy hotel and all the trimmings for a few games a year, I am all for it.
But I'm not if it's with tax payers money, besides Dallas will still benefit from all the games played in Arlington when that's all done. Losing UT and OU or any college game will not be the worst thing to hit this city. It would be unfortunate, but not doomsday.

And for the comments made by the UT alums comparing Dallas to Austin is a joke, and to add to it, All the uppity UT fans I know love's to come to Dallas, the shopping and and entertainment is no comparison, from what I've been told. (I've heard similar things from OU fans as well).

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 25 January 2006, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by rantanamo

^In all honesty, I think the whole issue is people with incomes several times that of the average Horn, not getting what they want out of a Cotton Bowl game. I guess its no different than the NFL. I always thought college football was a different monster. Not anymore I guess.

Exactly. Those people with money are the issue. Lose them at our peril.

We neglected Downtown for 30 years, Boeing (people with money) decided to build in Chicago. So lets just keep neglecting the Cotton Bowl, sounds like a great plan.

I dont agree with using tax money to pay for it either; but, short of getting Laura Miller to fund it from her savings account since she ran off Mr. Jones, how is the City of Dallas going to build a stadium worth building. The current city proposal seems woefully inadequate when compared to other stadiums and planned stadiums in the nation. If we're going to spend the money then shouldn't we build the best? Shouldn't we plan and build for the future population? So that we can keep what we have - Texas/OU - and attract others - an Olympics, a World Cup, a Superbowl, an expansion team, etc. Otherwise, aren't we just waisting everyone's time and money? If Dallas wants to be a world class city, its my opinion that we had better start thinking big ideas again, we are supposed to be Texans after all or has that changed too?

**rantanamo** · 25 January 2006, 10:34 PM

I still think there's a tangible amount out there that can tell us how much should be spent.

I agree that we have some of the most arrogant alumns around. Especially when it comes to this situation. I'm certainly not in this group and think the game is fine without anything being done to the stadium.

**Razorback** · 26 January 2006, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by rantanamo

^I've heard some comments that it wasn't in great shape, but never heard it compared to the Cotton Bowl. Its possible that it is. In all honesty, I think the whole issue is people with incomes several times that of the average Horn, not getting what they want out of a Cotton Bowl game. I guess its no different than the NFL. I always thought college football was a different monster. Not anymore I guess.

The Rose bowl is awful.

First off, you have a LOT more people trying to get into the stadium before a game than at the Cotton Bowl. Its built more like you would picture an ancient Roman stadium, with narrow, concrete tunnels the only way in and out.

The Rose Bowl game I attended, there were people designated at each narrow tunnel entrance to hold signs that said "tunnel full, please wait" and on the flip side it said "proceed". Actual time from when my party and I were within fifty feet of the entrance tunnel to when we reached our seats was about forty five minutes.

Its cramped, steep, and the whole enter/exit seemed very unsafe. As for the rest of the stadium, I was too housed to recall.

There is a large golf course surrounding it for tailgating and the neighborhood was pretty decent.

**Milkman Dan** · 26 January 2006, 11:34 AM

neighborhood was pretty decent.

You must have been REALLY housed to say the neighborhood was just "pretty decent"..

Pasadena is infinitely nicer than any neighborhood in Dallas or Austin (and yes.. <gasp> Fayetteville I suspect also) The Rose Bowl is what it is: a gigantic relic from a different age. It's not "modern stadium" nice, but that's not the point. The layout / surrounding area is great - much better than cotton bowl (I'm talking about the ramps, access in/out to the restrooms). Sure I had to wait in line getting into the stadium but big deal. It was 15 minutes.

The truth is, losing the cowboys to the suburbs will probably have a really bad ripple-down effect. I agree that it's silly to spend $400m to house a few college games a year, although losing these games would probably put a nail in Dallas' coffin as a "great sports city".. Laura Miller isn't a sports fan, and face it, that's one of the big things Dallas hangs its hat on. Well maybe in 35 years we'll finally get a downtown stadium.

**Lionel Hutz** · 26 January 2006, 12:07 PM

Some good news from the OU camp:

The University of Oklahoma board of regents on Wednesday authorized athletic director Joe Castiglione to negotiate with Dallas city officials an extension that would allow the annual football game against the University of Texas to continue at the Cotton Bowl.

The current agreement calls for the OU-Texas game to be held at the Cotton Bowl through 2008.

"Fans want to continue the tradition of the universities meeting in Dallas," OU President David Boren said Wednesday.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200....ap/index.html

**Mballar** · 26 January 2006, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by Mephis Gooseberry

The current city proposal seems woefully inadequate when compared to other stadiums and planned stadiums in the nation. If we're going to spend the money then shouldn't we build the best?

I think the distinction between the Cotton Bowl and "other" stadiums in the nation is that the Cotton Bowl will not be a facility used as frequently as those other stadiums. College/University athletic departments have significant incentives to constantly make their facilities BIGGER and BETTER. These incentives include, but are not limited to, increasing revenue (via extra seats/luxury suites), increasing student/alumni pride, increasing the "WOW" factor when trying to impress/entice new high school recruits. There are more reasons, but, I think you get the point.

Since Dallas doesn't have the need to use a new/renovated Cotton Bowl as much as a college athletic department would use its on campus facility, then the City has to come up with a reason to justify the expenditure of tax dollars on such a project. And the numbers have got to make sense.

As for UT being on the fence about playing in Dallas (notice I didn't say the Cotton Bowl), once a year, in undoubtedly one of the biggest College Games of the year, I think that Dallas will have no problem getting other good schools to come play and start a new tradition that will yield BIG rewards come recruiting time for those schools. IMHO, UT's athletic department will only be hurting itself when it comes to DFW Area recruiting by going to a home-home series with OU. It appears as though OU already recognizes this issue, and has basically committed to continued play based upon the proposed renovation plan. Now, if the two schools go to Arlington to play, then the recruitment issiue goes away. And, we can/should continue to blame Laura Miller for the next 30 years.

**rantanamo** · 26 January 2006, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by Milkman Dan

You must have been REALLY housed to say the neighborhood was just "pretty decent"..

Pasadena is infinitely nicer than any neighborhood in Dallas or Austin (and yes.. <gasp> Fayetteville I suspect also) The Rose Bowl is what it is: a gigantic relic from a different age. It's not "modern stadium" nice, but that's not the point. The layout / surrounding area is great - much better than cotton bowl (I'm talking about the ramps, access in/out to the restrooms). Sure I had to wait in line getting into the stadium but big deal. It was 15 minutes.

The truth is, losing the cowboys to the suburbs will probably have a really bad ripple-down effect. I agree that it's silly to spend $400m to house a few college games a year, although losing these games would probably put a nail in Dallas' coffin as a "great sports city".. Laura Miller isn't a sports fan, and face it, that's one of the big things Dallas hangs its hat on. Well maybe in 35 years we'll finally get a downtown stadium.

Dallas = DFW. That sportstown reputation is going nowhere. Having said that, I'd be surprised if Dallas doesn't press hard for the Rangers or a minor league team. The increased urban landscape will allow a ballpark to actually make a promised impact. After Victory I would think the Mavs are here to stay as well.

**downtownbum** · 26 January 2006, 01:39 PM

dallas is so stupid. "the Cotton Bowl will not be a facility used as frequently as those other stadiums." wouldnt it be nice if the cotton bowl had ten more games a year? wouldnt it be nice if dallas had an NFL team? laura miller is a retard. the cotton bowl game is going to go to Arlington anyway. dammit!

**Razorback** · 26 January 2006, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by Milkman Dan

You must have been REALLY housed to say the neighborhood was just "pretty decent"..

Pasadena is infinitely nicer than any neighborhood in Dallas or Austin (and yes.. <gasp> Fayetteville I suspect also) .

Pasadena, what I remember of it, was quaint and bungalow-ridden. Way too close to east L.A.

There were crummy parts too, if not in Pasadena, then Pasadena-adjacent.

Come to think of it though, I have never been to the Cotton Bowl when I wasn't drunk, so I really have no basis for comparison.

**hamiltonpl** · 26 January 2006, 06:46 PM

If UT has all this money, why aren't THEY paying for repairs/updates/additions to the Cotton Bowl? If they care about tradition, why are they even considering leaving the Cotton Bowl?

This is all about money. How much money UT can make.

If you want something, build it yourself. The city doesn't need to bail you out. This is just another form of welfare.

**FoUTASportscaster** · 26 January 2006, 07:07 PM

I am normally against subsidizing sports, which makes a ton of money, but Dallas gets a lot of tourist dollars. That being said, two more games would fill that economic void and most teams would jump at the chance to play in a traditional game for the state fair.

**Milkman Dan** · 26 January 2006, 08:28 PM

The city doesn't need to bail you out. This is just another form of welfare.

UT is hardly needing to be "bailed out". The tourist dollars that the game brings to Dallas is a mighty big incentive and helps pay off the cost over the long run. We aren't talking about Grambling / PVA&M. Dallas needs UT more than UT needs Dallas. That much is obvious watching the prostrating going on in the city council.

**antoinekhuu** · 26 January 2006, 09:04 PM

No matter how much money we pour into Cottonbowl,ultimate we will not win over Cowboy stadium in Arlington or other stadiums that are affiliated with universities.
Our strength in in the Fai park.I would envision Dallas partnering with private company( Disney,may be) to turn Fair Park into a family-oriented amusment park:renovating all the old museum and hall,digging a small lake,landscaping and planting new trees ,building more rides,attractions and restaurants and retails.$100mil-$150mil would be adequate.After that,Cottonbowl will automatically supoort itself

**Mephis Gooseberry** · 26 January 2006, 10:02 PM

Now we got ourselves a good discussion going. Some good ideas/critiques coming out of this.

**rantanamo** · 26 January 2006, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by antoinekhuu

No matter how much money we pour into Cottonbowl,ultimate we will not win over Cowboy stadium inArlington or other stadium that are affiliated with universities.
Our strenth in in the Fai park.I would envision Dallas partnering with private company( Disney,may be) to turn Fair Park into a family-oriented amusment park:renovating all the old museum and hall,digging a small lake,landscaping planting new trees ,building more rides,attractions and restaurants and retails.$100mil-$150mil would be adequate.After that,Cottonbowl will automatically supoort itself

Now that The Daniel and his boys have announced their emasculation of the Six Flags chain to the point of some insiders saying, "you aint seen nothin' yet" , the time may be right for Dallas to hire a real company like Cedar Fair to keep up Fair Park and turn the midway into a real attraction.

As for the stadium ova dere, unless they plan on matching the rest of the metroplex in hotel, restaurant and entertainment infrastructure, then they are simply paying for the rest of the metroplex to get lots of economic impact from bigger events. Any Superbowl will seriously have Dallas doing a bang up job.

**antoinekhuu** · 27 January 2006, 12:20 PM

I would love a have a small lake in Fair park and have a ride that plunges into a glass tunnel under the lake and come up.
Very thrilling.

**Lakewooder** · 27 January 2006, 03:59 PM

http://www.patriciajohanson.com/fairpark/

The Lagoon at Fair Park

**AndyIvey** · 27 January 2006, 04:32 PM

Is that ADA compliant?
j/k

**rantanamo** · 09 February 2006, 05:29 AM

UT says to Dallas, "Say hello.........to my little friend!!"

Cotton Bowl announces 90,000+ for $50 million. UT announces:

http://www.statesman.com/news/conten.../8utbuild.html

---------------
$149.9 million expansion of UT stadium planned

Price tag for hotel-conference center rises 44 percent, to $120.9 million.

By Ralph K.M. Haurwitz
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, February 08, 2006

University of Texas System regents on Thursday are expected to approve spending nearly $150 million to remodel and expand Royal-Memorial Stadium.
The project, scheduled to be completed in August 2008, would boost seating capacity for football games to more than 90,000.

The regents also are expected to authorize construction of a $120.9 million hotel and conference center at the southern edge of campus. That is nearly $37 million more than previous estimates, an increase caused partly by the need to build underground parking to avoid condemning a restaurant that has operated adjacent to the site for more than 20 years.

The stadium expansion, which focuses on the north end zone, has been under discussion for some time, but officials have not disclosed a price tag until now. The $149.9 million cost includes $15 million approved by the regents in November for renovating and expanding the west side of the stadium, work that is under way.
"We had exceptional demand before we won the national championship. I think because of winning the national championship, sales of the inventory of new seating will probably go even faster than we anticipated," said Patti Ohlendorf, UT-Austin's vice president for institutional relations and legal affairs.

The expansion would make Royal-Memorial one of the nation's largest college football stadiums but not one of the true giants. The University of Michigan's stadium has a capacity of 107,501, and Penn State's seats 107,282.

A committee of regents will meet in Austin today to consider the stadium and hotel-conference center projects, with the full Board of Regents scheduled to take action Thursday. UT System Chancellor Mark Yudof and his top aides have recommended approval.

The stadium proposal calls for replacing the existing north end zone structure. Besides increasing the seating capacity, currently 80,082, the project would add offices for the cheerleading program, production TV crew members, ticketing, patron services, the Longhorn Foundation, athletics officials and academic advising. Also, sprinklers would be added to interior portions of the stadium that lack such fire controls.

"There will also be some gymnasiums in the basement for academic use, classes and that type of thing," Ohlendorf said. "And there will be a portion — I think one floor — not yet finished out that will have some future university use."

Bonds would be issued to cover $106.6 million of the project, with the debt to be repaid from revenue generated by Centennial Room and west stadium seating. Gifts would pay for $35 million, and the $8.3 million balance would be covered by investment returns on UT-Austin's construction account.

The budget for the hotel and conference center — to be known as the University of Texas Executive Education and Conference Center — is poised to rise about 44 percent from the $84 million estimated last year.

UT-Austin officials had hoped to acquire the adjacent property occupied by Player's restaurant for a parking garage to serve the hotel and conference center, but the restaurant's owners didn't want to sell. Although the regents had authorized the use of eminent domain to acquire the tract, a legislative effort last year to restrict the university's condemnation power prompted officials to forgo that option.
The increased cost for the project stems from a decision to build three levels of underground parking and to expand executive education capacity, with 300 hotel rooms rather than 250, according to UT System records.

The financing plan consists of $85.9 million in bonds, $30 million in gifts and $5 million in investment earnings from UT-Austin's construction account. Bond debt would be paid with revenue from operating the hotel and garage.

rhaurwitz@statesman.com; 445-3604

Royal-Memorial Stadium
Seating capacity: 80,082
Total capacity: 85,000, including media, stadium workers and others
Largest crowd: 84,082, against Nebraska in 1999
First game: Nov. 8, 1924, against Baylor, at what was then known as Memorial Stadium

Source: University of Texas

Can't wait till they start talking about closing the south end zone.

**BigD5349** · 09 February 2006, 08:10 AM

Some feel sidelined in Cotton Bowl talks
Dallas: But Miller says no negotiating done behind the scenes

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...2.c5cb4df.html

06:17 AM CST on Thursday, February 9, 2006
By EMILY RAMSHAW / The Dallas Morning News

Three Dallas City Council members said Wednesday that they think Mayor Laura Miller is purposely excluding them from negotiations on the future of the Cotton Bowl. And they say the last time that happened – when the Dallas Cowboys were angling for a new stadium in Fair Park – the deal fell apart.

"She thinks she can do this by herself," Mayor Pro Tem Don Hill said of Ms. Miller's efforts to keep the annual matchup between the University of Texas and the University of Oklahoma at the Cotton Bowl.

"We do not need a repeat of what happened to us with the Cowboys."

Ms. Miller said she's not doing anything behind the scenes. State Fair officials asked her to join them on trips to several schools interested in playing at the Cotton Bowl, and she said she has been working hard to help them out. She hasn't been negotiating, she said – just cheerleading. And she's waiting like the rest of her council colleagues for a commitment from UT.

"Everyone's frustrated. I'm frustrated, too. We'd really like to get an answer," Ms. Miller said. "I've told them I hope to hear something in mid-February."

Dallas officials became slightly more concerned Wednesday, as UT regents approved a $150 million expansion of their home field. Under the improvements, which have been in the works for months, seating capacity at Royal-Memorial Stadium would reach 90,000 by late 2008. Some believe the investment will inspire Texas to hold the annual game at home – in Austin one year, in Norman, Okla., the next.

"I am very skeptical, very pessimistic with regards to the success of the renovations of the Cotton Bowl," council member Leo Chaney said. "I wonder if the mayor's involvement is part of [Texas'] hesitance to commit."

Ms. Miller says that is an unfair and inaccurate characterization of the issue.

The City Council agreed this winter to make $50 million in upgrades to the 76-year-old Cotton Bowl – including pushing stadium seating capacity past 90,000 – in exchange for long-term commitments from Texas and OU to play there. That money is tied into a bond package that could come before Dallas voters in November.

Since then, Mr. Hill and council members Bill Blaydes and Mr. Chaney say, Ms. Miller has gone out of her way to keep them out of the loop: She's attended private meetings and taken trips to universities without briefing the council on her progress, she hasn't asked for their help or input, and they've had to get their news from local media reports instead of firsthand.

It's a scenario, they say, that reminds them of the Dallas Cowboys' negotiations to build a new stadium in Fair Park: Ms. Miller was the city spokeswoman, and the deal fell apart.

"I feel completely isolated from what has been discussed and what has been promised and what cost factors are involved," Mr. Blaydes said. "It's her desire to be the sole negotiator. It all falls back to strong mayor and her 'leave me alone' mentality."

Mr. Blaydes and Mr. Hill are considering running for mayor against Ms. Miller in 2007.

Securing commitments from the universities is the State Fair's responsibility, not the city's responsibility and certainly not Ms. Miller's responsibility, said Pete Schenkel, the fair's liaison between the colleges and the Cotton Bowl. Mr. Schenkel, who has been shopping the deal around to teams across the region, asked Ms. Miller to join him on trips, he said, because she's a "great cheerleader for the city" and because "quite frankly, I'd rather deal with one person than 15."

"Laura has been very supportive and very helpful and has really been essential in helping us have conversations with the various institutions," he said. "I have kept the mayor informed so she could keep the city informed."

He also said he's attended recent Cotton Bowl meetings attended by Mr. Chaney and Mr. Blaydes. "I don't know of anyone that's been left out," he said.

Mr. Blaydes said the only reason he's been invited to join recent Cotton Bowl discussions is because "I keep sticking my head out."

Mr. Chaney, whose district includes the Cotton Bowl, said he showed up at meetings after Fair Park officials gave him a heads-up – an invitation he thinks should have come from the mayor.

City Council members expected a contract agreement for the Texas-OU game by early January. OU's regents have authorized school officials to negotiate a contract extension for the Cotton Bowl.

But Texas hasn't jumped on board. And athletic director DeLoss Dodds said Wednesday that the university still has no timetable for making a decision.

The slow pace of negotiations forced the city to hold off on several improvements planned for the Cotton Bowl this year.

Staff writers Dave Levinthal in Dallas and Chip Brown in Austin contributed to this report.

**Columbus Civil** · 09 February 2006, 09:26 AM

The expansion for DKR looks pretty sharp!

**txRNGr** · 09 February 2006, 01:01 PM

I cant stop thinking about how Dallas shot itself in the foot by loosing the Cowboys. Personally, I would've rather buldozed the Cotton Bowl to the ground at the opportunity to get Jerry World downtown. UT and OU wouldnt be pulling out, Cowboys would actually be in Dallas instead of adding more to Arlington, and all the development it would have spurred(just think AA Center x10). AHHHH I need a drink.

**slfunk** · 09 February 2006, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by txRNGr

I cant stop thinking about how Dallas shot itself in the foot by loosing the Cowboys. Personally, I would've rather buldozed the Cotton Bowl to the ground at the opportunity to get Jerry World downtown. UT and OU wouldnt be pulling out, Cowboys would actually be in Dallas instead of adding more to Arlington, and all the development it would have spurred(just think AA Center x10). AHHHH I need a drink.

One it wasn't just the city of Dallas, but Dallas County, having to go for legislation in Austin to allow an event stadium like this being home to a private company on state park land (had a slim chance of making it, and would have been a special session). The proposal had strong opposition for the hotel alliance here because of the hotel tax rate increase the city would have had to require; resulting in higher hotel rates and people going outside Dallas to stay for cheaper rooms. The hotel and convention industry had threats of many conventions not coming to Dallas any more becuase of the increase of hotel fees (Mary Kay to start the list, which brings the most money to the city out of any other convention). TOO many people forget what would have been given up if we 'financially' would we have built this. The Merc may not even of had a chance because of our bond rating and in ability to raise more money..........

TIME AND TIME again it has been proven that a football stadium does not provide much if any revenue for a city unless it is built downtown. Fair Park is not downtown, Irving has seen the studies for what they can do with the land the Cowboys stadium is setting on. Irving is all too excited. Even if it where just subdivsions the city would make more money then the Cowboys bring in.

As for the amount of development, and Victory times 10. How many home games are there? 10? Look at AAC, just about every week there are at least 3 maybe four sporting events at the Arena. I know just from first hand experience. It may be only 20,000 fans compared to the Jerry Jones 80,000 or whatever. That 20,000 can lend to 80,000 in a week easily. Its a smaller crowd, allows more frequent visits...etc. If you go to a football game with 80,000 people you have to contend with 80,000 people and the majority of fans are destination people. So you get less frequency...May get more people at one spot at one time...but the development won't be there because you do not have the foot traffic.

I am not disappointed one bit about the Cowboys going to Arlington. Now if JJ had offer for a little of tax incentives and not the city to finance half of it...it would be a different story.

**VectorWega** · 09 February 2006, 02:17 PM

TIME AND TIME again it has been proven that a football stadium does not provide much if any revenue for a city unless it is built downtown.

Which is exactly why the stadium should have been built at the Trinity River site and leaders should not have tried to pigeon hole the Cowboys into Fair Park.

**The Great Hizzy!** · 09 February 2006, 02:21 PM

Plus you'd have actual transit access. Reliant Stadium here in Houston and Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego are two great recent examples of how to mix transit and sports venues.

**txRNGr** · 09 February 2006, 02:32 PM

slfunk, you do have to admit though, it would be pretty cool to have the Cowboys closer to home

thats the extent of my frustration....

**DallasStar** · 09 February 2006, 02:32 PM

The main thing that pisses me off about this whole thing is that the citizens of Dallas did not decide the fate of the Cowboys stadium being here. And yes the trinity would have been a better site for the stadium.

During that time I envision a mecca of development from the Arts District, to Victory Park, to the West End, and the trinity and The new Cowboys stadium. But it was all to good to be true. But still, I love the fact that we still have the Victory project going and the Arts District, and they are moving some dirt at the trinity.

**Lakewooder** · 09 February 2006, 02:34 PM

Jerry Jones owns the blame for all of this -- it sickens me to see him pretend to care about Dallas!

**St-T** · 09 February 2006, 02:50 PM

^I agree. I know the city & conty didn't help the matter... but, if he really wanted to be in Dallas he could have. Instead he just pulled out of the negotiations and left us high and dry.

**slfunk** · 09 February 2006, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by txRNGr

slfunk, you do have to admit though, it would be pretty cool to have the Cowboys closer to home

thats the extent of my frustration....

Definantly! I was very excited about it when I heard about it...

**rantanamo** · 09 February 2006, 04:11 PM

Things that really bug me about this whole thing:

- Slow pace of everyone. Back in 1999, there was a chance for the Cotton Dome with or without the Cowboys. This should have been done THEN.

- Laura Miller. She had NO negotiating power with the Cowboys as the deal was a county deal, but she thrusted herself into the negotiations. Last night she said she had no hand in the negotiations. That it was Cotton Bowl deal. I literally wanted to smack the woman, as non-violent as I am. The nerve.

- Keliher. Too much politics in this situation. Pitiful that Dallas County voters never even got the chance to say yes or no.

- UT's lack of negotiation. DeLoss Dodds wants home and home. Its that simple. He wants to make his own revenues. He's a great AD, but he's going to kill that legacy in the minds of a lot of us "Whiney Orange"

- Jerry. Threw us under the bus for 1 game, will lose potential revenues from a bad location, and will only get one Superbowl from that location.

Who had it right all along:
Stephen Jones and John Wiley Price: Biggest advocates for the Industrial Blvd site, which could have drawn federal dollars and put the Cowboys downtown. The rest of us are fools.

The memory of this debacle must not be forgotten. The Rangers will be looking for a venue in about 10 years. I hope this will stay fresh in the minds of everyone. A commission to deal with these issues needs to be formed now, and everyone else needs to get out of the way.

**FoUTASportscaster** · 09 February 2006, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by txRNGr

Cowboys would actually be in Dallas instead of adding more to Arlington, and all the development it would have spurred(just think AA Center x10). AHHHH I need a drink.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!. Victory times ten made me laugh. Think Victory divided by ten at best. If you looking for sports stadium developments in the suburbs, you aren't going to find an extensive list, if for no other reason than an expansive amount of surface parking, which coincidentaly enough, is what that part of Arlington is going to be on game days.

**Big D** · 17 February 2006, 12:00 PM

The Texas Exes <TexasExesChapters@alumni.utexas.edu> wrote:
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 11:00:58 -0600 (CST)
From: The Texas Exes <TexasExesChapters@alumni.utexas.ed
Subject: Texas/ou

DALLAS CHAPTER
Dear Alumni and Friends of The University of Texas at Austin,
Let me first start by introducing myself. My name is Jeff Duchin, and I am the President of the Texas Exes Dallas Chapter for 2006. The purpose of this letter is to solicit your vocal support for keeping the Texas-o.u. game in Dallas. Many of us are active in both the Texas Exes and the Longhorn Foundation, and I believe that your voice can make a difference with regard to whether the game stays in Dallas or becomes a “home and home” series.
According to Athlon Sports, the Texas-o.u. weekend is the fourth-greatest college football tradition. Unfortunately, this tradition may be coming to an end after 2007. Based on published reports, the University of Oklahoma is interested in maintaining the game in Dallas, but our university appears to be struggling with the decision. Not only will discontinuing this special rivalry game in Dallas dramatically change the uniqueness of the game, it will also greatly impact the ability of the Texas Exes Dallas Chapter to raise funds for its scholarship endowments.
In conjunction with TX-o.u. weekend, the Dallas Chapter hosts a golf tournament, the “Bash before the Clash” party and the Texas Tailgate (pre-game) Party. While these events are fun and get us ready for the big game on Saturday, they also serve another purpose. Collectively, these are our core scholarship fundraising events. Approximately 90% of the corporate funds we receive from our local underwriters are driven by our TX-o.u. Weekend events.
In 2005, we generated approximately $50,000 during Texas-o.u. Weekend, which continues to support our scholarship endowments. You should feel extremely proud that your Texas Exes Chapter in Dallas has awarded over $400,000 in scholarships to more than 270 deserving students from the Dallas area in just the last 10 years. The impact on the community and on the lives of those young people is worth every hour of work invested in our 100% volunteer-run organization.
To preserve the tradition and continue the positive impact on the local community of current and future Texas Exes, I strongly urge each of you to contact University of Texas president Bill Powers at One University Station, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712 or president@po.utexas.edu and UT Athletics Director DeLoss Dodds at One University Station, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712 or ddodds@mail.utexas.edu. Please tell them to keep the game in Dallas!
Let’s preserve the tradition.

Hook ‘Em Horns,
Jeff Duchin
President
Dallas Chapter 2006