Monty staying.

[astonmartin708]

That's why I posted that future planning for colleges on parking. It is a wiser article, than spending a bunch of money on underground parking. That underground lost will not be necessary when the blue hairs are no longer alive. The 20 and 30 year olds will take the place of the blue hairs eventually, and the 40 and 50 year olds of today will adapt.

I appreciate you posting the article though I can't read it without resetting my cookies lol.

However, I would note that TU is in a different situation than pretty much any other FBS school considering our enrollment, alumni base, and campus size. We have to attract casual fans in order to grow attendance. Most state schools have the luxury of large enrollment + large alumni bases + lots of casual fans to bridge the gap. We have to do more with less to get fans in the stadium. Just like our football team has to do more with less to beat schools with more financial support. OU may not need to have ease of access for casual fans there fans will show up rain or shine after a 5 mile walk through mud... we don't have that luxury.

 

[JesseTU]

Yeah, lets pretend the 5 minute walk from the parking space is the reason people aren't coming to TU games. The same logic doesn't apply to other venues, but it's totes the reason why people aren't coming to Tulsa games.

Parking is a great donor perk. For people with mobility issues, it is an access issue. But for Joe Blow Oklahoman, calling for more parking is just the song of our people. We aren't actually willing to pay for it.

Look at it like an oil well. Right now... we have a well that's producing 10 barrels per day. We have a pipeline that sized to carry off 10 barrel per day from the well.

We want more oil. We are going to recomplete the oil well in a different manner that allows us to produce 100 barrels per day... but we still only have a pipeline that allows us to transport 10 barrels per day away. We have a sizing issue. We need to pay to install a pipeline to accommodate the flow that we are trying to achieve rather than what we currently have. We also need to pay to recomplete the well so that it will produce what we know it can. We need to do BOTH.

Yeah, lets use that analogy. For 90 years the well has been producing at a level that the existing pipeline can handle. Even in years when the well is reperforated or production is otherwise temporarily up - the pipeline has been able to keep up with minor inconveniences. Any excess production has always been handled without catastrophe, and production has always returned to normal. In fact, a more efficient pump was recently installed that had the effect of reducing the total output capacity of the well by 25%, the efficiency was deemed worthwhile because the well so rarely exceeded that level of output anyway. Same pipeline, 25% less max output from the well.

Now, the owner of the well is saying he will increase the output of the well beyond that of the pipeline by wildcatting new directional holes. There is no evidence this will increase the output of the well beyond its 90 year average or trend line, but the well owner demands the pipeline add to its capacity in case something different happens. The well owner promises to invest heavily in wildcatting but wants the pipeline expanded immediately.

What does the pipeline operator do?

 

[astonmartin708]

Yeah, lets pretend the 5 minute walk from the parking space is the reason people aren't coming to TU games. The same logic doesn't apply to other venues, but it's totes the reason why people aren't coming to Tulsa games.

Parking is a great donor perk. For people with mobility issues, it is an access issue. But for Joe Blow Oklahoman, calling for more parking is just the song of our people. We aren't actually willing to pay for it.



Yeah, lets use that analogy. For 90 years the well has been producing at a level that the existing pipeline can handle. Even in years when a pump is replaced or production is otherwise temporarily up - the pipeline has been able to keep up with minor inconveniences. Any excess production has always been handled without catastrophe, and production has always returned to normal. In fact, a more efficient pump was recently installed that had the effect of reducing the total output capacity of the well by 25%, the efficiency was deemed worthwhile because the well so rarely exceeded that level of output anyway. Same pipeline, 25% less capacity on the well.

Now, the owner of the well is saying he will increase the output of the well beyond that of the pipeline by wildcatting new directional holes. There is no evidence this will increase the output of the well beyond its 90 year average or trend line, but the well owner demands the pipeline add to its capacity in case something different happens. The well owner promises to invest heavily in wildcatting but wants the pipeline expanded immediately.

What does the pipeline operator do?

I don't think your analogy is accurate.

In this case we know that the well is capable of sustained higher production given the right investment. (We know that the school can achieve multiple 10 win seasons with the right coach).

What we also know, is that during periods of high production we haven't been able to deliver all the production to market and we aren't 100% sure why. (We know that in seasons where we've competed for conference championships we haven't consistently filled the stadium)

We need to ask ourselves, why is that? What is it that's inhibiting us from delivering our product to the people we want to pay us for it. Is it our infrastructure? Is it the market forces? Is it our marketing? Is it some combination of all of them. I would argue that our infrastructure is certainly one issue. If we pay to recomplete the well again, is it going to make a difference in terms of how much benefit we receive from it? (Is paying for a new high dollar coach, really a benefit when no one is coming to watch the team?)

We then ask ourselves, what investments in addition to recompletion will give us the biggest benefit? Or will they give us any increased benefit at all?

 

[JesseTU]

@astonmartin708

I'm confused.

I think you mixed up your metaphor. Oil well production was attendance. Parking was pipeline capacity. You've now added demand, but conflated it with attendance. Lets abandon the metaphor.

More parking will not help us get to a 10 win season, and you say that even if we do, a 10 win season doesn't lead to a situation where we need more parking. By extension, one can assume that you agree that presently there is not enough demand to require more parking. Ergo, we are not aware of a situation which necessitates more parking.

You conclude that the solution is to build more parking.

I agree that the basic question is "why don't more people come to TU games." I agree that there are a myriad of possible answers (lack of performance, general marketing, lack of connection to the school, game day experience, cost, and even parking), but I disagree that parking is a significant factor for most.

I have no doubt people say that it is, but most of those same people are walking just as far to get from one end of the mall to the other. Heck, ask them if they would go if they could park within a 5-10 minute walk of the stadium. If they say YES, I call shenanigans because they aren't showing up. If they say NO, their expectations are unrealistic unless they are willing to pay significant money*. Or do we have the funds to build and give away a ~$20k parking garage space to everyone who buys a $15 ticket to a TU game?

Assuming more parking would significantly help, cost benefit still matters.

Here's a challenge: Type out a quick proforma for a 1500 space parking ramp. There's data below from the TW on what recent ramps cost in Tulsa. Assume 24 games a season (6 football, 18 basketball) and the athletic department wants to build it and break even. Go ahead and assume we lose no parking to add the ramp, zero interest, no maintenance or operation costs, and lets put it on a 10 year note. How much would we have to charge for every parking spot on every game day in order to break even? Could we sell them all for that? What does a similar parking spot sell for right across 11th street on a game day? How much would the average Oklahoman pay to avoid a 5 minute walk?

https://www.tulsaworld.com/business...cle_b3624205-9d1f-5464-80c1-35d99c89a8c8.html


*again, I understand there are people with mobility issues that have different needs and I hope TU finds ways to meet them

 

[astonmartin708]

@astonmartin708

I'm confused.

I think you mixed up your metaphor. Oil well production was attendance. Parking was pipeline capacity. You've now added demand, but conflated it with attendance. Lets abandon the metaphor.

More parking will not help us get to a 10 win season, and you say that even if we do, a 10 win season doesn't lead to a situation where we need more parking. By extension, one can assume that you agree that presently there is not enough demand to require more parking. Ergo, we are not aware of a situation which necessitates more parking.

You conclude that the solution is to build more parking.

I agree that the basic question is "why don't people come to TU games." I agree that there are a myriad of possible answers (lack of performance, general marketing, lack of connection to the school, game day experience, cost, and even parking), but I disagree that parking is a significant factor for most.

I have no doubt people say that it is, but most of those same people are walking just as far to get from one end of the mall to the other. Heck, ask them if they would go if they could park within a 5-10 minute walk of the stadium. If they say YES, I call shenanigans because they aren't showing up. If they say NO, their expectations are unrealistic unless they are willing to pay significant money*. Or do we have the funds to build and give away a ~$20k parking garage space to everyone who buys a $15 ticket to a TU game?

Assuming more parking would significantly help, cost benefit still matters.

Here's a challenge: Type out a quick proforma for a 1500 space parking ramp. There's data below from the TW on what recent ramps cost in Tulsa. Assume 24 games a season (6 football, 18 basketball) and the athletic department wants to build it and break even. Go ahead and assume we lose no parking to add the ramp, zero interest, no maintenance or operation costs, and lets put it on a 10 year note. How much would we have to charge for every parking spot on every game day in order to break even? Could we sell them all for that? What does a similar parking spot sell for at Jimmy Johns right across the street on a game day? How much would the average Oklahoman pay to avoid a 5 minute walk?

https://www.tulsaworld.com/business...cle_b3624205-9d1f-5464-80c1-35d99c89a8c8.html


*again, I understand there are people with mobility issues that have different needs

Production wasn't attendance. Production was the product that we're putting out on the field. We are producing oil / winning games. The pipeline just represented our ability to deliver that product to market (people's eyeballs) in return for payment. Attendance is basically how many games we're able to win that people will pay us to see.

Also, I wasn't advocating for a parking garage specifically. I was advocating to solve the deliverability problem we have. Whether that's via a parking garage, or just buying a bunch of houses for above market price around TU and making a free parking lot, or coming up with an elegant solution as to which lots become free the day of the game when the GHC passholders don't show up.

To your point, about why we aren't able to deliver our product to more fans: It's not the product on the field. We've had tons of success in the past and it hasn't led to significant increases in attendance. UCF championship game for example. There's something that we're missing and it's not how many win's we're producing. Producing more wins doesn't mean more people come. Some of it has to do with the opponent. We want to figure out how to get 30,000 against Tulane, ECU, and Wyoming. That means not only giving people a quality shot at seeing a "W" but also making it worth their wild to come to the stadium rather than sitting at home and watching it alongside the OU game, the OSU game, the Arky game... etc... That means making it easy for them to get there, and having fun when they do.

 

[HuffyCane]

They’ve spent a considerable amount of time and money to try and figure out why people aren’t coming to games. Parking is on the list of reasons but it isn’t high. The answers varied greatly by demographics and giving history though.

 

[HuffyCane]

Production wasn't attendance. Production was the product that we're putting out on the field. We are producing oil / winning games. The pipeline just represented our ability to deliver that product to market (people's eyeballs) in return for payment. Attendance is basically how many games we're able to win that people will pay us to see.

Also, I wasn't advocating for a parking garage specifically. I was advocating to solve the deliverability problem we have. Whether that's via a parking garage, or just buying a bunch of houses for above market price around TU and making a free parking lot, or coming up with an elegant solution as to which lots become free the day of the game when the GHC passholders don't show up.

If they are going to be demolishing buildings near the stadium they should be tearing them down to realize their full commercial potential not making the eyesore of parking used 25 days a year. We should be renting that space to someone who turns around and sublets where the book store is to Starbucks or Chick-fil-A with athletics getting a few pennies for every cup or nugget sold. Sometimes the way around donor issues is to become the donor yourself.

 

[astonmartin708]

They’ve spent a considerable amount of time and money to try and figure out why people aren’t coming to games. Parking is on the list of reasons but it isn’t high. The answers varied greatly by demographics and giving history though.

"Giving history"? With alumni base size, we don't need to be considering "giving history" as a control variable lol. 50% of the fans in our stadium are going to be people who are still paying for school or who have never given a dime. The ones that give money are likely to come reliably as long as there is a good Tulsa team on the field. We know they'll come.

We want the others. I want to know why the people who donate nothing come to games and what we can do to entice them to the game when we're not playing A) Their team or B) A national contender. I want to know how we can get those people to come see Tulsa vs. Arkansas State in the sweltering August heat.

 

[astonmartin708]

If they are going to be demolishing buildings near the stadium they should be tearing them down to realize their full commercial potential not making the eyesore of parking used 25 days a year. We should be renting that space to someone who turns around and sublets where the book store is to Starbucks or Chick-fil-A with athletics getting a few pennies for every cup or nugget sold. Sometimes the way around donor issues is to become the donor yourself.

There has to be a market for someone to build a business there. If you haven't noticed... we don't have enough of a population market of students / staff to support that many businesses around campus. Why would you put a chik-fil-a across from campus when you already have one on campus?

You're basically arguing that we shouldn't try to get more attendance because the school can make more money by investing that capital somewhere else... which is plausible. But I don't know if the school's just out to make money or if the athletic program is worth more than just the dollars and cents that the butts in seat provide.

 

[HuffyCane]

"Giving history"? With alumni base size, we don't need to be considering "giving history" as a control variable lol. 50% of the fans in our stadium are going to be people who are still paying for school or who have never given a dime. The ones that give money are likely to come reliably as long as there is a good Tulsa team on the field. We know they'll come.

We want the others. I want to know why the people who donate nothing come to games and what we can do to entice them to the game when we're not playing A) Their team or B) A national contender. I want to know how we can get those people to come see Tulsa vs. Arkansas State in the sweltering August heat.

I’m sure they will take your money if you want to pay for another study.

 

[astonmartin708]

I’m sure they will take your money if you want to pay for another study.

I'm just saying, whoever sold them the last study apparently wasn't considering all the important factors if that's the kind of thing they were given. Maybe if we quit wasting money on inconclusive studies and just started to think logically we could actually afford to make some improvements! HAHAHA

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Have every VP and above level TU employee serve as a valet on game day. No fan would ever have to wait for a valet!

I would looooove to have Miss Janet Levit park my vehicle!

 

[Weatherdemon]

We want the others. I want to know why the people who donate nothing come to games and what we can do to entice them to the game when we're not playing A) Their team or B) A national contender. I want to know how we can get those people to come see Tulsa vs. Arkansas State in the sweltering August heat.

We need to win the big games at home, be consistently ranked, and win vs OU or OSU every two years.

People don’t care about an unranked team or one that is occasionally ranked but loses the big games consistently.

They don’t care about a team with 2, 3, or 4 win seasons or one that occasionally gets 10 but isn’t ranked.

 

[chito_and_leon]

I’m sure they will take your money if you want to pay for another study.

It's worth noting that the university's consultants said "hire Phil Montgomery" and "True Commitment is a great idea", so it's certainly reasonable to wonder whether we're getting the best and brightest to help us. Perhaps we should look at replacing whoever is choosing the consultants.

 

[astonmartin708]

We need to win the big games at home, be consistently ranked, and win vs OU or OSU every two years.

People don’t care about an unranked team or one that is occasionally ranked but loses the big games consistently.

They don’t care about a team with 2, 3, or 4 win seasons or one that occasionally gets 10 but isn’t ranked.

OK. Is that possible? And how much would it take? If we can't afford to fund a program that has that potential then what is the next thing we can afford that gives us as high a benefit as possible?

Also, if we do believe we can achieve it, but it will take sustained improvement from the program, are there necessary intermediate steps that are required to continue our improvement? (Like building an IPF, or getting more fans in seats to improve recruiting, or pulling an SMU / Memphis and cheating our butts off)

 

[chito_and_leon]

But I don't know if the school's just out to make money or if the athletic program is worth more than just the dollars and cents that the butts in seat provide.

LOL, if you don't know the answer to that question (at least for the people in charge today), then you've been living under a rock for the last year!

 

[astonmartin708]

LOL, if you don't know the answer to that question (at least for the people in charge today), then you've been living under a rock for the last year!

Oh I do. But I think we're all bias on here as TU athletics fans. Maybe we should just say, "OK.... we're not great, no one sees us play, but our endowment is huge"

 

[HuffyCane]

We need to win the big games at home, be consistently ranked, and win vs OU or OSU every two years.

People don’t care about an unranked team or one that is occasionally ranked but loses the big games consistently.

They don’t care about a team with 2, 3, or 4 win seasons or one that occasionally gets 10 but isn’t ranked.

This seems intuitive but the research doesn’t back that up both TU specific research and sports in general. For instance, more than half the people who spent $100 or more attending a minor league baseball game were unable to name who won the game while exiting the stadium. And those numbers stacked up across a half dozen AAA and AA parks. I’d bet the same is true of the Drillers. A large portion of people come to games for reasons other than who is playing or what the result is. The people Aston thinks are most important I guess.

Our attendance suffered in the late 70s and 80s when our teams were a favorable match up with OSU and a legit threat to a down OU. So history doesn’t really support the thinking either.

The numbers point towards wider aisles/seats, better lighting, better instant replay in the stadium and more food amenities at competitive prices. Which means a refurb. And with TU football essentially a made for TV project, filling up the East side with a refurb makes sense. Not that any of this matters. I could win the powerball and threaten to set myself on fire in front of Collins Hall if they don’t take the money but they still aren’t going to build.

 

[Hurricane Drummer]

Let's install some outdoor moving sidewalks around this mamma jamma and pave the green earth black! EAT THAT GRETA!

 

[Weatherdemon]

I don’t know if we can do it but, it seems we should be able to.

In terms of an IPF, video board, and concessions, we don’t even compete with some 6A schools in the area so those certainly need improvement.

 

[chito_and_leon]

Oh I do. But I think we're all bias on here as TU athletics fans. Maybe we should just say, "OK.... we're not great, no one sees us play, but our endowment is huge"

I think the powers that be would prefer to just get rid of this athletics nonsense altogether, but barring that, they would probably view your suggestion as an acceptable Plan B. Or at least a useful first step.

 

[astonmartin708]

This seems intuitive but the research doesn’t back that up both TU specific research and sports in general. For instance, more than half the people who spent $100 or more attending a minor league baseball game were unable to name who won the game while exiting the stadium. And those numbers stacked up across a half dozen AAA and AA parks. I’d bet the same is true of the Drillers. A large portion of people come to games for reasons other than who is playing or what the result is. The people Aston thinks are most important I guess.

Our attendance suffered in the late 70s and 80s when our teams were a favorable match up with OSU and a legit threat to a down OU. So history doesn’t really support the thinking either.

The numbers point towards wider aisles/seats, better lighting, better instant replay in the stadium and more food amenities at competitive prices. Which means a refurb. And with TU football essentially a made for TV project, filling up the East side makes sense.

Is comparing football / basketball attendance to baseball attendance appropriate? Baseball has a major thing going for it.... weather. People go to baseball to go drink beer in nice parts of the day with their friends.

Which small schools that have issues with the size of their enrollments / the proximity of their fans have the best enrollments and what do they have in common? I'd say look at TCU. They have a comparable % of Students per overall attendees but much higher attendance as a percentage of capacity. I think the TCU model is probably the one most attainable by TU... that does mean getting a high caliber coach though.

 

[JesseTU]

Also, I wasn't advocating for a parking garage specifically. I was advocating to solve the deliverability problem we have. Whether that's via a parking garage, or just buying a bunch of houses for above market price around TU and making a free parking lot...

New strategy, run an analysis to support your contentions:

1. Is there a small, private university in the same community that has a sea of free surface parking next to their athletic venue? Does the ample surface parking appear to guarantee strong attendance?

http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statistics/ncaa-mens-basketball-attendance

2. Do the math on purchasing one of the blocks near TU to use for surface parking. How many spaces would fit, and then tell us the cost per space. Then do some math and let us know how practical that appears, show your work. (Even if we ignore how distasteful the idea of bulldozing a neighborhood to put in surface parking lots that will rarely be utilized is)

 

[JesseTU]

I think the TCU model is probably the one most attainable by TU...

How does TCU manage without free parking right next to the stadium?

Sorry, I'm really not this invested. It's just a fun distraction from discussing football.

 

[chito_and_leon]

(We know that the school can achieve multiple 10 win seasons with the right coach).

You put your finger on the problem - we're terrible at hiring coaches. Look at our recent history in BB and FB - Jordan's friend (fail), JP (fail), Wojick (Fail), KU dude (fail), Haith (fail). And football - Burns (fail), Kragthorpe (good), Graham (good), BB (fail), Monty (fail). In major sports since the late 90s as far as I remember, our success rate is 20%. Not good. We hired Graham in 2007 - every hire since then has failed. So start by figuring out how to get people who can actually select athletics coaches.

 

[astonmartin708]

New strategy, you run an analysis to support your contentions:

1. Is there a small, private university in the same community that has a sea of free surface parking next to their athletic venue? Does the ample surface parking appear to guarantee strong attendance?

http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statistics/ncaa-mens-basketball-attendance

2. Do the math on purchasing one of the blocks near TU to use for surface parking. How many spaces would fit, and then tell us the cost per space. Then do some math and let us know how practical that appears, show your work. (Even if we ignore how distasteful the idea of bulldozing a neighborhood to put in surface parking lots that will rarely be utilized is)

I don't know why it's distasteful to purchase people's homes for at or above market value. You want to pay me more than my home is worth!? Be my guest.

Looking at my closest positive analog: TCU not incredibly small, but small compared to most FBS schools (No. 8 smallest. Tulsa is No. 3 behind Air Force + Army) They have 10K students.

Their stadium holds 15K more than ours (50% more). Let's say, they get 5K more students to games than we do on average. So they have an extra 10K people driving to get to games.

They have ample parking space surrounding their stadium. They also finished construction on a 900+ space garage in 2015. Not counting individual spaces at the moment, they have 7.5 large lots within 1000 feet of their stadium in addition to that new 900+ space parking garage (which is sitting where a ~500 space lot used to). They have a TON more parking surrounding their stadium and they are also much closer to their capacity on a regular basis.

 

[astonmartin708]

How does TCU manage without free parking right next to the stadium?

Sorry, I'm really not this invested. It's just a fun distraction from discussing football.

It's much more reasonable to ask for donor parking when your parking lots are actually full on gameday week in and week out and you're playing a big 12 team every week. When we get to that point, I'll be all for reverting to donor only parking. The moral of the story is that they have WAY more parking spaces in close proximity than we do. INCLUDING A PARKING GARAGE.

I do really dig them basically having an Uber lane.... maybe we could try something like that! Also, it promotes people getting to and from campus safely! Maybe we could have Gragg drive an uber for us on gameday. He might be better at that.

 

[astonmartin708]

All that parking gibberish being said, we still need a better product on the field to make parking at our stadium worth wile in the first place.

 

[astonmartin708]

You put your finger on the problem - we're terrible at hiring coaches. Look at our recent history in BB and FB - Jordan's friend (fail), JP (fail), Wojick (Fail), KU dude (fail), Haith (fail). And football - Burns (fail), Kragthorpe (good), Graham (good), BB (fail), Monty (fail). In major sports since the late 90s as far as I remember, our success rate is 20%. Not good. We hired Graham in 2007 - every hire since then has failed. So start by figuring out how to get people who can actually select athletics coaches.

That's above my paygrade. I can make suggestions on who the admin should hire, but as to who the admin should be? Man... idk.

 

[TU1NNJ]

It's worth noting that the university's consultants said "hire Phil Montgomery" and "True Commitment is a great idea", so it's certainly reasonable to wonder whether we're getting the best and brightest to help us. Perhaps we should look at replacing whoever is choosing the consultants.

I could be the consultant! I am from out of town and have a slideshow presentation.

 

[astonmartin708]

I could be the consultant! I am from out of town and have a slideshow presentation.

I'm imagining lots of poop emoji's and maybe some comic sans.

 

[TU1NNJ]

I'm imagining lots of poop emoji's and maybe some comic sans.

I will even wear some of the squeaky type of slacks George Castanza wore to his McKinsey interview!

 

[astonmartin708]

Are you the consultant choosing the consultants or the consultant choosing the coach?

How do we choose the consultants to choose the consultants who choose the consultants? Oh God! I need to sit down.

 

[Raisin_Cane]

Honestly, you kind of need to do both. The "if you build it, they will come" belief is a bit flawed. I look at it kind of like Disney World. Yes... people will come to the swamp in Florida to see your theme park.... but, only if you put the proper infrastructure there to process them. If you're going to want 30,000 people in your theme park at a time, you're going to need places for 30,000 people to park when they get there.... and places for 30,000 people to eat. Yes, all of us know the places around TU to park... but for quite a few casual fans, the hastle in trying to find where they're allowed vs. where they're liable to be towed is a problem. Not saying a parking garage is the ultimate solution. But something needs to be done to improve ease of access for casual fans.

Every single lot on campus being for GHC pass holders only is ridiculous. Especially when many of the lots never fill on gameday anyway.

The saddest line in TU's press release for gameday parking:

"Free Parking is available for some games on the OSU-Tulsa campus in downtown at 700 North Greenwood Ave. Shuttle services run to and from those available games."

The fact that we're promoting parking at OSU-Tulsa just to see a TU game is friggin pathetic. Keep in mind, downtown Tulsa is probably pretty out of the way for the suburban Tulsa fans we'd really like to attract from BA, Jenks, Owasso, Bixby, etc... So, not only do they have to come all the way to TU... they have to take a big detour before they can get free parking.

This is not accurate. OSU-Tulsa was used for parking for one game in 2014. It’s super easy to look that up. Whether or not that decision made sense, that hasn’t been in effect in five years. At that time, all parking lots on campus were reserved for GHC members. Since then, the GHC has actually done a really good job off consolidating parking for members and make room for the paid lots for general fans.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

I do really dig them basically having an Uber lane.... maybe we could try something like that! Also, it promotes people getting to and from campus safely! Maybe we could have Gragg drive an uber for us on gameday. He might be better at that.

All that kinda crap was in that article I posted. Uber, ridesharing, parking space app, automated cars, blah, blah, blah.

 

[TU4ever2]

You put your finger on the problem - we're terrible at hiring coaches. Look at our recent history in BB and FB - Jordan's friend (fail), JP (fail), Wojick (Fail), KU dude (NCAA), Haith (NCAA) And football - Burns (fail), Kragthorpe (good), Graham (good), BB (fail), Monty (fail). In major sports since the late 90s as far as I remember, our success rate is 20%. Not good. We hired Graham in 2007 - every hire since then has failed. So start by figuring out how to get people who can actually select athletics coaches.

Corrected. Looks like we are batting around .400. Now looking at who hired those people it's been several different ones. Some of those hires had a lot of work put into them, some of them had nothing to do with the people hiring. Krag is a perfect example and hiring Graham who had won at Rice was as easy a choice as getting Self from ORU.

 

[chito_and_leon]

Corrected. Looks like we are batting around .400. Now looking at who hired those people it's been several different ones. Some of those hires had a lot of work put into them, some of them had nothing to do with the people hiring. Krag is a perfect example and hiring Graham who had won at Rice was as easy a choice as getting Self from ORU.

Wait, you think Manning and Haith were successful hires??? Seriously? Will Haith forever be successful because he made 1 tournament? Manning was like Steve Robinson, we dodged a bullet when they got hired away.

I know that these hires have been under multiple ADs and Presidents, so the problem is bigger than just the current ninnies.

 

[TU 1978]

The problem is the product, not the parking. We’ve had games years ago where people parked at the fairgrounds and buses ran to and from the games. There are other parking lots nearby that could be utilized (old Wilson Junior High, Prosperity bank) that are within walking distance.

 

[astonmartin708]

All that kinda crap was in that article I posted. Uber, ridesharing, parking space app, automated cars, blah, blah, blah.

It would certainly be utilized, but I don’t think it would alleviate the need for parking

 

[Gmoney4WW]

It would certainly be utilized, but I don’t think it would alleviate the need for parking

Not now, in 10 or 15 years. You know, they are planning for the future.