The House of Blue

A conference competitor whom UK plays every season and who we compete with for many recruits just yesterday announced stadium expansion/improvement plan. Pretty relevant and legitimate discussion thread.

Well, for all of the LOD that chose to abandon ship this year. Your lack of $ to the revenue of UKAA won't exactly help UK's pitch in trying to get the bonding capacity for stadium renovation.

They had my $ the last 25 years - it didn't help then and I doubt that it will make a difference now.

Slightly off topic, but if UK does need to hire a new coach any time soon, the fact that they can't get bonding authority to renovate the stadium and upgrade other facilities could be a HUGE roadblock in getting a high grade coach.

This is more a Kentucky State Legislature issue than a UK issue.

Blatantly and categorically false.

In the last 5-7 years (since brooks arrived) We have a fully renovated nutter Football headquarters, we have a fully renovated Nutter Indoor practice facility, we have 100% new practice fields, we have a newly "facelifted" nutter football headquarters, we have new ribbon boards, sound system and jumbotrons.

Please learn the facts before you post such things. You never know when there is somebody who isn't educated about UK sports who might believe the falsehoods you post.

Just to chime in, if this is any reference to my recent posts concerning the effect of revenue losses, please don't misconstrue what I said and what I clarified later in the same thread.

It's not an excuse for anything. It's an observation on the effect of decreased revenue in a situation where optimal revenue was (obviously) not enough to accomplish what we feel is deserved. It's an observation on what could happen going forward, without taking into account what has happened in the past, as it is largely irrelevant.

Getting bonding or any other capital sourced is obviously a long term proposition. No agency will ever look at a single year's revenue and declare "yep, looks like you'll have a big enough revenue stream to pay this note for 25-30 years."

As an analogy:

You've asked your father for a new vehicle. You show him that you've made $500 per month for the last two years. You want him to lend you money for the car, to be paid back over the course of five years.

Situation 1: Your father knows your job is stable and that you are a good employee. You like your job and are on track to be promoted. Your future with that employer is looking bright.

Situation 2: Your father knows that you're a fickle employee. Although you've been at the same place for two years, you're constantly complaining about your job and not showing up to work. Although you've earned the same in the past, you recently took a pay cut due to your bad attitude. Your future with that employer is unstable.

Which if these situations is the father more likely to loan money? Easy right? For the analogy purposes, the fans are the child and the [insert capital source here] is the father.

The whole point is that the legislature has obviously shot its wad on bonding the hospital. There is likely no relief in the immediate future due to bonding $1Billion for that purpose.

That's why I believe UK is currently looking at other funding models. For that to happen, it must prove itself an acceptable risk for lending. Fluctuations in its revenue stream (read: lack of season ticket sales) will detract from any evaluation for that purpose.

Of course, as I said before, for those who dropped tickets due to the economy or the myriad of reasons outside of "sending a message," that is a negative factor that cannot be controlled.

Those who are operating under the belief that purposefully decreasing the ability of UK Athletics to service its own debt is an appropriate message or somehow helpful long-term, at a time when UK Athletics is seeking capital sources elsewhere (or the ability to even do so) are fooling themselves.

Those schools were 12 years behind. Bout time they got in the game.

What you say is true to an extent. Making a complete renovation of the nutter center by using 100% private funds is MAJOR. making a complete renovation of the nutter indoor facility with private funds is MAJOR. Making a complete renovation of the practice fields wtih 100% private money is MAJOR. Doing the new ribbon boards and Jumbotrons and new sound system with private funds IS major. Renovating all of our locker-rooms both practice and game with 100% private funds is major.

In reality, being able to do all of this with NO bonding is a miracle and people should thank Mitch Barnhart.

What you described were "stadium" upgrades. OUr practice facilities still outpace several sec schools and are "up to snuff" with most of the other programs. Of course we lag behind Bama and a couple of others. If we get the bonding we need, we'll have that.

But to say that "nothing has been done" is ignoring reality. A TON has been done considering the circumstances. The "everyday" facilities. The facitlities that players use day in and day out are very good. Are they the best? no. Do I wish they were? yes. If we can get bonding will they be the best? yes. But to say that we are somehow "behind the times" with our practice/every day facilieites isn't true.

We need some more "revenue generating" types of facilities the most. I've told Mitch myself that I'd buy 8 club level seats the day they announce the renovation to include such. The problem is, he can't pay for it without the legislatures blessing.

It's not that they have to be mind blowing. As a matter of fact, relatively mediocre facilities make them tops in their conference.

What matters, in my opinion, is the effort and action.

UK suffers from plenty of historical and geographical negatives. Leaning on fan and administrative support to attract talent is about all we have to offer high level athletes, other than the chance to play early and "turn the program around," which has been sold for a long time now.