All Hail Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 There has been talk about CU getting corporate sponsorship for Folsom Field so like Cal, the name of the stadium could change. Coors put down a lot of money for the Dal Ward Center at Folsom Field and instead of renaming the stadium, they renamed the Events Center to the Coors Events Center and that name is still there.The name of the Cal's stadium has not and will not change. It will always be memorial stadium and for now its Kabam field. Most of you probably haven't heard of Kabam but they a rapidly growing Bay Area tech company that create games for your phone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted December 7, 2013 Author Share Posted December 7, 2013 The name of the Cal's stadium has not and will not change. It will always be memorial stadium and for now its Kabam field. Most of you probably haven't heard of Kabam but they a rapidly growing Bay Area tech company that create games for your phone. At least Cal fans can say they are Pac-12 Champs if Kabam makes a CFB game. CU's stadium is Folsom Field but it used to be Colorado Stadium. My guess is that with corporate sponsorship, it will still say Folsom Field at (corporate name) Stadium. It's also possible it will be renamed Folsom Stadium so the field can be sold for naming rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBug708 Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 UCLA has 26 of 60 million pledged already for their facility Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scscsc89 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Arizona's McKale Center ... https://twitter.com/APlayersProgram/status/412707741279334402/photo/1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 UCLA has 26 of 60 million pledged already for their facility Ah yes, pledged money. History suggests 26 million in pledged money equals out to 13-16 mil in future donated money. As I have witnessed throughout my life, pledged money from the wealthy is only as good as their current finnancial outlook, which can often change faster than you would think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scscsc89 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 ... or they would think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBug708 Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Ah yes, pledged money. History suggests 26 million in pledged money equals out to 13-16 mil in future donated money. As I have witnessed throughout my life, pledged money from the wealthy is only as good as their current finnancial outlook, which can often change faster than you would think. For sure. I dont doubt it might be the P. Diddy Facility if push came to shove Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 http://www.buffzone.com/ci_25080550/rick-george-cu-more-than-half-way-50 Buffs are now halfway towards the $50 million mark to begin construction on the $143 million facilities plan for Folsom Field. AD George said that shovels could be in the ground in April or May. It's very clear why former AD Mike Bohn was shown the door last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scscsc89 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2014/2/10/5242790/the-ongoing-struggle-to-pay-off-the-stadium-debt-q1-of-fy2014-update Cal hoping to pay off their stadium by 2053 -- just in time for it to be the least modern stadium in the conference again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2014/2/10/5242790/the-ongoing-struggle-to-pay-off-the-stadium-debt-q1-of-fy2014-update Cal hoping to pay off their stadium by 2053 -- just in time for it to be the least modern stadium in the conference again. To be fair, that date assumes Cal will be able to both, pay off the stadium debt, AND have an extra 319 million for "other AD uses." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scscsc89 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Nothing against Cal -- just a warning to the other public institutions that new toys are fun, until they're not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Nothing against Cal -- just a warning to the other public institutions that new toys are fun, until they're not. This could be a warning to other institutions but how many institutions need to worry about: hordes of protesters occupying trees around the construction site, California valuation rules as it pertains to renovating a building on an active fault line, a very powerful NIMBY housing association who delays construction for 3 years with lawsuits. How many institutions will face these events? All 3 of those events buoyed the cost of Cal's stadium "renovation" considerably. Also, Cal's "shiny toy" was a necessary upgrade as the prior structure was deemed to be "seismically unsafe" due to an 100 year old massive building being located on an active fault line. The stadium was at risk of being condemned so something had to give. It was either upgrade or die. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KUGRDON Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Cal was in an extremely unenviable position. These sorts of costs contribute to why UCLA does not have its own stadium and why the NFL is not in LA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 Cal was in an extremely unenviable position. These sorts of costs contribute to why UCLA does not have its own stadium and why the NFL is not in LA. Are you saying that Cal should have given up and shared the Coliseum with the Raiders and A's? EDIT: Another question to be asked...why couldn't Cal simply build a new stadium just like Stanford did on the cheap and away from that fault line? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KUGRDON Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Where did you get that? Moving games off campus has a tremendous and deleterious effect as well. The costs they incurred, for the reasons stipulated, were significant, mostly unavoidable and unenviable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Are you saying that Cal should have given up and shared the Coliseum with the Raiders and A's? EDIT: Another question to be asked...why couldn't Cal simply build a new stadium just like Stanford did on the cheap and away from that fault line? This is not and was not a realistic alternative. There's a reason Cal played their 2012 season at AT&T Park and not a single game was played at the Coliseum. In fact, AT&T park was occupied for Cal's season opener against Fresno State and the game was moved to crumbling Candlestick rather than the dilapidated Oakland Coliseum. The 2012 season suffered huge attendance set-backs and was a net-loss for the program. 2012 taught Cal that they were justified in building a new stadium and that the program cannot survive at an off-campus site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KUGRDON Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Are you saying that Cal should have given up and shared the Coliseum with the Raiders and A's? EDIT: Another question to be asked...why couldn't Cal simply build a new stadium just like Stanford did on the cheap and away from that fault line? Find land close to campus and not on a fault line? Serious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 EDIT: Another question to be asked...why couldn't Cal simply build a new stadium just like Stanford did on the cheap and away from that fault line?There is no such place that fits your description in the city of Berkeley. Also, I'm losing confidence in the idea that you have any understanding of plate tectonics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scscsc89 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Husky baseball: http://twitter.com/gbellseattle/status/433322589927530496/photo/1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted February 11, 2014 Author Share Posted February 11, 2014 Husky baseball: http://twitter.com/gbellseattle/status/433322589927530496/photo/1 Looking good to me. Found a good website for that: http://www.gohuskies.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209389784&DB_OEM_ID=30200 Should be a nice field: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.