College Football's Top Facilities

Cam

Cam

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,591
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
247 printed their new article on the top 20 college football facilities. Spoiler: GT does not make the cut. However, I think we have a chance at breaking into the rankings once we complete the fundraising/construction for the new Edge Center and weight room. It's interesting to see how much some teams have pumped into their programs in the last 5 years or so. It's definitely an "arms race."

https://247sports.com/LongFormArtic...Clemson-Oklahoma-Texas-126107528/#126107528_1
 
GT_05

GT_05

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,370
LibertyTurns said:
We plunked down $9M for the Brock indoor facility and Northwestern choked over $270M to build a ginormous facility. We’re racing a Meserati with a Festiva and are a lap down. We’ve got some huge catching up to do.
Click to expand...

Wile E. Coyote always used an Acme rocket. Strap one of those babies to the top of the Festiva.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
iceeater1969

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,677
We have to market ATL.
I am sure cgc will.
Hope u like hip hop cause kids do.

Ain't got dat no crib dee listo
Goin at 404 ATL swaaaag up!
(Rap talk)

Got to sell what we have and they dont.
I still remember seeing Otis Redding in a late nite practice session . Ain't in kansas moment.

Schools in Norman , college station, auburn , Tuscaloosa etc have to have fancy lockers cause they stink.

If the direction to the live music restruant includee chucked cheese - u know your are in Tuscaloosa .
 
Last edited:
GTRock

GTRock

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
377
LibertyTurns said:
We plunked down $9M for the Brock indoor facility and Northwestern choked over $270M to build a ginormous facility. We’re racing a Meserati with a Festiva and are a lap down. We’ve got some huge catching up to do.
Click to expand...

I think many of our fellow alums/supporters have no idea. Forget that Top 20, most of which aren't ACC, but even in our own conference now.

Formerly "GTjay"
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,100
Ok, we may have to do it, but this whole process is symbolic of what's wrong with college sports.

Universities and colleges are educational institutions. The money we spend on sports is counter-productive. Sooner or later - let it be sooner - we will go back to funding post-secondary education at the level needed to catch the US up to other developed countries (our rate of college completion among college age young people is 19th among the 34 OECD countries). That will mean some refocusing of educational expenditures at all levels of government, including infrastructural spending for sports facilities and other indirect subsidies to college sports. Let the fans support the athletic associations as they already do, but if they want to get athletes in on faux scholarships or get facilities built, the answer should be no. We need the money for other and, from a public policy standpoint, much more important things.

I'll miss big time college sports, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop changes that would get rid of them.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,550
takethepoints said:
Ok, we may have to do it, but this whole process is symbolic of what's wrong with college sports.

Universities and colleges are educational institutions. The money we spend on sports is counter-productive. Sooner or later - let it be sooner - we will go back to funding post-secondary education at the level needed to catch the US up to other developed countries (our rate of college completion among college age young people is 19th among the 34 OECD countries). That will mean some refocusing of educational expenditures at all levels of government, including infrastructural spending for sports facilities and other indirect subsidies to college sports. Let the fans support the athletic associations as they already do, but if they want to get athletes in on faux scholarships or get facilities built, the answer should be no. We need the money for other and, from a public policy standpoint, much more important things.

I'll miss big time college sports, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop changes that would get rid of them.
Click to expand...
I hear you. I lived in the UK where folks were extremely puzzled by the very idea of big-time college sports. But I missed it myself.

Logically, you're correct. Emotionally, that won't happen in my lifetime. Americans haven't been very rational when it comes to this sort of thing. (See: NBA Popularity)
 
Dpjacket

Dpjacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
183
takethepoints said:
Ok, we may have to do it, but this whole process is symbolic of what's wrong with college sports.

Universities and colleges are educational institutions. The money we spend on sports is counter-productive. Sooner or later - let it be sooner - we will go back to funding post-secondary education at the level needed to catch the US up to other developed countries (our rate of college completion among college age young people is 19th among the 34 OECD countries). That will mean some refocusing of educational expenditures at all levels of government, including infrastructural spending for sports facilities and other indirect subsidies to college sports. Let the fans support the athletic associations as they already do, but if they want to get athletes in on faux scholarships or get facilities built, the answer should be no. We need the money for other and, from a public policy standpoint, much more important things.

I'll miss big time college sports, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop changes that would get rid of them.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the well-reasoned points—much appreciated.

It doesn’t take any particular partisan view to acknowledge that, at the least, the economy of all sports/entertainment has grown exponentially relative to other segments. At the end of the day sports is just entertainment and for most of us just vanity (or obsession).

At least there is no Federal mandate to subsidize (at least directly). Still, there’s only so many $$ to go around. I for one would not contribute a one penny to increase a head FC salary from, say, $2.5m to $3.5m #annually#. A $5M salary? $8M?! Pffft...no.

Guys, let’s keep it fun, but let’s keep it real and things in proper perspective with Tech. I’d value the over-achiever than the over-privileged any day.
 

jatchet

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
160
Location
Decatur, GA
takethepoints said:
Ok, we may have to do it, but this whole process is symbolic of what's wrong with college sports.

Universities and colleges are educational institutions. The money we spend on sports is counter-productive. Sooner or later - let it be sooner - we will go back to funding post-secondary education at the level needed to catch the US up to other developed countries (our rate of college completion among college age young people is 19th among the 34 OECD countries). That will mean some refocusing of educational expenditures at all levels of government, including infrastructural spending for sports facilities and other indirect subsidies to college sports. Let the fans support the athletic associations as they already do, but if they want to get athletes in on faux scholarships or get facilities built, the answer should be no. We need the money for other and, from a public policy standpoint, much more important things.

I'll miss big time college sports, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop changes that would get rid of them.
Click to expand...


I'm not an expert on the subject, so feel free to educate me... I believe the multi-million dollar facilities and largest football programs are mostly funded by TV deals and donations to athletic associations. Are you suggesting not allowing athletic associations to fund programs and projects, even if all the funds are from ESPN contracts or willingly donated? How would that improve secondary education funding?

I'm guessing you're talking about going after athletic fees and subsidies that do increase the cost of an education. I don't love those fees, but I think that would also destroy funding for all small schools and sports. These programs often provide scholarships to deserving students trying to live out the american dream. Meanwhile, Clempson fans would keep IPTAYing millions into football.
 
Dpjacket

Dpjacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
183
jatchet said:
I'm not an expert on the subject, so feel free to educate me... I believe the multi-million dollar facilities and largest football programs are mostly funded by TV deals and donations to athletic associations. Are you suggesting not allowing athletic associations to fund programs and projects, even if all the funds are from ESPN contracts or willingly donated? How would that improve secondary education funding?

I'm guessing you're talking about going after athletic fees and subsidies that do increase the cost of an education. I don't love those fees, but I think that would also destroy funding for all small schools and sports. These programs often provide scholarships to deserving students trying to live out the american dream. Meanwhile, Clempson fans would keep IPTAYing millions into football.
Click to expand...

Obviously it’s a touchy subject and I dare say that none of us here really have the data, the insight. Not me for sure.

With the risk of ignorance, I would just suggest any money sourced ultimately comes from the lowest level—you and I. How the economy of ESPN works beyond subscriptions [disclosure: I worked for Comcast most of my career...you might not be surprised why your cable bill goes up] is beyond me. Ultimately it seems to me that if you favor exponential, expansive increase in amateur athletics, e.g. college football, I’d assume you’d favor universal healthcare, universal college education. Even a border wall for cripe’s sake.

Of course, all this is subject to one’s own values. Hmmmm. Universal health care. Universal college education. “Beautiful border wall”. Military investment. Overseas conflicts. Oh, and a primo CFB head coach, facilities and top-tier recruiting budget. We can have it all!!!

I think that’s the thought-provoking essence of the original post — of which I 100% agree — regarding public investment. Stated with being the logical, reasonable Tech man my family would hope.
 
MaconBacon IM88

MaconBacon IM88

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
105
takethepoints said:
Ok, we may have to do it, but this whole process is symbolic of what's wrong with college sports.

Universities and colleges are educational institutions. The money we spend on sports is counter-productive. Sooner or later - let it be sooner - we will go back to funding post-secondary education at the level needed to catch the US up to other developed countries (our rate of college completion among college age young people is 19th among the 34 OECD countries). That will mean some refocusing of educational expenditures at all levels of government, including infrastructural spending for sports facilities and other indirect subsidies to college sports. Let the fans support the athletic associations as they already do, but if they want to get athletes in on faux scholarships or get facilities built, the answer should be no. We need the money for other and, from a public policy standpoint, much more important things.

I'll miss big time college sports, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop changes that would get rid of them.
Click to expand...
I only watch NCAA sports. That being said, there was a special in HBO about amateur athletics and they offered a stat that African American males make up over 60% of athletic teams in FB and Bb - but only 3% of undergrads. I don't know the cause or the solution - but it is too disparate
 
okiemon

okiemon

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,784
takethepoints said:
Ok, we may have to do it, but this whole process is symbolic of what's wrong with college sports.

Universities and colleges are educational institutions. The money we spend on sports is counter-productive. Sooner or later - let it be sooner - we will go back to funding post-secondary education at the level needed to catch the US up to other developed countries (our rate of college completion among college age young people is 19th among the 34 OECD countries). That will mean some refocusing of educational expenditures at all levels of government, including infrastructural spending for sports facilities and other indirect subsidies to college sports. Let the fans support the athletic associations as they already do, but if they want to get athletes in on faux scholarships or get facilities built, the answer should be no. We need the money for other and, from a public policy standpoint, much more important things.

I'll miss big time college sports, but I wouldn't lift a finger to stop changes that would get rid of them.
Click to expand...

Even though I'd hate it in many ways, I have to like this post. As the US falls further behind other countries, especially in STEM, I don't think it will help to say "Yeah, but look how many people watched the college football championship game on TV!".
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,243
UgaBlows said:
Are we even top 50?
Click to expand...

YES.

(According to the Princeton Review https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=best-athletic-facilities , we actually come in at #4 in overall athletic facilities...which is an achievement considering GT is located in an expensive urban environment. GT was #1 at one point.)

We're in the conversation with some in the top 20.

No, GT doesn't have mega complexes like Clemson, 'Bama, Texas, etc. Those are just ridiculous monstrosities. GT has everything the guys in the top 20 has (indoor practice facility, updated locker rooms, updated weight room, etc) and will get even better after construction is complete with the capital raise TStan initiated. GT's facilities just aren't over the top and they're not monstrosities like what they have at Clemson, 'Bama, Texas, etc.

I really wish we didn't talk so poorly about what we have. It's not the flashiest, but I promise you 90% of colleges wish they had GT what has.
 
Top