Coug Center

What is good for UW is always good for WSU in the long run.

…every year the state coughs up over 4 million dollars to support cougar athletics. I’ll stop my efforts to garner King County tax dollars (specifically targeted at facilities such as Husky Stadium) if the cougars stop accepting state tax dollars every year to support cougar athletics.

…the same tax base that funds Qwest and Safeco.

…and yes there were some valid points made over there. Specifically where was the foresight of the past administrations at UW, ( Hedges and Gerberding) When the program was generating 20 million dollar surpluses every year during the Hedges period, where did that money go? If it went to the UW then it would seem to me they have an obligation to get this thing done. My guess is conservatively. that’s over 200 million dollars PROFIT that the football program has pumped somewhere? If it went to some kind of fund that perpetuates football (sholies) than fine. If not where did it go?

First of all they had a $20 million dollar surplus total not $20 million per year.

To be fair Hedges had a lot of neglected facilites on her hands when she took over.

The question at the time was where do you start first?

The seating in Hec Edmundson was in danger of being condemned so you can’t argue with her for going in that direction.

What she did do wrong was not include improvements to Husky Stadium as a vital component of the Campaign for the Student Athlete. That piece meal approach never created enough excitement for the football fan base which by the way does all the supporting around here. The campaign dragged on for years during the centuries most vibrant economic time.

I’m still pissed (10+ years is a long time to hold a grudge) at the Montlake neighborhood residents who screamed, whined, and moaned when (unless my memory has faded along with my hairline) Paul Allen was offering to foot the bill to remodel Husky Stadium and have the Seahawks play there on Sundays. “OH, NO!” they cried, “we can’t have 11 more days of football every year!” It all could have been resolved without a dime going to Qwest Field. Now, here we are still dealing with this BS a decade later. I’ve never understood why someone would knowingly purchase a home in the same neighborhood as a major stadium, and whine about additional stadium events. They get the same sympathy from me as those clowns who bought homes near Sea-Tac airport and cry about the noise of the third runway.

Pro: Renovations increase construction jobs (and a couple other types as well), and therefore the project is good for the entire state’s economy
Con: Jobs are temporary in this case, the economy gets a slight boost but then drops back to normal
My opinion: I doubt that any receding done by the economy after the project is complete will leave us in worse shape than we are now, so at worst case we are back where we started but with a shiny new building as an asset.

Pro: Money comes from a sports-stadium specific King County tax and is not a “new” tax, just an extension of the old one – also, the main taxpayers in this case are tourists.
Con: Extending a tax is just as painful for the taxpayers as creating a new one, still less money in people’s pockets, tax cuts in general are the way to stimulate the economy.
My opinion: I do not have an economics background outside of my 102 class years ago, so I’m not sure whether the tax-cut economic theory has really been proven to be true. If cuts are generally accepted to stimulate the economy, then I would argue against the King County tax being overall beneficial to the state. In general however I feel that if tourists in King County don’t want to contribute to the tax then they will stop coming to Seattle and just watch the games on tv, which will punish UW in ticket sales and other revenues, so it will all work itself out.

Pro: what’s good for UW is good for the state and therefore for WSU, especially considering the net loss at which the WSU athletic dept. operates.
Con: What’s good for Seattle is good for the state, and it is debatable whether renovating UW’s stadium is more beneficial to the state as a whole than just playing the games at Qwest Field.
My opinion: I understand the desire to have a stadium on campus but a perfectly good stadium is just a few miles away. I have heard arguments that UW’s stadium is used for many community activities and I’m sure that is true, but I wonder if it wouldn’t be cheaper overall to make the stadium safe enough for community activities but move the sports to Qwest field? This is the only “cougar” argument I agree with completely, but I will admit that as I live in Pullman I may be missing out on the significance of the UW stadium as a community property rather than just a sports venue.

As a whole, I don’t really see why the project shouldn’t go through with the taxes as-is. I think it may be smarter economically to shift the would-be construction jobs to projects with more state-wide appeal, like fixing the various highway problems in Seattle or expanding I-5 or I-90. I think the football team could just as easily play at Qwest with little to no drop in home field advantage. But to me it is King County tax money and if the voters in that county approve extending the task to renovate the stadium then that’s what they want, and it doesn’t make sense for anyone outside the county to stick their nose in just because they don’t like the idea. If you have legitimate economic arguments you are willing to expound upon then I am definitely willing to hear them – that to me would be more interesting than just saying “more jobs = more money” or “stadium renovation is good for WSU because they take state money.”

I actually was officially warned/banned by Coug Center today for using the term Cougies.

Invested 10 million in the construction of the BOA at Hec Ed. I guess nobody complained because it was “only” 10 million. Oregon and Oregon State are now getting significant tax payer help in funding Oregon’s new basketball arena and OSU is getting money for another upgrade of their football stadium. Minnesota is ponying up 137 million towards the UM’s new on campus football stadium.

So I guess the cougs somehow would be “OK” with it as long as they get 100 million for whatever athletic venue they choose to build, right? So answer me this, how much state money went into the cougar basketball arena? and Why should Washington state tax payers continue to fund cougar athletics to the tune of 4 million dollars a year. That is outrageous but we do it, year after year after year. Why aren’t people pissed off about that? That my friends IS paid for by every single taxpayer in the state of Washington!

Kirkd has it exactly right and that is where the argument to have the Huskies play at Qwest falls apart. Football and Husky Stadium is the engine that drive the enitre AD budget. Outside of Title IX waivers no state money goes to fund the AD. Take ownership away and become tenants and those revenues dry up. I suppose we can then divert general fund money to subsidize the AD like the Cougs do outside of those Title IX waivers and everyone loses.

…puppies, mutts etc etc. I think to a certain degree fans are going to dig one another. Especially on the nameless faceless internet. I know what you’re saying though. Some of this BS goes too far.

I never called anyone on your site any names.

I did say something that may have been a little too close to home:

I realize Cougar grads aren’t thrilled about high skilled jobs because they don’t qualify for them, but there will expanded concessions at all these venues so you will be able to continue to ask the populace if they would like to have fries with that shake.

I mean where is the name calling you accused me of?

Cougies….fries with that shake ok…but where is the name calling?

Any name calling came from your posters and I did not respond to it.

I sent you guys more traffic today then you have had since your site was established.

You guys don’t get it.

So today you more than doubled your average traffic.