Puppy Chow
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 6:33 AM PDT
Email
Print
We lead off today with the official Jake Locker for Heisman post card that the athletic department released recently. This officially starts of the Jake for Heisman campaign. The Huskies won't be doing billboards in Times Square to promote Jake but members of the national media have already been visiting Seattle.
SI's Stewart Mandel was in Seattle recently to watch a practice.
A Tale of Two Terrances
Husky basketball recruit Terrance Ross isn't making anything official till Friday when he holds a press conference at his school. Insiders are however saying that he is a lock for Washington. The 6'5 guard will give Washington a dimension they were missing last season.
Terrance Jones on the other hand hasn't tipped his hat on where he is going. the 6'10 power forward has been rumored to be a Washington lean but Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Oklahoma, and Oregon are still in the mix for his services.
Friday Night Lights
Steve Sarkisian says they are going to have a regular game on Friday night to conclude the spring. No word yet on how they will divide up the teams but with limited numbers available you can expect them to get creative.
"We'll have a Purple and a White team and we are going to play. What we won't do is we won't have kicks and punts to try to save our legs, so if a team scores we'll kick the extra point, and we'll have field goals throughout the game. But as opposed to having a kickoff you'll get the ball at the 20-yard line and if you get stopped it's an automatic 40-yard punt.''
ESPN Deal
Washington's new deal with ESPN/ABC is going to give the program a lot of exposure. ESPN is guaranteeing UW six units this season. For example the Thursday night game against UCLA counts as one unit. A nationally televised Saturday contest which is viewed by 51% of the nation would count as two.
ESPN also would love to to broadcast Gameday from Seattle next year. The Nebraska at Washington clash is an early contender if both teams come in 2-0. ESPN usually makes those decisions a week before the actual game.
Dave Brown, Vice President of Programming at ESPN, and the man responsible for coming to Washington with the idea of the Thursday game, said the exposure gained by moving the UCLA game will be tremendous for the Huskies. For starters, it's the only college game publicized heavily on ESPN's Monday Night Football. The Thursday game also gets more pre-game and post-game editorials during the week, adding to the hype.
"Husky Stadium has been home to so many great telecasts over the years," Brown said. "There few better settings than Husky Stadium for college football, and that's why we're really excited to bring that to Thursday night for the first time."
Dawgman
Revised 2010 Schedule
Sept. 4 --- at BYU
Sept. 11 --- Syracuse
Sept. 18 --- Nebraska
Sept. 25 --- Bye week
Oct. 2 --- at USC
Oct. 9 --- Arizona State
Oct. 16 --- Oregon State
Oct. 23 --- at Arizona
Oct. 30 --- Stanford
Nov. 6 --- at Oregon
Nov. 18 --- UCLA (Thursday at 5:00 PM)
Nov. 27 --- at Cal
Dec. 4 --- at Washington State
Plan B
The Athletic Department will be announcing some sort of Plan B for the renovation of Husky Stadium in the very near future. I am not sure exactly what they have in mind but it will involve some type of fund raisng campaign led by major donors to get the job done. Even though project planning dates back to Todd Turner's arrival on campus most find it pretty strange that UW hasn't kicked off any type of official fund raising until now. The estimated cost of the project at the moment is in the $250 million range.
Danielle Lawrie
Danielle Lawrie set a new Pac-10 record on Monday when she was named the Pac-10 Pitcher of the Week for the 15th time in her career, also nearing the single-season record with her fifth honor this year.
Oxford and Syracuse head to Seattle for the Windemere Cup
The 2010 edition of the Windermere Cup will host one of the biggest names in the sport - Oxford. The Dark Blues will be joined by Syracuse at the May 1 regatta on the Montlake Cut.
92 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You stated that Ross " will give Washington a dimension they were missing last season." Could you please be more specific on the dimension he brings that we were missing last year. Thanks
I think he gives us a dimension that works well against the USC’s and West Virginia’s of the world.
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions
He's as good a shooter as anybody we had last season
And unlike Turner and Suggs, he’s already got the pull-up in his arsenal and the ability to go to the rack. He also rebounds amazingly well from the guard position. The key to Ross is his versatility, he can pretty much do it all offensively.
he has physical attributes that hint at effective defensive presence
… assuming he has the mindset.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
The Dimension
I think what John was getting at was the fact that we didn’t have the taller guard to contend with opposing taller guards, especially in the NCAA tournament. It becomes a mismatch to some extent after awhile. Example: Washington vs. West Virginia
5’10" (on his tippy toes) IT was being heavily guarded by a WV 6’8" guard- advantage West Virginia.
All I saw was purple
Turner (was), Wilcox (will be), Holiday (is)
Big guys and wings like Ross. I don’t know that he necessarily adds a dimension as much as he adds more talent.
You're comparing Ross to the wrong players and positions....
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Am I?
From my experience wings and guards are inter-changable. Your Kyle Weaver was a wing player and I saw him playing point on a few occasions. Wing is just a fancy way of saying a player is a guard that doesn’t handle the rock as often. He sitll plays the perimeter but is not necessarily a distributor.
All I saw was purple
And comparing players from opposite systems doesnt work, either
Ross does what some guys on your roster do already, but does it better. Its not an either or situation with it, but more a both. IT is somewhere between a pg and sg. Ross is somewhere between a sg and sf.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 10:56 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
This is getting a little rediculous
The idea is to get taller on the perimeter. We marvel at Nate Robinson and IT and both will go down as some of the greatest Huskies ever. But the idea is to get a little taller on the perimeter so that we don’t have that glaring disadvantage come tournament time. Huggy Bear created a huge mismatch for us. Putting a 6’8 or 9" guy on IT was hard to overcome. building a team around more heigth on the perimeter will fix that area of mismatch.
All I saw was purple
That is still going to be there
Romars not just gonna pull IT for a guy that’s taller. The reason WVU could do that was because of the athleticism of their guards/wings. You have length on the roster and I listed them above. Ross gives you more versatility at the wing, but your pg and IT will still be short no matter what.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 11:09 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I knew I shouldve looked at that
Thought he seemed taller. So IT and Overton are the shorter guys and that’s about it.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 11:15 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Until Gaddy takes a big step forward though
He’s not seeing the floor without either Thomas or Overton there with him, so you can count Gaddy as a short player in that respect.
I expect him to make a jump between now and next season
He’s too good not to.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 11:20 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Are you saying Ross will be a one and doner?
Are we recruiting him for one season or are we looking at some 6’6" Brandon Roy longevity? I’d hope that we are recruiting this kid for more then just one season. We need to get taller on the perimeter and the way you do that is to recruit towards that. I’m looking down the road not just next season. It and Venoy will still be a huge part of the success next season. The idea I think going forward after next season is Gaddy at point with Wilcox and Ross on the perimeter. That combination is going to be the length we need to succeed in the tournament.
All I saw was purple
Romar doesn't recruit players like that
He goes after the best kids available. If they stick around, great. If they don’t then they were probably good enough that they contributed a ton in their time on campus.
Ross has the talent to go pro early. If he had played basketball this year, he could well have been a McDonald’s All American. It’s impossible to predict though.
Im saying that adding Ross doesnt solve your WVU problem
Adding Aziz, however, does negate a team of guys between 6 and 6’8 from switching every screen.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 11:30 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Well that's just dandy
But I am referring to the future, not just next season. The idea going forward to to get the taller perimeter guys that we see at Kansas, Kentucky, and Ucla- so that Washington can take the next step. We’re stuck on getting to the Sweet 16, and I think one reason is because the lack of length on the perimeter.
All I saw was purple
And I don't think height and length on the perimeter are some magic formula for winning
Adding talent and scorers is. Romar is doing just that and has been for some time. If he recruits the best kids he can, he’ll be just fine. If they have some length, good, but it’s not a necessity.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
The Schedule
I think we have a favorable schedule going into next season. BYU minus Max Hall, plus Jake Heaps looks like a great opener. Syracuse coming to Montlake, should be covered by the East Coast media. The big bad Big 12 Cornhuskers in town should create much buz.
But the key to the season is the Pac 10 slate. At this point I’m not sure which game looks to be the “measuring stick”. However we have USC, Oregon, and Cal on the road. All 3 look tough on the road. Not too worried, this schedule is more favorable then some of the other schedules we’ve had that were just meat grinders.
All I saw was purple
I like the bye coming early this season before the USC game.
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
@ USC
It will be a little refreshing that we won’t be starring across the field at Pete Carroll. I think that alone favors us. We really don’t know what to expect from Lane Kiffin. The guy didn’t really scare anybody in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Consider this no Pete Carroll, not Masolli and a lot of offseason trouble for Oregon, and Cal minus Javid Best. Usually having all 3 of these games on the road is tough, but all 3 became less tough and makes us more favorable. Now I am not saying we win all 3 of these games, but I like our chances going forward.
All I saw was purple
Stadium
Thanks for keeping us up to date on “Plan B”. I’m very interested in the timeline for raising the money (1, 2, or 3 years?) and the expected cost of the project.
The future of Husky Football as we know it (aka not at Qwest) hangs in the balance.
Qwest
The make-over will get done. Husky Stadium is to big of a Seattle icon to vacate. I can see us playing one annual game at Qwest. WSU wants to hold the Apple Cup there so that they can generate more ticket sales. We don’t need the game moved to Qwest simply because we have the luxury of more ticket sales now without Qwest. Yet I can see the Apple Cup eventually being played there. It could have the appeal of the Red River Shootout (OU vs. Texas) to some extent.
All I saw was purple
The Apple Cup at Qwest will never compare to the Red River Shootout.
Doak Walker Stadium at County Fair is a hall of greatness seating nearly 100,000 people, with an equal number of fans divided on at the 50 yard line. The grass field, the history of the stadium, the fact that it’s almost equidistant to Austin and Norman…
Qwest is a sterile concrete building with a good sound system. Moving the game to Apple Cup to Qwest is a non-starter. There is just no possible way that moving the game there benefits UW fans. None. Especially when you consider the fact that some season ticket holders aren’t going to be able to buy tickets to what will be a home game in odd years.
If the Cougs want to play the game there in even years, I’m fine with that. If the UW athletic department wants to piss off its fans, moving the game there will do just that.
Oh no, some season ticket holders couldn't get tickets except for every other year?
Kind of like…..now?
Qwest has a smaller capacity than Husky Stadium, so if/when Husky Stadium starts being a sellout again (and Apple Cups usually are), some Husky fans are going to be left out in the cold if the game were moved to Qwest on a permanent basis.
You also have the difficult situation of deciding which half of the season ticket base would get tickets to games in even years and which half would get tickets to games in odd years and all the resulting complaining.
On top of that, moving the game makes no sense for the UW if it doesn’t result in increased revenue for the Huskies, and I’m skeptical that would be the case given the smaller capacity of Qwest and the assumed need to pay some sort of rent to use the stadium.
Oh, not to mention worse tailgaiting options at Qwest…
Given the objections Husky fans have the objection Cougar fans have (“it’d be like a permanent home game for the Huskies!”), I don’t see it happening.
The revenue increase for a game at Qwest over a home and home Apple Cup is huge
I ended up doing the math back when it was first floated and it turns out to be a big increase during the usual two year cycle.
The capacity of Qwest is at 67K and can be 72K nearly the same size of HS. HS also includes a fair amount of visitor seating within it’s capacity, especially during the Apple Cup where the bowl on the Montlake side is given to WSU fans. There shouldn’t be anyone left in the cold during a two year cycle of games. A 50/50 game would be a pretty good atmosphere to watch an Apple Cup game in, even if only for a few years.
I understand the complaining, but the money to be made from the deal, for both sides, is very substantial. Not saying it’s a good idea permanently, but in the state both programs are in financially right now, it makes sense.
Want an easier way to increase revenue?
WSU moves their home Apple Cups to Qwest.
Problem solved.
Revenue for everyone!!
Right, because that's just genius, isn't it?
That totally works. How bout we try something that benefits both sides?
That does benefit both sides.
The reason the Apple Cup isn’t terribly profitable is that Martin Stadium only holds about 37,000 people. It’s the two-year split that’s problem. The game generates pretty close to the same money in the Qwest deal if the attendance is in the 140,000 range as opposed to less than 110,000.
Why should the UW do something to benefit WSU, if there are any detrimental effects to its own fans? I don’t mean that to sound as snide or standoffish as I’m sure it comes across. I just don’t see the logic.
Do the deal...
…if you must for money but make the venue controlled by each side as in a home and home series. In other words, just as it is now! What a concept! Wsu controls the venue and is their “home” game on odd years and UW is the home team on even years. I don’t think UW fans would have a problem with that, EXCEPT that we are trying to renovate Husky Stadium and this would be HORRIBLE timing and the JEWEL that Husky Stadium is, would be silent and vacant on Apple Cup Saturday which IMO would be a “damn shame!”
For the latter reason I’ve stated, I’m against it. Cougar fans WAKE UP!, this devalues “venerable” Martin Stadium too!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Didnt mean to come off snide either
I need to go back and find the numbers again because I did end up working this all out back when it was first floated. If I remember right, even one year at qwest outearns an apple cup at HS, but I’m not sure. It isn’t just the attendance numbers, but also the premium seats and pricing qwest can bring.
The 50 50 split, as opposed to home/away also adds a new dynamic that, if done right, could make for an entertaining environment. Couple that with a better tv deal than fsn regional and you’re making good money now.
by Brian Floyd on Apr 27, 2010 5:42 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, you really can't discount how much premium seating brings in.
As seattle sports fans we should remember that a large part of why the Sonics l were moved wasn’t just seating capacity it was that there was a desire for more premium seating which is where the majority of the money is made.
I work at Safeco in the Suites and I know that on a good day up there we out net the entire stadium( if I remember correctly). It’s pretty crazy to think that such a small portion of the attendance can add that much revenue.
"I call the big one Bitey."-Homer J. Simpson
by Willie Mays Haze on Apr 27, 2010 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I also did find the numbers from when the deal was first floated
Playing at Qwest guaranteed $2 million dollars per team per year.
Playing it the normal way resulted in just over $1 million per two year cycle.
That’s a huge difference and why I would’ve been okay with at least playing there while both departments are struggling financial. You’re also correct that the premium seating (like suites), clear a huge amount of money for games. That’s easily the biggest difference in playing at Qwest.
They really do
I thought I remember something about them wanting to put more premium seating in Husky Stadium if/when it get’s remodeled which would make a lot of sense and cents.
"I call the big one Bitey."-Homer J. Simpson
by Willie Mays Haze on Apr 28, 2010 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Yep, that was part of the package
It’s part of the package at any stadium looking for a remodel, it seems. The amount of money generated makes it really worth it, especially if you can get the majority of the premium seating committed to before construction starts.
It really is.
Like I said, that was a major sticking point w/r/t not being able to use Key Arena for the Sonics. However, I wonder how sustainable a source of revenue it is. Suites especially are bought by companies looking to show their clients a good time etc. But that was in a good economy. I know SafeCo’s suites have been hit hard by the economic downturn and I wonder how soon, if ever companies are going to be willing to spend so much on something like suites.
"I call the big one Bitey."-Homer J. Simpson
by Willie Mays Haze on Apr 28, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I was at a club at Qwest Field for the Seahawks '09 closer (against Tennessee).
The stadium was still sold out, and that’s without the entrenched loyalty of alumni, students and athletics boosters. The club seating there has ~12 seats per box (I’m recalling from memory) plus the actual “suite” area with food and televisions. There were maybe 20 people there, 14 of us on the seat level watching the game.
Safeco’s suites take a hit because baseball is nowhere near the draw football is—and why should it be? The Seattle metropolitan area (as defined by the US census) includes the counties of Pierce, King and Snohomish and has an estimated population of ~3.5 million people. Let’s say exactly 2/3 of them are baseball/football fans. That means 2.333 million people are fans for either sport.
Regularly configured, Qwest seats 67,000 fans for 8 games, or about 536,000 people over the course of an NFL season. Specially configured, it seats 72,000 and only raises attendance to 576,000. Safeco, by comparison, seats 47,116 fans for 81 games, or about 3,816,396 people over the course of a season. Assuming identical demand, the supply for Safeco is seven times that of Qwest over the course of a season. The Mariners regularly draw ~2,000,000 fans over the course of a year, or about 4x what Qwest can possibly draw.
A single Apple Cup game there, with the loyalty of schools rather than regional institutions—schools that graduate thousands of fans per year—would be huge for demand. It makes loads of sense for both the Huskies and Cougs to pursue this as an option, at least economically speaking.
You are wrong.
Qwest Field is an excellent football stadium.
Not long term, no. For the short term while HS is renovated--ha, like that's happening! =(--sure, why not?
But for a once a year event like the Apple Cup, splitting gates 50/50 with WSU, I could definitely see it working, at least economically speaking (see above reply to Willie Mays Haze).
This was merely a reply to SunDodger in regards to calling Qwest Field a “sterile concrete box”—which it isn’t—and he was specifically talking about the Apple Cup, comparing it to the Red River Shootout. Put plainly, no, he is wrong.
Well, it will obviously be the short-term home while Husky Stadium is renovated. But once Husky Stadium is renovated, there should be no reason to have any games played there – renovation should include the kind of club seating and additional luxury boxes that would make playing a game at Qwest unnecessary in terms of added revenue.
But I do agree that it’s not sterile and is a great place to watch NFL football.
"To some extent"
Hard to duplicate the OU vs. Texas game, but to some extent an Apple Cup at Qwest Field could be media frenzy if promoted the right way. Now I see the delemma for season ticket holders. I think it would create problems for both sides. Yet if that part could be worked out, where both sides are content on season ticket holders, I can see a possible one time experiment at Qwest. But to be quite honest, I’d rather see us buld a bigger rival out of the Apple Cup then to see a rival built vs. Oregon.
It’s impossible to duplicate anything associated with the Red River Shootout, I agree, but it isn’t impossible to replicate some of that fan frenzied atmosphere in the NW at Qwest if somehow they can figure out how to make the season ticket holders happy. I think that is the single biggest hurdle in all of this. Hell I’m for it, how many of us hate the trip over to Pullman every other season?
All I saw was purple
Emmert is leaving the UW to head up the NCAA.
Wow.
I wonder how far to the back burner the stadium will be pushed now that the UW doesn’t have a president. Again.
Maybe this is the start of something
We have to consider getting a president that is football-friendly, we just have to. If we consider how much the state legislature has made cuts. Putting an emphasis on football once again makes complete sense. Husky Football can generate more revenue then any other colliegate sport in the state. So in order to create needed revenue we have to put a premium on football.
All I saw was purple
Do you HONESTLY think the UW Board of Regents...
…is going to factor football into their selection criteria?
Actually, they might – but not the way you want. I’ll be surprised if the next president is as pro-football as Emmert was.
This isn’t a good thing. At best, the next president is going to be football-neutral. At best.
Let me make my point clear
I realize it’s all about academics and research and development- point noted. However you can’t deny the fact that the legislation has cut the University’s budget in every program. I think it is a sad state of affairs when the state legislation makes cuts to academic programs and with that said I seriously and highly doubt that we receive state funding for our stadium when simply we’ve seen cuts in regards to the academic programs. Face facts, state funds aren’t there for us and won’t be for the unforseeable future.
Where am I going with this? Husky football is the revenue generating sport of the university and the only way we are going to make a push at rennovating the ole’ gal is to simply pay for it ourselves. And if we want Husky football revived and the stadium rennovated then surely we’re going to need a president that undertands how important this program is to not only the fans and students, but to the entire HuskyNation involving the fans, students, boosters, and alumni. So if our next president isn’t entirely involved in regards to the athletic dept. then surely our new president must ensure us that we have the right people in charge making athletic decisions. The new guy coming in can’t be blind of the fact that football can generate more revenue then any other Husky sport at the school. That’s my point, no state funds are there and won’t be. So if rennovating the stadium is a priority then surely we must do it by getting back to being so dominant on the field, where the stadium is a sell out every single saturday.
All I saw was purple
Right. But that assumes that the higher powers at the UW...
…actually care about getting the stadium renovated.
Some actually want to tear it down and move to Qwest full-time. One has even had plans drawn for a new medical facility on the land currently occupied by Husky Stadium, and has offered to fund it in its entirety.
I don't think that is ever going to happen
It is the most scenic college football venue in the nation. I think constructing a medical facility can be built on any vacant lot. Tearing down the old stadium would just be assinine, which would make the Unviersity of Washington the biggest horses ass in many circles.
All I saw was purple
LMAO!!!!!!!!!
Tearing down the old stadium would just be assinine, which would make the Unviersity of Washington the biggest horses ass in many circles.
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Tearing down Husky Stadium
It would be a huge mistake and it would doom the future of the athletic department. Minnesota tore down their football stadium when the Metrodome opened and it was a disasterous mistake that they are now recovering from almost thirty years later.
College football needs to be played on college campuses. When you move downtown you tear the heart, soul, and tradtion out of the program.
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions
The only way you could begin to justify tearing down the existing stadium is if that land were then sold to help fund a new stadium elsewhere on University property. But I don’t think a better solution exists in terms of location, and losing the old stadium would be like losing the soul of the program.
Still, there are going to be people that will advocate for using Qwest Field. I have confidence that Woodward will be able to point out the various reasons that’s a bad idea…
But will Scott be around to make that arguement?
Or will he jet off with Dr. Emmert?
All I saw was purple
Tough to find an equal to Emmert when it comes to being a friend to the athletic department.
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I think a lot of it...
…boils down to timing. Get the timing wrong and I don’t care who’s the Pres, it won’t make any difference. Emmert was a friend to the Football program and UW Athletics in general, but if you don’t have the right skipper for the football program, it all goes for naught. We can thank him and Woodward though, for finally righting the ship. GO DAWGS!!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
agree with sundodger.
… running UW goes far beyond football. Thus the assignment of the AD job to a highly qualified individual.
I do disagree with Sundodger’s “at-best” opinion. As long as whomever has the job keeps the AD position and his/her immediate subordinates staffed with good people, the program won’t be impacted whether they are pro, neutral and anti football.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Really?
Look at the Board of Regents view of collegiate athletics – William Tarleton Turner. If the Regents hire a president with the same view, it doesn’t matter what Woodward wants to do. The president is going to be able to meld the athletic department to his image. That’s just the way it works – the president drives policy.
With as badly as Gates Sr. wants the land underneath Husky Stadium, the scariest part of this is if that’s the guy that’s hired as president, we might all need to go seat shopping at Qwest. Or, you know, not.
With as badly as Gates Sr. wants the land underneath Husky Stadium…
Can you please point me to a quote where Gates Sr. says this is what he wants to do? All I’ve seen is him asking the question – and as a regent, it’s his duty to investigate ALL options out there. Asking the question is not the same thing as advocating for that position.
Will you trust John Berkowitz for now?
http://uwfootball.blogspot.com/2007/10/husky-stadium-remodel.html
I know it’s not a direct quote, but it’s a pretty widely known fact.
I’ll keep digging to try to find the article. The fact that he spoke at UW’s graduation is taking up the first several pages of the google searches so far.
I won’t actually. I trust direct quotes, because otherwise you can get misinterpretations. So far in googling, the only attributions I can find on the subject are second hand statements made by John on the subject – no actual, direct quote from Gates Sr. himself.
Without that direct quote, and the context in which that quote exists, I’m not going to vilify Gates. He deserves better.
Can we get something less dated?
I mean that was written 2 and a half years ago!
Washington Husky Football-Undefeated 1991 National Champions 12-0!
Gates Sr
That was two and a half years ago and there are quotes out there in the past which state that Gates has brought up that a there may be a better use for the land under Husky Stadium than it is presently being used for. I think Gates has the right to ask that question and he far from the first regent at UW to ever broach the subject over the past ninety years.
William Gates Sr is an incredible friend of the University and the humanity of the world in general. He doesn’t need to be knocked for bringing up the obvious. As a regent it is his duty to look at every side of every question regarding the University. I would have been shocked if he or someone else hadn’t brought it up.
Two and a half years later do I still think Husky Stadium is in danger?
That answer is yes.
Unless the funds are secured to renovate the stadium to modern standards it will be eventually torn down to make way for a new medical campus. I am however optimistic that the funds will be raised and I am very anxious to hear what the stadium committee has to say later in May.
Wlll you trust John Berkowitz for now?
I have a feeling that Sundodger will dig up the Gates quotes because they are out there archived somewhere.
Just want to say that was an opinion piece that was written during the darkest days of willingham and turner. Thank God both of those clowns are gone and washington athletics are on a much firmer footing.
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 8:56 PM PDT up reply actions
…and there are quotes out there in the past which state that Gates has brought up that a there may be a better use for the land under Husky Stadium than it is presently being used for. I think Gates has the right to ask that question and he far from the first regent at UW to ever broach the subject over the past ninety years.
See, that’s the key point IMO right there. As a regent, Gates should discuss all options. My main point in all of this is finding some proof in the form of direct quotes that shows that Gates thinks that’s the best option. And even if such quotes exist, does that mean that he’s still of that opinion (if he was ever of that opinion in the first place)?
William Gates Sr is an incredible friend of the University and the humanity of the world in general.
This also can’t be emphasized enough. While Emmert is being given a lot of credit for the ~$2.5B fundraising effort for the University that was completed a few years ago, the reality is that Gates Sr. deserves a lot of credit as well – it was something he championed and IIRC, it was something he had a significant hand in directing and supporting. The Gates family are huge allies to have on behalf of the University, and while we here are sports fans, let’s not forget that it is first and foremost an institution of higher learning, and Gates Sr. has been a significant asset to the University towards that role.
I don’t think any of us here really knows for sure how the Gates family truly feels about the role of athletics at the UW, and I think it’s quite unfair for any of us to assume the worst in that regard, especially given his contributions towards the University as a whole.
I do disagree with Sundodger’s "at-best" opinion. As long as whomever has the job keeps the AD position and his/her immediate subordinates staffed with good people, the program won’t be impacted whether they are pro, neutral and anti football.
This is an important point. If Woodward is doing a good job, the most important thing for the new President to do is let Woodward continue doing his job without undue interference, and to do what he can to keep allowing Woodward to do a good job.
But it’s also important that the new President recognize the importance of renovating Husky Stadium and to be an advocate for it. Emmert proved to be a strong fundraiser for the University, and losing him is likely a blow to Husky Stadium fundraising efforts.
Woodward says he is going to stay a long time
That of course would change pretty quickly if he didn’t like working with his new boss. emmert is leaving in Novemeber and it will take a year to find his replacement. Just thinking that Emmert will have a lot of influence regarding who replaces him. It will be very interesting to see how this all plays out over time.
by John Berkowitz on Apr 27, 2010 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think anybody really knows just yet
But my guess is that Syracuse is one of them, so that the East Coast can see the game. Another solid bet is the Nebraska game, which could be hosted by Collge Gameday if both teams are 3-0.
The game already on the docket for ESPN is the clash with Ucla (Thur. night matchup). The ESPN deal if I am correct offers us 5 spots either on ESPN, ESPN2, or ABC. I think all five contests will be shown on ESPN or ABC. The only game that might get ESPN2 is Syracuse.
All I saw was purple
Not 5 spots, 5 units
National game costs 2, regional costs one. Could be as few as three games, and USC, Nebraska, and UCLA are already spoken for.
Gameday
I’m hoping game-day comes to Eugene for ducks huskies. I feel like its a underrated rivalry nationally
Well, it was an under rated rivalry until Ty took this program into the dumpster and it’s become all Ducks of late.
I don't think Gameday goes to the Oregon/Washington game
I think the best bet is Nebraska where both programs have a shot at being 3-0 along with the preseason Heisman frontrunner at center stage.
All I saw was purple
whose Nebraska Heisman hopefull?
and 128 days till the 1st Saturday!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on UW Dawg Pound
Related FanShots on UW Dawg Pound
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
