SkyscraperPage Forum - San Antonio (Alamodome) Cut from World Cup Stadium List

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- San Antonio (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=447)

- - San Antonio (Alamodome) Cut from World Cup Stadium List (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=172766)

San Antonio (Alamodome) Cut from World Cup Stadium List

http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0...there-were-27/

Quote:

The committee leading efforts to bring the 2018 or 2022 World Cup tournament to the United States pruned the list of possible cities on Thursday to 27 in the third stage of its evaluation process.

At total of 38 cities submitted detailed information to the U.S.A. Bid Committee before the end of July.

Quote:

The cities dropped were: Birmingham, Ala.; Cincinnati; Columbus, Ohio; Fayetteville, Ark.; Knoxville, Tenn.; Las Vegas; Minneapolis; New Orleans; Pittsburgh; Salt Lake City; and San Antonio, Tex.

Another blow to the Alamodome and the argument that it is a viable big-event venue for the future. To not even make the top 27 is pretty bad...

Here is the list of the cities (and stadiums) remaining:

Atlanta (Georgia Dome)
Baltimore (M&T Bank Stadium)
Boston (Gillette Stadium)
Charlotte (Bank of America Stadium)
Chicago (Soldier Field)
Cleveland (Cleveland Browns Stadium)
Dallas (Cowboys Stadium)(Cotton Bowl)
Denver (Invesco Field at Mile High)
Detroit (Ford Field)(Michigan Stadium, Ann Arbor)
Houston (Reliant Stadium)
Indianapolis (Lucas Oil Stadium)
Jacksonville (Jacksonville Municipal Stadium)
Kansas City (Arrowhead Stadium)
Los Angeles (Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum)(Rose Bowl)
Miami (Land Shark Stadium)
Nashville (LP Field)
New York City (I'm assuming this means the new Meadowlands Stadium)
Oakland (Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum)
Orlando (Florida Citrus Bowl)
Philadelphia (Lincoln Financial Field)
Glendale-Phoenix (University of Phoenix Stadium)
San Diego (Qualcomm Stadium)
San Francisco (Candlestick Park)(Stanford Stadium)
Seattle (Qwest Field)(Husky Stadium)
St. Louis (Edward Jones Dome)
Tampa (Raymond James Stadium)
Washington, D.C. (Fedex Field)(RFK Stadium)

How old is it again? I can't remember off the top of my head.

I think that after UTSA uses it for a couple of years, that it should be scrapped. Maybe by then there will be MLB calling, or at least MLS. I just can't see it being used for much other than that, unless the non-historical eastern edge of the space takes on a bit of a transformation.

Completed in 1993.

miaht, you're right in implying that it hasn't reached its death quite yet, but this facility is definitely entering its twilight years.

If we assume that the building now 16 years old, would it be unreasonable to consider that it is 2/3 used up? Would another 8 years be about right in terms of when the overall viabilty runs negative or do we think it'll be viable long after that?

It hosts high school all star games and playoff games. It hosts a mid-level college football bowl game. It will be the home of the UTSA football team. Serves as a training camp for the Dallas Cowboys. It has hosted a Final Four in college basketball. It is also a concert facility. I'm sure it also hosts plenty of other events as well. Without the Alamodome quite a few of these events would not happen in San Antonio. It seems to be something you want to keep, unless something better were going to be built.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottolini (Post 4416200)

Seems like something we would want to keep... But is it really?

HS All-Star games are minimally impactful.

AlamoBowl is a nice draw, with quality economic impact.

Dallas Cowboys use facility rent-free, so that is a money-loser.

Final Four is never coming back.

I challenge anyone to name the last concert that was held there.

There are, of course, home and garden shows and boat shows, but last i checked plenty of cities without 65,000 seat stadiums could host those.

Last concert off the top of my head...Luciano Pavarotti.

when was that? 1999?

Celine Dion was at the dome not too long ago. Some time in 08.

A time will come when a new stadium will need to be built, under what circumstances, I don't know but building while still operating the dome and then demoing the dome once the other is built is what's going to have to happen.

Hemisfair Arena - 1973-1995, 22 years
Alamodome - 1993-present, 16 years
AT&T Center - 2002 - present, 7 years

If we assume that the lifespan of facilities could be considered about similar, and that the dome has taken over partial duties of Hemisfair Arena (high school graduations, some concerts, headstart registration,) we can say that without any major renovations to the place, we can expect it to be done/useless in the next 6-9 years; that'll put the dome at 20-25 years old in 2013 and 2018 respectively. I just hope that better land use is addressed before anything goes up or down at the site of the dome.

Quote:

Originally Posted by miaht82 (Post 4416363)

Imagine the Commerce/Convention connector bridge actually being a connector to...Hemisfair Park East.

Imagine the east, north, and south sides of the park lined with mid-rises around a central green space. Imagine!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakyle04 (Post 4416380)

That would be nice. I always imagined San Pedro Park or Crockett Park like that.

There could be several reasons they cut San Antonio. Maybe the dome wasn't the best facility for Soccer, maybe other cities have a better record for supporting the game, maybe it's too hard to fly into the city, maybe the recent crime numbers scared them.

They don't really say, but I bet the larger metros will be the last ones standing (and maybe Indianapolis).

yeah but it's a year newer than the Georgia Dome it opened in 1992

Last Concert at the Alamodome

The last concert was held this past November. The Cult played to a crowd of around 10,000. It was the Post Race Concert for the Innagural Rock and Roll Marathon San Antonio.

^^ OK then..

I am not saying that the Alamodome should eb removed immediately.

I just want to be sure we are all aware of the facts to better inform us prior to the next time someone tries to tell us what a magnet it is for events and visitor spending and how we should spend 10s of Millions of $$$ to keep it "current".

It is not "current" and we cannot afford to bring it up to "current". So lets agree to enjoy it while it lasts and plan to have a meet-up at the 2025 demolition.

Different topic, same building:
from bizjournal.com
Alamo Bowl is working to bring higher-ranked teams to San Antonio

Quote:

Valero Alamo Bowl President and CEO Derrick Fox says the organization is talking to multiple conferences about potential affiliation deals that would kick in after the Jan. 2, 2010, game. Fox says that process has included discussions with the Pac-10 Conference about sending its No. 2 team to San Antonio.

There are no guarantees that the Alamo Bowl will close on a deal with the Pac-10 and move up the bowl ladder. But such a feat, says San Antonio Convention & Visitors Bureau Director Scott White, could raise the city’s sports profile and create huge opportunities for its multibillion-dollar hospitality industry.

The Alamo Bowl currently has conference affiliation agreements with the Big Ten and Big 12. San Antonio is supposed to get each conference’s fourth- or fifth-best teams on a rotating basis. But if either conference has a team qualify for a Bowl Championship Series game, the Alamo Bowl can get stuck with a sixth-best squad.

Alamo Bowl officials are working now to try and bring higher-ranked collegiate football teams to San Antonio.

“We’d like to move up,” Fox says. “We are exploring the opportunities that would allow us to do that.”

The inaugural Alamo Bowl kicked off in 1993 with teams from the Pac-10 and Big Ten conferences. California whipped Iowa 37-3 in that inaugural game.

Is the Pac-10 interested in re-connecting with the Alamo Bowl?

“They really initiated some conversations after the last bowl season,” says Fox about Pac-10 officials’ interest in San Antonio. “They asked if we had an interest in talking to them. We said, ‘Sure.’ ”

Jim Muldoon is associate commissioner of communications and football administration for the Pac-10. “We are in talks with San Antonio,” he says. “There is definitely an interest in San Antonio and the Alamo Bowl.”

Muldoon says the Pac-10 believes that the Alamo Bowl has “grown into one of the better bowls in the country.”

The Pac-10 currently sends its No. 2 pick to the Holiday Bowl in San Diego.

“I think the Alamo Bowl can certainly compete on that level,” Muldoon adds.

Visitor impact
Higher team picks typically require higher payouts from bowl organizers. Fox says Alamo Bowl officials are willing to step up if the deal makes sense for San Antonio. And this is the time to make a move, with current conference affiliation deals set to expire after the next Alamo Bowl.

White would like to see the Pac-10 bring its No. 2 team to San Antonio.

“Pac-10 cities are target markets for San Antonio and they align with our long-term strategic plans,” White explains. “Our research indicates that cities on the West Coast have positive impressions of San Antonio. However, our limited marketing budget does not allow us the opportunity to effectively target these destinations.”

White adds, “If we are going to grow and diversify our market share, we need to venture into new markets,”

Rick Hill is vice president of marketing and communications for the Alamo Bowl. He says the event is more than a football game.

“An important component for us is to bring that visitor impact,” he explains.

Higher-ranked teams could draw a higher level of interest from fans and the media. And that means more eyes are focused on San Antonio. But moving up the bowl hierarchy won’t be easy.

The Alamo Bowl has set attendance and TV viewer ratings over the years with lesser teams. And those accomplishments may have negatively impacted previous efforts to seek a bigger bowl opportunity.

“Our success worked against us in the last (conference) negotiations because we were hitting home runs with (lower) picks,” Hills says.

More challenges
Even if Alamo Bowl organizers can convince a conference like the Pac-10 to send a higher-ranked team to San Antonio, there is still the challenge of convincing a second conference to make a similar commitment.

“It’s not as linear as some people believe,” says Fox about the process of moving up.

Ideally, Alamo Bowl officials say they would like to extend their affiliation pact with the Big 12.

“It has really been our anchor conference,” Fox says. “It makes sense to continue that relationship, to grow it.”

But extending that relationship with the Big 12 could ultimately depend on conference officials’ willingness to send a better team pick to San Antonio.

However all of this plays out, Fox says conference and bowl officials across the board would like to have some deals in place by the start of the 2009 college football season, which begins in a few weeks.

“There is a lot of shuffling of the landscape in play right now,” Fox says. “One move will effect other bowls and conferences.”

How soon might the dust settle?

“We’re getting closer to the end of the tunnel and to what might be coming out of it,” Fox says, convinced that the lure of San Antonio is the Alamo Bowl’s ace in the hole.

“We’re very fortunate that we have a great city, a great destination,” Fox says. “There has been a lot of interest from multiple conferences to come to San Antonio. But it’s of matter of which conference and which picks are right for us.”

White says better teams equals a bigger impact for San Antonio.

“If the Alamo Bowl can improve its match-up, it should translate into higher-ranked teams, which could translate into a more excited fan base with a greater propensity to travel,” White says.

But while Alamo Bowl officials have their hands full with the conference affiliation discussions, they have another important task at hand. The Alamo Bowl’s title sponsor agreement with San Antonio-based Valero Energy Corp. is also set to expire after the January 2010 game.

Says Fox, “Once we get the conference deals finished, then the next step is to sit down with Valero and talk in earnest about a go-forward (plan).”

Quote:

But such a feat, says San Antonio Convention & Visitors Bureau Director Scott White, could raise the city’s sports profile and create huge opportunities for its multibillion-dollar hospitality industry.

Here we go...

Bringing Oregon State instead of Michigan State will expose a new area of the country to SA. This is true and this is good. It WILL NOT dramatically alter the city's sports profile. When you think San Diego sports, what do you think of...? Chargers? Padres? Wes Mantooth? Holiday Bowl?

Exactly.

Caveat for the AlamoBowl folks: All these years, they have been oh-so--happy to welcome Midwesterners to town, taking them from snowdrifts to sunshine. That was always listed as a big reason for the Bowl's success in drawing out of towners.

Well, what if UCLA is coming to the Alamo Bowl? Weather is no draw and attractions aren't really either. I mean, who wants to fly 4 hours to go to Fiesta Texas when DisneyLand is 20 minutes away? Different to invite people from LA or Tuscon than from Des Moines or Ann Arbor.

I am not saying it wouldn't be successful. At this point, the local market will probably support the game and the Big 12 team will usually draw casual fans.

But don't think that a Kansas v UCLA game would raise our profile or enhance the city's reputation any more than a Texas Tech v Penn State game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakyle04 (Post 4425472)

You're right. And I agree with you. But I do see what they THINK can happen.
If we list SA sports, we think Spurs,....... High School All-American Bowl, ........ & didn't that Trinity University lateral about 30 times to win some game?
Weatherwise, we better hope that a school in Oregon or Washington take the 2 seed.
For nationwide coverage and just a larger overall fanbase, we better hope that USC is the 2 seed.
Although, that 2 seed will mean nothing if they are playing a 4 or 5 seed from the Big 12.
Will it make a difference if its Michigan, Penn State, Oregon or Arizona playing Kansas or A&M? Probably not. USC vs. Texas or OU? Probably.
Thats the best case scenario I can see, if they manage to match up that 2 seed with another contender. It might be the "championship game" in some peoples minds since, without a playoff system, nobody agrees on the rankings anyways. It COULD raise the Bowls profile, but how much & is this the only reason the Dome is "useful?"

I still think that aside from a miracle, the Dome has become useless.
Maybe they can sell it to UTSA and use the money to buy land just East of the Dome to build a baseball stadium. Then we could try to lure MLB here. If that doesn't work, we can get the College World Series a couple times and call it a success.!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by miaht82 (Post 4425793)

the Dome has become useless.
Maybe they can sell it to UTSA and use the money to buy land just East of the Dome to build a baseball stadium. Then we could try to lure MLB here. If that doesn't work, we can get the College World Series a couple times and call it a success.!!

How many years before they would need to sell the baseball stadium to UTSA? :haha:

Quote:

Originally Posted by kornbread (Post 4426232)

How many years before they would need to sell the baseball stadium to UTSA? :haha:

10; then the City will build the San Fernando Dome over a demolished SAHA project near Guadalupe St. in an attempt to revitalize the West Side.

Alamo Bowl scores Pac-10 deal

Guess it's official. We'll see what the next move is.

from bizjournals.com
San Antonio Business Journal - by W. Scott Bailey

Quote:

The Valero Alamo Bowl has inked a deal with the Pac-10 Conference.

Under the arrangement, the Alamo Bowl will get the second overall pick from the Pac-10 beginning after the 2010 season.

The Pac-10 will face a Big 12 opponent in the new deal.

In January, the Alamo Bowl will feature its final Big Ten vs. Big 12 match-up, ending the current four-year pact with the two conferences. The new deal will also include the Big 12 Conference and will run through the 2013 post-season game.

The inaugural Alamo Bowl in 1993 included a Pac-10 team — the California Bears.

Jim Muldoon is associate commissioner of communications and football administration for the Pac-10. Last week he told the Business Journal: “There is definitely an interest in San Antonio and the Alamo Bowl.”

Muldoon said the Alamo Bowl has “grown into one of the better bowls in the country” and that it “can certainly compete on that level.”

Pac-10 Commissioner Larry Scott says he views this new deal “as a significant enhancement to the conference bowl lineup.”

Scott adds, “San Antonio is a marvelous post-season destination and the Valero Alamo Bowl has positioned itself as one of the elite bowl games. We anticipate providing exciting and deserving Pac-10 teams that will provide great match-ups for the game, and believe the Valero Alamo Bowl will be a great experience for our football teams and the fans who follow them.”

The Pac-10 has the best winning percentage all-time in bowl games of any conference (.535), highlighted by a perfect 5-0 record in last season’s bowl games.

“We are excited to partner with the Pac-10 and welcome the conference back to San Antonio,” says Alamo Bowl Chairman Gene Dawson. “This partnership, along with our upcoming announcement regarding the Big 12, will add to our growing track record of exciting games between ranked opponents that deliver top ESPN ratings and capacity crowds.”

Since its inception in 1993, the Valero Alamo Bowl has hosted 1,131,739 spectators at 16 bowl games and three Big 12 Football Championships. Factoring in the out-of-town fans, the games have generated a direct economic impact of more than $260 million, and another $23 million in measurable media exposure from the 137 million viewers watching the national television broadcasts, say Alamo Bowl officials.

Under the new deal, the Pac-10 would send its top team to a Bowl Championship Series game. The Alamo Bowl would then select second, taking the Pac-10’s next-best team.

“We are ecstatic with this Pac-10 Conference partnership,” says Alamo Bowl President and CEO Derrick Fox. “Based on recent history, this pick will provide an outstanding team for the game as the selection has averaged 10 wins and a Top 15 ranking.”

For the first time in its 17-year history, the Alamo Bowl will be played outside the month of December — on Jan. 2 at the Alamodome.

On Oct. 31, the Alamo Bowl will host a neutral-site game featuring Notre Dame vs. Washington State.

Here goes the Dome conversation again.

The main problem with the dome being so out of date is that it wasn't built to compete with the newer stadiums at the time. Political leaders told San Antonians that it was, but it wasn't. The Alamo dome can't hold a candle to the Edward Jones Dome or the Georgia Dome. Those facilities were bi=uilt to house NFL football teams. St. Louis built their dome to draw a team just like San Antonio did, except they built it for a team move in ready. Is the EJ Dome comparable to the domes that have been built in the last couple of years? Not necesarily.

It sucks to lose out on a possible World Cup site, but there are a lot of great stadiums in the US. It is very competative to get the World Cup in this country. Most people say that the Alamo Dome is not fit for a NFL franchise...there are 32 teams in the NFL in 31 stadiums, 25 of which I believe are supperior to the Alamo Dome. Even if we made this last cut, it was going to be a highly doubtful that we would have been selected.

If UTSA can get its program running as they hope and they move to the FBS the Dome could get new life as a major sports venue (college sports). If everything went great and UTSA got into Conference USA, its home field would be one of the best stadiums in the conference. The stadium may not be up to NFL standards, but it would be a fine college venue.

I agree that the Alamo Bowl taking the Holiday Bowl's slot as the Big 12 #3/4 and the Pac 10 #2/3 probably wouldn't do much for tourism throughout the year. But there is a difference in the event itself, especially for the Big 12 schools. It would be a better bowl which would bring more money. In other words it would be a good thing. I think that the two bowls should be on a rotating schedule: the Alamo Bowl the better bowl for two years and then the Holiday bowl for two years, and then repeat.

UTSA will build their own stadium before they would ever buy the Alamo Dome. If the city was going to part ways with the dome, you would have to assume that the property is worth more without the dome, but then there is the question on the environmental soundness of that property. It took millions to cleam up the site where the dome is, I'm not sure what is under the parking lots.

Over the next 5-10 years a decision will have to be made about the dome, but now with UTSA football coming into the picture and the event in the Alamo Bowl growing in importance San Antonio can't live (you know what I mean) without a football stadium.

I would like to see development on East Commerce, River North, and Downtown before on the dome site, but the vision is nice.

You're right. I guess once I start seeing some more use out of it, it will not seem so useless. UTSA playing there will do all of SA some good.

The much maligned Alamodome will host a men's sweet 16 regional in 2011.
:cheers:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/A..._regional.html

Quote:

The NCAA on Monday awarded San Antonio a men’s basketball tournament regional in 2011, welcome news for a city that was bypassed in the last round of the Final Four bid process.

The regional will feature four of the remaining 16 teams in the tournament that year. Dates are set for March 25 and 27, 2011, at the Alamodome.

In a news release out of Indianapolis, the NCAA announced sites for preliminary rounds of the men’s tournament from 2011-13.

Even though San Antonio was virtually guaranteed a bid, the city submitted formal paperwork for the right to host tournaments in each of the three years.

Jenny Carnes, executive director of the San Antonio Local Organizing Committee, said it’s “great for the city’’ to get to host another tournament.

After hosting men’s Final Fours in 1998, 2004 and 2008, the city learned last November that it had been shut out of the next cycle from 2012-16.

“We may not have been awarded one of the Final Fours for the next rounds,’’ Carnes said, “but we certainly want to stay on their radar and stay in their sights for the future, so that we’ll have the next and earliest chance to bring back the Final Four to San Antonio.’’

The dome has hosted NCAA basketball tournament events regularly since 1997. It is now booked with one in each of the next two years.

The women’s Final Four will be held in the dome April 4 and 6, 2010.

The 2010 men’s Final Four will be at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, with Reliant Stadium in Houston hosting the 2011 event. The 2012 Final Four is set for the Louisiana Superdome, and the 2013 Final Four at the Georgia Dome.