Started By
Message
re: Stadium expansion approved by BOT
Posted on 6/17/16 at 9:16 pm to Porker Face
Posted on 6/17/16 at 9:16 pm to Porker Face
Personally, I think it's more concerning that a Tyson and a former Senator are trying to use a not exactly truthful reason for not supporting this. It makes me wonder what their motivation is long term. What do they have to gain by it passing/not passing? That should be the real story here.
1
Posted on 6/17/16 at 10:21 pm to TheCheshireHog
I take them at their word that they legitimately have those concerns. I understand the point of view that UAs priorities are wrong. I personally also think they are wrong. I don't see any bond measures offered for academics or facilities. Were those offered I don't think they would enjoy the same support as this measure. I do see Athletics continuing to suck up our campus space with athlete only facilities that don't really advance the university's mission
I also think they are 100% correct on the stadium only being full a handful of times. I don't care about the "shifting the balance of luxury suites vs cheap seats" stuff. It's a lot of money for limited new value. I think this is just a bad deal. There are some ideas I think we should implement, but this deal doesn't have enough of them for me
I also think they are 100% correct on the stadium only being full a handful of times. I don't care about the "shifting the balance of luxury suites vs cheap seats" stuff. It's a lot of money for limited new value. I think this is just a bad deal. There are some ideas I think we should implement, but this deal doesn't have enough of them for me
Page 1 of 1
Latest Arkansas News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News