New Pitt Stadium site concept… and a heck of a view (Part II)

(If you missed Part I, I highly encourage you to read it before continuing with this.)

I want to tell you the story of a college football program.

This program has had success through the years (nine championships), but fortunes are not as good as they once were. Fans remember the good ol’ days — successful seasons at the stadium on campus. Sure, it was too big and past its time, but the best times the program ever had were when they played there. But the university had to tear it down to make room for new buildings, and who needs a big football stadium on an urban campus anyway?

So the team moved to an NFL stadium. Of course, it’s a grand venue. Better than most schools in the conference have. But the atmosphere is lacking. College fans can’t fill up all those seats. So while it is nice to have NFL facilities, some fans see this team (right in a football-lovin’ region) and think, “wouldn’t this all look better if we were back on campus in a smaller stadium?”

The school put plans in motion for a new stadium on campus. Of course, it is a crowded area. Neighbors of the university were rightly concerned: How will you deal with the traffic and noise? Where will everyone park? Aren’t you already playing in a perfectly good stadium? Why is this necessary?

The neighbors’ qualms were taken into account, and the university offered new plans to address those traffic, parking and noise issues. And the stadium looks great! It is compact and fans get great sightlines close to the field. Did it solve the team’s attendance problem? No. Only winning will do that. But nowadays, 27,000 fans look better when they fill 90% of the seats instead of 33%.

That is the story, so far, of Tulane University football.


Check out Tulane University's new on-campus stadium after years in the too-big Superdome.

Check out Tulane University’s new on-campus stadium after years in the too-big Superdome.

I will grant you: Tulane’s story is not identical to Pitt’s story.

Those nine championships? Conference championships, not national ones.The attendance struggles? Caused by being a laughingstock, not just a disappointment (think four bowl appearances in the last 30 years). And Tulane certainly is playing in a less-renowned conference now; they would never need 70,000 seats unless they were playing LSU.

Most of the facts about Tulane and Pitt, however, are congruent. If you don’t believe me, go back and read the story again. Tell me how Pitt is that much different.

So with that story in mind, I present my site proposal for New Pitt Stadium.

New Pitt Stadium Within Oakland

In the heart of Oakland, there is space for a football stadium that suits Pitt’s needs.

The stadium site would be bound by Bigelow Boulevard to the west, Tennyson Avenue to the northeast, Alumni Hall and the Pittsburgh Athletic Association (on Fifth Avenue) to the southeast.

What’s there now? A parking lot, the Wyndham Hotel and the three-story UPMC University Center. That’s it. Pitt could construct its stadium by building over the end of Lytton Avenue and tearing down only those two older buildings.

New Pitt Stadium would stand directly against Alumni Hall to the east. The main structure in the way? The historic Pittsburgh Athletic Association building on Fifth Avenue. My idea would be for the University to purchase the building and retrofit it as a hospitality space for donors, boosters and premium ticket holders (plus athletic facilities and locker rooms, naturally).

Here are the main details:

  • Total seating capacity: 41,000 seats
  • Southwest Stands: 13,500
  • Lower Northeast Stand: 14,500
  • Upper Northeast Stand: 10,000
  • Southeast End: 3,000
  • Stadium Site: 6.1 acres
  • Estimated Cost: $120 million

New academic and student life facilities can be built into the northeast and southwest stands, available to students throughout the week. After all, the site is right next to Soldiers & Sailors, Crawford Hall, Langley Hall, Clapp Hall and the Cathedral of Learning. It’s not the center of campus, but it is pretty darn close.

And just as every problem can be an opportunity, here’s one: there is not enough space to have stands behind the north endzone. The opportunity? Open up the field to the Oakland community. Close Bigelow Boulevard to traffic on game days, of course, but then have the FieldTurf field open up for intramural sports and general green space. It could be a unique idea in modern college stadiums.

You can read more in Part III, including traffic and parking logistics. But for now, imagine this view from the western edge of new Pitt Stadium, which I took a picture of this afternoon.

New Pitt Stadium view

Now tell me: does this not scream University of Pittsburgh?

Solution for Pitt Football — Two Stadiums (Part I)

(Note: This is Part I of a three-part series proposing a new on-campus stadium for the University of Pittsburgh. Super long, right? But if you read this and are interested in soldiering on, check out Part II and Part III.)

Whether Pitt fans want to accept it or not, the team has an attendance problem. Or at least an optics problem.

Heinz Field was more yellow than a Terrible Towel factory last night. In front of a national ESPN audience (albeit one that was paying more attention to Jets-Patriots, the NLCS and the return of the NHL), Pitt fans were seen as unwilling to show up for a primetime game.

Don’t get me wrong: I will accept any reason you had for not attending Pitt vs. Virginia Tech on Thursday night. It was raining. The Penguins were playing. You don’t want to pay to watch a team on a three-game losing streak.

Actually, you don’t even need to give me a reason! It’s your money and time, and I won’t shame you for not spending it on college football.

But this is the problem for the University of Pittsburgh and its athletic department: In 75% of Pitt’s games over the last decade, fans filled less than 75% of the stadium.

Put another way, the vast majority of Pitt football home games see at least a quarter of the seats sitting empty. Bright yellow. It’s not a good look for an ACC program, especially when the Steelers are about to expand Heinz Field to 68,000 seats and exacerbate Pitt’s problem.

Rob Rossi of the Tribune-Review was right to bring up the issue in his column, though unfortunately he spent little space on how to implement his solution: a new Pitt Stadium in Oakland.

Some Pitt fans agreed with Rossi. Many did not. Those who didn’t most commonly replied, “a new stadium isn’t a solution. Winning is a solution.” Or something close.

That is absolutely fair. Pittsburghers will flock to see a winning football team, thus solving Pitt’s attendance issue. But back up one second. How much winning does it take to fill Heinz Field?

Over the last decade, there has only been one season in which Pitt needed 52,000 seats for more than two games — the 2009 campaign, in which the Panthers were a Cincinnati comeback away from the BCS.

So yes, winning is a solution. If Pitt can win 10 games every year, reach the AP Top 10 every year, and be a legitimate playoff contender every year, fans will fill an NFL stadium.

The only snag in that plan is you would have to be delusional to think it will happen. This is not the 1970’s and 80’s. Pitt will not be a perennial championship contender in the new millennium of college football, in which every FBS school is in an arms race to make the playoffs.

Can they win? Absolutely. In fact, the program has made six straight bowl games and 11 bowls in the last 14 seasons. That is excellent! Thus, here’s the reality for Pitt: the school has a winning program, but not a championship-contending one like Oregon, Alabama, Florida State, Ohio State, etc.


Pitt needs a stadium solution that matches its reality as a program. Here is my concept: build a 41,000-seat on-campus stadium. Use it for the majority of home games, then play one or two big games each year at Heinz Field.

Look at how Stanford attacked the problem of its too-big stadium:


Doesn’t it look a little like old Pitt Stadium? Massive, all-bowl, bleachers, track around the field…

Well Stanford re-built its stadium on the same site after the 2005 season, and the results are stunning:


Stanford dropped the capacity down to 50,000 in its practically-brand-new stadium, and the program is far better for it. I have been there — it is an intimate venue in a beautiful setting. When it’s packed, it is loud. When it’s not full, the optics are not as bad as an empty Heinz Field.

I know you have questions. I’ll try to read your mind and guess them. Put your forehead right up on the screen.

  • Why 41,000 seats?

Two reasons.

1. Pitt has needed less than 41,000 seats for the majority of its games over the last decade.

Consider that 56% of Pitt’s home games have had a paid attendance below 46,000. Subtract 10% for no-shows to those games (which is probably generous. I would guess it is more than 10%) and you get 41,000. It is the ideal size for your run-of-the-mill game against conference foes past and present — think Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Virginia, Louisville, Connecticut.


Keep in mind, this is *paid* attendance. Subtract 10 to 15 percent for the actual butts-in-seats number for most home games.

And as Pitt basketball has proven, sellouts are a good event for the program. Sellouts can become the rule for Pitt football too, instead of the exception.

2. It fits the current trend of new stadiums on campus.

Since 2003, Division I FBS schools have built 10 new stadiums. They range from 30,000 for non-BCS schools (Akron, Florida Atlantic, Tulane) to just above 50,000 seats (Minnesota and Stanford).

The average new stadium size? 39,211 seats. If you want to design in a few thousand more seats or build with the possibility to expand, that’s cool. The idea here is to build a venue that suits Pitt’s needs but is not so large that it overwhelms the Oakland neighborhood in footprint, traffic and parking.

  • Which games would Pitt play at Heinz Field?

The Panthers would only need Heinz Field’s larger capacity for one or two games each season. Only 10 times over the past decade has Pitt’s paid attendance been higher than 55,100, and 7 of those games were against either West Virginia or Notre Dame.

Sounds easy enough. Schedule Notre Dame, Florida State, Miami and Penn State games at Heinz Field. If the Backyard Brawl ever returns, put those games at Heinz as well. Have Heinz Field available for the season’s final home game if Pitt is competing for an ACC title. Even all that makes up a minority of the Panthers’ schedule, an example of why a new, smaller stadium better serves the program.

  • Why go back on campus if Panthers fans couldn’t even fill Pitt Stadium?

Look, I never attended Pitt stadium. The school tore it down when I was seven years old. From how it looked though, Pitt Stadium was built for 60,000 fans, had stands way too far from the field, and as Bob Smizik wrote in 1999, “backless seats, inadequate restrooms, insufficient concessions and invisible parking.”

New Pitt Stadium would be smaller, leaner and serve the entire university. That’s because on-campus stadium does not need to be empty the 360 days per year that the Panthers are not playing.

Look to Notre Dame as an example. The university is spending $400 million to construct three new buildings on the sides of Notre Dame Stadium. ND’s new stadium will offer “space for student organizations, a recreation center and career center… anthropology and psychology departments and a digital media center… the Department of Music… [and] some 3,000 to 4,000 premium seats for the football stadium with supporting club amenities.”

New Pitt Stadium would not be just for the athletic department, but for the whole school. Intramurals and summer concerts on the field, career festivals and parents’ weekend events in the concourses, and academic facilities on the sides of the stadium. New Pitt Stadium could be the center of Pitt campus life, expanding on the success of the Petersen Events Center.

  • Where would it go? Where would people park?

That we will explore in Part II, coming up tomorrow. But rest assured, there is space available for a 41,000-seat stadium and attached facilities.

Read Part II, with my New Pitt Stadium site concept, right here.

Love This Time, Pirates Fans

Pirates fans, these are the good times.

I know you know this, but it bears repeating — these are the times you have been waiting for as a fan, and you ought to enjoy it.

If you were at PNC Park for tonight’s game (or even watching on TV), you felt the crowd electrify when Russell Martin hit the go-ahead home run. Rob King called it “one of the most dramatic moments in PNC Park history,” and he is absolutely right. Watching the drama of September baseball finally come to Pittsburgh feels incredible.

So my request to you, Pirates fans: be grateful. I don’t mean grateful in a “you must like Bob Nutting and never criticize management” kind of way. I don’t mean grateful in a “how could you be mad at anything when the Pirates are in the playoffs?” kind of way.

What I mean is: this is the kind of September (and forthcoming October) that we saw in other cities for 20 years, and we dreamed that the same excitement could come here. Be grateful for that. Let your emotions, high and low, run wild. The next few weeks represent the pinnacle of baseball and sporting drama.

Be grateful to be a part of these new Pirates golden years. They may not last forever.

Sports are funny for many reasons. One of them: U.S. professional team sports are not a zero-sum game. They are less than a zero-sum game. At the end of a season, there’s always: 1 fan-base celebrating, 3 or 4 fan-bases being satisfied at overachieving and about 25 fan-bases left disappointed and often angry.

Why do we as sports fans subject ourselves to this losing system? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ However, we can change it within ourselves. At the end of this Pirates season, if they don’t win the World Series, go ahead and be disappointed and angry. It’s natural.

But right now? This is the fun part. This is why we root and nonsensically devote our time, money and passion to this losing system. Because right now is hope. Right now is fun. Right now is joyous. Be grateful to feel those emotions after 20 years of apathy, and lose yourself in the right now.

The One Chart that Shows Why You Should Support Lyft & Uber in Pittsburgh

This week, Pennsylvania lawmakers are expected to vote on new legislation for “ridesharing” companies like Uber and Lyft.

I have been driving for Lyft since last month and have really enjoyed my time shuttling Pittsburghers around. But even before I began using it as a part-time job, I was a satisfied customer of Uber and Lyft in Los Angeles.

That is why I urge Pittsburghers to support the full legalization of ridesharing in Pennsylvania. Three things to keep in mind:

1. Pittsburgh has the most bars per capita of any city in the United States — 12 bars per 10,000 people.

2. People in Pittsburgh are desperate for car service on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. Check out this chart from Uber public relations on the number of requests they get in Pittsburgh throughout the week:

Uber Pittsburgh Requests

Guess what — those folks aren’t requesting Uber rides to go to the grocery store. They’re drunk.

3. Cab service in Pittsburgh is inadequate. I have heard sad tale after sad tale from my Lyft passengers — waiting 60 minutes for a taxi on a Friday night, waiting 90 minutes for a taxi on a Saturday night, having a taxi they requested “jacked” by someone else who had not requested it, or worst of all having a taxi they requested not show up at all.

And that’s just the areas of Allegheny County where Yellow Cab will actually drive.

I don’t know if Lyft and Uber will decrease traffic, open up more parking spots or increase quality of life (though all that is possible).

I do know that legalized Lyft and Uber will prevent many people from driving drunk in the Pittsburgh area. And that is bound to save lives.

If you’re in Pennsylvania, contact your legislator. Use the guide Uber published the other day or the form email that Lyft posted. Either way, take two minutes and support innovation in Pittsburgh that keeps dangerous drunk drivers off our streets.

Gus Johnson Has Priorities. I Hope I Will Too.

At first I was surprised by some news in the broadcasting world today: Gus Johnson is removing himself from the top play-by-play spot for Fox Sports’ soccer coverage.

Wow. That was unexpected.

Then I got to the 6th paragraph, and it absolutely floored me. Johnson’s last conversation with his cancer-stricken mother took place on the phone, as he was in Lisbon to call the Champions League Final.

“I asked her if she wanted me to come home and she said, ‘No. You are a Johnson man and your job is to work.’ I finished the game, got back home, and she was pretty much unconsciousness at that point because she had Stage Four ovarian cancer. I never got the chance to talk to her again because the cancer was eating her up. I think I’m still in the process of healing. My mother was the most important person in my life.”


I’m going to need a couple paragraphs, so hang tight for a second.

Okay, I think I’m ready.

Johnson’s story breaks my heart. And it terrifies me. I pray I am blessed enough to have even a fraction of the professional success that Gus Johnson (who has announced March Madness, Knicks basketball, championship boxing, Champions League, NFL and college bowl games) has had.

But I pray even more that I have the right kind of success: one that allows me to put my personal life (some people know this as a life) first. Thus the terror: if Johnson’s story of not talking to his mother before she died ever happened to me with my mother/father/sisters/brother/spouse, and I was stuck out of town because of work… my soul would free-fall.

Some people may choose to read the Sports Illustrated story cynically: Fox Sports read the negative feedback to soccer announcer Johnson, wanted to make a change and offered Johnson the out of a resignation instead of a demotion.

I choose to read Johnson’s story at face value: this is a man who prioritizing the right things. Some parts of life are more important than announcing a World Cup Final. Johnson has achieved wonderful successes in his professional career, but those successes are not all that matters.

I am reading a terrific new book from Arianna Huffington called Thrive: The Third Metric to Redefining Success and Creating a Life of Well-Being, Wisdom, and Wonder. Look past the new-agey, self-help title. She writes some great advice, especially for me, someone just about to start his career.

The gist:

“Our relentless pursuit of the two traditional metrics of success — money and power — has led to an epidemic of burnout and stress-related illnesses, and an erosion in the quality of our relationships, family life, and, ironically, our careers…. Our current definition of success is literally killing us. We need a new way forward.”

Doesn’t sound too crazy, right? Don’t let success in your work solely determine your happiness. Create a new measure. Thrive. It sounds like Gus Johnson is re-organizing his life in the right way. It is never too late to start.