It will be more convenient, but traffic will still be heavy unless they put an exit on rock creek. The 24th/Tecumseh/Flood area is becoming notorious

It will be more convenient, but traffic will still be heavy unless they put an exit on rock creek. The 24th/Tecumseh/Flood area is becoming notorious

Yes a rock creek exit would be needed for sure.

Yes a rock creek exit would be needed for sure.

And if the TIF is rejected in Feb., it will not be a priority.

And if the TIF is rejected in Feb., it will not be a priority.

Again, getting what they deserve.

Being shortsighted isn't a good quality.

Again, getting what they deserve.

Being shortsighted isn't a good quality.

Iniative petitions in a representative democracy are a great thing. Let the voters, not 5 guys decide.
If it is such a good thing then OU, Larry and McKinney can make their case. Then whatever side wins will get what they deserve.
I gathered signatures and most folks signing were not against the district/arena. They were against the TIFs.

Iniative petitions in a representative democracy are a great thing. Let the voters, not 5 guys decide.
If it is such a good thing then OU, Larry and McKinney can make their case. Then whatever side wins will get what they deserve.
I gathered signatures and most folks signing were not against the district/arena. They were against the TIFs.
What would really be great for our democracy is for a large part of the voting public to vote, not just a small minority of the public who are zealots.

Students, though... $8.50 for a beer versus $3.50 (specials may be even cheaper)?

When I was a student we would’ve killed to pay $8.50 for a beer inside the stadium (though at least for football there are some cheaper draft options). The ones that are there to watch the game don’t generally leave just to go drink now unless the weather sucks or the game gets out of hand in either direction. The ones who don’t care about watching the game that much go for a bit and then head to the bars like they always have.

What would really be great for our democracy is for a large part of the voting public to vote, not just a small minority of the public who are zealots.

for sure. As long as it’s a large part of the public that agrees with me. The other folks can stay home. LOL jk

I gathered signatures and most folks signing were not against the district/arena. They were against the TIFs.

this is my perception as well here in norman... the biggest problem is that most of those who were against the TIF, when asked for specifics of what they felt would happen, wouldn't actually happen with this TIF... as soon as it was announced there was a lot of misinformation that was spread about the project and the TIF, and then that created a lot of uninformed opinions.

this is my perception as well here in norman... the biggest problem is that most of those who were against the TIF, when asked for specifics of what they felt would happen, wouldn't actually happen with this TIF... as soon as it was announced there was a lot of misinformation that was spread about the project and the TIF, and then that created a lot of uninformed opinions.

I could agree with that. OU also did a pretty bad job selling it to the public. When Harroz came out and said they would just move it to another city most people just said "Ok fine, do that". Not great PR from OU.

Those schools have been getting the big SEC money for decades and also built those facilities before hundreds of millions had to be steered to NIL.

Completely different situations.

The Southeastern Conference's media deals have been roughly the same as those of the other conferences until relatively recently. If I recall correctly, OU had been collecting more media-deal revenue as a Big 12 member than it otherwise would have as a member of a different athletic conference, as Big 12 member institutions uniquely retained their "Tier-3" media rights (hence having football games exclusively on a pay-per-view channel).

The Southeastern Conference's media deals have been roughly the same as those of the other conferences until relatively recently. If I recall correctly, OU had been collecting more media-deal revenue as a Big 12 member than it otherwise would have as a member of a different athletic conference, as Big 12 member institutions uniquely retained their "Tier-3" media rights (hence having football games exclusively on a pay-per-view channel).

this is correct OU was getting almost the same (recent years ) or more money then the SEC (the 5 years before that) ... Texas was getting far more (do to the LHN ) ...

The Southeastern Conference's media deals have been roughly the same as those of the other conferences until relatively recently. If I recall correctly, OU had been collecting more media-deal revenue as a Big 12 member than it otherwise would have as a member of a different athletic conference, as Big 12 member institutions uniquely retained their "Tier-3" media rights (hence having football games exclusively on a pay-per-view channel).
Sec media deal has been about 25% more than B12 and will see a gigantic increase now. OU will get way more in SEC than B12

Sec media deal has been about 25% more than B12 and will see a gigantic increase now. OU will get way more in SEC than B12

but that didn't take into account the OU and texas 3rd tier deals .. which are both substantial ..

in 22-23 OU got 44 million from the Big 12 + 7ish from ESPN so over 50 mil the sec was 51 mil ... texas was at 59 mil that same year .. (15 million for LHN) ...

Any update on what is going into the old Logan's location? I remember it brought up before but can't find the post.

Any update on what is going into the old Logan's location? I remember it brought up before but can't find the post.

I believe it is going to be Green Turtle: https://thegreeneturtle.com/

but that didn't take into account the OU and texas 3rd tier deals .. which are both substantial ..

in 22-23 OU got 44 million from the Big 12 + 7ish from ESPN so over 50 mil the sec was 51 mil ... texas was at 59 mil that same year .. (15 million for LHN) ...
Both will be getting substantially more in SEC than in B12. Fact.

Both will be getting substantially more in SEC than in B12. Fact.

yes they will going forward .. that is why they switched but the SEC new espn deal .. just started this season ..


in the past 10 years the sec has not really made more tv money

yes they will going forward .. that is why they switched but the SEC new espn deal .. just started this season ..


in the past 10 years the sec has not really made more tv money

Not sure what you are arguing for or about. SEC has outpaced the B12 for awhile. B12 was bolstered by OU and UT and now that is gone and added to SEC so gap continues to widen.
19257

And, if you want to look at total revenue per schools, look at the SEC schools vs B12 and see the HUGE differences in revenue and budgets. https://sportsdata.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

It is undeniable that the SEC has been more financially successful for awhile and will be bolstered by OU & UT. The B!2 was very much supported by OU & UT's membership and will be hurt with their leaving.

Not sure what you are arguing for or about. SEC has outpaced the B12 for awhile. B12 was bolstered by OU and UT and now that is gone and added to SEC so gap continues to widen.
19257

And, if you want to look at total revenue per schools, look at the SEC schools vs B12 and see the HUGE differences in revenue and budgets. https://sportsdata.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

It is undeniable that the SEC has been more financially successful for awhile and will be bolstered by OU & UT. The B!2 was very much supported by OU & UT's membership and will be hurt with their leaving.

no one is arguing going forward ..

but in the past .. the 3rd tier tv contract of OU (9 mil +/-) and texas (15 mil) .. kept them around or in texas case well above the SEC ..

no one is arguing going forward ..

but in the past .. the 3rd tier tv contract of OU (9 mil +/-) and texas (15 mil) .. kept them around or in texas case well above the SEC ..

So, what's your point? OU and UT will do well wherever they are. But they will do best in the SEC for the time being. And, OU & UT knew there would be a ceiling on what they could earn in the B12 and know that ceiling is much higher in the SEC. That is why they left.

So, what's your point? OU and UT will do well wherever they are. But they will do best in the SEC for the time being. And, OU & UT knew there would be a ceiling on what they could earn in the B12 and know that ceiling is much higher in the SEC. That is why they left.

if you read the thread there was a comment that the SEC was ahead in facilities because of their TV money gap over OU >...

that is what i was responding too .

^ This. The claim refuted was Ole Miss and other SEC schools were making big SEC money for decades. Not what is going on NOW.

https://www.koco.com/article/oklahoma-norman-petition-tif-entertainment-district-vote-signature-requirement/62832036

On to the election in Feb. 2025

Too bad this election won't be at the county level. As a Moore resident, I feel that we are a little bit more progressive in approving these types of propositions than Norman. Cleveland County residents would of helped pushed this through.

I hope Norman suffers because of this. They deserve no good things. No companies are moving there, students leave as soon as they graduate, young people flee it like crazy.

Things like this won't help them, and they cut off their nose to spite their face.

Lol. Norman will be just fine should the voters reject this. Maybe OU will come back with a better offer. Or they move the team to Goldsby or Moore. Or they stay at the LNC. The horra!

I hope Norman suffers because of this. They deserve no good things. No companies are moving there, students leave as soon as they graduate, young people flee it like crazy.

Things like this won't help them, and they cut off their nose to spite their face.

I think thats a bit hyperbolic. Its a basketball arena. I am a Norman voter and will probably vote yes as I think it could be a neat area for development. But I get why people don't want it. Either way I'm not too worried about the future of Norman. OU is still a top 3 employer in the state and will continue to be for a long while.

I think thats a bit hyperbolic. Its a basketball arena. I am a Norman voter and will probably vote yes as I think it could be a neat area for development. But I get why people don't want it. Either way I'm not too worried about the future of Norman. OU is still a top 3 employer in the state and will continue to be for a long while.

no it is a billion dollar development .. norman would lose

Lol. Norman will be just fine should the voters reject this. Maybe OU will come back with a better offer. Or they move the team to Goldsby or Moore. Or they stay at the LNC. The horra!

that's really kind of the problem though... it's people who think norman is "just fine" they way it is, and don't want major stimulating development to occur. this city fights everything... it gets tiresome.

no it is a billion dollar development .. norman would lose

No it is NOT. It is a 650M contractural agreement. That 1B was for marketing purposes.
Taxpayers responsibility- 230M
Developers responsibility- 420M
= 650M

went to the Womens basketball game last night... my friend and i decided to to talk to all 23 students in the student section that we could, and then we talked with the band members. none walked there, all drove, all said that they don't live on campus, and so even if it were there, they would still have to drive. several of the band members said they wished it was in UNP, because they always eat torchies before basketball games anyways.

i understand it's a small sample size... but literally none that i talked to cared about it being on campus.

^ And how many of those are tax paying full time residents of Norman?
The issue here is the $600M price tag that the city is on the hook for. When I collected signatures that was the concern. Folks signing did not care about the arena, they cared about the city budget.
Most felt it was on the State to pay for it.

^ And how many of those are tax paying full time residents of Norman?
The issue here is the $600M price tag that the city is on the hook for. When I collected signatures that was the concern. Folks signing did not care about the arena, they cared about the city budget.
Most felt it was on the State to pay for it.

So you preyed on their ignorance. Got it.

Your own ignorance, for that matter.

I'm not a Norman Resident and I don't really care about OU basketball so I don't really care if the Arena gets built one way or another. I do kind of think this Arena is being talked about like it's a silver bullet that is going to jump start development. So what chains specifically do we think Norman would lose? This college Arena is certainly by itself isn't going to bring in new acts or tenants, it's going to to be outcompeted with the amenities packed 1 plus billion dollar arena up the road. It's all going to be dependant on engagement in OU Athletics. If they can get OAK level tenants thay would be great, I may have actually come down from Moore at that point. Not convinced that would actually happen.

and there is why it will fail and hurt norman. part of the opposition keeps talking about wanting it on campus to make it better for students, when students don't care. and the other doesn't want it to affect the norman budget, but can't seem to wrap their head around the idea that he won't affect the norman budget. even the money for schools piece just shows that it gets paid of significantly quicker and then the money can get to schools.

who have two groups of people who don't want to believe the facts and so are working together

and there is why it will fail and hurt norman. part of the opposition keeps talking about wanting it on campus to make it better for students, when students don't care. and the other doesn't want it to affect the norman budget, but can't seem to wrap their head around the idea that he won't affect the norman budget. even the money for schools piece just shows that it gets paid of significantly quicker and then the money can get to schools.

who have two groups of people who don't want to believe the facts and so are working together
Well, in fairness, Moore isn't so far away, so they can just drive there and into OKC for the quality of life developments. They don’t need development and growth in Norman. They can just live off of OU and live in their own little berg.

Well, in fairness, Moore isn't so far away, so they can just drive there and into OKC for the quality of life developments. They don’t need development and growth in Norman. They can just live off of OU and live in their own little berg.
Haha for now. That is until the exurbs south of the river explode with the development if that ever happens, Norman will probably be singing a different tune.

Haha for now. That is until the exurbs south of the river explode with the development if that ever happens, Norman will probably be singing a different tune.

You do know i was being sarcastic, right?

You do know i was being sarcastic, right?
No I didn’t. Ugh me and the internet.

^ And how many of those are tax paying full time residents of Norman?
The issue here is the $600M price tag that the city is on the hook for. When I collected signatures that was the concern. Folks signing did not care about the arena, they cared about the city budget.
Most felt it was on the State to pay for it.

as has been stated is in print and is real the city would not be on the hook ... the TIF and developers would PERIOD >>

The development agreement states that it is a "large, high risk venture" that is only feasible with public assistance in financing 230M in principal to build an arena. There is a high risk the OU foundation goals are not met. If 100 M has already been diverted to the TIF then the city has lost that money. There is no money back guarantee.

The proposed arena TIF grabs tax from 11 properties south of Rock Creek. These are adjacent to developed lots and the YAC. These will develop further w/o the arena. All government entities give up any revenue growth from these properties. The TIF impact is estimated to be over 1M annually after stabilization.

Another cost to Norman taxpayers is the loss of tax revenues from existing business outside of the proposed TIF. After the previous TIF for UNP was created the tax base on the ENP cratered when existing business moved to UNP. Reports that informed the project plan suggest 45% of activity in the Arena TIF would have happened naturally w/o an arena.

As far as schools go. A rough estimate is that the project would take $100M of school taxes from NPS. Take the $389M in estimated tax collections (from project plan) multiplied by the % of property taxes that go to schools (60%) and multiply the natural growth rate w/o the arena, 45%.

This is a horrible deal for the taxpaying residents and families with school kids.

This plan as is needs to be scuttled.

It will be decades before that estimated 45% eventual growth actually might happen and will likely not be of the quality as proposed. As well, the city can become known as an anti-growth provincial community that steers substantial development to other areas of the city growing faster and better than Norman. Meanwhile, the anti group can celebrate all the income they saved that isn’t there and won’t be for decades. Norman anti group is overplaying their hand substantially. Not saying they might not win as it is easier to be anti than to create and be for something.

It will be decades before that estimated 45% eventual growth actually might happen and will likely not be of the quality as proposed. As well, the city can become known as an anti-growth provincial community that steers substantial development to other areas of the city growing faster and better than Norman. Meanwhile, the anti group can celebrate all the income they saved that isn’t there and won’t be for decades. Norman anti group is overplaying their hand substantially. Not saying they might not win as it is easier to be anti than to create and be for something.

Speak more of this "quality" of growth, that can only happen with a small-ish college arena? They'll get bad retail and restaurants instead of good retail and restaurants if theres no arena? Apartments would be nicer with an arena?

UNP is a nice looking power center, and somehow has developed without an arena and according to Pete is the most visited shopping center in the state. Amazing how this happened without an arena, as well as against the anti-group of norman wishes.

I still think pro-arena people are looking at it wrongly. Most Norman people look at this arena as not the city of Norman's responsibility and the costs are too high. Its that simple.

Speak more of this "quality" of growth, that can only happen with a small-ish college arena? They'll get bad retail and restaurants instead of good retail and restaurants if theres no arena? Apartments would be nicer with an arena?

UNP is a nice looking power center, and somehow has developed without an arena and according to Pete is the most visited shopping center in the state. Amazing how this happened without an arena, as well as against the anti-group of norman wishes.

I still think pro-arena people are looking at it wrongly. Most Norman people look at this arena as not the city of Norman's responsibility and the costs are too high. Its that simple.

That was what I was alluding to in post #2375. OKC just got done making its case on why any arena less than a billion dollars is 'garbage'. There's only so many chain restaurants and stores out there in the world.

Speak more of this "quality" of growth, that can only happen with a small-ish college arena? They'll get bad retail and restaurants instead of good retail and restaurants if theres no arena? Apartments would be nicer with an arena?

UNP is a nice looking power center, and somehow has developed without an arena and according to Pete is the most visited shopping center in the state. Amazing how this happened without an arena, as well as against the anti-group of norman wishes.

I still think pro-arena people are looking at it wrongly. Most Norman people look at this arena as not the city of Norman's responsibility and the costs are too high. Its that simple.

Everyone is so energized to stop OU that they ignore the developer bringing 100s of millions of dollars and new quality development to the city... willing to do in one fell swoop what will take others decades to do. It is silly to think they will make this huge investment to bring in inferior businesses. This small town protectionism of certain Normanites and their resentment of OU is pretty dangerous to the long term development of Norman as a high quality community. Norman won't die if they don't pass this, but they won't realize their potential either. It will be decades to match this .... decade and decades of lost potential. And people wonder why we can't have nice things in Oklahoma. It is this kind of provincialism. Fortunately there are other areas in the metro who would be glad to have this kind of shot in the arm.

and there is why it will fail and hurt norman. part of the opposition keeps talking about wanting it on campus to make it better for students, when students don't care. and the other doesn't want it to affect the norman budget, but can't seem to wrap their head around the idea that he won't affect the norman budget. even the money for schools piece just shows that it gets paid of significantly quicker and then the money can get to schools.

who have two groups of people who don't want to believe the facts and so are working together

To be fair, the product OU is putting out there right now is not going to put butts in the seats, regardless of facility type / location. For an arena that will be sitting quiet most nights of the year, and without the student base being adjacent / nearby, I don't see how additional development will just "explode."

To be fair, the product OU is putting out there right now is not going to put butts in the seats, regardless of facility type / location. For an arena that will be sitting quiet most nights of the year, and without the student base being adjacent / nearby, I don't see how additional development will just "explode."

Careful... the women are ranked #9 in both polls!!! (Yeah, they don't have CC, but they are good!)

To be fair, the product OU is putting out there right now is not going to put butts in the seats, regardless of facility type / location. For an arena that will be sitting quiet most nights of the year, and without the student base being adjacent / nearby, I don't see how additional development will just "explode."

Student attendance has never been the bulk of attendance. Growth in attendance from OKC population which enjoys better pre-game, in-game, and post-game experiences will drive commerce around and in the stadium and provide a robust entertainment area environment even when there are not events. Hopefully, students who fail to go because they aren't as rah rah loyal to their school teams as students of the 1950s will be coaxed back by the sushi restaurants and cocktail bars and general coolness of the experience. Entertainment areas surrounding venues are popular and being built all over the country because they draw consumers of entertainment and create fun environments. Oklahoma is often slow to recognize and support positive trends in real estate development and facilities. OKC is getting much better but Norman is still lagging due to a provincial mentality of a few but vocal people.

For all the on campus advocates, that kind of enhanced environment will never be developed on or south of campus which is inconvenient for most of the OKC population to get to. It isn't just about the students but also all us alums who would more often frequent a more convenient and engaging game experience.

Norman can stay stuck in the nostalgic 50s or try to grow with the times.

To be fair, the product OU is putting out there right now is not going to put butts in the seats, regardless of facility type / location. For an arena that will be sitting quiet most nights of the year, and without the student base being adjacent / nearby, I don't see how additional development will just "explode."

womens gymnastics had more sellouts last year in lloyd nobel than mens basketball. and that wasn't by students. again, students don't matter in this conversation because they just don't go. it's about making it easier for alum, who actually do go to events

womens gymnastics had more sellouts last year in lloyd nobel than mens basketball. and that wasn't by students. again, students don't matter in this conversation because they just don't go. it's about making it easier for alum, who actually do go to events

And make donations..... big and small. And send their kids to school there.

It looks like they are starting on the foundation for the main event. I will try to get photos later this week

womens gymnastics had more sellouts last year in lloyd nobel than mens basketball. and that wasn't by students. again, students don't matter in this conversation because they just don't go. it's about making it easier for alum, who actually do go to events

There hasn’t been an on-campus arena. LNC is a mile south of campus. You can’t compare something that doesn’t currently exist.

OU is in the midst of an historic building boom as it relates to student housing on-campus. When the master plan is completed in 2030 there will be over 5,000 students living along Lindsey. Another 2,000 students will be living in East Campus west of the RR tracks not to mention future private housing developments along University Blvd in CC that will house another thousand students. OU will have a concentration of students it has never had before that will be able to easily walk to football/basketball games. If the team is good the students will show up.

There hasn’t been an on-campus arena. LNC is a mile south of campus. You can’t compare something that doesn’t currently exist.

OU is in the midst of an historic building boom as it relates to student housing on-campus. When the master plan is completed in 2030 there will be over 5,000 students living along Lindsey. Another 2,000 students will be living in East Campus west of the RR tracks not to mention future private housing developments along University Blvd in CC that will house another thousand students. OU will have a concentration of students it has never had before that will be able to easily walk to football/basketball games. If the team is good the students will show up.

while I agree with your general thoughts ..... the LNC is very much on campus ..

while I agree with your general thoughts ..... the LNC is very much on campus ..

Techically, maybe . More accurately, it is on OU owned property far south of the academic campus and about a mile from the dormitories. Im curious as to what percentage of students who actually do go get there by walking. Im guessing very few.

Techically, maybe . More accurately, it is on OU owned property far south of the academic campus and about a mile from the dormitories. Im curious as to what percentage of students who actually do go get there by walking. Im guessing very few.

No maybe about it -- it is on campus. Also, there is OU housing a half block north of the Lloyd Noble Center and a half block west, not to mention apartments in the area. I walked to Lloyd Noble many times from Walker back in the day. It's not bad and really though it is a little further, it's not that much more of a walk from the quad as it is to the union.

You can’t compare something that doesn’t currently exist.

I mean we have something that currently exists... look at how many students just leave after the 1st quarter or the 1st half of football. it's pretty clear that students (for the most part) don't care about sports other than as a social event for a few minutes. To think that they will just magically stay for basketball in any real quantity is just fiction.

No maybe about it -- it is on campus. Also, there is OU housing a half block north of the Lloyd Noble Center and a half block west, not to mention apartments in the area. I walked to Lloyd Noble many times from Walker back in the day. It's not bad and really though it is a little further, it's not that much more of a walk from the quad as it is to the union.

My question still stands about students walking there. Never see foot traffic between the campus and Lloyd Nobel when I go to bb games. But parking lot is active. Bball being a winter sport is usually at night most likely discourages pedestrian activity when dark and cold and a pretty fair hike.

And yes, as I agreed it is technically it on campus but not central and not conveniently located. For the few dozen more students who might walk there are thousands of alums who would appreciate a more convenient and time efficient location, not to mention a lively atmosphere in and outside of the arena itself. Leaving the game and going next door for a beer and nachos waiting for traffic to clear is way more appealing than walking past darkened classroom buildings to a parking garage or out into a dark lot.

My question still stands about students walking there. Never see foot traffic between the campus and Lloyd Nobel when I go to bb games. But parking lot is active. Bball being a winter sport is usually at night most likely discourages pedestrian activity when dark and cold and a pretty fair hike.

And yes, as I agreed it is technically it on campus but not central and not conveniently located. For the few dozen more students who might walk there are thousands of alums who would appreciate a more convenient and time efficient location, not to mention a lively atmosphere in and outside of the arena itself. Leaving the game and going next door for a beer and nachos waiting for traffic to clear is way more appealing than walking past darkened classroom buildings to a parking garage or out into a dark lot.

Can't disagree with you on the modern student walking all the way down there. Many of us walked down there to watch during the Kelvin Sampson era. Never missed a game!

Personally, I don't mind a new arena there at the Town Center. I agree with what you're saying leaving to a fun lively atmosphere. That being said, I would rather it be on campus so I can directly impact my kids in the brainwashing while walking through campus to get to games. I would've liked the old field house to be renovated and added on to. Supposedly that wasn't an option so UTC will be cool. It will also be neat to see the OU branding right there for everyone to see on 35.

Can't disagree with you on the modern student walking all the way down there. Many of us walked down there to watch during the Kelvin Sampson era. Never missed a game!


The Minor Meter! Those were the days! I rarely missed a men's or women's game the 3 years I went there... I always drove, but I never lived on campus. The men's games were almost always sellouts while, other than employees and relatives, it seemed like I was the only other one at the women's games. How times have changed.