$60M HS Stadium

Guees things really are bigger in Texas. This is just crazy

My college didn’t even have a stadium that big, down economy my ass.

[quote]Himora22 wrote:

Guees things really are bigger in Texas. This is just crazy[/quote]

WOW! Would be awesome to play in that thing as a high school kid.

Surely the sports “bubble” is getting ready to pop. Coaches salaries, players salaries, tv deals, stadiums, etc. have really started to trickle down into high school, can’t imagine it sustaining at all levels…

That’s TX HS football for you.

Don’t fuck with our football

I played football in Allen. It was a school with a very large budget with a very large desire to hook the program up PHAT

after reading that article it doesn’t seem all that ridiculous anymore… but I feel like I should look more into it

The field will be used for more sports than just football. Probably soccer and lacrosse too.

I played in front of 24K in high school. 50K is crazy.

What an opportunity for teams playing there.

[quote]dk44 wrote:

[quote]Himora22 wrote:

Guees things really are bigger in Texas. This is just crazy[/quote]

WOW! Would be awesome to play in that thing as a high school kid.

Surely the sports “bubble” is getting ready to pop. Coaches salaries, players salaries, tv deals, stadiums, etc. have really started to trickle down into high school, can’t imagine it sustaining at all levels…

[/quote]

I have my doubts about the bubble. College and Pros generate huge revenue. That is not the case in high school. All of the bubbles that are in Texas do not have room for fans/stands. they simply used for practice.

The team I coach has used the Texans bubble for practice twice the past 2 seasons.

Good use of public funds. Honestly, the priorities in this country have gone to shit when people don’t have to defend spending $60M on a HS athletic field.

I love how the guy justified it by saying that it’s not like the funds could be used for other educational purposes since it’s under a separate (capital projects) budget. How about reapportioning the tax revenues (because while the article didn’t say so, it’s tax revenues that will pay this back) to something else worthwhile. It seems to me that they would be better served by building a second HS for the district since they are pushing 4,000 students in the lone HS (grades 10-12). If they really wanted to, they could vote on it, but BillyBob and Tiffany apparently need their HS football to be top-notch.

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Good use of public funds. Honestly, the priorities in this country have gone to shit when people don’t have to defend spending $60M on a HS athletic field.

I love how the guy justified it by saying that it’s not like the funds could be used for other educational purposes since it’s under a separate (capital projects) budget. How about reapportioning the tax revenues (because while the article didn’t say so, it’s tax revenues that will pay this back) to something else worthwhile. It seems to me that they would be better served by building a second HS for the district since they are pushing 4,000 students in the lone HS (grades 10-12). If they really wanted to, they could vote on it, but BillyBob and Tiffany apparently need their HS football to be top-notch.

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB[/quote]

In Austin we have several high schools with near that many students… and there is about 15ish high schools in the district. Its Texas… our high schools are fairly large. They’re also building a performing arts center that costs about the same amount… no one is complaining about that.

At first I thought it was ridiculous then I remembered back when I went to high schools… similar stadiums etc… had been built… cheaper… but in no way inexpensive. They’ve obviously paid off in the long run.

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Good use of public funds. Honestly, the priorities in this country have gone to shit when people don’t have to defend spending $60M on a HS athletic field.

I love how the guy justified it by saying that it’s not like the funds could be used for other educational purposes since it’s under a separate (capital projects) budget. How about reapportioning the tax revenues (because while the article didn’t say so, it’s tax revenues that will pay this back) to something else worthwhile. It seems to me that they would be better served by building a second HS for the district since they are pushing 4,000 students in the lone HS (grades 10-12). If they really wanted to, they could vote on it, but BillyBob and Tiffany apparently need their HS football to be top-notch.

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB[/quote]

Cant build another HS if you dont have the teachers to fill it. Fundamentally I agree with you and I am a very big football fan and have a kid play HS football. But they also are not taking money from out of their district to build this, so the people paying for it are the parents of the kids playing on it. This also created a bunch of jobs also.

[quote]DJHT wrote:

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Good use of public funds. Honestly, the priorities in this country have gone to shit when people don’t have to defend spending $60M on a HS athletic field.

I love how the guy justified it by saying that it’s not like the funds could be used for other educational purposes since it’s under a separate (capital projects) budget. How about reapportioning the tax revenues (because while the article didn’t say so, it’s tax revenues that will pay this back) to something else worthwhile. It seems to me that they would be better served by building a second HS for the district since they are pushing 4,000 students in the lone HS (grades 10-12). If they really wanted to, they could vote on it, but BillyBob and Tiffany apparently need their HS football to be top-notch.

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB[/quote]

Cant build another HS if you dont have the teachers to fill it. Fundamentally I agree with you and I am a very big football fan and have a kid play HS football. But they also are not taking money from out of their district to build this, so the people paying for it are the parents of the kids playing on it. This also created a bunch of jobs also.[/quote]

Finding teachers to fill schools isn’t usually a problem, especially in the current environment. I guess Texas is different in that regard too. But to spend that kind of money on a HS football stadium just doesn’t seem wise when there’s nothing wrong with parents and girlfriends sitting on wooden/aluminum bleachers all over the country. (My old HS stadium holds 12,000+ the old fashioned way and it still hosts state championships). To spend that kind of money, “just because we can raise it”, seems rather shortsighted and foolish to me. But hell, it’s y’allz tax dollars.

DB

But hell, it’s y’allz tax dollars.

DB[/quote]

Like I said I agree fundamentally. And no they cannot find teachers in Texas the teacher to student ratio is very slanted, last I looked it is almost 30:1. My thing is the Texas educational system period, we do not prepare kids for life/college etc. All its about is state testing and getting money. At least they are putting money into something to help kids in a physical aspect. Lord knows kids spend enough time sitting on there ass playing playstation. (Yes I sit on my ass playing playstation, but I do work 8 hrs a day and lift 4 days a week)

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Good use of public funds. Honestly, the priorities in this country have gone to shit when people don’t have to defend spending $60M on a HS athletic field.

I love how the guy justified it by saying that it’s not like the funds could be used for other educational purposes since it’s under a separate (capital projects) budget. How about reapportioning the tax revenues (because while the article didn’t say so, it’s tax revenues that will pay this back) to something else worthwhile. It seems to me that they would be better served by building a second HS for the district since they are pushing 4,000 students in the lone HS (grades 10-12). If they really wanted to, they could vote on it, but BillyBob and Tiffany apparently need their HS football to be top-notch.

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB[/quote]

It’s not like we were hurting for much of anything at all anyways. Our teachers were always treated very well, we always had new computers. Heck, we even had projectors in every room in the high school.

Truthfully we do not need or want another high school. All too many times we have seen schools in our district get absolutely smashed when they split up. It was a little bit packed during certain hours and parking sucked but we would rather have that than the other option.

[quote]tommytoughnuts wrote:

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB[/quote]

It’s not like we were hurting for much of anything at all anyways. Our teachers were always treated very well, we always had new computers. Heck, we even had projectors in every room in the high school.

Truthfully we do not need or want another high school. All too many times we have seen schools in our district get absolutely smashed when they split up. It was a little bit packed during certain hours and parking sucked but we would rather have that than the other option.
[/quote]

Smashed how, in football? Academically? Contrary to popular belief in TX, HS should NOT be about football. I’ll buy a lack of teachers argument, but athletic competition should never drive school districting and expansion decisions. If it does, it only strengthens my Ancient Rome comparison.

DB

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:

[quote]tommytoughnuts wrote:

[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:

We aren’t resembling Ancient Rome too much these days, are we?

DB[/quote]

It’s not like we were hurting for much of anything at all anyways. Our teachers were always treated very well, we always had new computers. Heck, we even had projectors in every room in the high school.

Truthfully we do not need or want another high school. All too many times we have seen schools in our district get absolutely smashed when they split up. It was a little bit packed during certain hours and parking sucked but we would rather have that than the other option.
[/quote]

Smashed how, in football? Academically? Contrary to popular belief in TX, HS should NOT be about football. I’ll buy a lack of teachers argument, but athletic competition should never drive school districting and expansion decisions. If it does, it only strengthens my Ancient Rome comparison.

DB[/quote]

Thats an incredible generalization… high school in Texas is not all about football… the only schools that are like that are the small town high schools in west Texas etc…(those are also the schools that bring our “numbers” down)… They’re also building a performing arts center as well… no one says thats a waste of money.

Not sure about the lack of teachers though… In Austin teachers are having a hard time finding jobs.

so can graduates of this high school put “$60 million stadium” on their resume`s and get hired?

Contrary to popular belief in rest of the US…TX high school isn’t about football. It’s just held to an higher standard…obviously.

Plus it’s TX…we do whatever the fuck we want.

All bullshit aside…TX public school system is a joke when it comes to results. We are ranked at the bottom. In fact,I believe we rank just above/or below Montana. Pretty sad for a state our size and with resources we have.

But of course,some argue that the entire public school system is a joke regardless. Do they home school a lot in Montana??