Talk:Ben Hill Griffin Stadium

Sentence deletions

I removed the following sentences and just wanted to provide a little rationale for watchful editors of this page.

Mick Hubert the voice of the Gators since 1989 provides the radio play by play and is well known for his knowledgable and enthusiastic playcalling usually punctuated by his trademark "OH MY!"

Offtopic; being on radio, Hubert does not affect the stadium atmosphere.

Many broadcasting team during game days have the sideline reporter equipped with a sound measuring device that make the sound output by the crowd to be equivalent to that of a high decibel rate.

This sentence is meaningless without some number - what is a "high decibel rate"? All stadiums have "high decibel rates". Has it ever been measured? How high? Is it published/verifiable like LSU's 122 decibels or Millenium Stadium's (London) record 130.7? I know the place is very loud, but a hard number is needed to add that to the article without it just being a weasel phrase. Autiger 19:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

---Removed the sentence about the Gators being 34 point underdogs vs. FSU in 1997. FSU was number one in the nation, the Gaters were ranked number 10 and at home. A 34 point spread is crazy talk.

• • Actually, unless I'm mistaken, I remember that quite a few national sportscasters picked UF by as much as a 35 point underdog. I'm not sure if that was the official Vegas line but that is a valid number. That was the year we lost to LSU and Georgia creamed us, FSU was expected to waltz to the championship game. The problem is that I've only got memory to go off of, I can't find any actual statistics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.206.174 (talk) 19:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed "Legendary"

The word "legendary" was used to describe both Ben Hill Griffin and Steve Spurrier, and I removed them to restore NPOV. KyuzoGator 15:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Indicating that in the edit summary would have been sufficient; no one would quibble over that change. But thanks! AUTiger ʃ ^talk/_work 23:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'm new to editing Wiki and I didn't know about that. KyuzoGator 14:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

New Picture

I don't want to cause an edit war, but I think the new picture that was added by Berniestew is unnecessary and simply crowds the page. Does anyone think it's a good idea to have it? Adam Weeden 18:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree the position was definitely bad and I moved it down before I saw your comment here. AUTiger ʃ ^talk/_work 20:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

repeated vandalism

A non-registered user has twice removed cited facts. I recommend he takes his agenda to a football message board somewhere as this website is supposed to be a fact-based information resource. Zeng8r 19:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

"fact" based?

it's hard to believe that you are an unbiased editor with the word "g8r" in your ID. this article is somewhat biased. nice job carrying the "fact based website" banner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.17.110.196 (talk) 02:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Is it better for people to write about subjects of which they know nothing? I'm not repeatedly vandalizing the UCLA article, am I?

There are no un-cited "controversial" statements in this article. The fact that you removed (twice) now has not one, not two, but three references. Zeng8r 02:23, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the history, it appears the UCLA edit was made to correct a blatant falsehood that existed in the article. Please explain how that was vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.17.110.196 (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The user removed facts and added completely unrelated info. After the facts were restored with multiple references, he removed them again. Probably not vandalism the first time, but definitely the second. As already stated, every fact in question is cited with multiple sources. Zeng8r 12:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

list of notable players

Should the list really be in this article? I think the focus should be on the stadium. Maybe a "notable games" section would be appropriate, but the player list should stay in the Florida Football entry, imo. Zeng8r (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• On second thought, I think your right. I deleted them, but keep in perspective that they can still be found on the famous UF Alumni page. Thanks for your input. Jccort (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's for the best. The Ring of Honor is mentioned in this article, so a few great Gators are included. You know, I thought of including a "memorable games" section as I was typing the earlier comment w/o really thinking about it, but on reflection I think it'd be a great addition. What do you (or anybody else) think? Zeng8r (talk) 00:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

What is the name of this facility?

The official site of Gator football actually is most unhelpful, including two mutually contradictory versions of its football facility's name. From the opening paragraph:

Ben Hill Griffin Stadium, or “The Swamp,” is widely recognized as one of, if not the toughest, environments for a visiting team in all of college football. Several facelifts after the stadium’s original construction in 1930 have made Florida Field at Ben Hill Griffin Stadium the state-of-the-art facility you see at today’s game. Without a bad seat in the house, "The Swamp" ranks as the largest stadium in the state of Florida.

But at the top of the page it makes reference to Ben Hill Griffin Stadium at Florida Field. Oh well, I'm leaving this one alone; it's not of earthshaking importance, and if the folks at UF don't care enough to make it clear, neither do I. Unschool 14:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

While I've seen written it both ways, the BHGS part usually comes first. Sports facilities at UF generally have the stadium/benefactor's name before the traditional name of the field, like at Alfred A. McKethan Stadium. Those guys ponied up the cash, so I guess they deserve it... Zeng8r (talk) 15:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Record Attendance

Has anyone noticed that the article that the 93,000 record attendance figure cites actually says the record crowd was 90,907? It seems like Gator-flation to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.174.25 (talk) 07:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Now what is the name of this facility?

The previous discussion from a few years back seemed to conclude that the article remained being called Ben Hill Griffin Stadium rather than "BHGS at Florida Field" or vice-versa. Further, as mentioned by the previous discussion, the article about Alfred A. McKethan Stadium is not titled "Alfred A. McKethan Stadium at Perry Field" or vice-versa. Moreover, the article title now is just unnecessarily long. Also, throughout the article, wouldn't it be more consistent if we said "Steve Spurrier–Florida Field" with an en dash (–) rather than the hyphen (-) as Bryant–Denny Stadium does? Ben^hen₁₉₉₇ 01:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The official name has certainly grown into quite a mouthful, hasn't it? Right now, there are redirects from "Florida Field" and "Ben Hill Griffin Stadium", and "The Swamp" is included on a disambiguation page, so readers should be able to find this article no matter how they search for it. But is the title just too long? I can see that argument, and I guess if it's shortened, it could be returned to just BHGS and make the full name another redirect. But I'd be ok with leaving the full name as well. --Zeng8r (talk) 10:40, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I could care less either way as well, I just think that for consistency's sake with other UF facilities it should simply be called BHGS. Ben^hen₁₉₉₇ 17:48, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ben Hill Griffin Stadium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160904141255/http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/27/Sports/100_things_about_100_.shtml to http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/27/Sports/100_things_about_100_.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160904141255/http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/27/Sports/100_things_about_100_.shtml to http://www.sptimes.com/2006/08/27/Sports/100_things_about_100_.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150707055319/http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/active/f/florida/opponents_records.php?teamid=1265 to http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/active/f/florida/opponents_records.php?teamid=1265

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

mention in Lincoln Project ad

@27.104.139.220: The brief mention of The Swamp in a political ad is not notable enough to be included in this article. The old stadium has previously been featured in several ESPN and Gatorade ads (among others), but per MOS:POPCULT and WP:UNDUE, none of those are notable enough for a mention, either. In fact, I'd say the case for including some of those football-related commercials is stronger than the case to include this political aside, though I'd argue against them as well. The Lincoln Project ad in question should definitely remain at Dan Mullen, as that's who getting criticized for some unfortunate corona-comments. But not here. Zeng8r (talk) 17:44, 20 October 2020 (UTC)