|
Post by Coyote Fan on Oct 6, 2010 22:44:04 GMT -6
If SDSU is going to get a huge football stadium with a big cost, USD should build a state of the art basketball arena that is very user friendly for the student athlete and one that provides a great atmosphere for games. Make it one of the best basketball arenas out there and make sure it has red seats;-)
That way USD has a better home court advantage for both. As much as I like outdoor football SDSU can have their 20,000 seat outdoor stadium but it still wouldn't be as loud as a renovated dome with a capacity of around 16,000. Even with a crowd of 8,000 the home field advantage is great with the noise factor.
For basketball USD could have a nicer and newer arena than frost which would definately steer recruits towards USD. I already think USD is doing a good job recruiting but it would only get better. If anything lets do this one for Dave Boots. He has turned around the program and made USD a basketball school. If this thing gets going maybe Boots will be around long enough to coach at least one season in a new facility.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 7, 2010 7:29:08 GMT -6
A basketball school? Sure, in the last twenty years USD has had more success on the basketball court, but judging from gameday atmospheres and attendance for both sports over the last 7-8 years, and definitely the last couple, I'd say USD is firmly a football school with good basketball success and history.
|
|
|
Post by yotefan on Oct 7, 2010 9:04:36 GMT -6
I agree with Yote53, the Dome is capped. You can't expect to have more than 10,000 people at the Dome when there is no where to put people. You get in to the 9,500 to 9,800 range and it's packed in there. Simply put, if you build it they will come (within reason that is).
Currently there is really only one main entrance and one main exit in terms of getting in to the Dome and in to the bleachers for students. That is unacceptable and having a more fan friendly experience for students and additional fans on the west side would put more fans in the seats.
Last Saturday there were more students than the bleachers could hold so kids had to stand in the endzone and by the concession area near the student section.
Watch any Coyote game footage and you can see 7-8 rows worth of bleachers behind the Coyote bench that could be holding students, but aren't due to space limitations to accomodate the team. Also, those students sitting behind our team got in through only one means, the stairs by the concession area and had to shuffle their way along 6-7 rows of bleachers in and around other fans. There should be multiple ways to access this entire section and they should have some choice seating right on the field.
The problem is how to expand seating without compromising one of the premier indoor tracks in the region. I trust the engineers to figure that one out. Perhaps a combination of permanent seats and bleachers that pull out or having the track run under an over-hanging portion of the new grandstands. Who knows, just make it happen.
Coyotefan is right, 16,000 would be a great crowd in the Dome and that's the capacity any renovation should shoot for. The word I have heard is red seats are one of David's priorities in the near future.
As for basketball, I agree with previous posters, you don't want to build a facility you outgrow in a few years, but like others have said you don't want a cavernous environment devoid of life when you aren't playing a regional rival or big-time program. Intimate setting with good sight lines, steep bleachers, classic feel (i.e. Cameron Crazies) with banners in the rafters etc...., should be and is the goal. David has talked about having a Coyote Sports Hall of Fame between the Dome and the arena.
When attending the UNI games, I liked being able to watch the football game from a top one of their endzones near the breezeway between the McLeod Center and UNI Dome...we could likely do the very same thing.
Exciting times for sure. Join the Howling Pack for $25-$50 a month and help make it happen. You're helping USD and you're helping your own cause when it comes to securing good seats in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 7, 2010 9:38:32 GMT -6
NDSU seats 19,000+ right now. UND has had ongoing discussions about a 30,000 seat retractable roof stadium. SDSU is shooting for 22,000 seat renovation. What all three of these schools are looking at is positioning themselves for an FBS future where stadiums will need to hold 25,000 and attendance average 15,000.
A 16,000 seat Dome seems great right now but will limit us in the future (15-20 years) if the other 3 Dakota schools have there eyes set on FBS and bigger and better things. Then where will USD be? We need to really think about this and plan for the future when it comes to all of our facilities decisions.
I'll also make the case that an FBS USD is more conceivable than an FBS UND or SDSU given our proximity to larger population centers.
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Oct 7, 2010 10:09:36 GMT -6
I agree that a 16k Dome is about as thigh they can go without blasting everything and doing some major cantilevered decks. I am somewhat torn on what they should do. Yes, XDSU and UND, are looking at going to the 20K plus stadiums for football. This will allow them to fulfill the requirements for a move to FBS, if that day comes. However, I have a feeling that the seating and attendance requirements for FBS will be different (lower) once any of the Dakota schools gets to the point of moving up, if ever, to another level. In the present time we need to do something with the current seating to the Dakota Dome to make it an even larger asset to the student/athletes and fan experience. I don't think reconfirguring the Dome into a 16k capacity facility is so short sighted. If we get to the point where another 6k fans fill the Dome we deal with it then in another 30 years.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 7, 2010 11:38:41 GMT -6
Yeah, really the only option we have if want to go over 16k is to scrap it and start with a whole new stadium.
I wonder how much it will cost to expand seating to 16k and how long it will take. It sucked when the roof was being put on, having to play "home" games in Yankton and Sioux Falls. That would be an attendance killer.
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Oct 7, 2010 11:52:02 GMT -6
Yeah, really the only option we have if want to go over 16k is to scrap it and start with a whole new stadium. I wonder how much it will cost to expand seating to 16k and how long it will take. It sucked when the roof was being put on, having to play "home" games in Yankton and Sioux Falls. That would be an attendance killer. Keep in mind I am not an engineer, architecht or a construction manager but I think it would have to be done in phases. Once the Wellness Center and Proposed Arena are complete you start with the Bleacher Side and build permanent seats. The permanent seats can be built at a steeper slope and with much more space between the edge of the current field. You then move the field closer to the edge of the "new" permanent side seating and redo the slope and seats on the current permanent side. I would like to add some endzone seating if they blast a connector area to the new Arena. I also would like to have the first row of seats about 15 feet from the edge of the sideline area so the view on the sidelines is not so obstructed. I better hit the lottery for all of my "wants"
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 7, 2010 12:10:55 GMT -6
You can't win if you don't play!
I would think they would leave the east side the way it is and just add permanent seats on the west side. It should fit exactly the same way as the east side. The long jump and high jump areas would have to be sacrificed. It would be a necessary sacrifice to make.
|
|
|
Post by Eric on Oct 7, 2010 21:27:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 8, 2010 7:50:11 GMT -6
So SDSU has plans to build a 20,000 to 22,000 seat stadium, with room for expansion, and we think 15,000 is going to be adequate? Also, SDSU plans to spend $90 million and we are only planning on $52.5 million. Let's get a little more vision here. This is shaping up for USD to have to play catch-up, again, to the other Dakota Schools. Let's get out in front on this one and think bigger. A proposed soccer field surrounded by an outdoor track facility with grandstands. I wonder who thought of that one. I would give you the link but all my posts from the last board are gone. Still don't see anything about the hockey arena, darn. In other news, looks like their finely going to retire Ackley and build a new Science Building. Good. Let's get out in front on this one as well and build the premier science research center in the midwest.
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Oct 8, 2010 8:14:55 GMT -6
Honestly, I would rather have a separate TF and Soccer Facility. Build them next to each other with seating on one side back to back. Watching a soccer match with a track ring is somewhat brutal. In addition you could have the field events within the infield of TF facility. I know they are D2 but Augie is doing two separate facilities for their TF and Soccer teams. In any event progress towards a new soccer pitch and outdoor TF facility is a positive. For the most part it all comes down to USD getting the Dome to be a student/athlete only facility. Once the Wellness Center is completed the Dome will open up for mulitple uses for just student/athletes. We still need some other facilities to take some load off the Dome but that is a first step. I agree that 15k may someday be too small but we have to be reasonable for what our alumni/univeristy/fanbase can support. Seems to me that UNI does fine with a 16000 seat dome. We have to be concerned with what is right for USD and not worry about what SDSU is proposing to build.
I also agree about new labs. The campus and academic buildings look great. Go Yotes
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 8, 2010 8:33:25 GMT -6
I agree with you Pierre, we do have to do what is right for USD, however, we also need to be looking towards the future and how we position ourselves. What if 15 years from now, which is not very long, the other 3 Dakota schools make a move for FBS (or whatever constitutes FBS then)? There will be a cry from the alumni that USD has to keep up with their peers. You know that will happen and it will be right for USD to stay on the same level with our brethren.
All I am saying is great thought should be given to this changing landscape. Look at the projects that are being proposed on the other three campuses. Is USD athletics staying in lockstep with those schools or are we shortchanging ourselves?
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Oct 8, 2010 8:54:33 GMT -6
It is a difficult situation on what we should build/do long term. We are a liberal arts school with graudate degree granting programs. Our student enrollment is 55/45 female. We are the smallest of all 4 dakota schools. Take out graduate students and the gap is even larger. We have the smallest alumni base. We are in the smallest community. We lack large employers to support large sponsorship. UND and NDSU get aided by the fact the cities they reside in contributed tax money to the construction/maintenance of the their facilities. We will never be the leader unless some major sugar daddy comes through or Vermillion/North Sioux City gets another Gateway to contribute heavily to the athletic programs. BTW, don't get me wrong, the local businesses and boosters have been great. If this summer didn't teach us anything it taught us that NCAA FBS/FCS is dynamic and what is true today is not neccisarly true tomorrow. In 15 years when/if we move up again the BCS schools will also be moving up/out of the NCAA FBS. Honestly, I don't know what we should do but at least we are moving forward with something. I shiver when I think about what our campus and athletic facilities would be like if B. Turner Asher was still our President. Her tenure set the U back about 20 years and we are now starting to climb out of that. President Abbot, Staff, Students, Alumni and the Foundation get a huge thumbs up for that.
|
|
|
Post by Yote 53 on Oct 8, 2010 9:55:58 GMT -6
I am in total agreement with how thankful we should be with our current leadership. I was there for Ms. Asher and I agree, she set us back 20 years, at least.
USD is the oldest of the Dakota Schools, we have a fairly good size alumni base. I don't know the exact figures but believe you if you say we're the smallest. I believe we have an ADVANTAGE over SDSU and UND in that we are smack in the middle of Sioux Falls and Sioux City. The Hyperion project is also going to increase the population in and around Vermillion. UND is stuck on the Canadian border and SDSU doesn't have that much of population advantage over USD.
I agree, it is a difficult position, but we do need to pay attention to what the other 3 are planning and plan accordingly in order to compete.
|
|
|
Post by pierreyote on Oct 8, 2010 11:05:10 GMT -6
You know the more I look at the dome with the newer roof, we could eventually add enough seating to get to 25-30k if we really needed it. Isn't the newer roof 60-80 feet higher than the previous parachute roof? There is so much space above the current east stands. It would demand a couple decks and maybe lowering the field 10-15 feet. No doubt cost a boat load but it could be done, if needed. I also believe, they could cut into the south enzone and add some endzone decked seating as well. I believe they already plan on cutting into the north endzone for the connecter building to the proposed arena. It is really amazing what lowering a field 10-15 feet can do to additional seating. I understand plumbing and other issues need to be taken into account but 10-15 feet down can add up to 2000 seats per side.
|
|