• Hi Guest,

    We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.

    With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile.

A couple of interesting articles

U

uncfootballrules

Active member
Looks like NAU is stepping up big.
http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/?title=55-8m-in-renovations-benefitting-nau-foo&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Big time AD on the market.
http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/?title=uni-ad-rick-hartzell-resigns-post&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
 
So we now know the going rate for a 6,500-seat arena is $86.0M.

That should be our goal as well.
 
What's going on with the capital campaign? Troy? I thought it was supposed to start this month. If NAU can do this, doesn't mean we can't. In fact I think it's great they're doing this. Can the Big Sky start a facilities-type arms race? The bigger conferences do, like the Big 12 and SEC. We could do it too, of course on a smaller scale.
 
Give me a couple of days to catch up from the road trip, and I'll hopefully pull some answers, beardown.
 
Idaho State also announced a big facility improvement program in the past 6 months or so.
http://isubengals.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/idsu/genrel/auto_pdf/BengalVillage

Sacramento State has a big plan going on also (here is the link to the FB teamhouse, but I know this is only the front end of a new BB arena, FB stadium renovation, etc.).
http://www.spanossportscomplex.com/broadathleticfacilityphase.htm

The point is that UNC already has (arguably since I have not been everywhere) the worst facilities in the conference. Seems like we are falling further behind.
 
uncfootballrules, while I can agree that our facilities need improvement, they are not the worst in the BSC. Especially with the renovation of the B-H fields, Jackson soccer complex and B-H itself, ours fall in the middle of the conference.

Sac State's football stadium is a dilapidated beast that includes a wonderful elevator to the media level--a cargo elevator that scared me into walking up and down bleachers. Their fieldhouse/arena is worse than many high schools.

Idaho State and Northern Arizona are both in need of doing something to improve their domes. Old turf, and at NAU, you can get motion sick in the press box hung from the roof of the building. ISU had even gone as far as playing games in smaller Reed Gym, where there women play b-ball, but returned hoops to the dome last year.

Portland State's gym facilities again fall under the "I've seen better at high schools", though the building they are in is an improvement over Sac. PGE Park is another in need of a turf replacement, not to mention upgrades of facilities at the stadium.

Weber State, Montana, Montana State and Eastern Washington have good facilities, though each has a weakness or two. Weber's is a bad batch of grass for football. Montana State's is the oversized fieldhouse, which could use a facelift. The football stadium is solid, but on the north edge of Bozeman, which makes it brutally cold late in the season.

Eastern and Montana would have to be the best, because the facilities are clean, well organized, fit their sports, etc. In Eastern's case, forethought went into their arena and recent football suite upgrades. At Montana, the football stadium is done well with room to grow, while basketball plays in a facility they've done a nice job overcoming obstacles in. It's another arena that could fall into the high school category, except that there are luxury boxes at the top.

Here's something to gnaw on, though: everyone is making pitches for additional money for upgrades. Why? Because that's the nature of Division I athletics--trying to keep up with the big guns. At a time the government is attempting to determine the best way to goose the economy, its not a good time to be trying to raise money.
 
bearsradio said:
uncfootballrules, while I can agree that our facilities need improvement, they are not the worst in the BSC. Especially with the renovation of the B-H fields, Jackson soccer complex and B-H itself, ours fall in the middle of the conference.

Sac State's football stadium is a dilapidated beast that includes a wonderful elevator to the media level--a cargo elevator that scared me into walking up and down bleachers. Their fieldhouse/arena is worse than many high schools.

Idaho State and Northern Arizona are both in need of doing something to improve their domes. Old turf, and at NAU, you can get motion sick in the press box hung from the roof of the building. ISU had even gone as far as playing games in smaller Reed Gym, where there women play b-ball, but returned hoops to the dome last year.

Portland State's gym facilities again fall under the "I've seen better at high schools", though the building they are in is an improvement over Sac. PGE Park is another in need of a turf replacement, not to mention upgrades of facilities at the stadium.

Weber State, Montana, Montana State and Eastern Washington have good facilities, though each has a weakness or two. Weber's is a bad batch of grass for football. Montana State's is the oversized fieldhouse, which could use a facelift. The football stadium is solid, but on the north edge of Bozeman, which makes it brutally cold late in the season.

Eastern and Montana would have to be the best, because the facilities are clean, well organized, fit their sports, etc. In Eastern's case, forethought went into their arena and recent football suite upgrades. At Montana, the football stadium is done well with room to grow, while basketball plays in a facility they've done a nice job overcoming obstacles in. It's another arena that could fall into the high school category, except that there are luxury boxes at the top.

Here's something to gnaw on, though: everyone is making pitches for additional money for upgrades. Why? Because that's the nature of Division I athletics--trying to keep up with the big guns. At a time the government is attempting to determine the best way to goose the economy, its not a good time to be trying to raise money.
Click to expand...


Wait, huh?

Dahlberg arena holds about 7200 fans. How is that "high school" category? And it doesn't literally have luxury boxes, it has a "Sky Club" that is like an upscale bar for the bigwigs at the top of the east side (kind of like what's being added for Washington-Grizzly stadium now).

You're right about Hornet Gym, though. Even here in Missoula, all 3 class AA high schools hold more than that "arena". Sentinel HS Gym (where UM played in '98-99 during the Dahlberg renovations) holds more than double what Hornet Gym holds.
 
Sorry. Poor choice to describe my perspective of Dahlberg.

The bulk of the place is built of cinderblocks, is aged and is tight seating, though. Compared to other arenas, it lacks a good number of amenities for fans, but does have luxury boxes, which no one else in the conference can offer.
 
Troy, this is really nice to hear. Being the new kids on the block, I usually have this impression that our facilities are the smallest and least impressive of the bunch. Nice to know that the other schools face similar (if not the same) problems that we do.
 
I think what happens with ours is that our seating capacities are low for football and basketball so they seem poor. Now in basketball I agree that Butler isn't up to grade. It's bare bones and small and what you would expect from a D-II school. Nottingham capacity is small but the facility itself is nice... we just need expanded capacity and locker rooms so we are close there.

Beyond that our women's soccer facility has to be the best by far and close to as good as anything in the country. Also, practice facilities with the add on to the rec. center and the fields at Butler are far better than many schools out there.

So in the high profile facilities we fall short, but in the grand scheme we have a lot of good ones also.

Having said that we need to always be moving forward. Now that the last student funded round of improvements have been completed we need to work towards that next round. If not, we fall further and further behind.

In basketball I'd rank Butler 7th ahead of only Sac and PSU. In football I'd take ours over all but Montana, Montana State, and Weber. I have no interest in crappy domes, PSU plays on a baseball field that isn't on campus and Sac is large but delapidated. Eastern Washington seems very similar to ours but older so nothing special there.
 
Good info and thanks for the comparison BR. I just hope that UNC can announce a big master plan ala the other schools that we seem to be about on par with. Of course they also have to be funded but assuming they are, ISU, SAC and NAU are making major upgrades that could leave us at the bottom of the conference if we don't keep the ball rolling (as Blofeld pointed out). It is never a good time to raise money, it is especially a tough time I can imagine given the state of our FB program. What the heck though, lay out a good master plan, put your hat in your hand and start shaking some hands, maybe something good will happen.
 
They did come up with an athletics facilities master plan about a year ago. It was done by Davis Partnership architects, a very talented group who also designed the new west campus residence hall. I have scoured the website hoping to find it, but no such luck. However, if someone wanted to go by the athletic department, and make an official request, they could probably get their hands on a copy.
 
GoBears said:
They did come up with an athletics facilities master plan about a year ago. It was done by Davis Partnership architects, a very talented group who also designed the new west campus residence hall. I have scoured the website hoping to find it, but no such luck. However, if someone wanted to go by the athletic department, and make an official request, they could probably get their hands on a copy.
Click to expand...

True, but it's a sad state of affairs when the supports need to employ the Freedom of Information Act to get any information out of the athletic department. :x
 
yup.....more of the same out of the athletic department, with all the secrecy you would think they are running public relations for the CIA or something...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top