• 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.

Roos Field Renovation

I've heard talk of new stadium..thought we already tried that. No matter what is said isn't the answer going to be the same? As in there's no money so we have to raise it for anything they come up with. Been hearing the same thing for 20 years (saw architectural drawings in 2000) drawings have differed since then but result has been the same. I'm try extra super hard to be positive. Sure hope they come up with a plan A, B and C this time around.

images
 
Just got the email and looked at the renders. Looks good, although removating to roughly the same capacity seems a little short sighted. And it looks like they’re going to remove the end zone seating. Why not leave that in place for the higher attendance gamea? Kinda strange.
 
Gotta admit, it’s actually more than I hoped for in terms of scale.

I assume the Eastside grandstand is the first to be built? The nice thing about this plan is that it is clearly built to move in phases.

The weird thing is the capacity... which we definitely need more of... it is said the total seating remains similar, but how would adding a loge above existing West side bleachers and a new East side grandstand not add a LOT of seats?

I'd be a little disappointed if $25mm didn't mean we bump up to the 12k or so mark, which seems like almost a requirement based on current support. Without more seats, it feels like we'd just be spending $25mm and kicking the can further down the road.
 
I'm getting a little unnerved reading this plan. All the phases are listed as A, B, C, D... etc. Assuming these are the chronological order, the East side grandstands are "G." This should the be the top priority after the new turf, and thus ought to be "B." If money runs thin before that phase, we could actually be stuck with a lesser stadium for a period, thereby destroying any positive effects from the money previously spent. Without that piece, everything else is sort of irrelevant. I really don't think having more suites is a big deal to the average fan.
 
- remove the track
- replace the turf
- replace the east side stands
- leave room to expand

This is a home run IMO, love the new design
 
LDopaPDX said:
I really don't think having more suites is a big deal to the average fan.
Click to expand...

They probably bring in more money though. It's been a trend in stadium design to reduce the capacity to allow for more premium seating.

It does strike me as a odd little of that seating isn't being bumped up, if even a little. Aren't we averaging almost 9.5k per game?
 
goeagles17 said:
LDopaPDX said:
I really don't think having more suites is a big deal to the average fan.
Click to expand...

They probably bring in more money though. It's been a trend in stadium design to reduce the capacity to allow for more premium seating.

It does strike me as a odd little of that seating isn't being bumped up, if even a little. Aren't we averaging almost 9.5k per game?
Click to expand...
Thank you...our capacity on the facts sheet says we are 8700 with this EXPANSION it will be 8612.....makes very little sense. I know that the bleachers will help in the end zone but man can we at least get to 10k?
 
EWURanger said:
Just got the email and looked at the renders. Looks good, although renovating to roughly the same capacity seems a little short sighted. And it looks like they’re going to remove the end zone seating. Why not leave that in place for the higher attendance games? Kinda strange.
Click to expand...

1. Renderings look great.
2. Agreed, why remove the endzone seating!?
3. Agreed, why “renovate” to a smaller capacity!?
4. Does EWU have a MSU-style endzone expansion in mind?
5. Agreed, anything less than 10k seems counterproductive.
6. Is the $25mm price tag too high for what’s here?
7. If the renovation was built exactly the way it’s shown would you guys love it? Or is there something missing? Dialogue helps us here IMO. GoEags!!
 
additional qualty seating means higher ticket prices and they will get it...supply and demand.
removing endzone in architects view prolly selling the idea of going for a cohesive look.
pictures are cool.
i'll be dead by the time it's finished.
 
HeavyIsTheCrown said:
EWURanger said:
Just got the email and looked at the renders. Looks good, although renovating to roughly the same capacity seems a little short sighted. And it looks like they’re going to remove the end zone seating. Why not leave that in place for the higher attendance games? Kinda strange.
Click to expand...

1. Renderings look great.
2. Agreed, why remove the endzone seating!?
3. Agreed, why “renovate” to a smaller capacity!?
4. Does EWU have a MSU-style endzone expansion in mind?
5. Agreed, anything less than 10k seems counterproductive.
6. Is the $25mm price tag too high for what’s here?
7. If the renovation was built exactly the way it’s shown would you guys love it? Or is there something missing? Dialogue helps us here IMO. GoEags!!
Click to expand...
Not so concerned about removing the end zone seating as long as we replace it with something to fill in the void. Kind of looks a little empty in the End Zone areas. Would love to see them leave a little bit of seating there with a structure behind it. Also, not sure if the renderings are drawn to scale but I'm a little concerned with how close the fans will be to the field. Removing the track is amazing and one of the top priorities in my opinion, but if it doesn't move the fans closer to the action, then what are we doing? Those are a few of my thoughts but overall I think we're on the right track.

go eags!
 
Rafter, my very 1st thought when looking at renderings was removing the track showed seating was not any closer. Again probably thought was part of the look (why they also are taking endzone seats out) they are going for...I'm also a track man and like the track facilty in the stadium so why take it out and at what cost if your not moving the seats up?
 
Obzerver said:
Rafter, my very 1st thought when looking at renderings was removing the track showed seating was not any closer. Again probably thought was part of the look (why they also are taking endzone seats out) they are going for...I'm also a track man and like the track facilty in the stadium so why take it out and at what cost if your not moving the seats up?
Click to expand...
The whole point of removing the track is to put the fans right on top of the action. That in itself would make our renovated Stadium incredible and explosive! I'm hoping my thoughts are incorrect about how far the fans would be from the field. With all of the time put into this I'm assuming this was well thought out and I'm hoping I'm wrong.

go eags!
 
I like the design concepts and believe the proposal is very saleable. The renderings look great, and until a plan view is available, I'm assuming that the apparent distance between the stands and the sidelines will be less than indicated in the perspective view. This phase may slide right into design, contributions and construction of expanded seating and parking facilities.
 
Now lets actually raise the money for this instead of getting a hard on for some renderings and have nothing happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top