• 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.
  • Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
  • Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!

    Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month

    Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!

Roos Field Renovation

I’ve always been curious to know if Eag fans think this expansion is something that should be “financed” by the fans/alumni/ private donors or the university itself. Thanks
 
My understanding is that public universities cannot use taxpayer dollars for facilities not used for education. This is why the recreation center and the PUB were funded by student dollars and EWU is looking for private donors for the stadium.


HeavyIsTheCrown said:
I’ve always been curious to know if Eag fans think this expansion is something that should be “financed” by the fans/alumni/ private donors or the university itself. Thanks
 
MLEagle said:
EagerEagle said:
Some great insights here into the state of our stadium expansion. I think Lynn is doing a great job and look forward to May 10. Great article

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2019/apr/20/ewu-ad-lynn-hickey-reflects-on-her-first-year-on-t/

Agreed, very excited for May 10th to see the plan.

It sounds good, I definitely agree! I hope we aren’t let down and this thing actually gets built. It sound like the upgrades are going to be modest, which is fine, but they better address that east side or my $75k stays in real estate.
 
The absolute first priority needs to be getting seating built on the East side. I'd love to see upgraded concessions, the track removed, new bathrooms, new premium seating, all of it... but getting a firm structure onto the Eastside trumps all of the rest. More seats to fill, and a far better aesthetic can only occur with some sort of structure built up. I can't possibly imagine that any thinking person could see it differently.
 
LDopaPDX said:
The absolute first priority needs to be getting seating built on the East side. I'd love to see upgraded concessions, the track removed, new bathrooms, new premium seating, all of it... but getting a firm structure onto the Eastside trumps all of the rest. More seats to fill, and a far better aesthetic can only occur with some sort of structure built up. I can't possibly imagine that any thinking person could see it differently.

I get where you're coming from, but it's kind of a chicken/egg situation IMO. If they invest in a nice East side first, it may be difficult to relocate once the track is removed (which is a must). Hopefully those can happen simultaneously.
 
FormerEag said:
LDopaPDX said:
The absolute first priority needs to be getting seating built on the East side. I'd love to see upgraded concessions, the track removed, new bathrooms, new premium seating, all of it... but getting a firm structure onto the Eastside trumps all of the rest. More seats to fill, and a far better aesthetic can only occur with some sort of structure built up. I can't possibly imagine that any thinking person could see it differently.

I get where you're coming from, but it's kind of a chicken/egg situation IMO. If they invest in a nice East side first, it may be difficult to relocate once the track is removed (which is a must). Hopefully those can happen simultaneously.

According to the Hickey interview, it does sound like they move the field any closer to the home side like some have hoped, but I suppose they could still lose the track. We’ll see I guess

“What can you say about the new renderings before they’re presented?

What’s been developed by the architects is absolutely beautiful. We’re fortunate in that we have a site. We don’t have to relocate the field or anything. They’ve found a way to save some costs there.”
 
MLEagle said:
FormerEag said:
LDopaPDX said:
The absolute first priority needs to be getting seating built on the East side. I'd love to see upgraded concessions, the track removed, new bathrooms, new premium seating, all of it... but getting a firm structure onto the Eastside trumps all of the rest. More seats to fill, and a far better aesthetic can only occur with some sort of structure built up. I can't possibly imagine that any thinking person could see it differently.

I get where you're coming from, but it's kind of a chicken/egg situation IMO. If they invest in a nice East side first, it may be difficult to relocate once the track is removed (which is a must). Hopefully those can happen simultaneously.

According to the Hickey interview, it does sound like they move the field any closer to the home side like some have hoped, but I suppose they could still lose the track. We’ll see I guess

“What can you say about the new renderings before they’re presented?

What’s been developed by the architects is absolutely beautiful. We’re fortunate in that we have a site. We don’t have to relocate the field or anything. They’ve found a way to save some costs there.”

The longer we entertain the dream of removing the track/moving the field, the longer we’ll have to wait for a stadium expansion! We’re going to have to concede defeat on the track being there for the next 20 years in exchange for a quality eastside grandstand & capacity of ~15,000.
 
HeavyIsTheCrown is right on...and I'm ok with that! Apprehensive about seeing pretty pictures...seen many a pretty picture.
 
HeavyIsTheCrown said:
MLEagle said:
FormerEag said:
LDopaPDX said:
The absolute first priority needs to be getting seating built on the East side. I'd love to see upgraded concessions, the track removed, new bathrooms, new premium seating, all of it... but getting a firm structure onto the Eastside trumps all of the rest. More seats to fill, and a far better aesthetic can only occur with some sort of structure built up. I can't possibly imagine that any thinking person could see it differently.

I get where you're coming from, but it's kind of a chicken/egg situation IMO. If they invest in a nice East side first, it may be difficult to relocate once the track is removed (which is a must). Hopefully those can happen simultaneously.

According to the Hickey interview, it does sound like they move the field any closer to the home side like some have hoped, but I suppose they could still lose the track. We’ll see I guess

“What can you say about the new renderings before they’re presented?

What’s been developed by the architects is absolutely beautiful. We’re fortunate in that we have a site. We don’t have to relocate the field or anything. They’ve found a way to save some costs there.”

The longer we entertain the dream of removing the track/moving the field, the longer we’ll have to wait for a stadium expansion! We’re going to have to concede defeat on the track being there for the next 20 years in exchange for a quality eastside grandstand & capacity of ~15,000.

This is my line of thinking as well. I'd love to see the whole venue restructured without a track, but if that's the sticking point, just get the eastside grandstand done now. It doesn't have to be perfect to be exponentially better than it is now. I'll settle for just making it a lot better even if it isn't everything we all want it to be. I don't even know if 15k is necessary, even 5k more seats to replace the POS temp grandstand that's there now is a huge improvement.
 
LDopaPDX said:
HeavyIsTheCrown said:
The longer we entertain the dream of removing the track/moving the field, the longer we’ll have to wait for a stadium expansion! We’re going to have to concede defeat on the track being there for the next 20 years in exchange for a quality eastside grandstand & capacity of ~15,000.

This is my line of thinking as well. I'd love to see the whole venue restructured without a track, but if that's the sticking point, just get the eastside grandstand done now. It doesn't have to be perfect to be exponentially better than it is now. I'll settle for just making it a lot better even if it isn't everything we all want it to be. I don't even know if 15k is necessary, even 5k more seats to replace the POS temp grandstand that's there now is a huge improvement.

I’d even take that PDX! I think the west side grandstand holds about 6k and I’ve always been in favor of a matching eastside structure, place Roos’ total at ~14,600. We’re better off negotiating whether the total is capacity is 13,500 or 17,500 in one phase than fighting for a modified Gateway Protect in phases all over again.
 
I’ve recently listened to the signing day broadcast and I’m starting to see what you guys like about Lynn. She mentioned that the EAF has grown about 250% since her arrival & that the EAF has about 1,200 boosters/contributors and “...[w]e need to get that number to around 4,000.”

She put it out there and I’m glad she did. Getting this thing built is going to cost big bucks and it sounds like it’s got to be built with private funds. 4,000 boosters contributing $5,000 yearly OR to a stadium renovation fund gets us $20m! That can jumpstart anything!
 
Link at the bottom. Upcoming Board of trustees meeting. All I could find there.

Review of campaign prep to date:

•Key initiatives identified for testing and consideration:

–Scholarships
–Undergraduate research
–Innovation HUB
–Football Stadium
–Student Success
–Honors College
–Lucy Covington
–Advanced Manufacturing

•Feasibility study completed
–47 participants
•Consultants recommend working goal of $60-75 MM (aspirational goal: 100 MM).
–8 year campaign
–Ability to count two years back from silent phase kick-off (FY18 & FY19)-estimated amount: $16 MM
–Includes cash and planned/estate gifts (40-60% of campaign = $2.5-4.5 MM); gifts-in-kind
•Implementation of Reeher: –Improved donor identification and assignment. –Improved tracking and strategy management

https://ewueagles.sharepoint.com/sites/BOTP/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FBOTP%2FShared%20Documents%2F2019%2F2019%20Meeting%20Materials%2FMay%202019%2FPoplawski%5FBOT%20Campaign%20Update%20050919%20%28002%29%2Epptx%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FBOTP%2FShared%20Documents%2F2019%2F2019%20Meeting%20Materials%2FMay%202019&p=true&cid=d1c1cce5-0afa-4fb0-95c8-d21b4cb8eea6
 
EWU21 said:
Link at the bottom. Upcoming Board of trustees meeting. All I could find there.

Review of campaign prep to date:

•Key initiatives identified for testing and consideration:

–Scholarships
–Undergraduate research
–Innovation HUB
–Football Stadium
–Student Success
–Honors College
–Lucy Covington
–Advanced Manufacturing

•Feasibility study completed
–47 participants
•Consultants recommend working goal of $60-75 MM (aspirational goal: 100 MM).
–8 year campaign
–Ability to count two years back from silent phase kick-off (FY18 & FY19)-estimated amount: $16 MM
–Includes cash and planned/estate gifts (40-60% of campaign = $2.5-4.5 MM); gifts-in-kind
•Implementation of Reeher: –Improved donor identification and assignment. –Improved tracking and strategy management

https://ewueagles.sharepoint.com/sites/BOTP/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FBOTP%2FShared%20Documents%2F2019%2F2019%20Meeting%20Materials%2FMay%202019%2FPoplawski%5FBOT%20Campaign%20Update%20050919%20%28002%29%2Epptx%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FBOTP%2FShared%20Documents%2F2019%2F2019%20Meeting%20Materials%2FMay%202019&p=true&cid=d1c1cce5-0afa-4fb0-95c8-d21b4cb8eea6

Any tips on accessing the document? Can't seem to get in...
 
There seems to be very little re: stadium expansion in that agenda. There is 30 minutes of “capital campaigns update” on Thursday where the presentation notes have a tidbit on the item. There is 30 minutes also dedicated to an “athletics update” on Friday, but no presentation notes are linked.

Mrs Hickey was very emphatic that the renderings would be made public at the Board Mtg on May 10. I’m interested in seeing what we’re working towards.
 
LDopaPDX said:
There seems to be very little re: stadium expansion in that agenda. There is 30 minutes of “capital campaigns update” on Thursday where the presentation notes have a tidbit on the item. There is 30 minutes also dedicated to an “athletics update” on Friday, but no presentation notes are linked.

Mrs Hickey was very emphatic that the renderings would be made public at the Board Mtg on May 10. I’m interested in seeing what we’re working towards.

Looks like they've added a deck to the athletics update. There's a slide from ALSC Architects with a couple of bullets about the stadium, but no rendering or any ground breaking information.
 
FormerEag said:
LDopaPDX said:
There seems to be very little re: stadium expansion in that agenda. There is 30 minutes of “capital campaigns update” on Thursday where the presentation notes have a tidbit on the item. There is 30 minutes also dedicated to an “athletics update” on Friday, but no presentation notes are linked.

Mrs Hickey was very emphatic that the renderings would be made public at the Board Mtg on May 10. I’m interested in seeing what we’re working towards.

Looks like they've added a deck to the athletics update. There's a slide from ALSC Architects with a couple of bullets about the stadium, but no rendering or any ground breaking information.

You there? No rendering of a project? :-(
 
EWU98 said:
FormerEag said:
LDopaPDX said:
There seems to be very little re: stadium expansion in that agenda. There is 30 minutes of “capital campaigns update” on Thursday where the presentation notes have a tidbit on the item. There is 30 minutes also dedicated to an “athletics update” on Friday, but no presentation notes are linked.

Mrs Hickey was very emphatic that the renderings would be made public at the Board Mtg on May 10. I’m interested in seeing what we’re working towards.

Looks like they've added a deck to the athletics update. There's a slide from ALSC Architects with a couple of bullets about the stadium, but no rendering or any ground breaking information.

You there? No rendering of a project? :-(

Haha no I've just been obsessively checking the agenda on sharepoint for updates
 

Latest posts

Back
Top