Farmer1906 said:

---

greg.w.h said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Why not just keep the same style at the stadium? Looks like a fusion of the rec and Olsen. I guess it's an improvement from the original concept in the first picture.

---

The Rec center shouldn't be where it is. But baseball doesn't have sufficient fan support (think donations) to demand a relocation. Anyone have a billion to donate?

---

Nah, we can make it work in this footprint. Just gotta stay creative.

---

Define what you think the result needs to look like to "work".

Right now we have on the table in this thread a parking garage and 10,000 seats. Neither of which is funded and both depend on very limited footprint space and likely limit revenue production since it keeps the bones of the original stands. Note support for handicapped folks has been mentioned as a shortcoming and most new builds work clubs under the stands which we really can't do.

So I'm guessing if we can fit in 5,000 permanent, undifferentiated seats everyone here imagines they will be cheaper than existing seats because further up or out?

And now instead of pulling the stadium back into the parking area, we're just boxing it in with the development building, cutting off probably the best avenue for growth on the existing site.

ensign_beedrill said:

---

And now instead of pulling the stadium back into the parking area, we're just boxing it in with the development building, cutting off probably the best avenue for growth on the existing site.

---

I don't think they have a committed, wealthy donor with Pat's equivalent resources or history of the program. I'm fine with "just expanding" but we need more revenue given how today's college sports work.

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

But the sense of entitlement that an expansion is deserved strikes me as selfish and short-sighted. I would also expect all sports facilities are fully donation and sports event or ancillary event funded with no draw from students other than a hopefully subsidized all-sports package which is an actual seat for all student buyers of passes and a license to hunt like the old parking stickers…

And regarding parking: hoof it. That's what football fans do from all over the place. The inconvenience is part of the joyous memories!!!

Farmer1906 said:

---

Why not just keep the same style at the stadium? Looks like a fusion of the rec and Olsen. I guess its an improvement from the original concept in the first picture.

---

The aesthetics of the building are fine. We don't need to spend exterior of the main stadium money on a Player Performance Center. Spend it on the goodies for the players inside the building. Using the same brick gives it enough of a similar look to work just fine architecturally.

BQ_90 said:

---

hsvag said:

---

If we're going to lose parking, can't they seriously look at the old softball space for a parking garage? Maybe not big enough if we copy existing campus designs, but more parking for events is definitely needed.

---

there is plenty of parking around Reed for Olsen, you just have to walk. Which really isn't that much different than parking for football and walking to Kyle.

---

I prefer not to cross streets or walk through dimly lit lots after dark when I have my kids by myself. At least for football, I can stay in the well light Kyle/MSC/hotel vicinity to get on a bus to ride back to my lot.

hsvag said:

---

If we're going to lose parking, can't they seriously look at the old softball space for a parking garage? Maybe not big enough if we copy existing campus designs, but more parking for events is definitely needed.

---

The athletic road map has the old softball space as an indoor practice facility, with the intent of having space for baseball infield practice indoors, but also share with softball. I think it would also end up as warm up space for indoor track meets (previously used old indoor football practice space when at the old indoor track facility).

trouble said:

---

BQ_90 said:

---

hsvag said:

---

If we're going to lose parking, can't they seriously look at the old softball space for a parking garage? Maybe not big enough if we copy existing campus designs, but more parking for events is definitely needed.

---

there is plenty of parking around Reed for Olsen, you just have to walk. Which really isn't that much different than parking for football and walking to Kyle.

---

I prefer not to cross streets or walk through dimly lit lots after dark when I have my kids by myself. At least for football, I can stay in the well light Kyle/MSC/hotel vicinity to get on a bus to ride back to my lot.

---

It's no different than after night football game, soccer, and softball games. And if it's that scary don't go to any night baseball games

Or you can park in WCG and walk down sidewalk that well lite and only have to cross the street between garage and rec center parking lot

If I don't have an Olsen pass, I do park in the garage. Having to wait to get out doesn't bother me.

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

85AustinAg said:

---

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

---

I don't think we want to fully max out seats; besides money, nothing is stopping us from continuing the double decks down both lines if we wanted to. I know the OF room is small, but we could fit a handful of rows all the way around the OF. Doing something like this would easily put the # of permanent seats over 10K.

This is kind of what I was getting at earlier with making the footprint work.

85AustinAg said:

---

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

---

I don't think all of that is achievable. Keep in mind evacuation requirements if you add lots of fans and also remember the 360 concourse. I'm pretty sure the only convenient place to put more seats is home down third. The rest are inferior seats and will fill poorly.

Keep in mind the fire lane and the need for a safety lane past the RR right of way.

It wouldn't be impossible to put a 3rd level in the future if you really needed more seats.

But I think 8-10k real seats, plus berms/concourses to allow a few more thousand SRO tickets to flex into the 12-15k range for big games is sufficient.

greg.w.h said:

---

85AustinAg said:

---

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

---

I don't think all of that is achievable. Keep in mind evacuation requirements if you add lots of fans and also remember the 360 concourse. I'm pretty sure the only convenient place to put more seats is home down third. The rest are inferior seats and will fill poorly.

Keep in mind the fire lane and the need for a safety lane past the RR right of way.

---

All stadiums have some inferior seats, though. Arkansas's sight lines down the line are terrible. Lsu has aluminum bleaches in their OF. Ole Miss's student section starts about 50-75' behind the OF wall.

Farmer1906 said:

---

85AustinAg said:

---

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

---

I don't think we want to fully max out seats; besides money, nothing is stopping us from continuing the double decks down both lines if we wanted to. I know the OF room is small, but we could fit a handful of rows all the way around the OF. Doing something like this would easily put the # of permanent seats over 10K.

This is kind of what I was getting at earlier with making the footprint work.

---

I think turning both berms into seating and then making the outfield a tiered berm area while allowing people to bring their own chairs would work.

Even better if they let you bring in your own food/drink, but we all know A&M would never go for that.

greg.w.h said:

---

85AustinAg said:

---

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

---

I don't think all of that is achievable. Keep in mind evacuation requirements if you add lots of fans and also remember the 360 concourse. I'm pretty sure the only convenient place to put more seats is home down third. The rest are inferior seats and will fill poorly.

Keep in mind the fire lane and the need for a safety lane past the RR right of way.

---

I've seen renderings that say otherwise...

85AustinAg said:

---

greg.w.h said:

---

85AustinAg said:

---

I'm fine with the current footprint but at some point it will be tough to compete though maybe the insanity in college sports wanes before the fans disappear.

What does this mean? There's room in CF, RF, down the 3B line and Crawford boxes in LF.

---

I don't think all of that is achievable. Keep in mind evacuation requirements if you add lots of fans and also remember the 360 concourse. I'm pretty sure the only convenient place to put more seats is home down third. The rest are inferior seats and will fill poorly.

Keep in mind the fire lane and the need for a safety lane past the RR right of way.

---

I've seen renderings that say otherwise...

---

Funded?

No but you are mentioning how it can't be built because of existing configurations and structures that are in the way. All I'm saying is that I've seen renderings that show that it can be built with the existing restrictions and in the existing footprint.

OK, Trev extended 6-years. Let's start fund raising for the Olsen expansion and green light the deal when we hit 50% of the goal!

Construction has started. The majority of the northwest side of Olsen parking lot will be unavailable for parking.