menu
Logo
person
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
person
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: $10 MILLION GIFT TO LEAD OHIO UNIVERSITY MULTIPURPOSE CENTER
Page: 3 of 4
Jeff McKinney
Moderator
JM
Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,163
person
mail
Jeff McKinney
mail
Posted: 12/24/2010 3:11 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Monroe...a lot of folks on here donate to the OBC so that may be why there wasn't a great participation in what you're talking about.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 12/24/2010 3:37 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Hopefully, Jeff.  But we should be at about a 100% contributor rate given the affinity for the specialness of The Ohio University.

I'm curious as to our % of contributors vs. comparable (if they exist) institutions and how that figure has been affected by recent small success in foot and basket.
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 12/24/2010 9:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
SBH wrote:expand_more
My hope for the design is based on practical, long-term (monetary) considerations and the desire to add some additional sophistication/class to Peden:

1.  Build the IPF directly behind the visitor's stands, allowing you to integrate modern restroom and concessions facilities into the ground floor of the new building.  At the top of the IPF, have one or 2 stories of glassed-in loge seats overlooking the visitor's stands.  This would dramatically enhance the appearance of those stands and look great on TV.  (It would also prevent us from putting a second deck on that side, which I think would be too cost prohibitive anyway.)

2.  If we ever need to add seating, I'd like to see the North side of the stadium closed in with an elevated "U" similar to the two half-shells. This would eliminate the unfinished look of the half-shells and be relatively inexpensive to do. When we need the seating for well-attended games, people will sit there. When those seats are empty, it won't be so obvious to a television audience, as it would if we built a (more expensive) second deck.  Also would like to see the elevated sections extend down to align at bottom with the Phillips and O-Zone seating in the main stands.


I like this very much.  The endzone bleacher seats bug the heck out of me, they just look cheap...  Bring those seats down to match the permanent stands along the sidelines.  Boxes would really make it look good on TV.  The concourses really could benefit from some lighting and paint...  Just like the Convo.  Concessions, yeah, that especially.
Kinggeorge4
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Guysville, OH
Post Count: 1,086
mail
Kinggeorge4
mail
Posted: 12/27/2010 1:53 PM
settings_applications edit_note
The IPF will be a huge help to baseball and softball.  I have coached these sports for a long time and they need a facility like this to get in work over the winter and in early spring when our weather doesn't permitt.  Just sad to see the faculty sending in their letters to the A-News complaining about sharing the money.  Didn't see the letters when Stocker and McCraken received large donations.  Should they share too.

I like a lot of the ideas being tossed out there for renovations to Pden, hopefully this is just a start for OHIO.
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 12/27/2010 6:30 PM
settings_applications edit_note
They're now officially whining.  Somebody write a letter and educate these people.  Where were the complaints about all the millions the Walters have donated to academics?
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 12/27/2010 7:39 PM
settings_applications edit_note
No way the new facility will cost anything close to $50MM.  We just don't have that kind of money. Looking over some numberss from other facilities-anywhere from $3.9MM at EMU for a bubble to over $50MM.  If I were a betting man I'd guess Wanamaker is pretty close.  Since $2MM is for Convo renovations, $8MM would be about 1/2.  There certainly will be other larger gifts now that the lead gift is in the bank so to speak.  These things are becoming pretty commonplace, even in the MAC, for northern schools anyway. Wouldn't likely give us any particular competitive advantage, but at least we're keeping up with the other have nots.  By the way, Appy state is the only FCS school with one as far as I can find (not counting the schools with indoor stadiums only).
mcbin
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 951
mail
mcbin
mail
Posted: 12/27/2010 8:15 PM
settings_applications edit_note
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
If I were a betting man I'd guess Wanamaker is pretty close. 


I'll take the under, and guess about 10 million or less.

EDIT: Here's a nice IPF we snuck into during the Louisville hoops tourney. Article mentions price, and this IPF does have the bricks that will fit in with the campus as well.
Last Edited: 12/27/2010 8:23:02 PM by mcbin
Tyler
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: AZ
Post Count: 894
mail
Tyler
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 9:47 AM
settings_applications edit_note
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more
By the way, Appy state is the only FCS school with one as far as I can find (not counting the schools with indoor stadiums only).


Youngstown State is currently building the Watson and Tressel Training Site (WATTS):

"The WATTS will include a 300-meter track, a full-length football field, two batting cages with room for expansion, two long jump pits, one high jump pit and a training room. The projected cost of the 125,000 square-foot facility is $12.3 million, and the scheduled completion date is January 2011."

http://www.ysusports.com/information/facilities/watts

Bobcat36
General User
Member Since: 1/5/2005
Location: Delaware, OH
Post Count: 1,167
mail
Bobcat36
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 5:05 PM
settings_applications edit_note
mcbin wrote:expand_more
If I were a betting man I'd guess Wanamaker is pretty close. 


I'll take the under, and guess about 10 million or less.

EDIT: Here's a nice IPF we snuck into during the Louisville hoops tourney. Article mentions price, and this IPF does have the bricks that will fit in with the campus as well.


That is a thing of beauty!
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 6:31 PM
settings_applications edit_note
One thing for sure, according to certain officials, is that it will fit into Ou's existing architectural style.  We've come this far by pretty much sticking to the bricks, so no reason to deviate from that, thank goodness.  You don't have to go too far to see schools that change style every decade. 
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 6:36 PM
settings_applications edit_note

 While there is only 1 FCS school with one, there are quite a few at other college levels and even high schools. It's amazing to me that so many pro teams don't have them., but they don't have donors I guess.

anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 10:20 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Massillon's IPF seems like a cost-effective building.

http://www.massillontigers.com/pld_facility.htm
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 11:01 PM
settings_applications edit_note
colobobcat66 wrote:expand_more

 While there is only 1 FCS school with one, there are quite a few at other college levels and even high schools. It's amazing to me that so many pro teams don't have them., but they don't have donors I guess.



The question is whether those teams are cheap or if they don't find much worth in those buildings.

Massillon is pathetic.  Pro-quality football facilities while the schools languish.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 12/28/2010 11:15 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcat Dragon wrote:expand_more
Massillon is pathetic.  Pro-quality football facilities while the schools languish.

From what I understand (and I could well be wrong), their situation is similar to this gift (money given for athletics and not academics).  However, I wouldn't say academics are languishing at OU, though things are tight.
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 12/29/2010 12:40 AM
settings_applications edit_note
I wouldn't say that either.  There's a lot of giving to the academic part of OU, including the Walters.  One would be hard-pressed to convince me we're putting sports over education here.  Massillon, however, is the poster child for misplaced priorities.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 12/29/2010 12:47 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcat Dragon wrote:expand_more
I wouldn't say that either.  There's a lot of giving to the academic part of OU, including the Walters.  One would be hard-pressed to convince me we're putting sports over education here.  Massillon, however, is the poster child for misplaced priorities.
Fair 'nuff -- guess I was just saying it isn't as though they took millions directly from the education pot to construct their facility.  But, lets not get started on school funding, or we'll take a great thread to Siberia really quickly!
Last Edited: 12/29/2010 12:47:31 AM by anorris
John C. Wanamaker
General User
Member Since: 1/2/2005
Post Count: 1,103
mail
John C. Wanamaker
mail
Posted: 12/29/2010 7:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 12/30/2010 12:08 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The field isn't 80 yards... and talk about splitting hairs and completely missing the point.
John C. Wanamaker
General User
Member Since: 1/2/2005
Post Count: 1,103
mail
John C. Wanamaker
mail
Posted: 12/30/2010 12:23 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The Optimist
General User
Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: CLE
Post Count: 5,611
mail
The Optimist
mail
Posted: 12/30/2010 8:56 AM
settings_applications edit_note
80 versus 100 yards really doesn't matter IMO...  What teams actually use the entire length of the field in practice?  Just having the surface and controlled climate is a huge boost for the program.  A track would be nice, but we are down to only women's track anyway now.  That does eliminate the possibility of indoor meets however, which would've been a nice plus...

Any word on location?
John C. Wanamaker
General User
Member Since: 1/2/2005
Post Count: 1,103
mail
John C. Wanamaker
mail
Posted: 12/30/2010 9:09 AM
settings_applications edit_note
With 120 kids that extra area can be very useful.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 12/30/2010 10:24 AM
settings_applications edit_note
My bad, John, the way your post was worded it sounded like the facility already existed, so I thought you were talking about the Massillon facility I brought up, not the planned OU one.

Those are interesting decisions -- is it a money-saving ploy, or one to try to fit a building onto a particular plot of land?
John C. Wanamaker
General User
Member Since: 1/2/2005
Post Count: 1,103
mail
John C. Wanamaker
mail
Posted: 12/30/2010 10:59 AM
settings_applications edit_note
anorris wrote:expand_more
My bad, John, the way your post was worded it sounded like the facility already existed, so I thought you were talking about the Massillon facility I brought up, not the planned OU one.

Those are interesting decisions -- is it a money-saving ploy, or one to try to fit a building onto a particular plot of land?


When this is all done there may be several "head scratchers",
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 1/1/2011 3:47 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcat Dragon wrote:expand_more

 While there is only 1 FCS school with one, there are quite a few at other college levels and even high schools. It's amazing to me that so many pro teams don't have them., but they don't have donors I guess.



The question is whether those teams are cheap or if they don't find much worth in those buildings.

Massillon is pathetic.  Pro-quality football facilities while the schools languish.


You hit on the main point about this facility-this is to be a multipurpose facility.  Not just 1 program-like say a pro team.  Their players can go south or west to train at the best facilities elsewhere in the off season.  They don't have 20,000 students doing their own things looking for places to go in bad weather.

RE-Massilon-didn't one of the articles talking about this facility say something about the donors also giving tuition? to over 5,000 students going to Massilon?
colobobcat66
General User
C66
Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,744
person
mail
colobobcat66
mail
Posted: 1/1/2011 3:50 PM
settings_applications edit_note
John C. Wanamaker wrote:expand_more
My bad, John, the way your post was worded it sounded like the facility already existed, so I thought you were talking about the Massillon facility I brought up, not the planned OU one.

Those are interesting decisions -- is it a money-saving ploy, or one to try to fit a building onto a particular plot of land?


When this is all done there may be several "head scratchers",

which is to expected when you have so many "stakeholders" participating in the decision making process.
Showing Messages: 51 - 75 of 76
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)