+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 103

Thread: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

  1. #16
    Administrator & 2006 Men's Progressive Bracket Champion Dwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond reputeDwayne From Minden has a reputation beyond repute Dwayne From Minden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    The Southwest Side of Beautiful Lake Claiborne
    Posts
    36,770

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by bleudog View Post
    Where is softball going?

    I was hoping the baseball complex could be fit in where the soccer and softball fields are with the entrance being where the TAC/JOE/DAC parking could be used for baseball too. (I could throw a stone that far.)

    Assuming the sub-structure is good, tear the roof off the baseball ball stadium and reconfigure the field for softball. It's "second hand" but at least not a trailer.

    Put soccer south of the railroad tracks.

    But there is something to be said for tradition.
    That area will do support a structure - too many sinkholes

    I think soccer will end up at the rugby field and I think softball will end up south of the tracks

    I'll say it again - we didn't have a parking problem prior to the tornado and we will not have one now...
    ''Don't be a bad dagh..."

  2. #17
    Varsity Bulldog Exes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really niceExes&Ohs is just really nice
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    199

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by Bone_afide_Dawg View Post
    Im afraid this means a minimizational approach of Techs ambitions for the future. I hope Im not wrong and that were not all disappointed in the outcome of this vision (?).
    I did not like the tone of his comment that the Dogs will be playing in a "new look" field. Sounds like it could be a new roof and fences.

  3. #18
    Big Dog Dawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant future
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    948

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden View Post
    I think soccer will end up at the rugby field and I think softball will end up south of the tracks
    Soccer going where Rugby is now would cause the removal of or shrink Stadium Blvd. The field is too narrow for soccer so they'll have to expand it. I think the removal of the blvd was already in the long term plan, was it not?

    I hope they can keep softball there but just switch its layout so the home plate is closest to the intersection. If not, I wonder if they could put the softball facility where the football practice field is and then give the soccer and softball area to the football team for practice area. I'm not against softball going on the other side of the tracks, but I'd hate to split up the athletics facilities where they are now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwayne From Minden View Post
    I'll say it again - we didn't have a parking problem prior to the tornado and we will not have one now...
    100% agree. We have a fantastic parking situation at Tech. In fact for many instances like football, we almost have it too good.

  4. #19
    Champ tenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond reputetenacious_dog has a reputation beyond repute tenacious_dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Minden / Homer
    Posts
    4,080

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawgonit View Post
    Soccer going where Rugby is now would cause the removal of or shrink Stadium Blvd. The field is too narrow for soccer so they'll have to expand it. I think the removal of the blvd was already in the long term plan, was it not?

    I hope they can keep softball there but just switch its layout so the home plate is closest to the intersection. If not, I wonder if they could put the softball facility where the football practice field is and then give the soccer and softball area to the football team for practice area. I'm not against softball going on the other side of the tracks, but I'd hate to split up the athletics facilities where they are now.


    100% agree. We have a fantastic parking situation at Tech. In fact for many instances like football, we almost have it too good.
    Pretty sure the last two versions of the master plan show Stadium Blvd closed and the entrance to the athletic complex moves to the north property line. Haven't gone back to look but I think I remember one version shows the softball field being where the rugby field is and the other had the soccer field there.

    Expanding the parking into the area where the softball field has been will be great for baseball and help with football too. I hope it's huge! The area is much better suited to parking than anything else because it's so low and doesn't drain so well.
    Graduate of Louisiana Tech University - Flagship of the University of Louisiana System, Lifetime Alumnus, LTAC, Season Tickets: 8 Football, 5 MBB, 5 Baseball. Go Dawgs!

  5. #20
    Champ FriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the rough
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,678

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by tenacious_dog View Post
    The dimensions of our playing field were grandfathered in and don't meet the newer criteria. And with our current seating capacity, I think the NCAA would have a tendency to award a hosting opportunity we would qualify for to another team with more seating and a larger field. They'd never say that's the case, they'd just manipulate the seeding (imagine that!).

    I don't want to build a new facility and leave them a reason to pass us by when we have the opportunity right now to fix everything.
    Exactly right regarding seating capacity.

    In an article posted on April 30, 2000, former NCAA Director of Championships Dennis Poppe said "that while the committee sets no minimum for number of seats a regional site must have, it typically looks for stadiums that can accommodate at least 3,000."

    Considering there were only around 1,500 permanent seats after chairback sections were expanded, 3,000 could not have been handled to the NCAA's satisfaction in the old facility. 3,000 should be the minimum permanent seating in the new facility. And that means actual seats, not phantom seats like in the TAC. If that isn't the plan, then the decision makers are doing Tech a great disservice.

  6. #21
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    49,739

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post

    Considering there were only around 1,500 permanent seats after chairback sections were expanded, 3,000 could not have been handled to the NCAA's satisfaction in the old facility. 3,000 should still be the minimum permanent seating in the new facility. If that isn't the plan, then the decision makers are doing Tech a great disservice.
    Another 1000 to 1500 could have been added in the old set up for temporary seating. 2000 is enough permanent seating for the new stadium in the main grand stands. It will be easy to add another 1000 if needed for a regional. 3000 seats is not "cozy" when 1500 to 2000 seats are empty. That would be the norm for our current HC and AD.
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

  7. #22
    Champ FriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the rough
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,678

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    Another 1000 to 1500 could have been added in the old set up for temporary seating. 2000 is enough permanent seating for the new stadium in the main grand stands. It will be easy to add another 1000 if needed for a regional. 3000 seats is not "cozy" when 1500 to 2000 seats are empty. That would be the norm for our current HC and AD.
    Won't be able to get 1,000 temporary seats if the field dimensions are built to NCAA specifications. There will be no room beyond the left field fence because of the apartments. Permanent seating should take up all available space down both foul lines. And nothing even temporary can be added in right field because of the railroad.

    Based on the on-field product, filling at least 2,000 actual seats on a regular basis shouldn't be an issue. If it is, then there are issues with coaching and/or administration. Anything under 3,000 would be underbuilding considering there won't be another upgrade in our lifetimes.

  8. #23
    Champ techman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond reputetechman05 has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ruston
    Posts
    11,859

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post
    Won't be able to get 1,000 temporary seats if the field dimensions are built to NCAA specifications. There will be no room beyond the left field fence because of the apartments. Permanent seating should take up all available space down both foul lines. And nothing even temporary can be added in right field because of the railroad.

    Based on the on-field product, filling at least 2,000 actual seats on a regular basis shouldn't be an issue. If it is, then there are issues with coaching and/or administration. Anything under 3,000 would be underbuilding considering there won't be another upgrade in our lifetimes.
    ^^this!

  9. #24
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    49,739

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post

    Based on the on-field product, filling at least 2,000 actual seats on a regular basis shouldn't be an issue. If it is, then there are issues with coaching and/or administration. Anything under 3,000 would be underbuilding considering there won't be another upgrade in our lifetimes.
    I've been saying we are underbuilding. Look at the attendance of USM and LaLaff. They have everything we don't, but don't come close to filling the seats they have. Looks like crap. I guess that's what we should strive for?

    BTW, we are backing things up closer to Alabama and Tech Drive not moving them out toward the apartments and the RR tracks. We will have more room than before.
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

  10. #25
    Champ FriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the roughFriscoDawg is a jewel in the rough
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,678

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    I've been saying we are underbuilding. Look at the attendance of USM and LaLaff. They have everything we don't, but don't come close to filling the seats they have. Looks like crap. I guess that's what we should strive for?

    BTW, we are backing things up closer to Alabama and Tech Drive not moving them out toward the apartments and the RR tracks. We will have more room than before.
    In case you haven't noticed, there was no room down the right field line already past the visitor bullpen because the street is so far below field level. If anything home plate will need to be moved away from Tech Drive and toward Alabama.

    If the rebuild includes the suites and other amenities that are needed, the depth of the grandstand will need to be greater than it was before. Almost all of the space gained by re-angling the field and moving the back of the grandstand as close to the street corner as possible should get used up with the space needed for the new facility. Pushing back the outfield fence dimensions will take up most if not all of the available space there too.

  11. #26
    Big Dog Dawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant futureDawgonit has a brilliant future
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    948

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post
    In case you haven't noticed, there was no room down the right field line already past the visitor bullpen because the street is so far below field level. If anything home plate will need to be moved away from Tech Drive and toward Alabama.



    I am not an engineer or architect (so feel free to tell me I'm wrong here) but that difference in height between the street and the field doesn't seem to be that big of a difference. It looks to be about two meters where the visitors' bullpen and dugout meet. If the stadium is built right up to the corner of Tech and Alabama then the stadium won't reach must past where the visitors' bullpen is depending on how big of a stadium we want. That inclined area between the street and the field will be taken up by the stands/concessions/locker room area anyway I assume so I don't think it affects the problem of the field too much. I think the stadium will fit nicely onto that corner and there's no need to move home plate away from Tech Dr.

  12. #27
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    49,739

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post
    In case you haven't noticed, there was no room down the right field line already past the visitor bullpen because the street is so far below field level. If anything home plate will need to be moved away from Tech Drive and toward Alabama.

    If the rebuild includes the suites and other amenities that are needed, the depth of the grandstand will need to be greater than it was before. Almost all of the space gained by re-angling the field and moving the back of the grandstand as close to the street corner as possible should get used up with the space needed for the new facility. Pushing back the outfield fence dimensions will take up most if not all of the available space there too.
    It reads like you assume things can't be "swiveled" over toward the players and coaches parking. I believe that will be ADA compliance parking only. This will give up PLENTY of room down RF and more room down LF. Adding 25 feet down the lines (don't need that much) is not taking much at all.

    There have been several diagrams here that show the area will work well for expanded dimensions and seating. Taking out most of the parking lot and practice shed will give us an amazing amount of room to work with.
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

  13. #28
    Champ The Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond reputeThe Historian has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    2,473

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    It reads like you assume things can't be "swiveled" over toward the players and coaches parking. I believe that will be ADA compliance parking only. This will give up PLENTY of room down RF and more room down LF. Adding 25 feet down the lines (don't need that much) is not taking much at all. There have been several diagrams here that show the area will work well for expanded dimensions and seating. Taking out most of the parking lot and practice shed will give us an amazing amount of room to work with.
    I agree with you. Most of the current parking behind the third base dugout is going to go. And the field will be "swiveled".

    But I also think we'll have a stadium with 3,000 to 3,500 seats. Hopefully most being chairback. The individuals involved are committed to building the top facility within our conference. We wouldn't be building at the current site if they weren't shown an architectural plan that could make that happen.

    I also don't think we're overbuilding if we have 3,500 seats. In fact, I think if Tech were to do this right - from the stadium, to concessions like ULL or Tulane, to MiLB type promotions, I think we might be surprised or even shocked at how many season tickets we sell to baseball.

  14. #29
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    30,679

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    If you build it...they will come.

    I like keeping the field in its traditional location. Yes, swivel it, shift it, move it left, right, forward, backward, whatever it takes to maximize the use of the available space, but keep it there. Which appears to be the final decision. Thumbs up!

  15. #30
    Moderator & 2008 NFL Survivor Contest Champion sportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond reputesportdawg has a reputation beyond repute sportdawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shreveport, LA
    Posts
    18,896

    Re: JC Love Field to Remain in Same Location

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post
    Won't be able to get 1,000 temporary seats if the field dimensions are built to NCAA specifications. There will be no room beyond the left field fence because of the apartments. Permanent seating should take up all available space down both foul lines. And nothing even temporary can be added in right field because of the railroad.

    Based on the on-field product, filling at least 2,000 actual seats on a regular basis shouldn't be an issue. If it is, then there are issues with coaching and/or administration. Anything under 3,000 would be underbuilding considering there won't be another upgrade in our lifetimes.
    From my understanding, the stadium will move closer to Alabama @ the intersection. I don't know how close they'll be able to build, but should be enough to have the NCAA recommended dimensions.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts