It almost looks like the Soccer/Softball design was hurriedly pushed out, while the baseball design has a lo of detail.Originally Posted by Blue Dawg
|
|
|
|
|
It almost looks like the Soccer/Softball design was hurriedly pushed out, while the baseball design has a lo of detail.
From the press conference, Tommy mentioned that when entering the campus on Tech Dr, you'll immediately notice the modern architecture. I think they're trying to make it match the look of the intramural center's pool expansion since it's right across Tech Drive. It has some brick in its design so I hope they add some to the new facilities too. It's nice to keep that brick as a constant throughout campus.
Also not trying to be a debbie downer, but I feel a bit disappointed in the baseball stadium design. I don't know what it exactly is but looking at it from the field level, it doesn't seem very impressive. The exterior facing the intersection has a nice look. I especially like that brick walkway idea but something about the interior seems lackluster to me.
Looks fine, I thought it looked odd from the field though. Partially because of the overhang part, the angle looks very steep from the inside.
Rendering vs Reality
Once we get our built, I think it'll look way better than the rendering. An example below (DBU)
UW Husky BallPark
For those occasions when a baseball game is played in a rain, It doesn’t look like the stadium covering is going to keep people in their seats. That’s not good.
One thing I didn't like on the baseball stadium was this note on the press release:
Seating: all chair-back seats with berm seating; partially covered; capacity of approximately 2,500.
That gives me the direct impression that the berm seating is included in the "approximately 2,500" number. I'm guessing it won't be close to 2,500 chairback seats just like the alleged 2,000 capacity of the old stadium was closer to 1,300 actual.
The blue chairbacks make it look like a lego stadium. And how many seats do we really need? 500-600 people is the norm. I don’t want a big stadium for that number.
Do you not want Tech to host tournaments?
That language is vague. This--can't vouch for accuracy--is in the Shreveport Times article:
The new J.C. Love Field, or more affectionately known as the “Love Shack” will get a substantial seating expansion, from 800 seats to 2,500. That doesn’t include general admission, student and berm areas where fans can take in the game.
From the looks it doesnt have any more seats than our old structure. They may all be chairbacks which is great but I believe we have a bright future in baseball and that should be considered. 500-600 is enough at present but if we can up our performance just a notch or two then a really winning team can draw well. There is confusing info out there now, 2500 chairbacks plus the berm and SRO or 2500 including 1,000 or so chairbacks plus berm and SRO. Looks like 1,000 or so chairbacks and I dont think that is enough for the future.
Think shade, not rain. Still, the drawings probably don't do justice to the actual structure at this point.
It's enough...
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
Based on the look at the mock-ups
1,200 to 1,500 permanent chair backs
Can easily put another 1,000 SRO and berm seating
We don't need a stadium with 3,000 permanent seats
''Don't be a bad dagh..."
Not in particular. Why?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
