I believe the incremental rebuild/phases is exactly what they are going to do. The field itself could be replaced starting tomorrow with very little repercussions to this season. Then I believe they will replace the East Side one year, then the West side the next year. And everything else every year. It would be a 5 to 6 year project once started.
There is no way they let any income out of Brookings.
Of course this a moot point until the BOR figures it out that the state and taxpayers are in no way shape or form going to pay for this.
I believe the incremental rebuild/phases is exactly what they are going to do. The field itself could be replaced starting tomorrow with very little repercussions to this season. Then I believe they will replace the East Side one year, then the West side the next year. And everything else every year. It would be a 5 to 6 year project once started.
There is no way they let any income out of Brookings.
Of course this a moot point until the BOR figures it out that the state and taxpayers are in no way shape or form going to pay for this.
J. Sell has stated at numerous events(SF Staters, TV's Chats, personal conversation) the new stadium will not effect any home SDSU football games.
I'm fairly certain he is adament that SDSU home football will be played at home(Brookings) and nowhere else, no matter what the reason...(cough...cough...SDSU/USD game).
Looks like a sound structure ,real bricks and mortar,instead of just flimsy looking "stands".This stadeum when completed, will be the pride of the state of South Dakota,doesn't the BOR have any "vision" ?
I remember talking to Dr. Oien about stadium upgrades in the early '00's. He said to replace the west side, they would start the day after the last game, knock it down and could have it replaced by the beginning of the next season. Granted, weather will play a factor, but even then he knew it could be done without interupting the season.
I updated my signature for the first time in six years.
Looks like a sound structure ,real bricks and mortar,instead of just flimsy looking "stands".This stadeum when completed, will be the pride of the state of South Dakota,doesn't the BOR have any "vision" ?
I dont know how old you are Jackdaniel, but obvioulsy you were not around to see the struggle of Staduim for State drive. To venure the staduim with brick back then would not have gone very far considerating the resources available. The original plans called for permanent seating on both sides of the field and also in one endzone. If you noticed we have aluminum bleachers on the east side and no permanent seating? Why because people were not committed to building a fancy staduim as planned.
Concrete seating was very vogue in the 1960's. Howard Wood Field was built about the same time, it too has a flimsy look to it in case you never noticed.
The bottom line is I been down this road before. As tight fisted as some folks in SD are, you really wonder what kind of a mircle will we need in order to get this pride of the state facility.
I dont know how old you are Jackdaniel, but obvioulsy you were not around to see the struggle of Staduim for State drive. To venure the staduim with brick back then would not have gone very far considerating the resources available. The original plans called for permanent seating on both sides of the field and also in one endzone. If you noticed we have aluminum bleachers on the east side and no permanent seating? Why because people were not committed to building a fancy staduim.
Concrete seating was very vogue in the 1960's. Howard Wood Field was built about the same time, it too has a flimsy look to it in case you never noticed.
The bottom line is I been down this road before. As tight fisted as some folks in SD are, you really wonder what kind of a mircle will we need in order to get this pride of the state facility.
Yankton is concrete as well, and looks to have been built in the same time period (maybe older). I agree, I here a lot of the same arguments that the Convention Center in Sioux Falls as CAS in Brookings. And to many people is, its good enough. Or as many have said, thats the way we have done it, so why do we need something new.
I'm not an engineer or an architect but would it surprise anyone if one of these years someone says they are unsafe?
Many times when it comes to people in South Dakota, they react rather then prepare.
what exactly does "concrete seating" mean? how else can you build besides concrete? it's the 21st. century, they still use it.
You are right "No fish guts", I suspect the new CAS will be concrete covered by brick venure as the drawings so depict. Makes for more attractiveness, but does not cheapen the costs of building.
You are right "No fish guts", I suspect the new CAS will be concrete covered by brick venure as the drawings so depict. Makes for more attractiveness, but does not cheapen the costs of building.
yeah I understand, but I think he was mentioning overall how they were constructed with being almost like regular bleachers just with concrete as seats, concrete as pillars. Now they enclose them, cover the sides, make them look nice.
Comment