Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 46 of 46
  1. #41
    RapmasterAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 09, 2003
    Location
    Topic View
    Posts
    10,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Will Stewart View Post
    I'd put it at the lower range, around 8,000. Look at Miami's convocation center (now called BankUnited Center) as a model: built with a capacity of 7,000 for just $48 million (about $55 million in today's dollars), with a current capacity of almost 8,000 (not sure why the capacity changed). Can host all sorts of events, including concerts.

    Build luxury boxes into it, and those are good revenue-generators. Keep the capacity down to 8,000 or so, because VT rarely sells that many tickets anymore. And if demand does go up, then the ability to generate more revenue via donations due to ticket demand is there, plus you can charge more for tix. (Similar reasoning to limiting Lane to just 65,000 seats.) Configure it so students can ring the court without blocking the view of big-money donors.
    Sounds good to me!

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Pylons View Post
    I often see this "we need to show we're serious about basketball" statement come up...now it's here in regard to either a bigger arena and/or a new arena.

    Show to whom? and in what way that's going to make a difference?
    I would assume people mean "show the rest of the world." If VT is "serious" about its basketball program and wants to change the perception about the school (aka no longer be known as just a "football school"), then I would think (off the top of my head) it could eventually have an impact on recruiting, the media, and maybe even the Selection Committee. If a high profile recruit is considering schools, then would he rather go to a "basketball school" (i.e. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Syracuse) or "football school" (i.e. Florida St, Alabama, Oregon, Oklahoma)? I am not saying a school can't be good in both sports, but it does seem fewer schools are able to maintain that high level of success in both sports for an extended period of time. If the media views a school as a "basketball school," then could that influence them to broadcast their games more even if they are not having a great year? If the Selection Committee is trying to decide a final spot in the Tournament and it is down to 2 schools; a basketball school vs. a football school. Both have similar records, RPI, good wins, bad losses to where it is a virtual coin flip on who should get into the field. Is it possible that a school could get in the field over another school because it is known for its basketball and the other school is known for its football? For example, if the Committee is deciding between Butler and Alabama. Both schools play DI football (Butler plays FCS non-scholarship football in the Pioneer Football League). However, most would say that Butler is known for its basketball and Alabama is known for its football.

  3. #43
    OrangeHokieFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 08, 2010
    Posts
    1,064
    im all in.
    Quote Originally Posted by RapmasterAC View Post
    Sounds good to me!

  4. #44
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    Virgninia State in Ettrick (D2 school betweenRichmond and Petersburg) just broke ground on a convocation center that will hold 5100.
    Price tag is $84 million.

    Like Will said, an arena with similar capabilities as VSU's or VCU's for VT will end up holding about 8000-8500. Adding in all the ACC level bells and whistles, price tag in today's dollars is likley in the $125-$150 million range.

    Looking forward to TSL buying the naming rights!


    http://www.vsu.edu/news/headlines/20...ndbreaking.php
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  5. #45
    Pylons's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 25, 2005
    Posts
    7,003
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    I would assume people mean "show the rest of the world." If VT is "serious" about its basketball program and wants to change the perception about the school (aka no longer be known as just a "football school"), then I would think (off the top of my head) it could eventually have an impact on recruiting, the media, and maybe even the Selection Committee. If a high profile recruit is considering schools, then would he rather go to a "basketball school" (i.e. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Syracuse) or "football school" (i.e. Florida St, Alabama, Oregon, Oklahoma)? I am not saying a school can't be good in both sports, but it does seem fewer schools are able to maintain that high level of success in both sports for an extended period of time. If the media views a school as a "basketball school," then could that influence them to broadcast their games more even if they are not having a great year? If the Selection Committee is trying to decide a final spot in the Tournament and it is down to 2 schools; a basketball school vs. a football school. Both have similar records, RPI, good wins, bad losses to where it is a virtual coin flip on who should get into the field. Is it possible that a school could get in the field over another school because it is known for its basketball and the other school is known for its football? For example, if the Committee is deciding between Butler and Alabama. Both schools play DI football (Butler plays FCS non-scholarship football in the Pioneer Football League). However, most would say that Butler is known for its basketball and Alabama is known for its football.
    I guess to me, being known as a "basketball school" has almost everything to do with being good at basketball...and building a new arena does almost nothing to get us there.

    I'm sure there's some "wow" factor for a new building in recruiting, but the practice facility matters more in that regard. The "wow" that matters in the arena is that it's a fun environment...which, again, has much more to do with winning that with how new the building is or how many bells and whistles it has.

    Don't get me wrong, having a new building is nice and makes a positive statement, but "we need to show we're serious" seems like a pretty empty justification for a $100MM investment.

    And I'm certainly in the "we have enough capacity" camp...I think shooting for anything more than what we have now would be a mistake.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Pylons View Post
    I guess to me, being known as a "basketball school" has almost everything to do with being good at basketball...and building a new arena does almost nothing to get us there.

    I'm sure there's some "wow" factor for a new building in recruiting, but the practice facility matters more in that regard. The "wow" that matters in the arena is that it's a fun environment...which, again, has much more to do with winning that with how new the building is or how many bells and whistles it has.

    Don't get me wrong, having a new building is nice and makes a positive statement, but "we need to show we're serious" seems like a pretty empty justification for a $100MM investment.

    And I'm certainly in the "we have enough capacity" camp...I think shooting for anything more than what we have now would be a mistake.
    I don't disagree with you that in order for a school to be known as a "basketball school," it must back it up on the court. Also, I agree with you there is some level of "wow" factor for a new facility which may be difficult to quantify. In terms of the practice facility, I am not sure it is necessary to build an independent structure or have it strictly dedicated to just the basketball program. For example the Dean Smith Center was built to include a practice facility.

    http://www.goheels.com/ViewArticle.d...CLID=205498267

    Duke on the other hand, built a multipurpose facility (Michael W. Krzyzewski Center) which includes 2 full length basketball courts in the center for both teams to practice on.

    http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.db...ATCLID=1385070

    From a financial standpoint, it might have made more long term sense if the Hahn Hurst had either been incorporated in a new basketball arena or a multipurpose facility instead of being strictly for the basketball team. However, for a "football school" it may be necessary (even if only for the time being) to build new facilities strictly only for the basketball program as a way to change the public's perception of the school. I am not suggesting there is 1 magical blueprint on how a school changes its image because each school's situation is different (location, academic standards, etc). Besides, it would make life less exciting if everyone did things the same way.

Posting Permissions

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