Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2005 11:14:05 GMT -5
Not sure if its been posted here, but I found it relevant considering this is loosely connected to any future McD renovation. Check out the March 23 and March 30 photos. guhoyas.collegesports.com/facilities/gu-multi-sport-photos.htmlIf you look at the March 23 photos and the Phase I and Phase II descriptions, it appears as if they have started on the east stands and lawns and pretty much everything in the artist renderings... and will put off the west stands (which has the press box, weight room and offices) until final funding/approval is gained. Can any undergrads give us out-of-towners an update on whether or not they have started tearing up the parking lot/old baseball field for the new b-school yet?
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Apr 5, 2005 11:55:37 GMT -5
Not sure if its been posted here, but I found it relevant considering this is loosely connected to any future McD renovation. Check out the March 23 and March 30 photos. guhoyas.collegesports.com/facilities/gu-multi-sport-photos.htmlIf you look at the March 23 photos and the Phase I and Phase II descriptions, it appears as if they have started on the east stands and lawns and pretty much everything in the artist renderings... and will put off the west stands (which has the press box, weight room and offices) until final funding/approval is gained. Can any undergrads give us out-of-towners an update on whether or not they have started tearing up the parking lot/old baseball field for the new b-school yet? They've started, but only in order to do utility work for the new msb building.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 5, 2005 12:23:26 GMT -5
It is not solely for utility work. A new field will be in place by September, albeit with temporary seats.
|
|
SoCalHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
No es bueno
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by SoCalHoya on Apr 5, 2005 12:34:49 GMT -5
Does anyone know if they are going to use the new astroturf or fieldturf?
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on Apr 5, 2005 12:45:18 GMT -5
It will be an artificial surface of some kind. I'm pretty sure it's the NextTurf stuff or something like it that is a lot like real grass, only more durable and easier to maintain. By the way, an interesting commentary today in The Hoya about the "lack of functionality" of the MSF, especially with regards to the fact that basketball, baseball, and track & field are still forced off-campus: www.thehoya.com/sports/040505/sports6.cfm
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 5, 2005 12:47:52 GMT -5
Lack of functionality for basketball and track? This is the Multi-Sport Facility, not the Carrier Dome.
Derek Richmond's premise is misinformed. I'll send a more detailed reply this evening.
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Apr 5, 2005 13:11:10 GMT -5
If anyone ever needs any updates on the work being done, I can look out my window from 5th floor Kennedy at any time and see everything that is happening.
The field is completely torn up and they have been digging and trucking away soil for several days now.
They have extended the work into the parking lot a little (the old baseball field) and I assume that is for the "North Lawn" area.
I think TBirds post about utility work was in reference to the parking lot for the MSB building, because its quite obvious for anyone on campus that the Harbin Field area is experiencing more than utility work.
Also, DFW- if they are not going to be building the East stands then why are they included in Phase 1A? They need to keep moving with this and at least get one side fully completed. I remember them saying they had raised like 12.5 million over a year ago but since then I havent heard any progess, whats going on? Is it that hard to raise the additional money or at least keep moving forward with the fundraising? Where are they now in money raised, they cant still be stuck at 12.5 million, can they?
|
|
|
Post by DuddingtonHoya on Apr 5, 2005 13:22:16 GMT -5
The original excuse for delaying the McD renovation was always that they needed to get the MSF completed first and relocate the offices. So where does this leave the team and the facilities?
Surely there has to be a fund-raising drive at this point if they intend to begin renovation shortly after MSF.... or are we still suffering through the same "we need an enormous donor first" excuse? As Howard Dean can tell you, multitudes of small donations can outpace a handful of large ones.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2005 14:25:21 GMT -5
It is not solely for utility work. A new field will be in place by September, albeit with temporary seats. DFW - I was under the impression that the new field and the East stands and north lawn were part of Phase 1. Then phase two was the west stands, press box, and inner rooms (weight room, offices, etc)? I was told in an email by someone I wrote to in Hoyas Unlimited (I think) about 6 months ago that they had done away with phase 1A and 1B in favor of Phase 1 only when they changed the MSF design. I'm sure you know more than I do... enlighten us, o' on-campus construction sage!!
|
|
hoya01
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 166
|
Post by hoya01 on Apr 5, 2005 17:05:29 GMT -5
One comment in Derek's article that I do agree with is the fact that the Multi Sport Facility will not have a track. I know of another college in Maryland that recently built a track from scratch (i.e. not just resurfacing current one) and the cost was around $3 million.
It is sad that with as good of a track program as Georgetown has, they cannot host a major track meet because of our poor facilities. Does anyone know why the track was dropped from the original plans?
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Apr 5, 2005 17:11:13 GMT -5
There was never a track planned for the MSF. There is a separate track project in the plans but I dont know whats happening with it now.
I dont think it would be possible to fit a track in the MSF anyway. A track needs to go around the endzones in a football stadium and there is really not going to be much room at all behind the endzones. One the side by the Southwest Quad there will be a wall right behind the endzone and then there is a sidewalk and road behind it, I just dont think its possible.
|
|
SoCalHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
No es bueno
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by SoCalHoya on Apr 5, 2005 17:27:18 GMT -5
As long as our well-deserving track guys/gals get their own facility, I'm fine with the MSF not including one. It might, from a crowd POV, be nice to be almost on top of the players when attending a game.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 5, 2005 18:43:49 GMT -5
From GUHoyas.com: "Phase 1A will involve the construction of the artificial turf field, East Stands, North Lawn, and the permanent and temporary fencing. The existing scoreboard will be temporarily relocated and reused. "I think this is still the case, only that the stands will not be ready by the start of the season. The continuing delays in the project (once set to open two years ago) stem from the fact that Georgetown will not start on a project until there is money in the bank. Fundraising for IA is there, IB still in progress. As to Derek Richmond's column in the HOYA, some points: Derek writes that "It will be what high schools, municipal parks and peewee football clubs everywhere now call “bleachers.” Not so. The plans clearly note chairback seats on the lower level and bleachers in the upper tier. Quote #2: "The soccer and field hockey teams had gotten along fine in the current facilities, and it was — and still is — obvious that neither lacrosse team has been hurt by its current grasslands." Again, not so. Saturday's game with Navy was moved because of the field conditions at North Kehoe, and the women's team has moved games as well because of poor field conditions and drainage issues. Clearly, North Kehoe is not suitable for the kind of mileage being put on it by so many teams. Quote #3: "Why not make minor changes to the current facilities until plans can be developed that benefit all of our sports teams?" Because nothing would ever get done. Plans are in place for nearly every other sport, but the money isn't there. Football alumni raised the money, hence, they are ready to go. As noted on this board in the past, basketball alumni have not stepped forward in a similar way. Quote #4: "Likewise, the baseball team plays off-campus — another problem not addressed by the Multi-Sport Facility." The footprint of the MSF (thanks to the Business School's takeover of the diamond) does not allow the room for a baseball field, nor is the footprint for a track available. I don't want to bag on Derek's opinion any further, but this column is no more accurate than the Voice editorial. Georgetown is not raising $22 million for bleachers and FieldTurf. Thre is a lot more to this building, to the future of GU atheltics, and the future of bringing McD to the front burner sooner rather than when it's too late to save major college basketball at the University. Nearly five years ago, Bob Benson spelled out the need for this facility. He wrote: "This new facility will be designed and built to bring the history and tradition of Georgetown University and the Georgetown football program to our impressive campus. It will be built with the idea that it has been here for years. It is a vision:
- Play peer institutions.
- Build a new facility with all the tradition of the past in mind.
- Place it in the center of campus.
- Create a new school spirit among our students, faculty, and the community, and bring an environment of history and tradition to the Georgetown campus."
All are in short supply on this campus. Keep the dirt flying.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,743
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 5, 2005 18:48:43 GMT -5
The criticism is silly. The architecture is beautiful. The building is needed.
The only criticisms I have are: what took so long (and is taking so long -- and I aim this at alumni giving and fundraising) and I worry that it is a bit small.
|
|
SoCalHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
No es bueno
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by SoCalHoya on Apr 5, 2005 18:53:07 GMT -5
Right, I also worry that it is a bit small. But then again, so is our campus.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 5, 2005 18:56:35 GMT -5
Quote #3: "Why not make minor changes to the current facilities until plans can be developed that benefit all of our sports teams?" Because nothing would ever get done. Plans are in place for nearly every other sport, but the money isn't there. Football alumni raised the money, hence, they are ready to go. As noted on this board in the past, basketball alumni have not stepped forward in a similar way. I agree with most of your points in your post. I have yet to see a convincing argument made against the MSF. I think it represents an upgrade over what we have in a major way. If someone wanted to see college football played with high school facilities, they missed out in the fall at GU. I do, however, disagree respectfully with your point that is quoted above. The money isn't quite there even for the MSF. They're completing the project in a piecemeal fashion simply because the money isn't there. I don't disagree with this because our funds are in short supply. What I disagree with concerns your point about the "money not being there" in terms of renovating McDonough. I realize that this is an institutional perspective, but, if I were an alum, I'd find it mildly offensive. When they demand an 8 figure donation up front from a single donor (not an escrow), there's no wonder why the money isn't there. (Source: discussions during last offseason that resulted in an abortive effort to raise money outside of the university's purview). Maybe the only bball alum who could do that is AI. I am almost positive that there would be quite some success if they allowed funds to be collected at this time. There's no reason why they shouldn't be because, face it, the GU bball donor base is larger by virtue of the program's national stature, and many in this population aren't predisposed toward supporting the football program financially. I'd even be willing to say that the basketball base is larger than that for all of the other teams that would use the MSF combined.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,539
|
Post by DanMcQ on Apr 5, 2005 19:07:50 GMT -5
I agree with most of your points in your post. I have yet to see a convincing argument made against the MSF. I think it represents an upgrade over what we have in a major way. If someone wanted to see college football played with high school facilities, they missed out in the fall at GU. I do, however, disagree respectfully with your point that is quoted above. The money isn't quite there even for the MSF. They're completing the project in a piecemeal fashion simply because the money isn't there. I don't disagree with this because our funds are in short supply. What I disagree with concerns your point about the "money not being there" in terms of renovating McDonough. I realize that this is an institutional perspective, but, if I were an alum, I'd find it mildly offensive. When they demand an 8 figure donation up front from a single donor (not an escrow), there's no wonder why the money isn't there. (Source: discussions during last offseason that resulted in an abortive effort to raise money outside of the university's purview). Maybe the only bball alum who could do that is AI. I am almost positive that there would be quite some success if they allowed funds to be collected at this time. There's no reason why they shouldn't be because, face it, the GU bball donor base is larger by virtue of the program's national stature, and many in this population aren't predisposed toward supporting the football program financially. I'd even be willing to say that the basketball base is larger than that for all of the other teams that would use the MSF combined. RE: "GU bball donor base is larger by virtue of the program's national stature" ...if that is true, why are there only about 700 Hoop Club members? Step up to the plate people!
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 5, 2005 19:14:47 GMT -5
By donor base, I mean people who would fit the demographic of basketball donors or people with large affinity to the program. Part of the problem with HHC donations is that they are limited in terms of the degree to which they solicit outside DC. While you and/or DFW may contribute and do not live outside DC, I venture to say that your original contributions may have been unsolicited in the sense that you sought them out yourselves. If it doesn't apply to you, I know that it applies to me. I have signed up virtually every time that I have been asked to provide info (specifically on GUHoyas, "We are GU" campaign of earlier this year) that I'm interested in receiving more info on the HHC. Have I received anything? No. Do I live outside DC? Yes (ON EDIT: I live on-campus during the academic year, but always provide my non-DC home address on these forms). My name is also out there on the petition and YB's letter campaign. Did I receive a solicitation from that? No. Did I receive a reply? Yes, but probably only because I showed up as a source of the letter in forwarded e-mails. IMO, HHC et al. missed out on 4000 opportunities with that petition. If they only generated 250 new donors, well, that would increase the donor base by roughly 30%.
It is sad that it has to come to this where you have to encourage others to give money. The fact that I've received nada from them speaks to a larger problem that needs to be addressed and that they might not be able to correct without some other things falling into place from Healy 2.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 5, 2005 19:20:41 GMT -5
The MSF is being done in phases because a lack of cash in hand. The Unviersity's fundraising priorities are with the business school, and most of the fundraising for MSF has focused solely on football and lacrosse alumni. I'd even be willing to say that the basketball base is larger than that for all of the other teams that would use the MSF combined. It should be the case but that's not the facts. Only 20% of the FY2004 donor base (when posted on GUHoyas.com) now gives to men's basketball. The crew and football donors combined are close to exceeding basketball.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,539
|
Post by DanMcQ on Apr 5, 2005 19:29:54 GMT -5
By donor base, I mean people who would fit the demographic of basketball donors or people with large affinity to the program. Part of the problem with HHC donations is that they are limited in terms of the degree to which they solicit outside DC. While you and/or DFW may contribute and do not live outside DC, I venture to say that your original contributions may have been unsolicited in the sense that you sought them out yourselves. If it doesn't apply to you, I know that it applies to me. I have signed up virtually every time that I have been asked to provide info (specifically on GUHoyas, "We are GU" campaign of earlier this year) that I'm interested in receiving more info on the HHC. Have I received anything? No. Do I live outside DC? Yes (ON EDIT: I live on-campus during the academic year, but always provide my non-DC home address on these forms). My name is also out there on the petition and YB's letter campaign. Did I receive a solicitation from that? No. Did I receive a reply? Yes, but probably only because I showed up as a source of the letter in forwarded e-mails. IMO, HHC et al. missed out on 4000 opportunities with that petition. If they only generated 250 new donors, well, that would increase the donor base by roughly 30%. It is sad that it has to come to this where you have to encourage others to give money. The fact that I've received nada from them speaks to a larger problem that needs to be addressed and that they might not be able to correct without some other things falling into place from Healy 2. There are plenty of solictations that go to alumni. I don't know for sure, but I suspect the reason you personally haven't gotten a mailer or something is related to the fact that you are a current student, regardless of what address you list. They're starting to 'solicit' the future fan base - things like $upporting the T-shirt effort and underwriting student tickets to the on campus NIT game have potentially higher yield than a letter in the mail.
|
|