Paint the track black?

[/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09]

I'm in favor of the track going, but I don't think there is a need to move the east and west side closer. I don't think the cost it would take would be worth adding maybe three more rows (Which is even a stretch). I have watched a few from the front row and even that is a challenge seeing the game over 6 foot plus players and a shitty angle to see action for the entire field. I think those seats would be even worse and adding them would only probably be to appease those who feel it is an eye sore having that much gap.

[Boone Goon]

I'm in favor of the track going, but I don't think there is a need to move the east and west side closer. I don't think the cost it would take would be worth adding maybe three more rows (Which is even a stretch). I have watched a few from the front row and even that is a challenge seeing the game over 6 foot plus players and a shitty angle to see action for the entire field. I think those seats would be even worse and adding them would only probably be to appease those who feel it is an eye sore having that much gap.

I respectfully disagree.

The costs associated with the change isn't going to just be recouped via ticket sales. But even still there would be more than just 3 rows added. The changes would be captured in a broader stadium renovation. Which I think should include moving the hill closer, the north end zone project, updating the West concourse, adding bathrooms and extending the East upper deck to one level so it slides the field West.

As much as I'd love for the Rock to be a 100k seat stadium that isn't who we are and it never will be. I think 30k seats is the right number and will fit us for years to come.

[/\PP ST/\TE GRAD 09]

I'm in favor of the track going, but I don't think there is a need to move the east and west side closer. I don't think the cost it would take would be worth adding maybe three more rows (Which is even a stretch). I have watched a few from the front row and even that is a challenge seeing the game over 6 foot plus players and a shitty angle to see action for the entire field. I think those seats would be even worse and adding them would only probably be to appease those who feel it is an eye sore having that much gap.

I respectfully disagree.

The costs associated with the change isn't going to just be recouped via ticket sales. But even still there would be more than just 3 rows added. The changes would be captured in a broader stadium renovation. Which I think should include moving the hill closer, the north end zone project, updating the West concourse, adding bathrooms and extending the East upper deck to one level so it slides the field West.

As much as I'd love for the Rock to be a 100k seat stadium that isn't who we are and it never will be. I think 30k seats is the right number and will fit us for years to come.

Ticket sales are not a guarantee. How will we be Post-Lamb, and more importantly if the unfortunate happens and we face a Post-Satterfield era? We've had recent success, but we also all know people aren't making it up the mountain to watch a game if we suck. I am in favor of more club seating because there is already a demand, but it's risky to think there will be a need for the other.

[EastHallApp]

I'm in favor of the track going, but I don't think there is a need to move the east and west side closer. I don't think the cost it would take would be worth adding maybe three more rows (Which is even a stretch). I have watched a few from the front row and even that is a challenge seeing the game over 6 foot plus players and a shitty angle to see action for the entire field. I think those seats would be even worse and adding them would only probably be to appease those who feel it is an eye sore having that much gap.

If they moved the stands closer (or the field closer to the stands), it would have to be done some other way than just building rows in front of the existing stands. You're right, at that point you'd basically be coming down to ground level, and you can't really see anything happening on the field from there.

[HighlandsApp]

I think best is to build a 10 to 15 foot wide terrace in front of both east and west stands to allow standing room and for students to travel along sidelines. Visually it would look great. It would allow an extra several hundred or more students in the West side students sections and reduce the bottle neck on the main concourse near the tunnels. It wouldn't cost a whole lot and the students would love being a little closer to the players. On the East side it could allow for additional wheelchair area seating.

[appgrouch]

I think best is to build a 10 to 15 foot wide terrace in front of both east and west stands to allow standing room and for students to travel along sidelines. Visually it would look great. It would allow an extra several hundred or more students in the West side students sections and reduce the bottle neck on the main concourse near the tunnels. It wouldn't cost a whole lot and the students would love being a little closer to the players. On the East side it could allow for additional wheelchair area seating.

That is one of the more reasonable ideas I've heard in a while.

[Stonewall]

I heard that tracks don't come in black

I was actually told that by a former AD, when I suggested it 20 years ago ....

[ukappfan]

The track at my high school is black.

[CheckYosef94]

The track at my high school is black.

I am aware that they do actually come it black. I was referencing something we were told years ago by some higher-ups in the athletic administration.

[Stonewall]

Yeah,I was stunned by the level of arrogance or ignorance. Pick one.

[yosef13]

I think best is to build a 10 to 15 foot wide terrace in front of both east and west stands to allow standing room and for students to travel along sidelines. Visually it would look great. It would allow an extra several hundred or more students in the West side students sections and reduce the bottle neck on the main concourse near the tunnels. It wouldn't cost a whole lot and the students would love being a little closer to the players. On the East side it could allow for additional wheelchair area seating.

That is one of the more reasonable ideas I've heard in a while.

I think Kenan Stadium used to have something similar. Now I think it's for official use only.

If more rows won't work, what about planting some hedges between the first row and the sideline. I know it's terf, but maybe have the first row wall, a concourse, and somehow plant some hedges between the concourse and the field turf. Would help eat up some space and would add some character. Whatever we do, just make sure it does not look like Boise. The space between their field and the stands is ridiculous.

[Rekdiver]

Widen the field like a CFL Field.

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

Widen the field like a CFL Field.

A wider field I think would benefit the offense. If college football could be like baseball stadiums and have some dimensions unique to each stadium (width for football) would App be better off with a wide field or a narrower field given our current offense and defense strengths and weaknesses.

[CVAPP]

Widen the field like a CFL Field.

A wider field I think would benefit the offense. If college football could be like baseball stadiums and have some dimensions unique to each stadium (width for football) would App be better off with a wide field or a narrower field given our current offense and defense strengths and weaknesses.

Wouldn't less room to have to defend always benefit the defense and more room to move the ball always benefit the offense?

[McLeansvilleAppFan]

Widen the field like a CFL Field.

A wider field I think would benefit the offense. If college football could be like baseball stadiums and have some dimensions unique to each stadium (width for football) would App be better off with a wide field or a narrower field given our current offense and defense strengths and weaknesses.

Wouldn't less room to have to defend always benefit the defense and more room to move the ball always benefit the offense?

On the one hand maybe, but a weak passing team would not benefit from a wider field as much as a run based offense.

My hypothetical question should have been worded better. Assuming a wider field would help our O and hurt our D, would a wider field be a net positive for us or net negative. Or would we be better off with a narrower field that would hurt our O but help our D even more so and therefore be a net positive in that manner.

In the AE days I think a wider field would be a net positive just because what AE could bring to the table. Now I am not so sure. Just speculating.

I just want a longer CFL endzone, with the corners cut off the end zone a la Montreal. THAT would be unique in USA based college football.

[AppinVA]

Our kickoff coverage is shaky enough.

[Rekdiver]

I was joking......