SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms race!

by **CA Mustang** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:06 pm

Just posted on Facebook and Twitter.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/SMUFootball ... 2491893427
https://twitter.com/SMU_Football/status ... 4819954688

by **mrydel** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:53 pm

This was the upgrade to which I alluded a couple of weeks ago.

by **blackoutpony** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 4:02 pm

Houston breaks ground on their IPF in November

by **blackoutpony** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:07 pm

CargoGunki wrote:
blackoutpony wrote:Houston breaks ground on their IPF in November

What are you talking about? It's almost finished being built.

Then I guess I misread what I read

by **SMUer** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:30 pm

They showed their barn on TV vs Tech...it’ll be done soon. I say barn like it’s disparaging but I wish we had a barn we could upgrade instead of waiting for the Taj Majal of IPFs.

by **Stallion** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:33 pm

It looks like a warehouse-and fits right into the UH campus

by **mustangfan4life** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:32 pm

Does anyone know the latest word on the IPF for SMU? At $4 for a water at the games, surely the money is there.

by **Stallion** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:40 pm

Guess again

by **mustangfan4life** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 6:48 pm

I don't know any details on why nothing has been done or talked about much anymore about an indoor facility?

by **Stallion** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:09 pm

SMU's alumni/benefactors have not come up with 80% of the projected project cost to get the IPF started.

by **mustangfan4life** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:16 pm

Stallion wrote:SMU's alumni/benefactors have not come up with 80% of the projected project cost to get the IPF started.

Thanks Stallion, hope they can get come up with the 80% at some point in the near future.

by **Black Horseshoe** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:47 pm

Stallion wrote:SMU's alumni/benefactors have not come up with 80% of the projected project cost to get the IPF started.

You sure?

by **MV pony** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:20 pm

SMU is currently soliciting funds for current operating expenses.

by **gostangs** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:43 pm

MV pony wrote:SMU is currently soliciting funds for current operating expenses.

So what? That is a very common way to accelerate student quality - you just buy it instead of doing endowment dollars that pay out 4.5%. Don't make it out to be something negative.

by **tristatecoog** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:50 pm

Aggie IPF looks bad from the outside but very adequate from the inside.

http://12thman.com/sports/2015/3/23/GEN_2014010157.aspx

An SMU big wig once told our church that the formula is to raise 50% of funds quietly, 25% publicly (then break ground) and the other 25% while it's being built. It may be harder for facilities like IPFs instead of stadiums or church gyms/sanctuaries where new members rotate through with regularity.

SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms race!

SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms race!

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Re: SMU doesn't plan on falling behind in the locker arms ra

Who is online