|
PonyFans.com •
Board Index •
Around the Hilltop •
Football •
Recruiting •
Basketball •
Other Sports
This is the forum for talk about SMU Football
Moderators: PonyPride, SmooPower
by Digetydog » Mon Aug 04, 2014 3:03 pm
couch 'em wrote:I don't understand why everyone ranks ford so high. Everyone with a new stadium has suites. what amenities do we have that are so amazing? We are on par with Tulane, Houston and all other stadia of similar size and age.
While it is certainly nice looking, it is a poor design from a "seats between the goal line" perspective. UConn's stadium looks like Plano's Clark Stadium (ugly - lots of concrete - utilitarian), but has much better seating.
Do unto others before they do unto you!!
-

Digetydog

-
- Posts: 3913
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:33 am
by DanFreibergerForHeisman » Mon Aug 04, 2014 3:44 pm
Digetydog wrote:While it is certainly nice looking, it is a poor design from a "seats between the goal line" perspective.
UConn's stadium looks like Plano's Clark Stadium (ugly - lots of concrete - utilitarian), but has much better seating.
I agree Ford could be a lot better, but as far as the overall seating plan, Ford really isn't that much different than the Rose Bowl or The Big House and nobody seems to have a problem with those stadiums.
Shake It Off Moody
-

DanFreibergerForHeisman

-
- Posts: 16485
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2000 3:01 am
-
by SMU2007 » Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:31 pm
Rayburn wrote:Also, UH has very little local support as well.
Any smu fan would be happy to have UH's "very little support"... Not comparable.
-

SMU2007

-
- Posts: 5561
- Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:41 am
by sbsmith » Mon Aug 04, 2014 5:08 pm
SMU2007 wrote:Any smu fan would be happy to have UH's "very little support"... Not comparable.
If we had that kind of "support" we'd still be on the backburner in DFW (just like they are in Houston).
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security
-Benjamin Franklin
-
sbsmith

-
- Posts: 9540
- Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:21 am
- Location: Dallas
by Charleston Pony » Mon Aug 04, 2014 5:22 pm
If we could just get to a point where we put 30k in Ford no matter who the opponent, I would be very pleased with the state of the program. I haven't seen that (by our fans) in my lifetime
-
Charleston Pony

-
- Posts: 28947
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Stonebridge Golf Club, NC
by Stallion » Mon Aug 04, 2014 5:33 pm
UH has built a stadium which strengths their P5 prospects SMU built a super non-P5 stadium. Nothing wrong with that if that's what your goal is. But if SMU's goal is to be P5 then SMU will have to consider 1) enhancing Ford AND 2) figure out a strategy to boost attendance to fill it. Again, it doesn't matter that SMU is a small school with poor alumni support. Those are arguments suggesting that SMU should not seek P5 status because of historically poor support. Just can't accomplish what TCU has. What is our goal and how do we intend to achieve it? Our goals and our strategy are in conflict-perhaps for legitimate reasons
Tulane has conceded they have presumably a non-P5 future with their new stadium-probably a good decision in accordance with their ceiling
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
-
Stallion

-
- Posts: 44302
- Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 4:01 am
- Location: Dallas,Texas,USA
by NTXCoog » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:49 pm
Stallion wrote:Tulane has conceded they have presumably a non-P5 future with their new stadium-probably a good decision in accordance with their ceiling
I'm not sure they've conceded. If they had, they wouldn't be saying that the capacity is 30k. But they built for what they have (fan base, stadium footprint) and try to pretend it's bigger than it is hoping any possible P5 suitors won't notice.
-
NTXCoog

-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2000 3:01 am
- Location: Aubrey TX USA
-
by Digetydog » Mon Aug 04, 2014 7:56 pm
DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:Digetydog wrote:While it is certainly nice looking, it is a poor design from a "seats between the goal line" perspective.
UConn's stadium looks like Plano's Clark Stadium (ugly - lots of concrete - utilitarian), but has much better seating.
I agree Ford could be a lot better, but as far as the overall seating plan, Ford really isn't that much different than the Rose Bowl or The Big House and nobody seems to have a problem with those stadiums.
But nobody will move a NFL team into the Rose Bowl either. Modern college stadiums look like TCU's, not Michigan's - for a reason.
Do unto others before they do unto you!!
-

Digetydog

-
- Posts: 3913
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:33 am
by couch 'em » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:02 pm
DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:Digetydog wrote:While it is certainly nice looking, it is a poor design from a "seats between the goal line" perspective.
UConn's stadium looks like Plano's Clark Stadium (ugly - lots of concrete - utilitarian), but has much better seating.
I agree Ford could be a lot better, but as far as the overall seating plan, Ford really isn't that much different than the Rose Bowl or The Big House and nobody seems to have a problem with those stadiums.
stadium design has improved a lot since the rose bowl (1922) and Big House (1927)
"I think Couchem is right." -EVERYONE
-

couch 'em

-
- Posts: 9758
- Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 3:01 am
- Location: Farmers Branch
by Pony147 » Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:28 am
DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:Ford really isn't that much different than the Rose Bowl or The Big House and nobody seems to have a problem with those stadiums.
It helps that Michigan and USC play in those stadiums...
"[College] referees couldn't manage a White Castle." -Mark Cuban
-

Pony147

-
- Posts: 1414
- Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:23 am
- Location: About 25 feet from the Hillcrest track
by WordUpBU » Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:04 am
Pony147 wrote:DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:Ford really isn't that much different than the Rose Bowl or The Big House and nobody seems to have a problem with those stadiums.
It helps that Michigan and USC play in those stadiums...
UCLA, not USC. USC is in the LA Coliseum. However your point is good though. Large numbers help older 1-level designs.
-

WordUpBU

-
- Posts: 508
- Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:50 am
by Pony147 » Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:16 am
WordUpBU wrote:Pony147 wrote:DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:Ford really isn't that much different than the Rose Bowl or The Big House and nobody seems to have a problem with those stadiums.
It helps that Michigan and USC play in those stadiums...
UCLA, not USC. USC is in the LA Coliseum. However your point is good though. Large numbers help older 1-level designs.
Whoops, I guess I misread that. Although the Coliseum is the same style as well
"[College] referees couldn't manage a White Castle." -Mark Cuban
-

Pony147

-
- Posts: 1414
- Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:23 am
- Location: About 25 feet from the Hillcrest track
by blackoutpony » Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:45 am
Pony147 wrote: Whoops, I guess I misread that. Although the Coliseum is the same style as well
The coliseum is a MUCH better stadium to watch a game in than the rose bowl. Where as the coliseum was built more vertically and with height, the rose bowl is more flat and wider instead of taller. You can be on the 50 yard line at the rose bowl and be 100 yards away from the field and not be anywhere near the last row. Doesn't help when the rows are a foot and a half apart either.... FWIW UCLA has problems filling up the rose bowl all the time since they've played second fiddle to USC for the better part of this millennium. Since it seats over 100,000 people, they will have 50,000 or 60,000 for a lot of games and it looks really empty, although it has gotten better recently. Fun Fact, UCLA played in the Coliseum for a very long time back when the seating capacity was 100,000+ before moving over to the rose bowl
BOP - Providing insensitivity training for a politically correct world since 1989.
-

blackoutpony

-
- Posts: 4135
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:12 pm
- Location: The Tomb of Ken Pye
by SMUer » Tue Aug 05, 2014 2:12 pm
Might I suggest a 4-step process?
1. Capture medium quality, high-upside recruits and exploit their strengths, snagging a few local wanna-be-close-to-mama blue chips along the way with the facilities you already have 2. Win meaningful games, upset opponents and generate water-cooler talk 3. Promote and sell tickets: billboards, paraphernalia, bribing media outlets, whatever. Concentrate on increasing the fan experience inside your stadium (fan zone with beer, special seating sections, TVs, BEER, good food, good merchandise, near stadium tailgating, in-out policy etc.) 4. Take the increased monies and interest and then expand Ford Stadium to a P5 stadium (adding additional suites, closing the horseshoe, super-secret underground tunnel from the over-looking IPF, whatever).
Where are we in Year-7 of the current regime? Still on Step 1. SMU's facilities are in no-way so poor that it is a legitimate excuse not to begin.
Last edited by SMUer on Tue Aug 05, 2014 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-

SMUer

-
- Posts: 5276
- Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 12:03 pm
- Location: Dallas, Texas, The United States of America
by Stallion » Tue Aug 05, 2014 4:06 pm
True but quite frankly the sales job is tougher now that UH (Robertson), Baylor (Floyd Casey) and TCU (Amon Carter) have taken it up a notch which ties into a substantial recruiting advantage. Of course, all of them to varying degrees have addressed attendance issues-I'm throwing out UH's vagabond 2013 football season just like we threw out our 2013 Basketball non-conference season.
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
-
Stallion

-
- Posts: 44302
- Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2000 4:01 am
- Location: Dallas,Texas,USA
Return to Football
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests
|
|